Am I the first to notice this??

Scottrt · 05-09-2019, 07:53 AM

My latest acquisition, a 1917 DMW Navy, is fussy about how you pull the toggle to charge it, and I think I discovered why.

For reference, let say that straight rearward on the toggle is zero degrees and straight up is 90 degrees.

To cycle the Navy's toggle I must pull at an angle no greater than 30 degrees. Any higher angle and the toggle jambs up tight after moving the breech face about 1/2 inch. What happens is the upper doesn't move far enough rearward to allow the toggle heel to rotate without binding on the rear of the grip frame. The more rearward pull angle helps get the entire upper back far enough to avoid this as the toggle heel rotates.

I have two other 1917 DWMs'.... a PO8 and LP08, and they aren't fussy.

Comparison showed that the effective length of the toggle drop link is shorter by almost 1/8th ... due to the S bends being more compact. It looks to be the original as is everything else. It is not a numbered part, so can not be sure.

So is this typical behavior with some of these guns, and I am just learning about the idiosyncrasies of individual Lugers?... or does this sound unlike anything you have personally encountered?

Just picked it up yesterday and will test fire it Saturday. I am sure it will run fine because the slide runs all the way back before the toggle folds when cycling.

Thoughts?

Scott

mrerick · 05-09-2019, 08:24 AM

The toggle lock on a Luger or Maxim gun works because the action remains locked for a short period time while the cartridge remains in the chamber and the bullet exits the gun. It works like the human knee.

The joint is locked by a slight negative angle until it is pushed slightly into a positive angle that can then completely bend and collapse the action.

The original M1900 Lugers had a small metal point that retained the toggle joint in that position until it was pushed or pulled straight back slightly. This was found to be unnecessary and removed with the M1906 changes.

I don't have a M1917 Navy, so am not sure if its action is exactly like the M1906 / P.08 actions.

Is there excessive galling on the front face of the frame ears (whose job is to push up the toggle, breaking the breech lock condition)?

Note that there is a range of recoil springs used in Lugers, and different models need different springs. See the FAQ document for details.

Norme · 05-09-2019, 08:55 AM

Hi Scott,
What is the serial number with suffix (if present) of your 1917 Navy? Also, we would love to see photos.
Norm

Scottrt · 05-09-2019, 10:03 AM

Serial number is 275, no suffix. It was refinished at some point, but very well done, and priced accordingly lower.

Norme · 05-09-2019, 10:15 AM

Hi Scott,
Thanks for the photos. As a new member of the Navy Luger owner's club you are eligible to receive the Navy List, the listing of all known Navy Lugers world wide. If you send me a PM with your email address I can send you the link,
Regards, Norm

Mark1 · 05-09-2019, 10:08 PM

Hi Scott, If you are referring to the coupling link (part 009 on the diagram here on the forum) being shorter than on your other 1917 model Lugers. Then I don't think this is correct, all "new model" coupling links should be identical. I can't find a reference but seem to remember that "old model" coupling links are a different length and perhaps this is part of the problem.
Hopefully Tom H. (Lugerdoc) will be along shortly and can confirm that I have this right.
Mark

Scottrt · 05-09-2019, 10:45 PM

Yeah, I assume they should be the same. The whole point of my post, which I guess I totally failed at making, is that I have a gun that, for some reason, has a slightly shorter (due to its bends) coupling link, and the net effect of that is you have to pull rearwards much harder to charge it.'

I suspected I may be the first guy to run into this phenomenon and actually suss it out.

Scott T.

Norme · 05-10-2019, 08:03 AM

Hi Scott,
Here is a photo of the "S" link on a 1917 Navy #898", close in serial number to yours. Can you discern a difference?
Norm

Scottrt · 05-10-2019, 08:27 AM

As I mentioned, i own two other 1917's that I used for comparison. They all look the same, but my Navy toggle is about 3 millimeters shorter as measured with a digital caliper.

The fussy charging travels with the upper regardless of what lower it's on. That's what led me to start measuring things and found the togglelinc had slightly sharper bends and overall reduced reach.

Lugerdoc · 05-10-2019, 11:57 AM

The M1900 recoil link is indeed shorter than the standard P08. The one show here is the correct PO8 type, but due to use has become malformed. TH

Scottrt · 05-11-2019, 06:20 PM

Had the Navy at the indoor range today. Ran 8 magazines of S&B 115 gr FMJ perfectly. Shot 1.25 inch groups at 25 ft. Shot 2 mags with a shoulder stock attached... worked great...real nail driver, but it kicks hard enough for that narrow board to dig in uncomfortably.
Gun seems to charge reasonably, too. What a bummer that the funnest to shoot Luger that I own is also the one I least want to put at risk.

