HK 1936 On Auction...

[Pete Ebbink]

Norm,

Regarding pages 279-280 in Still's TRL...the toggle knobs still have the deep bevel/chamfer along the holes in the knobs...

I also gather from looking and reading through the Gibson book, that the characterist HK feautres held pretty steady through the contract 10,000 guns, but QA/QC and production techniques may have begun to vary for the later 3000 or so guns...

Another point : If you look at the gun on page 267 in the Still TRL book, this S-code HK (serial # 3195) does not appear to have the LWaA proof on its right side frame rail...noticed this HK belonged to Don Hallock at the time TRL's was printed. I will e-mail Don, off Forum and will ask him about that...

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[Pete Ebbink]

Did hear back from Don Hallock.

Unfortunately, Don no longer has this HK (that I mentioned in my last posting...). He sold all 28 of his HK lugers to a very deep-pocketed buyer a few years back...

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[John D.]

Hi Folks....

OK - seems like Pete is the only one to take up the challenge - and what a terrific job..!! Pete - if you will e-mail me your address - I'll fire off that commercial mag to you.....

First things first. This seller is *excellent* - and a terrificly honest individual. Based on several conversations, this piece is indeed what I suspected - a post-war HK. These are very diffent then "parts guns" - and actually, are a very collectible HK variation to some of us.

Now - Pete, even though you missed the big question of "what would you ask the seller to do?" The answer is really simple - remove the right grip and look for any stamps. The seller was more then the accomodating - and yes, there is a "7" stamped there. So - what does "7" mean?

Gibson touches on it - but my theory is that, based on the post-wars I have in my collection and those I have authenticated - a frame marked "7" was further into the assembly stage then a "star" rejected frame. On this piece - I do believe that the cannon, reciever and frame were assembled at the time of the major 1936 production, but was "set aside" to either be re-worked or turned into a commercial with a "Star or a" stamp. After the factory was "liberated", this piece was most likelyassembled by the few HK employees that were permitted to finish HK Lugers. Following, I also have several post-war production HKs of this same variation in my collection - 3 of the 4 have the same "7".

As well - I'll be writing a report for the current seller with quite a bit of detail, but in brief - here are some summary observations:

- The trigger does NOT match the outline of the trigger guard. The shoe is correct, however. HK had very good fitting matches on the guard to the trigger top 1/3. My guess is, on a post-war HK such as this, the trigger is stamped to match the frame. I believe that this is the case on this HK;

- The extractor is ill-fitted - correct for an HK postwar, as being assembled from the factory parts which included HK, Simson, DWM, Erfurt, etc.

- The rear toggle appears to be DWM â?? not HK â?? BUT â?? it should have a LWaA2 proof on the underside if taken in at the HK factory and assembled later with the remaining links. This one does, and again is â??correctâ?� for a post war;

Now for the â??obvious stuffâ?�.

- Look at the trigger bar. Closely. It is â??strawedâ?�. As well, the take down is, indeed Simson, not HK. Both are correct for a post war.

- The takedown â??shouldâ?� have the last 2 digets of the frame serial number stamped inside on the relieved portion â?? and this one does as well;

- The sideplate is absolutely correct for a post war. Again â?? the outside should be stamped with the last 2 digets, as this is, the inside can be stamped with any number. This follows suit to post-war HK. The trigger lever mounted in the sideplate can also be â??proofedâ?� or not proofed, but this one is â??proofedâ?� correctly;

- The barrel. You focused on the â??1â?�. Thatâ??s not really where I wanted your attention I wanted you to focus on the â??8â?� and the â??8â?�. Iâ??m looking for the â?? , â??, but it may not have been â??struckâ?� on the dies. Oh â?? and the LWAa2 proof is correct â?? both in placement and era die;

- The grips are correct for a post war â?? but are out of era for an issued HK. They are excellent examples of the fine checkered RITZMANN grips. However, there should be a â??scratched starâ?� on one of the grip panels designating that the grips are fitted to a â??7â?� or â??Starâ?� frame. After speaking with the seller, this is the case on this firearm â?? which would make them correct;

- Frame polish on the rails. If this was fitted as a production HK, the frame/cannon rails should be â??polishedâ?�. When contacting the seller, one should also ask if this is the case. On this example, the answer is no â?? they are not polished â?? as is correct on a post-war HK.

