M17 ?

Roadkill · 11-29-2003, 08:38 PM

"A variant of the Luger, the Parabellum M17, was issued in 1917. Possessing a longer barrel it resembled a machine carbine with its magazine capable of holding 30 rounds."

So this isn't a Navy or LP08 ?

http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm

rk

Navy · 11-29-2003, 09:00 PM

RK,

Quite simply, the most common elements in the universe are carbon and ignorance. He is simply and largely incorrect. Never let facts stand in the way of a good story.

This author suffers from a pro-c96 disposition and it appears he has failed to get his facts straight.

BTW, thanks for your warm hospitality in Hsv. I am now back at Festung Cato for the next several weeks.
Tom A.

Roadkill · 11-29-2003, 09:07 PM

You are welcome anytime. If something is so obvious that someone like me can spot it..

rk

George Anderson · 11-30-2003, 07:05 AM

I believe the original source for the above misinformation is the esteemed Ian Hogg. I first read that same M1917 drivel in his book "German Pistols and Revolvers". I am travelling now so the exact quote is not possible but he explains away everything to reworks. Needless to say, he never addresses all the 1914-1916 LP08 holsters.

Keep in mind that this person is a frequent "expert" on the History Channel, etc.

Dwight Gruber · 11-30-2003, 01:32 PM

Ian Hogg, "German Pistols and Revolvers 1971-1945" (1971) p.75.

I won't quote in its entirety (the entry is a third of the page) but here are the high points:

"Parabellum P17"

"...appears to have been issued for service in Aug. or Sept. 1917...The pistol is exactly as the '08 except that a 7.5 (192mm) barrel is fitted [along with the tangent sight]...

"...it was soon discoverd that the conical bullet of the original pattern jammed very badly in [the snail drum magazine]. As a result of this (italics mine) the entire German production of 9mm Parabellum was changed over in 1918 to round-nosed bullets...

"Although this model was only produced from 1917 to 1918, it is often found with dates as early as 1914...in the latter days of the war the German army was supplementing production by reconditioning early model pistols by fitting them with the longer barrel and sight...changing the barrel leaves the date on the chamber unchanged...the reconditioners had better things to do with their time than attempt to re-engrave the date on the chamber. Another point about this model is that they were all made by DWM, never by Erfurt; any model 1917 with the Erfurt marking is undoubtedly a postwar black market gun run up from assorted spare parts."

Well, I'm shocked. I've had this book on my shelf for a while, but never really cracked it until this discussion. I'd always understood that Ian Hogg was was one of the recognized experts in the field, but, after taking a moment to read the entire text, obvoiusly not as far as the Luger is concerned.

He has little respect for the Parabellum as a practical military weapon, and his disdain (expressed early on and repeated at the end) for Luger collectors' minutia directly affects the accuracy of his text. Suffice it to say that it is full of mis-information and error, some almost as egregious as the "P17" nonsense.

As far as Lugers are concerned, this book is valueless. Anyone with a little Luger experience who reads this, hoping to get good background on the subject, is going to be filled with misinformation; anyone who reads it who know enough to recognize the errors already knows more about the subject than Mr. Hogg.

I didn't start this reply to excoriate Ian Hogg, although that is how it has turned out. As a result of this reading, I have developed deep reservation about everything else written in this volume, and I will never again be able to accept anything he says about firearms unquestioningly, without concurrence from another source.

--Dwight

11-29-2003, 08:38 PM	#1
Roadkill User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,632 Thanks: 1 Thanked 28 Times in 17 Posts	M17 ? "A variant of the Luger, the Parabellum M17, was issued in 1917. Possessing a longer barrel it resembled a machine carbine with its magazine capable of holding 30 rounds." So this isn't a Navy or LP08 ? http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/pistols.htm rk

11-29-2003, 09:00 PM	#2
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	RK, Quite simply, the most common elements in the universe are carbon and ignorance. He is simply and largely incorrect. Never let facts stand in the way of a good story. This author suffers from a pro-c96 disposition and it appears he has failed to get his facts straight. BTW, thanks for your warm hospitality in Hsv. I am now back at Festung Cato for the next several weeks. Tom A.

11-29-2003, 09:07 PM	#3
Roadkill User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,632 Thanks: 1 Thanked 28 Times in 17 Posts	You are welcome anytime. If something is so obvious that someone like me can spot it.. rk

11-30-2003, 07:05 AM	#4
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,528 Times in 787 Posts	I believe the original source for the above misinformation is the esteemed Ian Hogg. I first read that same M1917 drivel in his book "German Pistols and Revolvers". I am travelling now so the exact quote is not possible but he explains away everything to reworks. Needless to say, he never addresses all the 1914-1916 LP08 holsters. Keep in mind that this person is a frequent "expert" on the History Channel, etc.

11-30-2003, 01:32 PM	#5
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,899 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,307 Times in 429 Posts	Ian Hogg, "German Pistols and Revolvers 1971-1945" (1971) p.75. I won't quote in its entirety (the entry is a third of the page) but here are the high points: "Parabellum P17" "...appears to have been issued for service in Aug. or Sept. 1917...The pistol is exactly as the '08 except that a 7.5 (192mm) barrel is fitted [along with the tangent sight]... "...it was soon discoverd that the conical bullet of the original pattern jammed very badly in [the snail drum magazine]. As a result of this (italics mine) the entire German production of 9mm Parabellum was changed over in 1918 to round-nosed bullets... "Although this model was only produced from 1917 to 1918, it is often found with dates as early as 1914...in the latter days of the war the German army was supplementing production by reconditioning early model pistols by fitting them with the longer barrel and sight...changing the barrel leaves the date on the chamber unchanged...the reconditioners had better things to do with their time than attempt to re-engrave the date on the chamber. Another point about this model is that they were all made by DWM, never by Erfurt; any model 1917 with the Erfurt marking is undoubtedly a postwar black market gun run up from assorted spare parts." Well, I'm shocked. I've had this book on my shelf for a while, but never really cracked it until this discussion. I'd always understood that Ian Hogg was was one of the recognized experts in the field, but, after taking a moment to read the entire text, obvoiusly not as far as the Luger is concerned. He has little respect for the Parabellum as a practical military weapon, and his disdain (expressed early on and repeated at the end) for Luger collectors' minutia directly affects the accuracy of his text. Suffice it to say that it is full of mis-information and error, some almost as egregious as the "P17" nonsense. As far as Lugers are concerned, this book is valueless. Anyone with a little Luger experience who reads this, hoping to get good background on the subject, is going to be filled with misinformation; anyone who reads it who know enough to recognize the errors already knows more about the subject than Mr. Hogg. I didn't start this reply to excoriate Ian Hogg, although that is how it has turned out. As a result of this reading, I have developed deep reservation about everything else written in this volume, and I will never again be able to accept anything he says about firearms unquestioningly, without concurrence from another source. --Dwight