My 1st P.08, a 1914 Erfurt

[drbuster]

Dear John, the pieces with these characteristics I have examined have not had matching grips, except one with dark inked numbers. I just don't know why or where these are coming from. Could there have been a batch of unused 1914 dated receivers that Erfurt came upon in their frenzy to get more handguns out into the field in 1917-18? But then why are so many of them appearing here and now? The ones I have seen, or owned, are well used and have no grip screw proofs. The prices on these, in my opinion, should be in the shooter range.

[John D.]

Hi Doc,

Great questions..! When I take a look at this again, I'll recheck the grips later this week as I asked to see it again, but I do believe that they were matching..? I have purchased several Erfurts from this gentleman over the past year or two, as he is slowly selling them off to concentrate on Banner Lugers.

There are also some other common aspects I see between the one I'm interested in and feldm�¼tze's "1914", but I don't know if it is true of other "q" blocks? I note the strong amount of remaining "blue". Why would "q" blocks have this amount of finish left after being issued to the field for 4 years of battle - unless your theory has some merit. That, coupled with the grip screw proof?

It would seem counter-intuitive that some enterprising person in WaffenFabUSA would purchase a bunch of "q" block later year Erfurts (I don't see any indication that the suffixes were altered?) and alter the chamber dates to 1914 - given the relative small higher return of the "1914" variation and that Erfurts generally do not command a price premium unto themselves? However - stranger things have certainly occured..?!!

As for more turning up only recently..??? That is a good question... The only thing I could attribute that to is the communication medium (Internet) has enabled many new and old collectors to share data. If you consider this Forum and Jan's forum - combined, they are one VERY large "Luger Symposium" with over 5,000 folks in attendance...??

Hmmm - great thread again - and thanks for the continued thoughts/comments!!

John

[Vlim]

Hi,

The idea that at the end of WW1 several shortcuts were made in order to satisfy a need for pistols for the war effort can be dropped.

During 1917 the major P08 production lines were actually slowed down as a result of material shortages and the fact that the arsenals were stockpiled with pistols. Focus changed to producing as much machineguns as possible, as they were especially in demand.

There was no shortage of handguns during 1917 and 1918.

If these 'weird' Erfurts demand an explanation, it would be most interesting to look at whoever inherited the Erfurt machinery and leftover parts after WW1.

[drbuster]

Gerben brings up another very interesting and very plausible explanation. I have heard on past posts on this subject, from Bill Garrison and others, about the lack of a shortage of handguns at this time in WW1. All I can say is these guns are out there, and no one can explain it. Gerben, have you seen any of these in your European travels?

[Edward Tinker]

This is a subject I do not know much about, but the oddity is that the year is 1914. Any thought that more than a couple of "left-over" 1914's were used after the war or after 1914, brings up the following questions;

1. Why 1914? If the thought is like what I have heard about KU guns, you'd see other years, not just 1914.
After all, why would the factory have â??left-overâ?� frames dated 1914, especially to the q block? If the factory had a few frames in 1915, then they would have used them, not waited 150,000 guns into the production cycle (1916 or 1917)? And if they used old parts, why wouldnâ??t they take the date off, put a new date, or add a 2nd date?

2. Did other years, 1916, 1917, or 1918 have q production? (so the q is more disguised if added later to other dated guns)

3. I thought the year was marked at the end of acceptance? If so, then if RC'd bad enough not to use, then why keep them around?

4. I have a police luger that had an 8 added before the serial number. It is possible that the q was added to a set of guns during or after the war. I doubt this theory, but it is possible.

[Vlim]

Doc,

Can't say I have seen many Erfurts. Most of them ended up at your end of the Atlantic

But I think there's one thing we can be sure off. Erfurt didn't create these. They were a government facility, stuck to the rules, had no under the counter point of sale and no official commercial customers.

[feldm�¼tze]

If P.08 production was slowing down beginning in 1917, how do we account for the late war Spandau (also a government arsenal) P.08's?
Have patience with me on probably silly questions, I don't have Jan Still's book yet....

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally posted by G. van Vlimmeren
If these 'weird' Erfurts demand an explanation, it would be most interesting to look at whoever inherited the Erfurt machinery and leftover parts after WW1.

Charlie Sorrentino, in Auto Mag, has suggested the possibility that 'someone'--no evidence who, not necessarily Simson--finished up and sold guns which were nearly done when Erfurt halted production. He thus explains u suffix 1918 Erfurts, and Erfurts which have surfaced with a 1918/20 chamber date. He suggests that these might be considered 'Weimar Transitional'.

--Dwight

[MauserLugers]

Interesting subject with no real answers.

Since the receivers are dated 1914 and notched, they were originally intended for a 1914 artillery. Since these have 4 inch barrels, the configuration (4 inch barrel) was added at some point/time after 1914.

My thoughts are these are Weimar assembled Lugers (reworks), made up from left over parts or dis-assembled Lugers, made to comply with the restrictions for the Weimar Military.

If -- that big word -- this pistol had a sear safety added, there would not be any questions about what it was, as we'd just say it was a reworked Weimar Police Luger. The only difference on this piece is that it escaped police use.

Anyway, the date, notched receiver, and 4 inch barrel suggest a rework of the Weimar era to me. -- Bill

[Edward Tinker]

Originally posted by feldm�¼tze
If P.08 production was slowing down beginning in 1917, how do we account for the late war Spandau (also a government arsenal) P.08's?
Have patience with me on probably silly questions, I don't have Jan Still's book yet....

There were no "produced" Spandau's, there may have been some refurbished ones with their marking on the toggle, but that is contested also.

