The little "Prototype" that wasn't

[StarOfTheWest]

Ok folks, here is one that left me wondering "what the heck is this gun about?"


From the family collection list here is the description:

Mfr: DWM on toggle

Caliber: 9mm

Grips: Smooth walnut, slotted for grip safety

Safe position: Thumb lever at top

Serial#: 10619, commercial style numbering, all small parts match. barrel not serialed.

Distinctive features: Serial in experimental 10,000 series, dished toggles with toggle lock, wide grip safety, no stock lug. Screw goes down through toggle top on the same side as the toggle lock. Thick barrel.

Chamber: American eagle

Barrel: E/623

Frame: "Germany" under serial# in front

Magazine: Nickel over tin, wood bottom with "Cal 9mm" in script.

Comments: This could very well be the first pistol to chamber the 9mm Luger cartridge. This Luger could be termed the "1902 Experimental" or "Experimental 9mm Luger".
The screw through the toggle was most likely the fix devised for the first two test samples with the 2,000 rounds of ammunition, that failed when the spring catch in the toggle joint came out and allowed the spring catch to be lost, (pg.65 Datig).
The "B" after the serial numbers of the prototypes listed in Jones variations could very well stand for "Bannerman" who purchased all the American eagles in the U.S. Armory for resale to the public after the U.S. tests.
This Luger could be a very rare and controversial piece.
Other "one of a kind" Lugers also have serial numbers in the 10,000 series, ref; page 182 of the 1969 Annual Guns and Ammunition article by Hans Tanner.
__________________________________________________________________

Now that *I* have gotten to closely inspect this gun this morning, I noticed first off that it has been buffed and reblued, and of course has the after market smooth grips.

I cannot find a witness mark on the barrel underside, only on the frame, so of course it was rebarreled.
However, the Eagle 623 on the underside of the barrel sent me off to do a search on this board.
Ok, now I know that E/623 is *Nazi* era Steyr production.
Whole different game now.

A really bored yet skilled gunsmith must have got a hold of this one:
There is an extra vertical pin through the rear of the breechblock that appears to aid in retaining the firing pin.

And then there is the screw through the toggle top...
The additional screw is put in very professionally, not a backyard job at all; countersunk, well done work.
But for the love of Dog, WHY?

I must admit that after having read many of the threads here, I have become very skeptical of Lugers that seem to be "exceptional", or claiming to be "one of a kind".
This time with reason.
This is apparently a rebarreled, reblued 02 AE with a cobbled toggle repair and some weirdness added to the firing pin retainer.

So, sorry, guess it *isn't* a Prototype for a 9mm, as the list claimed, but I just checked it out in depth this morning myself.
Thanks to all the info here, the research went easy.
Must have been a lot harder to come up with answers back in the 60s when the list was written.
From now on, I will do all my own research and not accept anything as stated on the family list.
I love the Internet!

But I guess I should ask, is there *anything* legit about this poor gun?

[Vlim]

Hi,

The original retaining ledge for the firing pin broke off. Someone did a fix by filing a slot in the firing pin retainer and tapping a screw through it to keep the firing pin in place.

Apart from that, trying to force the 9mm barrel in, someone actually cracked the reciever. A noticable fracture line runs along the area where the witness mark used to be.

This one certainly gets the 'not fit for firing' tag!

[Dwight Gruber]

Anna,

A very interesting gun you present here.

First off, it is a model 1900, both by serial number and the profile of the frame in front of the trigger guard. The serial number is present in an old, extensive database compiled quite a few years ago; I'm very glad to be able to fill in pistol details.

It looks like all the odd modifications may be related to the gun's conversion to 9mm. The extra power of the cartridge is beyond the gun's design parameters, and it looks like it has been pretty hard on the gun.

First, it is interesting that the frame and receiver length have been maintained, and the flange of the Steyer barrel has been turned down (and presumably the threads extended) to fit the longer receiver. This in itself is an interesting lesson on the size and dimensions of the long vs. short frame characteristics.

It looks like the rear of the breechblock has been both damaged and modified, necessitating the addition of the screw to keep the firing pin retainer in place. Look for evidence of battering at the back inside of the frame, and the stirrup which connects the rear toggle piece to the recoil spring.

The screw in the rear toggle is in position to retain the center toggle pin. This is normally kept in place by the toggle spring lock inset into the right toggle grip. Is it possible that the spring lock is missing in this gun?

Someone with a great deal of skill went to a lot of trouble to make this into a 9mm.

And the blue background makes a great deal of difference in the quality of the photographs.

--Dwight

Gerben beat me to the punch here, and I'm glad he noticed the crack in the breechblock. Obviously the gunsmith who altered the barrel to fit the long receiver didn't do quite a good enough job. --DG

[StarOfTheWest]

Thanks guys.
Yes, as I studied the blow up pics, I noticed the crack extending from the old witness mark on the frame, and just IMd LugerDoc asking if this is an unsafe condition for firing.
Kinda seemed so to me.
I guessed that perhaps to get the headspace correct, they threaded the barrel in too far, and started a crack on the old witness mark.
So now what?
A parts gun?
I sure wouldn't sell it to anyone to use as a shooter in this shape.

[Dwight Gruber]

Anna,

My guess would be that when "they" turned the barrel flange down--relieved it forward, actually--and extended the threading, they didn't reduce the diameter enough, and forcing into the receiver cracked it. Definitely unsafe to shoot, simply on the basis of the 9mm caliber and weak recoil spring.

