Butt stamp question...

[markhepler]

Hi,

Attached is a pic of the stamp on the butt of my 1920 Luger; I'll send the top stamp photo in another post.

What do you think?

Mark

[markhepler]

Hi Again,

Here's the top stamp to fleshout my prior post--does anyone know the origin of my WWII "bring back"?

Mark

[Edward Tinker]

Mark, interesting so far, can you show both sides? What kind of proofs on the right?

It is marked 1920 which is usually for Reichswehr property stamp and not a year.

What is the full serial, to include the suffix on the front of the frame.

The unit marking looks like a police one, and if it was an O.P.M I'd know, yours is a bit different.

Ed

[Don M]

Mark,

It's a bit misaligned, but I believe the mark is S.Op.IV.221. and stands for Schutzpolizei (Municipal Police) Oppeln Administrative District, Precinct (or City) IV, weapon number 221. There was obviously an earlier mark that was partially ground off. I think I see a slash to the right of the IV. If so, it was probably a Weimar Army unit mark. Can you make out any more of it?

I share Ed's interest in learning more about this pistol. It apparently has no sear safety.

[markhepler]

Hi,

My Luger has a safety in the usual place--it's hard to see from first photos, but appears in this attachment.

Underneath the butt stamp, almost obliterated by filing, are the numbers "7 109 (space between 7 and 1--the 7 looks like a slash in the photo).

Three small eagles are stamped in a row on the non-safety side of the slide, near the barrel; there are no other notable marks.

The serial number is 4828a--all major parts have a corresponding 28 stamp.

Also, pardon my ignorance, but what do the eagles on the side and the fancy DMW scroll on the top signify?

Hope you can shed light on the gun; thanks,

Mark

[Don M]

Mark,

I can help on only a couple of questions.

The sear safety I referred to was a special device added to Prussian police lugers after 1933 to prevent discharges after the sideplate was removed for cleaning. Without this device, it is possible for the cannon to be fired even after the receiver and barrel are removed from the frame (if there is a round in the chamber). Yours does not have this device, suggesting it was removed from police service before the 1933 order to add this device was implemented.

I suspect there was once a period between the 7 and 109 (at the lower right of the first 2?) to serve as a delimiter and that the 7 indicated a particular unit and the 109 was the weapon number of that unit. However, these numbers appear taller than the standard 2mm for Prussian police weapon numbers, so this may be a Reichswehr (Army) mark. Perhaps someone like Ron Smith will weigh in on this.

The DWM stands for Deutsche Waffen- und Munitionsfabriken, one of the major manufacturers of Lugers. The 1920 on the chamber and the serial number of 4828a indicate this was manufactured in 1920 by DWM for the Army. The placement of the last two numbers of the serial number on most of the small parts indicates it was for military service. This provenance is consistent with the speculation that the earlier mark was military.

I know very little about the meaning of the proof marks (eagles) on the right side of the receiver. I'm sure that if you post a good closeup photo of these you'll get lots of help.

[Ron Smith]

Hi Don,

Thanks for the hype. I have been getting a lot of requests for unit mark translations lately. I must know more than I thought I did. Or at least someone thinks I do.

Hi Mark, I can't see your photo very clearly. The mark that you believe to be a 7 is possibly a " / ". The photo below is of 3 Weimar Reichswehr unit marked lugers. Note the slashes. When the Germany Army was reorganized after WWI. They change their unit marking methods or 'codes ', for lack of a better term.

Almost all (not all) Reichswehr[post WWI] unit marks have a "/ "incorporated. As the three below.



These translate as~

1. 15th Batterie / Artillery Regiment 3 weapon #58

2. 2nd Eskadron(Squadron) / Reiter (cavalry) Regiment 1 weapon #46

3. 3rd Eskadron / Reiter Regiment 8 weapon #66







This is an Imerial or WWI marking. Actually three. The pistol went through three different regiments


102nd Regiment Train Sanit�¤ts( Medical train) 3rd Company weapon #223

108th Schutzen Regiment ("Sharpshooter Infantry" more or less) 2nd Company weapon #19

98th Infantry Regiment 8th Company weapon #11

And you can see that the armorer flubbed and had to overstamp the 8 with an R. The 108th unit marking is also an error possibly. It should have been 108.R.2.19. So you can tell that these can be difficult to translate sometimes.





This is 164th Infantry Regiment 1st Company weapon #1








As far as the police marking goes. Don is much better than I am on these.

