Swiss model 1900 #1

[John Sabato]

Thank you Albert for your generous contribution in the history of these firearms... Your extensive knowledge in this area of Luger history never ceases to amaze me... for the novice researchers in our forum, including myself, could you please identify your sources for this wonderful information...

kind regards,

John

[drbuster]

Albert, the 20 1900 Swiss pistols given to the Swiss Pistol Commission, were these pistols characterized by strawed sear bars, unmarked front toggle tops, engraved Swiss Cross in Sunburst on the chamber, and as pictured on page 51 of Kenyon's Lugers At Random?

[Imperial Arms]

Hello John,

Thank you for the kind compliment regarding my extensive knowledge in the field of Luger pistols and DWM history.

Firstly, my knowledge comes from studying and comparing the actual pistols in my hands. This does not only relate to Luger pistols, but also includes its competitors such as the Mauser pistol. Secondly, I study original documents, catalogs, reports and various other literature in archives and private collections - believe it or not, the most reliable information is printed before 1945! By the way, I must not forget my fellow friends who have shared their knowledge and information with me including those collectors who have debated with me. Thirdly, I learn about the proud heritage of my country Germany which had a strong bearing on the high manufacturing levels of German weapons companies, and I also try to get an insight to the internal management of the company which guided the standards and decisions from 'the boss' down to the worker. On account of these important factors which I have learned (there are a few more which I have not mentioned), I believe that I have gained my extensive knowledge based on logic and common sense which can produce reasonable facts and theories while at the same time cutting out most of the 'spam', false stories and incorrect details which we hear many times.

In the gun collectors society, there is a tendency for 'bragging' to occur which sometimes has been motivated by the weight of a person's wallet or the size of his collection. If you take those two big elements away, you might see a collector 'blowing hot air' because he lacks the most important element which is knowledge - knowledge is king and it takes a long, long time to learn it!

I nearly forgot to mention one other important factor which is as valuable as knowledge - its called integrity. Sadly, there are some dealers, auction houses and collectors who have thrown their reputation out the window by preying on new and amateur collectors (some quite rich) and this will only kill our great collectors society in the future.

I hope that the New Year will bring fruitful rewards and happiness to everyone.

Best wishes,
Albert

[Imperial Arms]

Hello Herbert,

The twenty M1900 'GL' Swiss Acceptance Lugers which were presented as gifts to the Swiss Pistol Commission had features along the lines as you mentioned in your question, however, the rear toggle link should be square. I believe that my pistol serial #13 was one of the pistols presented to a member of the pistol commission and he probably had an Swiss Arsenal change some small parts including the swapping to a wide trigger which is unnumbered on my pistol. It was normal for these changes to occur on these pre-production Lugers and in some cases the barrels were replaced such as with the M1899 pistol #19. Furthermore, some of these M1899 pistols were sabotaged after the trails and exist today in the Thun Museum with mismatched parts from other Lugers.

The sear bar on the pistol shown on page 51 of LAR is a replacement as well as on the M1900 British Test pistol serial #26 (refer to the image on my web site) which was delivered to the British trails of Spring 1901. This small group of six pistols had the stronger contoured toggle links, but still retained the double firing pin retainer springs which were improved later to a single spring when the Swiss received their first delivery.

I hope that my explanation answers your question.

Cheers,
Albert

[drbuster]

Thanks very much, Albert. Do you have any opinion as to what pistol is represented on page 51 of Lugers At Random? I have been told also by various people, such as Mike Krause and Ralph Shattuck, that some (if not all) squared off rear toggle joints were retrofitted (by who??) to the rounded type because of fear of metal failure. I have no idea if this is just conjecture and how it could be verified.

[Imperial Arms]

Hello Herbert,

The pistol represented on page 51 of LAR (I believe that it is serial #39) is probably an early pistol that was made/assembled after the British Trails of 1901 by reason of the fact that it has a radius toggle link and normal grips. It would be interesting to find out if it has a longer firing pin with a double firing pin retainer spring or a single one with the shorter firing pin. If I had to make a logical theory on this pistol, it could have been a another/second specimen delivered to England to demonstrate the small improvements that DWM was making on these early pistols concurrently with the production of the Swiss contract pistols which had not yet been delivered to Switzerland. This pistol could be an intermediatory pistol between the British Trails pistols and the true M1900 Luger pistol, but I could be wrong. The so-called 'retro-fitting' was made by DWM and it first appeared on the British Trail pistols because during the Swiss trails of 1898 and 1899, some of the square links on the pre-production pistols cracked where it was weak at the square corner. The same problem happened on the Mauser C96 prototype pistol where the extractor would hit the top of the upper receiver when the bolt was in the furthest rear position, but Mauser was very quick to observe the weakness and immediately improved this area to a radius for enforcement. It is very interesting to observe that the early 'System Mauser' pistols have a radius at the rear of the ejection port. Many collectors would not notice this detail without comparing the prototype and a 'System Mauser' pistol in their hand. On the other hand, DWM had already made 100 or so upper receivers (with square links) and nothing was discarded from stock. If they could use it later - they used it!

It is interesting to note that the six or so pistols delivered to England did NOT have the 'GL' hallmark which is also absent from this pistol. Is it a coincidence that serial #26 and this pistol both have a replaced sear bar which is strawed?

It was common/normal practice for German weapons manufactures to use old parts in later pistols and this probably explains why this pistol has a blank toggle and a Swiss cross on the chamber. Some collectors have questioned the authenticity and originality of the pistol on page 51, but I cannot give a good opinion without additional images or someday examining the pistol in my hands.