Still curious to know about the toggle lock and possible frame battering.

--Dwight

[StarOfTheWest]

It does have the toggle lock intact and in place:

Also the one on the frame rail:


And the battering looks worst on the barrel lug, with some additional deformation at the rear outside of the lower frame, just above the lanyard loop.
A bit of chewing up on the inside rear frame, but not notably excessive, in my eyes.

I think this poor beastie will definitely become a parts donor gun, much as I hate to do that to it.
Too much damage to too many integral parts.
A shame, as it is an oldie.
I wish they had just bought some damned .30 Luger ammo!

And I am *amazed* that your commercial list goes back far enough to have this gun on it!
May I ask what year it was added?

I will post on some more cheerful AEs soon.

[Edward Tinker]

Originally posted by StarOfTheWest

I sure wouldn't sell it to anyone to use as a shooter in this shape.

Anna, I will send you my FFL 03 and you can send it to me so you don't "accidently" try and shoot it. While you are at it, throw that simson in the box too, I think it's lonely



Seriously, I don't know, sell it to someone for parts?


Ed

[StarOfTheWest]

Heh, none of my guns are lonely, but it is very kind of you to show such loving concern.

No fear of accidentally shooting it, I don't fire collector guns.
Got plenty of shooters from years back.

Ya, I have a few that could use some donor parts; the grip safety spring to start with, and the grips will work somewhere, I bet.

After seeing what parts for the oldies go for, I may at some point put up a list of available stuff.

For the moment, I will hang onto it all, unless I get a pleading IM from someone in dire need of a part for a 1900.

[Dwight Gruber]

Anna,

The serial number came from a list accumulated over many years--maybe as early as the 70s--by Dave Soracco and Dave Rivera, which forms a significant part of the Commercial database. The list itself has floated around for quite awhile, I was given a copy of it about four years ago. There are no sources associated with this list, and so the origin of your number on it is lost to history.

If you decide to part it out please let me know, so I can make the notation.

--Dwight

[LugerVern]

Anna

It would be nice to see a picture of the inside rear frame, this gun obviously has fired ammunition that has caused excessive damage. Some of the new collectors might want to see this damage.

I am not so sure about the split receiver, knowing that high pressure loads were used this could also be signs of that and have nothing to do with barrel installation. A plugged barrel might also have caused over pressure and explain the damage and new barrel.


All guesses of course

Vern

[StarOfTheWest]

Vern, the inside rear frame just doesn't look all that bad to me, amazingly enough.



What's seriously chewed up is the barrel lug, (see pic in first post), and of course above the lanyard loop.

[Dwight Gruber]

Anna,

The lack of battering inside the frame is not surprising, since under normal operation the breechblock never gets that far back--the toggle tail impingement on the rear of the frame is the normal stop and in the case of this gun is heavily battered, as you point out. I wonder if there is any evidence on the front of the connecting stirrup of contact with the breechblock?

I'm not sure that the mess on the recoil lug as shown is due to recoil impact. What does it's rear face look like?

The presence of the toggle lock in the toggle indicates that the screw inserted to retain the center toggle pin is just an additional precaution--"belt and suspenders", as it were. I wonder if there was evidence of its movement during firing which prompted the addition?

As I look at these pictures this morning I see another anomaly with this gun, which I merely observe here due to lack of time for consideration.

On a model 1900, the top surface of the rear toggle is even with the top surface of the rear of the receiver rails. As pointed out here, the rear toggle flat is raised above the receiver railsl, as is the practice with 1906 and later guns.



--Dwight

[Lugerdoc]

Anna, Dwight pretty well covered the alterations to your M1900 luger. I would guess that the reason that the retaining screw was added to the top of your rear toggle link, is because the top (inside) arm of the toggle lock is broken off, and no longer keeps the mid axel in it's correct position. So that piece is defective in addition to the blown breech block, cracked receiver, repro grips, altered (to long frame) WW2 era 9mm barrel, etc. So I guess that your options are to purchase my 14,000 range AE top to make it a safe 7.65mm shooter, sell the remaining "good" parts individually, or sell me the whole "monster" to part out. TH

[StarOfTheWest]

You have a wonderful eye for details, Dwight.

I had not even noticed, and I have no idea why it is sitting that way.
All those parts are original.

What on earth could be causing that?

[Edward Tinker]

Originally posted by StarOfTheWest
You have a wonderful eye for details, Dwight.

...

he is a very handy guy to have at a gun show to look at something you are interested in.



Ed

[John Sabato]

Anna, I believe that you can easily breathe new life into this fine old girl, and without spending a fortune...

Just get yourself one of the later model ERMA .22 caliber conversion kits, the kind with the full toggle knobs, not just the small toggle pegs. Operation in .22 caliber would never violate the cracked receiver with pressure that is too high.

This would make a wonderful plinking Luger in .22 caliber... and you could even have a gunsmith make you a complete .22 caliber barrel to replace the one that is in it now... this would ensure that it never gets reassembled as a 9mm and hurts someone.


Just my two cents...

[Ron Wood]

I suspect that in the photo the fact that the rear toggle link is not flush with the receiver rails is due to the toggle train not being fully into battery. You can see that the toggle is still buckled at the joint. Perhaps the action was eased down and the toggle latch was not fully engaged and was holding the action open a wee bit. Try closing the action vigorously or push down on the toggle joint and see if it flattens out.