Artillery barrels and frames

Heinz · 08-25-2002, 10:04 PM

After reading Jan Still's Imperial Lugers and the recent thread on 1914 Erfurts I have some questions. Perhaps some of the more experienced can smarten me up.

1) The absence of Erfurt production in 1915 is puzzling.

2) Why do most artillery barrels have Erfurt style proof eagles?

3) Why would most Erfurt frames be notched for the Artillery sight when Erfurt never made (or made very few) long P08s after 1914.

A possible solution that was suggested to me by Norm is that Erfurt made the "Lauf and Gablegehause" or barrel and reciever, for DWM. This would make some sense if switching from producing 4 and 6 inch barreled recievers to 8 inch barreled recievers required significant switchover/setup tme or a different rifling machine than DWM had in place. Is there any information on this issue? Lack of a rifling machine does not seem possible since they manufactured Luger carbines with an even longer barrel but setup time changeover could be an issue.

Erfurts lack of P08 production in 1915 could have been do to other production (rifles?). Is there any information on this?

Jan Still notes that long P08 production serial numbers are intermixed with P08 numbers from DWM 1914 through 1918. I believe this but find it remarkable. If you are running a production line, and Loewe and Co. were masters at high speed and high tech production, why would you interject short bursts of different barrel lengths, unless you had a stock of barrels or barreled recievers you could feed in as needed?

I realize this is conjecture and am seaching for support or rejection of the hypothesis.

One point that would help to clarify the issue is exactly when were the barrel and reciever serial numbered? If they were assembled, proofed and then not serial numbered until mating to the frame unit, this wild hypothesis could have some plausibility. If they were serial numbered at the same time they were proof stamped. Then this email goes to the bottom of the canary cage.

Any thoughts, or even better, data??

kind regards, Heinz

Lugerdoc · 08-26-2002, 09:24 AM

Heinz, I agree that all of the WW1 vintage LPO8 barrels that I've seen are Erfurt Imperial eagle proofed and have an assembly number that is stamped into the top of the rear sight dove tail (mostly covered by the rear sight when installed). This is not the same as the serial number of the pistol, which leads me to believe that all of these LPO8 barrels may have been subcontracted, and supplied to Erfurt and then DWM, as needed.

Johnny Peppers · 08-26-2002, 11:39 AM

The discussion of the Erfurt proofed DWM LP08 barrels came up on the old forum and the consensus of opinion was that all LP08 barrels were made by Erfurt. On page 1 of Jan Still's IL, there is a nice line drawing of the DWM and Erfurt test proofs. On 1914 dated DWM LP08 serial number 1612ns the barrel, receiver, and breechblock are all proofed with the same proof indicated by Still to be DWM. Under the rear sight tangent is found number 612 which is the last three digits of the serial number.
On 1915 dated DWM LP08 serial number 669ns the barrel, receiver, and breechblock are all proofed with the same proof and again it is the proof indicated to be DWM by Still. Under the sight tangent is found the number 2769. Sadly that is the extent of my LP08's.
This brings up the question of proofing on the barrels. Even if the barrels should carry an Erfurt proof, shouldn't they also carry a DWM proof as indication of proofing after assembly? I had a small data base of the numbers found under the rear sight tangent, but lost it in a hard drive failure. Most of the numbers that I had had at least the last two digits matching to the serial number of the pistol.
It would be interesting to know what others have found on their LP08's.

Heinz · 08-26-2002, 09:36 PM

Johnny and Tom, thanks for the input. Do either of you know when in the assembly process the barrel was proofed? For some reason I had the impression the barrels were proofed befor the actions were completely assembled using a test breech of some sort. This concept may be left over from my background in Muzzle loading.

thanks again

Johnny Peppers · 08-26-2002, 11:07 PM

The proof firing of a firearm normally consists of firing the completed firearm with a cartridge that is loaded substantially in excess of the pressure of the cartridge that will normally be fired. When the firearm passes this firing proof, the firearm is then marked with "proof" of it's successfully passing the test firing.
I have no knowledge of what procedure was used by either DWM or Erfurt as to the proofing procedure on newly manufactured Lugers, but see no reason the procedure would differ from any other manufacturer. Possibly in the case of providing barrels for another manufacturer the barrel was proofed by the manufacturer, but this would not prevent the eventual user of the barrel from proofing the completed pistol and applying it's own proofs. For a time Winchester had a "mail order proof" on their barrels that were shipped out for installation by someone else. This identified the barrel as being proofed but as not being installed in the Winchester factory.

