1937 Mismatch...

John D. · 01-04-2003, 06:13 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Wm. Pete Ebbink:
<strong>John D.,...do any of your HK's have witness marks missing ? Mr. Randal Gibson seems to be "silent" on this matter in his book...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hi Pete,

The reason Gibson was silent on that, is that there was no sample large enough for him to take, I believe. When he wrote his book, he had only a few samples of each to inspect.

Most Kriegs do not have that mark, until the 1944 production (both variations), the 1945 and the Post War. Therefore - a witness mark is more uncommon in the military G, S, 36, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 Series - and in the 1939 production (commercial). Also - it doesn't appear to follow a Serialized trend - just that in 1944 it became more prevalant.

So - kidvett's 1937 top end is correct as it stands (BTW - my 1937 does NOT have a witness mark either).

Best Always,

John D.

01-04-2003, 06:13 PM	#1
John D. Administrator & Site Owner LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Little NE of Somewhere... Posts: 2,651 Thanks: 477 Thanked 515 Times in 128 Posts	[quote]Originally posted by Wm. Pete Ebbink: <strong>John D.,...do any of your HK's have witness marks missing ? Mr. Randal Gibson seems to be "silent" on this matter in his book...</strong><hr></blockquote> Hi Pete, The reason Gibson was silent on that, is that there was no sample large enough for him to take, I believe. When he wrote his book, he had only a few samples of each to inspect. Most Kriegs do not have that mark, until the 1944 production (both variations), the 1945 and the Post War. Therefore - a witness mark is more uncommon in the military G, S, 36, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 Series - and in the 1939 production (commercial). Also - it doesn't appear to follow a Serialized trend - just that in 1944 it became more prevalant. So - kidvett's 1937 top end is correct as it stands (BTW - my 1937 does NOT have a witness mark either). Best Always, John D.