1906 DWM factory presentation

[StarOfTheWest]

Serial 27642
This gun has the initials HCP or CHP *factory engraved* over the chamber.
"P"is largest.
Absolutely NO evidence of refinishing, and the gun is in 99% condition.
DWM on toggle, serial under barrel and on front of lower frame.
Commercial serializing of small parts.
NO firing proofs at *all*.
I am curious who the recipient may have been.
Wild speculation has suggested Hugo Panzer Co.?
Somehow I don't think that is correct.
Ideas?

Came in a black lacquer case, (more modern production), with take down tool, (not original, has E/ *something*3), pin punch, and cleaning rod and spare mag.

Mag in gun is mint unmarked wood bottom.
Spare is wood bottomed marked in script "Cal 9mm".

Talk to me about this gun.
It is perfect condition, but I need to know who the lucky recipient *might* have been, please.

[Dwight Gruber]

Anna,

"No proofs" would be proper for a gun exported to the US. Is it GERMANY marked on the front of the frame?

'Fraid I draw a total blank on the inscription...

--Dwight

[StarOfTheWest]

Nope, not marked Germany, anywhere.

[Ron Wood]

If that might be a GHP it looks like a later re-run of the 1900 presentation piece given to G.H. Powell of cartridge counter fame.

[StarOfTheWest]

Wow, now that you mention it, the bottom tail of the C does appear to have 2 little ears, whereas the top has only one.
I wonder if it *is* a G?
Doesn't match to any fonts we have access to.
Is there a pic of the other one Powell got?
Let's try the magic of Photoshop...

[lugerholsterrepair]

Anna, A very nice pistol! Great photo's too...If Ron Wood dosen't know...only the Shadow knows! Great setup, the cleaning rod is of special interest. Looks like a nice original.
Jerry Burney

[StarOfTheWest]

Heh, comments from my German friend on the engraving:

"The decorative P, the knurled and double curled C, together with the bauhaus-y H is totally strange.

Amazing design to create without AutoCAD or Photshop.

It is one thing to hammer it out one after another, but all three letters are intriguingly complex intertwined.

Just as a final coup, different textures on the letters, too.

And if you turn it around, it probably says something rude in French."



I also think it makes this one look primitive and suspect:
http://www.phoenixinvestmentarms.com/870SPRes00.htm

[Ron Wood]

Powell's 1900 presentation piece is on pages 50-51 of Kenyon's "Luger: The Multinational Pistol", but it is a lousy shot of the chamber engraving. It is gold inlaid and appears to be quite a different style of engraving from this one.

[StarOfTheWest]

Thanks for looking Ron, it was a long shot, I suppose.

[Ron Wood]

It may be a long shot but I wouldn't count it out of the running altogether. After all, there is a span of 5-7 years between the two guns and who knows who engraved each example...probably unlikely it would be the same engraver for both. The monogram looks like GHP to me (the extra little flourish is more like a G than a C). But, all that notwithstanding, there isn't a shred of evidence to link it to Powell (unless your family stashed away a documented provenance!), so it will probably remain a neat mystery. Thanks for posting it.

[Pete Ebbink]

Here are some chamber engraving photos :

First one on a gun sold by Ralph Shattuck in the past year or two :



Second one on a gun sold by Charlie Kenyon in the past year or so :



Third one sold by Ralph Shattuck about 3.5 years ago (marketed by the Greg Martin auction house) :



Fourth one sold by Shattuck through the Phoenix Investment Arms outlet in the past 2 years :



Fifth one a book photo scan of a Mexican presentation carbine chamber engraving :

[Pete Ebbink]

Here is a photo scan/zoom from the chamber marking on the gun in Kenyon's 2nd. book (Ron mentions above...) on pages 50-51 :

Kenyon states the initials are GHP.

I seem to see a "B" and not a "P"...and cannot see a "G" at all...

[Imperial Arms]

Hello Anna,

It is very difficult to give an opinion of a pistol based on images and without an inhand inspection, so I shall do the best I can based on your description and images. If you do not mind, I would like to give you my opinion of this particular pistol.

In my opinion, the engraving on the chamber is NOT factory engraved and, therefore, this leads me to feel that the pistol has been refinished after the engraving. The engraving is crude for a 'presentation' pistol, so this gives me bad vibes about this pistol. A presentation Luger from the DWM factory would definitely have a better polished finished than compared to what I see on this pistol. I have examined a few presentation Lugers in my hands including the M1902 'GL' HCR presentation carbine (see image hereunder) which was a gift from Mr. R. J. Reynolds of the Reynolds Tobacco Company to his Chief Financial Officer Mr. Harold Conwell Roan in 1903. His name is listed the the book entitled 'The Golden Leaf'.

