WW1 vs WW2 Lugers

trias10 · 07-16-2008, 11:49 AM

I am interested in purchasing a nice shooter/semi-collector Luger (9mm, 4" barrel), but mainly for target shooting at distances of no more than 50 feet. And maybe even use it as a backup home defense gun.

I've looked up some nice pieces on gunbroker, and I already have a WW1 DWM artillery luger that I use mainly for shooting, so I'm familiar with the WW1 construction, but not so much with the quality of the WW2 models (like the 1939 S/42 Mauser version, or the byf41, for example).

My question is, is there a practical quality and/or accuracy difference between the WW1 lugers, and the WW2 era lugers? A luger collector who works at the gun store I frequent mentioned that he believes the WW1 lugers were manufactured to a higher standard, and are thus more accurate and more reliable than the WW2 era Lugers. Is this largely true? I don't mind paying more money for a WW1 luger to use as a shooter if there is a noticeable and significant improvement in build quality, reliability, and/or accuracy.

Thanks.

Ron Smith · 07-16-2008, 12:10 PM

I don't think that there is much noticeable difference as far as accuracy and function is concerned. The "hand fitted" quality of Imperial(WWI) DWM Lugers is superior to Erfurts.

Something to keep in mind is that the quality of the steel is somewhat better in Mausers (WWII), and the difference in the age, wear and fatigue (90+ years vs. 60+ years) would have some bearing.

And you are probably aware also, that if you break a numbered part on a matched Luger. It will reduce the value by a considerable amount.

Vlim · 07-16-2008, 01:24 PM

Yup, it's literally a case of 'the younger, the better'. Steel quality has been improved a number of times, the last time around 1940.

Other than that its more a matter of 'who owned it for the last 50+ years'...

Frank · 07-16-2008, 01:57 PM

Good answers guys. I have two Luger "shooters", one 1917 DWM and a 41 byf Mauser. Both are far more accurate than the "nut" pulling the trigger. If you are careful in your selection, you can't go wrong with either.

I would lean towards the WWII Pistol.

Good Luck

Michael Zeleny · 07-16-2008, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ron Smith
The "hand fitted" quality of Imperial(WWI) DWM Lugers is superior to Erfurts.

My limited observation suggests that the quality of DWM fit declined somewhat in wartime handguns in comparison to pre-WWI specimens. Has anyone else observed anything like that? Also, did DWM practice anything like Colt's channeling of military contract rejects into commercial markets?

Quote:

Originally posted by G. van Vlimmeren
Yup, it's literally a case of 'the younger, the better'. Steel quality has been improved a number of times, the last time around 1940.

I hear similar claims made all the time in reference to different kinds of arms. In the case of Colt's Government Models, it is a well-documented matter of incremental improvements in heat treatment of the slide, starting with the breech in the early Thirties, advancing to differential treatment around 1942, and culminating in comprehensive heat treatment in 1947. Is there any comparable timeline available for Lugers?

alvin · 07-16-2008, 05:51 PM

Page 219-220 of "Mauser Pistolen" (Weaver, 2008) has two tables listing Mauser Luger's accuracy tested in 1936. Unfortunately, they were presented in German, I don't understand the details.

The side notes says Mauser LP08 was more accurate than C96 (I guess probably because the barrel is longer), and Schnellfeuer was more accurate than P08 (probably for the barrel length reason again).

Vlim · 07-17-2008, 06:26 AM

Michael,

There is material surfacing at the moment, but it doesn't help much in determining the exact dates of changes, but they do clearly illustrate the changes in material, heat treatment, reinforcement, etc...

Since the DWM/Mauser P08 has been made under the supervision of 1 man for about 32 years, there are lots of small 'running changes' and this, at least for the DWM and Mauser products helped formulating the phrase 'the younger the better'

07-16-2008, 11:49 AM	#1
trias10 User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Chicago Posts: 6 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	WW1 vs WW2 Lugers I am interested in purchasing a nice shooter/semi-collector Luger (9mm, 4" barrel), but mainly for target shooting at distances of no more than 50 feet. And maybe even use it as a backup home defense gun. I've looked up some nice pieces on gunbroker, and I already have a WW1 DWM artillery luger that I use mainly for shooting, so I'm familiar with the WW1 construction, but not so much with the quality of the WW2 models (like the 1939 S/42 Mauser version, or the byf41, for example). My question is, is there a practical quality and/or accuracy difference between the WW1 lugers, and the WW2 era lugers? A luger collector who works at the gun store I frequent mentioned that he believes the WW1 lugers were manufactured to a higher standard, and are thus more accurate and more reliable than the WW2 era Lugers. Is this largely true? I don't mind paying more money for a WW1 luger to use as a shooter if there is a noticeable and significant improvement in build quality, reliability, and/or accuracy. Thanks.

07-16-2008, 12:10 PM	#2
Ron Smith User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 4,243 Thanks: 118 Thanked 245 Times in 150 Posts	I don't think that there is much noticeable difference as far as accuracy and function is concerned. The "hand fitted" quality of Imperial(WWI) DWM Lugers is superior to Erfurts. Something to keep in mind is that the quality of the steel is somewhat better in Mausers (WWII), and the difference in the age, wear and fatigue (90+ years vs. 60+ years) would have some bearing. And you are probably aware also, that if you break a numbered part on a matched Luger. It will reduce the value by a considerable amount. __________________ I Still Need DWM side plate #49... if anyone runs across a nice one. What ~Rudyard Kipling~ said...

07-16-2008, 01:24 PM	#3
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,990 Times in 1,205 Posts	Yup, it's literally a case of 'the younger, the better'. Steel quality has been improved a number of times, the last time around 1940. Other than that its more a matter of 'who owned it for the last 50+ years'...

07-16-2008, 01:57 PM	#4
Frank RIP Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Hot & Dry PHX, AZ Posts: 2,078 Thanks: 24 Thanked 164 Times in 87 Posts	Good answers guys. I have two Luger "shooters", one 1917 DWM and a 41 byf Mauser. Both are far more accurate than the "nut" pulling the trigger. If you are careful in your selection, you can't go wrong with either. I would lean towards the WWII Pistol. Good Luck

07-16-2008, 05:51 PM	#6
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Page 219-220 of "Mauser Pistolen" (Weaver, 2008) has two tables listing Mauser Luger's accuracy tested in 1936. Unfortunately, they were presented in German, I don't understand the details. The side notes says Mauser LP08 was more accurate than C96 (I guess probably because the barrel is longer), and Schnellfeuer was more accurate than P08 (probably for the barrel length reason again).

07-17-2008, 06:26 AM	#7
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,990 Times in 1,205 Posts	Michael, There is material surfacing at the moment, but it doesn't help much in determining the exact dates of changes, but they do clearly illustrate the changes in material, heat treatment, reinforcement, etc... Since the DWM/Mauser P08 has been made under the supervision of 1 man for about 32 years, there are lots of small 'running changes' and this, at least for the DWM and Mauser products helped formulating the phrase 'the younger the better'