08-25-2002, 10:04 PM	#1
Heinz User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Greenville SC Posts: 1,004 Thanks: 377 Thanked 410 Times in 180 Posts	Artillery barrels and frames After reading Jan Still's Imperial Lugers and the recent thread on 1914 Erfurts I have some questions. Perhaps some of the more experienced can smarten me up. 1) The absence of Erfurt production in 1915 is puzzling. 2) Why do most artillery barrels have Erfurt style proof eagles? 3) Why would most Erfurt frames be notched for the Artillery sight when Erfurt never made (or made very few) long P08s after 1914. A possible solution that was suggested to me by Norm is that Erfurt made the "Lauf and Gablegehause" or barrel and reciever, for DWM. This would make some sense if switching from producing 4 and 6 inch barreled recievers to 8 inch barreled recievers required significant switchover/setup tme or a different rifling machine than DWM had in place. Is there any information on this issue? Lack of a rifling machine does not seem possible since they manufactured Luger carbines with an even longer barrel but setup time changeover could be an issue. Erfurts lack of P08 production in 1915 could have been do to other production (rifles?). Is there any information on this? Jan Still notes that long P08 production serial numbers are intermixed with P08 numbers from DWM 1914 through 1918. I believe this but find it remarkable. If you are running a production line, and Loewe and Co. were masters at high speed and high tech production, why would you interject short bursts of different barrel lengths, unless you had a stock of barrels or barreled recievers you could feed in as needed? I realize this is conjecture and am seaching for support or rejection of the hypothesis. One point that would help to clarify the issue is exactly when were the barrel and reciever serial numbered? If they were assembled, proofed and then not serial numbered until mating to the frame unit, this wild hypothesis could have some plausibility. If they were serial numbered at the same time they were proof stamped. Then this email goes to the bottom of the canary cage. Any thoughts, or even better, data?? kind regards, Heinz

08-26-2002, 09:24 AM	#2
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 736 Times in 483 Posts	Heinz, I agree that all of the WW1 vintage LPO8 barrels that I've seen are Erfurt Imperial eagle proofed and have an assembly number that is stamped into the top of the rear sight dove tail (mostly covered by the rear sight when installed). This is not the same as the serial number of the pistol, which leads me to believe that all of these LPO8 barrels may have been subcontracted, and supplied to Erfurt and then DWM, as needed. __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 lugerdoc@charter.net

08-26-2002, 11:39 AM	#3
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	The discussion of the Erfurt proofed DWM LP08 barrels came up on the old forum and the consensus of opinion was that all LP08 barrels were made by Erfurt. On page 1 of Jan Still's IL, there is a nice line drawing of the DWM and Erfurt test proofs. On 1914 dated DWM LP08 serial number 1612ns the barrel, receiver, and breechblock are all proofed with the same proof indicated by Still to be DWM. Under the rear sight tangent is found number 612 which is the last three digits of the serial number. On 1915 dated DWM LP08 serial number 669ns the barrel, receiver, and breechblock are all proofed with the same proof and again it is the proof indicated to be DWM by Still. Under the sight tangent is found the number 2769. Sadly that is the extent of my LP08's. This brings up the question of proofing on the barrels. Even if the barrels should carry an Erfurt proof, shouldn't they also carry a DWM proof as indication of proofing after assembly? I had a small data base of the numbers found under the rear sight tangent, but lost it in a hard drive failure. Most of the numbers that I had had at least the last two digits matching to the serial number of the pistol. It would be interesting to know what others have found on their LP08's.

08-26-2002, 09:36 PM	#4
Heinz User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Greenville SC Posts: 1,004 Thanks: 377 Thanked 410 Times in 180 Posts	Johnny and Tom, thanks for the input. Do either of you know when in the assembly process the barrel was proofed? For some reason I had the impression the barrels were proofed befor the actions were completely assembled using a test breech of some sort. This concept may be left over from my background in Muzzle loading. thanks again

08-26-2002, 11:07 PM	#5
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	The proof firing of a firearm normally consists of firing the completed firearm with a cartridge that is loaded substantially in excess of the pressure of the cartridge that will normally be fired. When the firearm passes this firing proof, the firearm is then marked with "proof" of it's successfully passing the test firing. I have no knowledge of what procedure was used by either DWM or Erfurt as to the proofing procedure on newly manufactured Lugers, but see no reason the procedure would differ from any other manufacturer. Possibly in the case of providing barrels for another manufacturer the barrel was proofed by the manufacturer, but this would not prevent the eventual user of the barrel from proofing the completed pistol and applying it's own proofs. For a time Winchester had a "mail order proof" on their barrels that were shipped out for installation by someone else. This identified the barrel as being proofed but as not being installed in the Winchester factory.