unit Mark 1920

[sej-gun]

Hi Ron and Don
Is that what you want??
No sear or mag safety, correct??
Photo: seen from left side. sat in above proffs from the right side.
Thanks very much for helping me
Regards, Jes

[Ron Smith]

Jes,

Your photo is fuzzy, but are those the proofs? If so, they should be on the opposite (right) side. The serial number should be in that location. This is getting strange.

Ron

[sej-gun]

No it is not the proof, you see the reciver from left, on the photo
it is the number 1699. the proff is on the right side, (sat ind)
Regards Jes

[Don M]

Jes,

OK, I'm ready to go out on a limb. I believe this to be one of the Lugers produced by DWM in 1920 for military and police use. I don't see the commercial c/N nitro proof on the left side of the receiver and the acceptance stamps and small parts markings seem appropriate. I believe the assigned serial number was 1699b, which put it in the third 10k of guns produced that year. See Jan Still's Weimar Lugers, pp. 1 & 15.

This gun was mistakenly property stamped 1920 although it would not have been required since it already had a 1920 date identifying it as govenment propery. Quite a few of the 1920 and 1921 dated DWMs were "double dated."

I suspect that this gun originally went to the Prussian police in the K�¶nigsberg district. It does not have a sear or mag safety suggesting that it was removed from police service prior to the implementation of the 1933 order mandating these devices on police Lugers.

My main sources of concern with this identification are the placement of the suffix "b" above the serial number on the barrel and the presence of an "n" on the barrel and frame. I don't know what the "n" signifies.

This is all I know and more. I hope it helps.

[sej-gun]

Hi again
Could the â?�nâ?�, be a mistake, and then they have given a â?�bâ?� over the number, instate??
Regards, Jes

[Don M]

Well, my limb is starting to crack! Jes found this thread on Jan Still's forum: http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4652 reporting 1920 DWM #5335. This also refers to #4134n in Jan's Weimar Lugers, p. 140.

Ross Murchison reported 1920 DWM #7138n in the latest Auto Mag.

I have queried my database and come up with quite a few more. Adding those from replies in Jan Still's forum results in the following list. With the exception of #2977n, all have police unit marks and/or sear safeties but this is probably skewed by my database containing only police unit marked examples. These include police units in Prussia, Saxony and Thuringia.

1699n (and b)
3108n
3176n
4605n
4134n
4647n
5335n
6655n
6938n
7138n
9483n

From the range of numbers it looks like there were 10,000 of these produced. Any more out there?

[sej-gun]

Hi again
I now had measure my chamber on the DWM 1920/1920 Doublet Dated,
(22,24mm), and it shows that it is 0,21 mm smaller than my Mauser
S/42 1937, (22,45mm), it looks like that some body have grinding on the
chamber before it got its 1920/1920 stamp, it got Police rework stamps
on right side of receiver.
I also had the gun X-ray`t on the chamber, and on the right side on the
receiver, I hope to se any marks left in the steel. The results of that work
is: Nothing to see!! on the X-ray pictures.
I think this gun is a Imperial Luger?, from 1913 to 1918 ( it got hold open)
that came into rework and then served the Police in Konigsberg, and again
changed to the army and ended up in Denmark at WW2. That will explain
the n suffix on the gun????. (only ns,a,b, suffix in 1920, Jan C. Still Books)
Some comment will be great!!!
Regards, Sej-gun.

[Don M]

Jes,

I don't have anything else to add to the discussion of your gun but I do believe there really was an "n-suffix" block of Lugers produced by DWM in 1920. I have no idea why this suffix was chosen.

[John Sabato]

I am not much help on unit marks, but wouldn't Jeff Noll's book have the answer to this question? I don't have that book in my Luger library, but perhaps someone here does.

[sej-gun]

Hi

Don, I think you got a point on all that â?�nâ?� block Lugers that is known.
Could the explanation be that DWM got a lot of â?�nâ?� block half built
Lugers at the end of WW1, full range 10.000 guns, and then use them in 1920, I guess that they were at production to the end of WW1?, and there must be some Lugers who was not finished at the DWM factory (and Erfurt) in 1918??.
Anybody knows what was the last suffix that came out of DWM in 1918??.
I hope that somebody have the book of Jeff Noll, and then will cast some
lights on this case, as John wrote.
Maybe we never got the full explanation of this â??nâ?� suffix.
Thanks to all
Regards, Sej-gun

[Don M]

I'm a novice at Luger production, especially in the Imperial era. Someone else needs to address this speculation.

[Dwight Gruber]

Jes,

DWM production in 1918 is reported into the w suffix range; Erfurt production that year is reported into the t suffix, with the possibility of reports into the u suffix (Still, "Imperial Lugers" p.15).

According to the German Army instructions for marking P08 dated 1910, revised up to 1914 (G�¶rtz & Bryans, "German Small Arms Markings" pp.111-114), if the construction of these Lugers had reached the point of being serial-numbered on the frame, they would also have had their parts numbered. This numbering would then be on the exposed faces of the parts, rather than in the hidden, commercial style. In additon, if they originated at Erfurt, the parts would all have the Erfurt Inspectors' marks applied.

--Dwight