Like I said, very contested, supposedly a couple of "true" spandau guns, but I can't believe there were any produced from scratch.

ed

[George Anderson]

I think that the answer to these unconventional 1914 P08s lies in the undiscovered production history of the Royal Arsenal. There are no 1915 dated Erfurts, I would assume that the government arsenal was not instructed to cease LP08 and P08 production as of 31 December 1914. It is more likely that parabellum production was halted sometime during the year of 1914. It was most likely halted quite abruptly in order that facility and man power resources could be put to a more urgent use.

If 1914's production was halted rather abruptly then one might assume that P08 components were available but put aside in order to pursue whatever the greater need was. Subsequently, when that greater urgency had been satisfied, P08 production resumed and at some point the 1914 dated receivers were pulled in to the production line.

If one uses logic, the fact that these oddballs all fall in the same letter block should indicate that it was an original production anomaly and not the work of some modern day charlatan. The mecahnics and economics of boosting a line-run Erfurt to an improperly serial numbered 1914 do not add up.

Think about it.

[feldm�¼tze]

The Erfurt arsenal was rather busy in 1914. Besides producing numerous bayos, they made alot of Kar98a's rifles. Serial #'s for '14 run to #506ee (reported), and #8123x (confirmed). Regarding the Gew98's produced by Erfurt that year, only about three are reported, and a friend/collector has one of those (#1754).

[Vlim]

Certainly we can write off the 'Spandau' varations as fakes. The Spandau arsenal had no production facilities for P08 production and, as stated before, there was no handgun shortage during 1917 and 1918, so no reason for Spandau to start producing (or even reworking) P08's.

I don't believe the '1914 Erfurt anomaly' is a postwar boost, as George said, it's not worth the effort financially. I also don't believe they were put together during the 1914-1918 period. If 1914's were produced during the first months of 1915 there would be no reason for the receiver cut, unnumbered screws and relieved sear bar.

It might just as well have been a commercial company that bought the Erfurt leftovers and assembled a couple of guns for commercial or semi-commercial sale. Who knows?

A more recent example is Mauser. When they ceased to exist in their old form in 1997, the remaining stock was bought by a couple of dealers, who assembled and sold a number of pistols. To this day, at least one of them still has unbuilt but complete Mauser Parabellums in stock.

[feldm�¼tze]

Many thanks to all of you that spoke up and voiced their opinions. This pistol is not what I wanted for my first P.08, but I'll just chalk it up to a lesson learned. Sometimes that's just the way those apples fall.....

[John D.]

Originally posted by feldm�¼tze
....This pistol is not what I wanted for my first P.08, but......

Hi feldm�¼tze..!

If I were you - I wouldn't be a bit disappointed.. For that - if yours was the "only one" known to ever exist, well - then you'd have a problem... However - to make you feel better, I sold one of my 1911s today, so I had the cash to pick up my 1914 Erfurt as well. Since "misery" loves company - following is a short description of mine. As well - I'll try to post some rather extensive pictures in a new thread in the next few days. In the meantime...

After reading all these posts and theories and closely examining mine, I'm more inclined to agree with the following post:

Originally posted by George Anderson
.... I would assume that the government arsenal was not instructed to cease LP08 and P08 production as of 31 December 1914. It is more likely that parabellum production was halted sometime during the year of 1914..... If 1914's production was halted rather abruptly then one might assume that P08 components were available but put aside in order to pursue whatever the greater need was. Subsequently, when that greater urgency had been satisfied, P08 production resumed and at some point the 1914 dated receivers were pulled in to the production line...

I'm way out of my specialized area here, so I reserve the right to be wrong

1914 Erfurt - serial number "7019 q". Overall VG to excellent blue with strong straw. Non-matched MAG, but correct type.

Some of the details....

- Notched receiver for arty sight;
- Relieved sear bar;
- The grips are matched, stamped with the last two digits AND are proofed;
- Grip screws are NOT proofed;
- The same "RC" stamps as shown on the "q" block pictured by feldm�¼tze are present - including one on the left of the barrel he indicates is also present on his 1914;

Now - I have a question... When did Erfurt stop putting the proof on the MAG releases (right side). If I look at the photos in Jan's "Imperial Lugers" (I'd be LOST without that reference!!) - it would not be present on post 1914 production? If that's true, coupled with the relieved sear and grip screws - it points to post 1914 Erfurt production, with Erfurt producing these "q" block 1914s....

As for the theory that these were produced after the end of WW1, I'm not so certain I'd agree. To make that theory plausible - it would say that these were completed "Lugers" (read below as to why) that were not issued during the war - but during the Weimar period by the "new owners" of the Erfurt spares. That certainly doesn't make sense - but it would have to be the case... Why?

Based on the fact that these are all serialized (including the small parts) and the majority of the small parts also carry the Erfurt proof which again, are also correctly numbered to the pistol. If they were assembled post WW1 - I would tend to doubt that the Erfurt proofs/digit matched parts would continued to be used to "make these complete" Erfurts;

Second - note the comments about the crown RC being prevelant. I highly doubt that the new post-war assembler would have "matched" so consistiently all the parts that had the crown RC old Erfurt spares to "create" this new variation. If the proofs/serialized part/crown RCs were more random - I could be more inclined to agree with post-war assembly - but they are not random - hence, highly unlikely is was a "post war spare parts" Erfurt;

Third - fit and finish. This variation appears to have a uniform finish and blue. If they were "assembled" from different year parts - one would expect that the Luger would have to re-blued to achieve the same consistiency overall throughout the firearm. That is not the case, they are not re-blued - as all the stamps proofs are crisp - including the correct halo on the serial number digits on the left side of the receiver (not the toggle, see the previous posts in this thread on this issue).

For all that - I'm more inclined to agree with George's theory stated above, certainly moreso than any of the "post war" theories brought forth so far.

Just my $0.0002

John D.