1940 holster question

RockinWR · 10-09-2004, 12:42 AM

Dave,
* I'd like to expound slightly based on my readings & understanding. Jerry is essentially correct; although, I've heard a slight variant of the rationalization.
* Fact is we have no documented answer for a definitive date as far as I know. The change was actually a transition based on stock already accepted by the Army, saddler's on-going work-in-progress/contracts, and Directive dissemination(communications) as Jerry points out.
* Today's generally accepted answer is based on observation of Vet rigs & the year-date/suffix block pistols they contained. Long time collectors observed/postulated/concluded the change to a three digit code on holsters occurred approximately mid-1940.
* This conclusion was reinforced by the Army's final acceptance of the "480" code P.38 from Walther in April, 1940. The Army actually only accepted this pistol's design in 1938; but, it took Walther a while to facilitate, tool, produce the test "0" Series to mature the Army's final P.38 configuration acceptance, and to overcome production glitches to achieve a mandatory contractural requirement of 10k pistols/month. Hence, April, 1940 as a start; but, later into 1940 before any significant quantities of P.38's made it to the field units.
* As Jerry points out, the similarity in holster designs yielded enough potential/real confusion that the Heeres directed each style of PT to be marked P.08 or P.38 respectively.
* The full maker/town/date to code/date change was made for a different reason....to deny the Allies intelligence about Axis production sources/quantities. This was likely spurred by WWII starting in earnous with the early 1940 Norway invasion & the Western front starting in May, 1940. More units in foreign territory; thus, more examples from which to garner intelligence.
* Finally, there always seems to be the 5% who either don't get or don't want to get "the word". A few Luger holster examples, well into and after 1941, have been seen still displaying full maker's data. Surprisingly, I think these are also found with Waffen Inspection acceptance stamps. Maybe Schnapps was involved!!
* Trust this adds insight to your query.
Respectfully,
Bob

10-09-2004, 12:42 AM	#4
RockinWR User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: D/FW, Tx Posts: 279 Thanks: 109 Thanked 31 Times in 16 Posts	Dave, * I'd like to expound slightly based on my readings & understanding. Jerry is essentially correct; although, I've heard a slight variant of the rationalization. * Fact is we have no documented answer for a definitive date as far as I know. The change was actually a transition based on stock already accepted by the Army, saddler's on-going work-in-progress/contracts, and Directive dissemination(communications) as Jerry points out. * Today's generally accepted answer is based on observation of Vet rigs & the year-date/suffix block pistols they contained. Long time collectors observed/postulated/concluded the change to a three digit code on holsters occurred approximately mid-1940. * This conclusion was reinforced by the Army's final acceptance of the "480" code P.38 from Walther in April, 1940. The Army actually only accepted this pistol's design in 1938; but, it took Walther a while to facilitate, tool, produce the test "0" Series to mature the Army's final P.38 configuration acceptance, and to overcome production glitches to achieve a mandatory contractural requirement of 10k pistols/month. Hence, April, 1940 as a start; but, later into 1940 before any significant quantities of P.38's made it to the field units. * As Jerry points out, the similarity in holster designs yielded enough potential/real confusion that the Heeres directed each style of PT to be marked P.08 or P.38 respectively. * The full maker/town/date to code/date change was made for a different reason....to deny the Allies intelligence about Axis production sources/quantities. This was likely spurred by WWII starting in earnous with the early 1940 Norway invasion & the Western front starting in May, 1940. More units in foreign territory; thus, more examples from which to garner intelligence. * Finally, there always seems to be the 5% who either don't get or don't want to get "the word". A few Luger holster examples, well into and after 1941, have been seen still displaying full maker's data. Surprisingly, I think these are also found with Waffen Inspection acceptance stamps. Maybe Schnapps was involved!! * Trust this adds insight to your query. Respectfully, Bob