M17 ?

Dwight Gruber · 11-30-2003, 01:32 PM

Ian Hogg, "German Pistols and Revolvers 1971-1945" (1971) p.75.

I won't quote in its entirety (the entry is a third of the page) but here are the high points:

"Parabellum P17"

"...appears to have been issued for service in Aug. or Sept. 1917...The pistol is exactly as the '08 except that a 7.5 (192mm) barrel is fitted [along with the tangent sight]...

"...it was soon discoverd that the conical bullet of the original pattern jammed very badly in [the snail drum magazine]. As a result of this (italics mine) the entire German production of 9mm Parabellum was changed over in 1918 to round-nosed bullets...

"Although this model was only produced from 1917 to 1918, it is often found with dates as early as 1914...in the latter days of the war the German army was supplementing production by reconditioning early model pistols by fitting them with the longer barrel and sight...changing the barrel leaves the date on the chamber unchanged...the reconditioners had better things to do with their time than attempt to re-engrave the date on the chamber. Another point about this model is that they were all made by DWM, never by Erfurt; any model 1917 with the Erfurt marking is undoubtedly a postwar black market gun run up from assorted spare parts."

Well, I'm shocked. I've had this book on my shelf for a while, but never really cracked it until this discussion. I'd always understood that Ian Hogg was was one of the recognized experts in the field, but, after taking a moment to read the entire text, obvoiusly not as far as the Luger is concerned.

He has little respect for the Parabellum as a practical military weapon, and his disdain (expressed early on and repeated at the end) for Luger collectors' minutia directly affects the accuracy of his text. Suffice it to say that it is full of mis-information and error, some almost as egregious as the "P17" nonsense.

As far as Lugers are concerned, this book is valueless. Anyone with a little Luger experience who reads this, hoping to get good background on the subject, is going to be filled with misinformation; anyone who reads it who know enough to recognize the errors already knows more about the subject than Mr. Hogg.

I didn't start this reply to excoriate Ian Hogg, although that is how it has turned out. As a result of this reading, I have developed deep reservation about everything else written in this volume, and I will never again be able to accept anything he says about firearms unquestioningly, without concurrence from another source.

--Dwight

11-30-2003, 01:32 PM	#5
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,908 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,330 Times in 435 Posts	Ian Hogg, "German Pistols and Revolvers 1971-1945" (1971) p.75. I won't quote in its entirety (the entry is a third of the page) but here are the high points: "Parabellum P17" "...appears to have been issued for service in Aug. or Sept. 1917...The pistol is exactly as the '08 except that a 7.5 (192mm) barrel is fitted [along with the tangent sight]... "...it was soon discoverd that the conical bullet of the original pattern jammed very badly in [the snail drum magazine]. As a result of this (italics mine) the entire German production of 9mm Parabellum was changed over in 1918 to round-nosed bullets... "Although this model was only produced from 1917 to 1918, it is often found with dates as early as 1914...in the latter days of the war the German army was supplementing production by reconditioning early model pistols by fitting them with the longer barrel and sight...changing the barrel leaves the date on the chamber unchanged...the reconditioners had better things to do with their time than attempt to re-engrave the date on the chamber. Another point about this model is that they were all made by DWM, never by Erfurt; any model 1917 with the Erfurt marking is undoubtedly a postwar black market gun run up from assorted spare parts." Well, I'm shocked. I've had this book on my shelf for a while, but never really cracked it until this discussion. I'd always understood that Ian Hogg was was one of the recognized experts in the field, but, after taking a moment to read the entire text, obvoiusly not as far as the Luger is concerned. He has little respect for the Parabellum as a practical military weapon, and his disdain (expressed early on and repeated at the end) for Luger collectors' minutia directly affects the accuracy of his text. Suffice it to say that it is full of mis-information and error, some almost as egregious as the "P17" nonsense. As far as Lugers are concerned, this book is valueless. Anyone with a little Luger experience who reads this, hoping to get good background on the subject, is going to be filled with misinformation; anyone who reads it who know enough to recognize the errors already knows more about the subject than Mr. Hogg. I didn't start this reply to excoriate Ian Hogg, although that is how it has turned out. As a result of this reading, I have developed deep reservation about everything else written in this volume, and I will never again be able to accept anything he says about firearms unquestioningly, without concurrence from another source. --Dwight