Don,
My thought would be that this pistol was religated to a police unit in the late 30s, while the Reichswehr was being armed with newer Mauser produced Lugers. That could account for the lack of sear safety. It may have been over looked. Just my opinion.

Thanks, Ron

[Don M]

Ron,
It would be interesting to know if it really was originally produced under a military contract. Shouldn't the proofs on the right receiver say something about that?

[Ron Wood]

You can't read a Luger story book unless you have all the pages (maybe not even then). Pictures of the right side of the receiver, the underside of the barrel, the rear frame, etc., etc., help to tell the story. Pictures, pictures, pictures...sounds like a broken record, but if you want identification, that's what you need to provide.

[Ron Smith]

Don,

It would most probably have been a military contract pistol. Difficult to say if the proofs would tell the story. The serial number placement is the most telling. And the fact that it has an obliterated unit mark. The proofs could give an indication if it is a reworked Imperial with a scrubbed date. Or new manufacture.


The problem with 1920 dated Lugers is that it's hard to tell if it is the year of manufacture or a Reich's property stamp.

As Mr Wood says, more good clear photos of the markings are required.

Ron

[Edward Tinker]

Originally posted by Ron Smith
The problem with 1920 dated Lugers is that it's hard to tell if it is the year of manufacture or a Reich's property stamp.
Ron

Except that many times the 1920 if it is a bit whacky then there is a very good chance it is added by an armorer and not the manufacturer... DWM 1920's are a lot more straight on and deeper, least that is my take,

Ed

[Ron Smith]

Ed,

I agree, and from his photo it looks as though his is a 1920 DWM. Judging from the location on the chamber. Being closer to the rear of the chamber. And it looks like it's very straight. A good clear photo of the proof and acceptance marks would help.

I just read his discription of the proof/acceptance marks. Missed it last night. If they are eagles? Then it would be a 1920, most likely.

Ron

[Don M]

One more nit to pick. If the 7 is really a Reichswehr slash, shouldn't it be followed by a letter and not a number? Ron's examples and a quick scan of G�¶rtz & Bryans shows only letters. After Mark called it a 7, I relooked at the photo and it does look like a 7.

This doesn't mean its not a Reichswehr mark, however. I think the height of the numerals in the apparent weapon number 109 suggests it is not police, at least Prussian police. Scaling from Mark's photo indicates these numerals are about 3.1 mm, the height specified in the 1922 police orders to designate the Hundertschaft (company). The specified height for the numerals in the weapon number was 2.1 mm. On the other hand, my database of Weimar Police Unit Marks indicates that many of the very early marks (1919-22) were not exactly according to specification.

[markhepler]

Hi,

Here are some details in an attached pic, plus a full right-side shot in a post that will follow.

Also, my dad's P-38 had the eagle marks, too.

Thanks for your interest, gentlemen,

Mark

[markhepler]

Here's the right side:

[Ron Smith]

Mark,
Sorry, I lost track of this thread. The proofs are correct for a 1920-21 production Luger. And the Army and Police procured pistols were all in the NS, A , and B suffix range. Origin of the scrubbed unit marks is still pretty much speculation.

Ron

[policeluger]

What I would call this a "small date" as chamber markings is a date and not I feel a property stamp, 3 "AYA4" consistant with police proofing and lack of Police type sear or mag safety, would not IMHO keep from calling this a police....would be interested in it if it comes up for sale.....thanks

[Ron Smith]

Hi Howard,
I agree, it is a Police Luger, but was it originally an Army Luger?

[policeluger]

Ron, I see no proof that it served in the Army, but then sometimes the line between Army/Police was I believe thin at times, I feel safe it rests as a police gun and would love to add it to my collection....

[Don M]

Mark, et al.,
I am continuing to learn more about these police unit marks and will add a further speculation about the original mark. It may have been: S.Op.?.7.109., where the ? was a Roman numeral. This format was specified by the 1922 Prussian marking order where the ? represents the Abteilung (Department), later Inspektion (Inspectorate); 7 represents the Hundertschaft, later Bereitschaft (riot squad); and 109 is the weapon number within Hundertschaft 7. The 1932 Manual 40a revised and simplified this format for the Schupo. The new format was S.X.Y.xxx., where X was the abbreviation for the Prussian Regierungsbezirk (Administrative District), Y an optional Roman numeral indicating the Inspectorate for districts having more than one, and xxx. the weapon number within that Inspectorate.

From the photo in the thread starter, it appears that the earlier ?.7.109. was partially ground off and overstamped with IV.221., consistent with the 1932 instructions.

I find these multiple marks fascinating!