Anyway, no longer concerned about the connector link as the gun cycled beautifully without imprinting the rear toggle heel into the rear of the frame.

Scott

Ron Wood · 05-11-2019, 06:23 PM

Glad it functions properly...if it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Ron

DonVoigt · 05-11-2019, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottrt

My latest acquisition, a 1917 DMW Navy, is fussy about how you pull the toggle to charge it, and I think I discovered why.

For reference, let say that straight rearward on the toggle is zero degrees and straight up is 90 degrees.

To cycle the Navy's toggle I must pull at an angle no greater than 30 degrees. Any higher angle and the toggle jambs up tight after moving the breech face about 1/2 inch. What happens is the upper doesn't move far enough rearward to allow the toggle heel to rotate without binding on the rear of the grip frame. The more rearward pull angle helps get the entire upper back far enough to avoid this as the toggle heel rotates.

I have two other 1917 DWMs'.... a PO8 and LP08, and they aren't fussy.

Comparison showed that the effective length of the toggle drop link is shorter by almost 1/8th ... due to the S bends being more compact. It looks to be the original as is everything else. It is not a numbered part, so can not be sure.

So is this typical behavior with some of these guns, and I am just learning about the idiosyncrasies of individual Lugers?... or does this sound unlike anything you have personally encountered?

Just picked it up yesterday and will test fire it Saturday. I am sure it will run fine because the slide runs all the way back before the toggle folds when cycling.

Thoughts?

Scott

To answer your question,
NO it is not normal. If you have not lube it well with oil.
Since you have now fired it, how does it work?
As Tom pointed out, your S link may be bent and causing some strange binding.

Scottrt · 05-12-2019, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonVoigt

As Tom pointed out, your S link may be bent and causing some strange binding.

Where does he say that, Don, exactly ?

DonVoigt · 05-12-2019, 10:40 AM

In Post #10 above:
"The one show here is the correct PO8 type, but due to use has become malformed"

Maybe you didn't realize that "malformed" = bent.

05-09-2019, 08:24 AM	#2
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,900 Thanks: 1,370 Thanked 3,094 Times in 1,503 Posts	The toggle lock on a Luger or Maxim gun works because the action remains locked for a short period time while the cartridge remains in the chamber and the bullet exits the gun. It works like the human knee. The joint is locked by a slight negative angle until it is pushed slightly into a positive angle that can then completely bend and collapse the action. The original M1900 Lugers had a small metal point that retained the toggle joint in that position until it was pushed or pulled straight back slightly. This was found to be unnecessary and removed with the M1906 changes. I don't have a M1917 Navy, so am not sure if its action is exactly like the M1906 / P.08 actions. Is there excessive galling on the front face of the frame ears (whose job is to push up the toggle, breaking the breech lock condition)? Note that there is a range of recoil springs used in Lugers, and different models need different springs. See the FAQ document for details. __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

05-09-2019, 10:03 AM	#4
Scottrt User Join Date: Apr 2019 Location: So. Minnesota Posts: 33 Thanks: 20 Thanked 20 Times in 9 Posts	Serial number is 275, no suffix. It was refinished at some point, but very well done, and priced accordingly lower. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Scottrt; 05-09-2019 at 10:33 AM. Reason: add text

05-09-2019, 10:45 PM	#7
Scottrt User Join Date: Apr 2019 Location: So. Minnesota Posts: 33 Thanks: 20 Thanked 20 Times in 9 Posts	Yeah, I assume they should be the same. The whole point of my post, which I guess I totally failed at making, is that I have a gun that, for some reason, has a slightly shorter (due to its bends) coupling link, and the net effect of that is you have to pull rearwards much harder to charge it.' I suspected I may be the first guy to run into this phenomenon and actually suss it out. Scott T. Last edited by Scottrt; 05-09-2019 at 11:12 PM. Reason: clarify

05-11-2019, 06:23 PM	#12
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 6,986 Thanks: 1,065 Thanked 5,088 Times in 1,674 Posts	Glad it functions properly...if it ain't broke, don't fix it! Ron __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

05-12-2019, 10:40 AM	#15
DonVoigt User Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: near Charlotte NC Posts: 4,677 Thanks: 1,439 Thanked 4,347 Times in 2,038 Posts	In Post #10 above: "The one show here is the correct PO8 type, but due to use has become malformed" Maybe you didn't realize that "malformed" = bent. __________________ 03man(Don Voigt); Luger student and collector. Looking for DWM side plate: 69 ; Dreyse 1907 pistol K.S. Gendarmerie

