Mauser Hump

Thor · 06-12-2002, 10:31 AM

The late collector Berny Lafferty wrote a great article entitled "Collecting the Mauser Military Parabellums" that was published in the Jan/Feb 1977 issue of The American Handgunner. He discusses the added hump, which is an extension of the rear of the frame to better contain the toggle axle pin. He also mentions the later Navy models accomplishing the same thing by enlarging the head on one side of the pin. He says somewhere within the K and G dates transition the OVERALL FRAME was lengthen, and when they wanted a hump on a model then just ground some of the material away. My question is, since the extension of the frame on all Mauser Military Lugers from G date had the extended frame and in doing so contained the pin better as intended, why o why did they go to the trouble to grind the metal off at all?? Seems like an ineffecient step as it is really not needed unless they were trying to keep a visual reminder that this frame was lengthened as opposed to earlier frame. It really makes no sense to me. Am I missing something, or just need more coffee?? What ya think? [img]confused.gif[/img]

Dwight Gruber · 06-12-2002, 11:07 AM

I may run into a descriptive terminology problem here, so bear with me...

I can visually compare an Erfurt, an S/42 1936 (has a "thick" casting) and a byf 41 with hump. I note that the grinding on the byf which results in the hump, puts the rear of the frame (where the toggle stop stikes it) back to the original dimension, i.e., where it is on the Erfurt.

It would take a micrometer (which I do not have) to make an objective determination.

Is it possible that the thicker Mauser casting disturbed the geometry of the pistol's operation, and they discovered that it worked "better", somehow, if it was put back to its original dimension? Grinding this back, but leaving the extra metal to retain the toggle pin, would naturally result in a hump

--Dwight

Thor · 06-12-2002, 11:20 AM

Interesting question, since the G dates have a thickened frame and seem to work fine, I would guess that there is another answer as well??

John Sabato · 06-12-2002, 11:42 AM

I submit that though the grinding of the Hump from a thickened frame may seem like a lot of wasted effort, I think that it was intended to keep the Luger's weight down close to it's orginal "fighting" weight...

my $0.02 worth of speculation.

unspellable · 06-13-2002, 12:23 AM

The Interarms Mausers have a larger head on the pin. Seems like a simpler fix all the way around. I never heard of any trouble with the original DWM setup anyway.

unsepllable

Karl · 06-13-2002, 03:38 PM

The original DWM setup works fine as long as the head on the reciever axle is intact, but if part of the head chips off (which happens) the pin can catch on the back edge of the frame in its extreme rearward travel and jamb. KFS

06-12-2002, 10:31 AM	#1
Thor User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Rio Rancho, New Mexico Posts: 4,583 Thanks: 958 Thanked 970 Times in 276 Posts	Mauser Hump The late collector Berny Lafferty wrote a great article entitled "Collecting the Mauser Military Parabellums" that was published in the Jan/Feb 1977 issue of The American Handgunner. He discusses the added hump, which is an extension of the rear of the frame to better contain the toggle axle pin. He also mentions the later Navy models accomplishing the same thing by enlarging the head on one side of the pin. He says somewhere within the K and G dates transition the OVERALL FRAME was lengthen, and when they wanted a hump on a model then just ground some of the material away. My question is, since the extension of the frame on all Mauser Military Lugers from G date had the extended frame and in doing so contained the pin better as intended, why o why did they go to the trouble to grind the metal off at all?? Seems like an ineffecient step as it is really not needed unless they were trying to keep a visual reminder that this frame was lengthened as opposed to earlier frame. It really makes no sense to me. Am I missing something, or just need more coffee?? What ya think? [img]confused.gif[/img] __________________ Thor's Luger Clinic http://members.rennlist.com/lugerman/ Ted Green (Thor Yaller Boots) 725 Western Hills Dr SE, Rio Rancho, NM 87124 915-526-8925 Email thor340@aol.com ----------------------------------- John3:3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

06-12-2002, 11:20 AM	#3
Thor User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Rio Rancho, New Mexico Posts: 4,583 Thanks: 958 Thanked 970 Times in 276 Posts	Interesting question, since the G dates have a thickened frame and seem to work fine, I would guess that there is another answer as well?? __________________ Thor's Luger Clinic http://members.rennlist.com/lugerman/ Ted Green (Thor Yaller Boots) 725 Western Hills Dr SE, Rio Rancho, NM 87124 915-526-8925 Email thor340@aol.com ----------------------------------- John3:3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

06-12-2002, 11:42 AM	#4
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,154 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,306 Times in 1,097 Posts	I submit that though the grinding of the Hump from a thickened frame may seem like a lot of wasted effort, I think that it was intended to keep the Luger's weight down close to it's orginal "fighting" weight... my $0.02 worth of speculation. __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

06-12-2002, 11:07 AM	#2
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,902 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,317 Times in 431 Posts	I may run into a descriptive terminology problem here, so bear with me... I can visually compare an Erfurt, an S/42 1936 (has a "thick" casting) and a byf 41 with hump. I note that the grinding on the byf which results in the hump, puts the rear of the frame (where the toggle stop stikes it) back to the original dimension, i.e., where it is on the Erfurt. It would take a micrometer (which I do not have) to make an objective determination. Is it possible that the thicker Mauser casting disturbed the geometry of the pistol's operation, and they discovered that it worked "better", somehow, if it was put back to its original dimension? Grinding this back, but leaving the extra metal to retain the toggle pin, would naturally result in a hump --Dwight

06-13-2002, 12:23 AM	#5
unspellable User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Iowa Posts: 768 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 11 Posts	The Interarms Mausers have a larger head on the pin. Seems like a simpler fix all the way around. I never heard of any trouble with the original DWM setup anyway. unsepllable

06-13-2002, 03:38 PM	#6
Karl Lifer - Twice Over Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Savannah Posts: 522 Thanks: 0 Thanked 271 Times in 118 Posts	The original DWM setup works fine as long as the head on the reciever axle is intact, but if part of the head chips off (which happens) the pin can catch on the back edge of the frame in its extreme rearward travel and jamb. KFS