You brought up a good topic to the surface regarding this pistol which has helped with the expansion of knowledge and research. It is important to examine pistols and their history from realistic angles while using a logical frame of mind.

Cheers,
Albert

[Pete Ebbink]

Albert, Doc...

I suspect the luger shown in Kenyon's LAR (printed in 1969 and reprinted in 1990) on page 51 is actually serial number "33" and not "39". In LAR, its serial is not identified.

But in Kenyon's 2nd. book L-TMNP (pritned in 1991) on page 67 and in Datig's Swiss Monograph (printed in 1992) on page 23, the gun is identified as "33".

If you compare these other photos with the photo shown in LAR, you will see identical wear patterns at the TD lever and on the thumb safety and the flattening of a grip screw slot on the left side is the same.

The Datig photo is the more recent...and "33" now sports B-L "styled" grips not shown in the two other Kenyon books.

Dr. Geoff Sturgess makes some interesting reading comments about "33" in his long article on the B-L pre-production lugers, also...on the past page of that article.

[drbuster]

Albert, Thanks again for your comments. Luger #33, pictured on page 51 of "Lugers At Random" and page 67 in Kenyon's "Luger, The Multinational Pistol", is the same pistol and is in the possession of Ralph Shattuck. It has a single firing pin spring and a rounded rear toggle joint. And Pete, the reason the grips are different is that Ralph, in the older Datig book, had replaced the original borderless grips with bordered Swiss grips that he had because he thought they looked better! He had no idea that it would stir the controversy that is still ongoing. The original grips (borderless) are now on the pistol. Whether this #33 is a pre-production model or a later prototype model like that sent to Britain, or just a very well made fake is up for grabs. It depends on who you read or talk to. What really puzzles me is why some talented booster, or faker, would spend a large sum of money to weld a 1900 frame, or use a real unrelieved frame, engrave the chamber like the real pre-production pieces, make up the rest of the luger and sell it for a fraction of what it cost to make. Ralph Shattuck told me that he bought it for much less than it would have taken to fabricate with 1990's or later dollars.

[Imperial Arms]

Hello Pete & Herbert,

Excuse my mistake of the serial number of the pistol #33 which is in Ralph's collection. If that pistol actually has a single firing pin spring, it is an early M1900 Swiss Luger and NOT a pre-production/Swiss Acceptance Luger even if it has a blank toggle, an engraved cross on the chamber, and serial number placements in the style of a pre-production Swiss Luger. The only explanation I can provide for the pistol having some early features (i.e unrelieved frame etc) is DWM using old parts in inventory to assemble the pistol. I reckon that the checkered grips which were initially on the pistol would have been correct, but when Ralph decided to make B-L borderline grips for the pistol to make it look better/pretty, he unfortunately opened a 'can of worms'. Using a Luger with a very low serial number can easily allow for some 'playing around' which might enhance the importance and value of the pistol against collectors who do not know what is occurring in the 'workshops'. However, when such a mistake occurs, the result can lead to condemnation which is probably the direction Luger #33 is taking now. Obviously, Geoff took such an opportunity in his bull**** article to mark this pistol #33 for death and the controversy still continues.

Unfortunately, there is a fool born everyday including the person/collector who bought the fake pre-production Luger serial #20 from the last RIA for $40k-$45k. Will Luger #33 shows up in the same auction in the future and fetch a similar price? In the gun collector's society, capitalism takes no prisoners, and we are responsible to protect ourselves against those sharks who prey on amateur and expert collectors who may lack the necessary knowledge and skills.

Albert

[drbuster]

Albert, I re-read the Sturgess article and agree with your inference that he makes several dogmatic statements that have no way of being proven or dis-proven. Many re-fittings could have and probably were made on several prototype and pre-production Swiss lugers by the Swiss after the fact to make them serviceable for use. I feel this is especially true about the double firing pin springs. After all my reading about #33, I get the impression that it is a correct pre-production piece with a possible retrofitted toggle train. We thought the same thing about #20 when it was examined at the recent Reno show. There were many features about #20 that looked right to people with much more experience than I, including the frame machining, trigger spring, trigger spring frame well cutting, and the grips. Sturgess wants to make us believe (at least in the late 1990's when the article was written) that things just went from A to Z, but witness #40, the British prototype with squared rear toggle joint. We know that Georg Luger rounded this off much earlier, so an older prototype was sent to Britain (and also Holland) for trials. The bottom line is that we must keep an open mind and not condemn an early Swiss luger just on pictures alone.

[Pete Ebbink]

Doc,

Maybe use your influence with Shattuck and have detailed, interior view photos taken of # 33.

That should certainly quite the nay-sayers if # 33 is right.

If I owned # 33 and read the Strugess article, I certainly would have posted such photos up all over the place to prove the "bad talk" wrong.

If such photos would prove the B-L heritage of # 33 (albeit...with some rework), it could certainly not hurt when the time comes to sell off # 33.

[drbuster]

I agree with you, Pete. Ralph just doesn't care and won't post anything on the Forums any more for various reasons that I'm sure you are familiar with. Mike Krause has examined #33 several times in the 1970's, reportedly before the north country boosters became overly active. He says there nothing on that luger that either DWM, Georg Luger, or the Swiss didn't put on themselves.

[Pete Ebbink]

As Strugess said...it does not help when the current Owner changes grips on the gun to make it look more like a M1899.

He also mentions a toggle number change as well (more modern-day...), but I do not know the details of the source of that Strugess information.

It very well could be a original M1899 with some M1900 parts used as replacements.