When I carefully examine the condition on a Luger pistol, I look for CONSISTENCY. If this pistol would have retained 99% original factory finish, there would have been a high percentage of straw on the safety lever. The safety lever on this pistol has hardly any straw remaining and it is nearly smooth - there is no so-called 'tiger-grain' machine marks on the lever and these characteristics must be present, especially on a near mint pistol.

Furthermore, when I look at the various images, I do not notice any patina on the pistol. Every pistol made before 1945 WILL have some presence of micro patina no matter the amount of care given to the pistol.

You can accept or reject my opinion, and I apologize if I may have upset you. If you want to receive an accurate opinion, may I suggest that you make arrangements to allow Ron Wood to examine this pistol in his hands.

By the way, I like your Ideal rig which looks correct based on the images.

Albert

[Pete Ebbink]

The polished area of the thumb safety on Anna's gun looks a bit odd, IMHO...maybe evidence of rework at some time...

[StarOfTheWest]

Oh no offense taken at all, Albert.
I am presenting these guns to the community to get a wide range of opinion, and I thank you for yours.
I appreciate your input, and it will give me more things to look for on this gun.

I must defend the factory finish in this case though, as it passes all the sniff tests for a refinish, (inside rails in the white, under safety lever white with the blue appropriately bordered, etc.).

My photos are not doing the piece justice, and I would certainly prefer that it be examined in person.
I am in no way an expert or even reasonably practiced photographer, and I am afraid this is casting some doubt over the legitimacy of this gun.

Do you have a photo of the "tiger grain" straw effect you mention on the safety lever?
I would love to compare it to what I can see in person under good light.
I do indeed see age patina overall, but again, my photos did not show it, as the light may have washed it out a bit.

As for the engraving being "crude", I find it anything *but* that.
It is not gold filled, but the detail and craftsmanship is minute and quite perfect.

I will be patient until some of the more expert members in my area or within a state or so may be passing this way.
Mr. Wood knows my location, and would be welcome here anytime.

None of my guns are for sale, nor will they be, so there is certainly no attempt to pass off a gun as a fraud happening here.
I am very willing to admit if something is not right on any of my guns, but I am very convinced this one is right as rain.
Of course, I have the advantage of having it here in good light, in my hands, and you have only my rather poor photos of it to judge it by.

Thanks again for your information.

[Ron Wood]

Pete,
Thanks for the blow-up of the chamber marking in Kenyon's book. Obviously the marking is ABT and not GHP. Gotta ask Charlie what the heck that is all about the next time I see him. Going to Louisville next month, maybe I'll see him there. Any chance you will be there?

[LugerVern]

Hi Anna

Albert is correct about the strawing, should have very fine lines (scratches) and yours does not. I also don't like the looks of your barrel alignment marks, even though that picture is a bit blurred. I also think I see evidence of a barrel wrench being used.
The grip screws should be fire blued and they look very worn in your pictures.
The engraving â??well it does look a bit unfinished to me, but that is an opinion only and shouldnâ??t weigh much.

It doesnâ??t mean it isnâ??t a presentation gun, but I tend to believe it has been messed with at some point; this shouldnâ??t surprise anyone if the gun was used or carried. As a family heirloom they often get a re-do treatment.

Vern

[StarOfTheWest]

In strong light, the gun does indeed have the qualities that it is being faulted for lack of.
The photos are not showing finish details and patina correctly.
It obviously must be seen in person, but I completely understand your healthy skepticism.

[alvin]

I am learning. A little comparison here:

[Mauser720]

Someone on this Forum, a Moderator, I think, has pointed out that there is a tool which can be used to engrave metal. The tool is called a "Pantograph" (not sure of the spelling). It involves a rotary metal cutting tool, and a mechanical tracer which can be used to trace designs. Apparently it is similar to a "Pantograph" which is used to trace letters with an ordinary wood router. I have not seen one of these used to trace letters or designs in metal; however, I do have one which is used with an ordinary wood working router.

Now if you look at the ninth picture in this post, the one posted of the Monogram and posted on the 12th there is something that I think may be important.

Look at the right side of the left letter, which is the letter "C" or something like the letter "C." Please look at the inside edge of this letter, just slightly above the middle, and you will see a circular dot that looks almost like a slight period ("."). The middle of this letter, on the right side, has a concave indentation, and this little period is on the top side of this concave indentation. (Actually, it looks like there is one on the bottom side to; however, it does not show as clearly as the one on the top.)

I wonder if this period mark could be the result of a pantograph having been used to etch this Monogram?

Just a thought.

Mauser720 - Ron