05-09-2019, 07:53 AM	#1
Scottrt User Join Date: Apr 2019 Location: So. Minnesota Posts: 33 Thanks: 20 Thanked 20 Times in 9 Posts	Am I the first to notice this?? My latest acquisition, a 1917 DMW Navy, is fussy about how you pull the toggle to charge it, and I think I discovered why. For reference, let say that straight rearward on the toggle is zero degrees and straight up is 90 degrees. To cycle the Navy's toggle I must pull at an angle no greater than 30 degrees. Any higher angle and the toggle jambs up tight after moving the breech face about 1/2 inch. What happens is the upper doesn't move far enough rearward to allow the toggle heel to rotate without binding on the rear of the grip frame. The more rearward pull angle helps get the entire upper back far enough to avoid this as the toggle heel rotates. I have two other 1917 DWMs'.... a PO8 and LP08, and they aren't fussy. Comparison showed that the effective length of the toggle drop link is shorter by almost 1/8th ... due to the S bends being more compact. It looks to be the original as is everything else. It is not a numbered part, so can not be sure. So is this typical behavior with some of these guns, and I am just learning about the idiosyncrasies of individual Lugers?... or does this sound unlike anything you have personally encountered? Just picked it up yesterday and will test fire it Saturday. I am sure it will run fine because the slide runs all the way back before the toggle folds when cycling. Thoughts? Scott

05-09-2019, 08:55 AM	#3
Norme Always A Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,414 Thanks: 224 Thanked 2,591 Times in 930 Posts	Hi Scott, What is the serial number with suffix (if present) of your 1917 Navy? Also, we would love to see photos. Norm

05-09-2019, 10:15 AM	#5
Norme Always A Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,414 Thanks: 224 Thanked 2,591 Times in 930 Posts	Hi Scott, Thanks for the photos. As a new member of the Navy Luger owner's club you are eligible to receive the Navy List, the listing of all known Navy Lugers world wide. If you send me a PM with your email address I can send you the link, Regards, Norm

05-09-2019, 10:08 PM	#6
Mark1 User Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 72 Thanks: 332 Thanked 74 Times in 25 Posts	Hi Scott, If you are referring to the coupling link (part 009 on the diagram here on the forum) being shorter than on your other 1917 model Lugers. Then I don't think this is correct, all "new model" coupling links should be identical. I can't find a reference but seem to remember that "old model" coupling links are a different length and perhaps this is part of the problem. Hopefully Tom H. (Lugerdoc) will be along shortly and can confirm that I have this right. Mark

05-10-2019, 08:03 AM	#8
Norme Always A Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,414 Thanks: 224 Thanked 2,591 Times in 930 Posts	Hi Scott, Here is a photo of the "S" link on a 1917 Navy #898", close in serial number to yours. Can you discern a difference? Norm Attached Thumbnails

05-10-2019, 08:27 AM	#9
Scottrt User Join Date: Apr 2019 Location: So. Minnesota Posts: 33 Thanks: 20 Thanked 20 Times in 9 Posts	As I mentioned, i own two other 1917's that I used for comparison. They all look the same, but my Navy toggle is about 3 millimeters shorter as measured with a digital caliper. The fussy charging travels with the upper regardless of what lower it's on. That's what led me to start measuring things and found the togglelinc had slightly sharper bends and overall reduced reach.

05-10-2019, 11:57 AM	#10
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 736 Times in 483 Posts	The M1900 recoil link is indeed shorter than the standard P08. The one show here is the correct PO8 type, but due to use has become malformed. TH __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 lugerdoc@charter.net

05-11-2019, 06:20 PM	#11
Scottrt User Join Date: Apr 2019 Location: So. Minnesota Posts: 33 Thanks: 20 Thanked 20 Times in 9 Posts	Had the Navy at the indoor range today. Ran 8 magazines of S&B 115 gr FMJ perfectly. Shot 1.25 inch groups at 25 ft. Shot 2 mags with a shoulder stock attached... worked great...real nail driver, but it kicks hard enough for that narrow board to dig in uncomfortably. Gun seems to charge reasonably, too. What a bummer that the funnest to shoot Luger that I own is also the one I least want to put at risk. Anyway, no longer concerned about the connector link as the gun cycled beautifully without imprinting the rear toggle heel into the rear of the frame. Scott