Ummmm - I could go on - but you get the idea. As well - the seller is a terrific person - and I envy the next owner of this piece.

Anyway - great job, Pete!!! No - it's not a PX or G.I "parts gun" - but rather a post war HK production, which is somewhat a rarer variation which should NOT include a "P" prefix and is very different then a PX HK or a GI "parts gun".

[Pete Ebbink]

Hello John,

What a great education...you certainly do operate in an entirely different HK universe than us mere mortals...!!!

I will send you my mail-to address via private e-mail...if you still think that I "am worthy"...

Did the seller say he will modify his ad text ?

p.s. One final question : Would this late date HK still display the typical "thumb print" on the rear frame from flame hardening ?

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[Pete Ebbink]

John D.

I did find in Gibson's book where he mentions the "7" issue.

Is there anything else in the book about the late-date assembled guns ? Other than the PX and the 3-digit, post-war late-dates, I cannot find any other info.

Or did the history/theory of these guns surface only after Gibson wrote his book...?

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[John D.]

Hey Pete.. (OH - I have to get your MAG in the mail!!! thanks for the reminder !!)

Anyway - the "7" is indeed covered in Gibson's book, but only somewhat superficially, as you know. The "theory" that I presented above, is my theory after examination of various post-war HKs.

Honestly - there are 4 distinct variations of "post-war" that I'm working on documenting, and once it's complete over the next 6 months to a year - I'll post it here in the LugerForum and to the HK collectors I chat with. Anyway - my "7" observations come from my work and analysis, rather then Mr. Gibson's excellent work...

Best to you!

John

[AGE]

John D.

Wow!!! I understand you also run a Porsche forum (or some such car). Do you know all of the comparable stuff on those cars? I would hate to try to slip a modified car by you. Funny, neither my 9 mm 1911 nor shooter Lugers have any of the parts you mentioned (wonder why).

[John D.]

Hey Al....

Well - sort of... The Porsche site I run has about 16,000 folks registered on the Forums, and about 150,000 "lurkers" (it's about a 1:10 ratio) - and takes about 2,000,000 page views per day. The e-mail lists have another 82,000 folks - and the servers (there are 15 of them) send about 14,000,000 e-mails on a weekday....

Yea - I'm kind of wierd - as I collect Lugers, rebuild - drive - race Porsches - and have yet to figure out how this Internet stuff is suppossed to make someone a living. So I still have my "day job" to help pay for all this

Now - about your 9mm and Luger... If your Luger has one of those funny "dagger/anchor" toggle marks - I can probably assist you On your 1911 - I think I posted here and on the 1911Forum site. There, I post as "jd-08", and you'll see me in the Colt, Kimber, DW and STI Forums. See - I shoot my 1911s, collect my Krieghoffs and restore/drive/race my Porsches...

Best to you, Al!!!

John

[Navy]

John D,
Pls contact me off list @ catofong@aol.com re: a 1911 with some history that needs a home. Oh, those Kreighoffs gotta be Navy or why would they have the anchor?

Tom A.

[John D.]

Hi Tom..!

You'll have e-mail in a moment.. Oh - the Kreigs with the Anchor - I think they were Navy issue - then the "flyboys" took them over

Best to you!

John D.

[AGE]

John D.

You must be one of those guys who never sleeps or never sees his wife. ...or your job is pretty forgivingxxx scratch that.

Your help with my guns has been greatly appreciated. The 9 mm 1911 now runs flawlessly although it won't group as well as it could. It is pretty tight and has a good collet bushing, but groups about like a stock .45 WWII G.I. gun that I have that rattles like a can of bolts when I shake it (really not too bad--3-4" groups).