Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A couple of years ago one of our most trusted Forum members was kind enough to sell me a 1908 DWM shooter for a project I was planning at the time. He told me that he suspected that some earlier owner had buffed the rear grip strip down to remove rust spots, making the rear section quite thin. When I received the gun I photographed the following:


Download Attachment: 1908 Military DWM.jpg
82.12KB

I could not see any signs of grinding or polishing, but I had to admit that the rear strap, near the mag insertion point, was unusually thin.
The curvature of the grip strap seemed perfectly normal.

Recently I purchased another 1908 - this time a Commercial - and found the same kind of thin rear grip strap.


Download Attachment: 1908 Commercial DWM.jpg
61.29KB

MY QUESTION: Since both of these Lugers seem to have normal rear grip straps - no signs of grinding or polishing - and have normal curvature, I am wondering if some of the 1908 DWMs were just made this way. Would you please look at your 1908 DWMs and advise if anyone else finds this thin strap anomaly?

Thanks for your help.

Luke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Hi Ron,

Thank you so much for the picture. I didn't notice the difference until I got my 2nd 1908. The weight of your evidence along with that of my two 1908 Lugers leads me to suspect (no hypothesis yet) that maybe, just maybe, some of the 1908s were simply made with a thinner rear grip strap. After all, 1908 was a transition year for DWM to the new frame without the grip safety, and it seems conceivable that in this first year of production there was no clear guideline to determine the rear grip strap thickness. A stretch in reasoning maybe ? ? ? ?

Luke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Ron -

Agree. Unfortunately, I do not own a 1906, so I cannot verify. I know we have a lot of 1906 collectors, so maybe one of you can comment. Thanks.

Luke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,497 Posts
Luke,

No photos forthcoming, but I surveyed the guns in my safe.

P-08 Commercial--thin
1st issue DWM--thin
1st issue DWM--thin
1911 DWM--thin

1911 Erfurt--Thick
1912 Erfurt--thin

Vickers (1906 frame)--thin
KOL (1906 frame)--thin

1900 AE (13000 range)--thin
Test Eagle--thin
1900AE #2104--Thick (!)

The amount of relative "thinness" seems to vary slightly from gun to gun, but the difference between those and the Thick grip straps is distinct. I'm intrigued by the Thick early 1900 strap and the thin, later guns.

--Dwight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Dwight -

Thanks for the data. It is beginning to look as if "thin" was the norm in early production. The 1911 Erfurt doesn't seem fit the pattern, but it seems possible that the DWM and Erfurt manufacturing folks might have read the specifications differently and acted accordingly.

Luke
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,343 Posts
Hi,

Quickly browsed a blueprint-example (thanks to the excellent detective-work of mr. Goertz and the digitising skills of mr. Sabato) and noticed the
thickness according to one of the drawings (bottom view) should be 0.75 centimeters, but according to another (sideview) on the same page, it should be 1.1.

Perhaps this misinterpretation of data could explain for differences in thickness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Gerben -

I have a copy of the drawings, and I think I found the one to which you refer. The one I found is for a frame WITH stock lug, and the configuration is somewhat different for this later version of the frame. Am I looking at the wrong drawing?

Luke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Gerben -

Now I see what you mean. The drawing you referenced is for the frame with a stock lug, but the two dimensions given for the rear grip strap thickness are inconsistent. This might lead to speculation that the drawing (one which I do not have) for the frame w/o stock lug is also inconsistent. Thanks for pointing that out.

Luke
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,343 Posts
Luke,

Also had a quick look at the 1904 drawings. Interestingly enough, the dimensions mentioned there are exactly the same as those on the 1908 drawing. The addition of the stock lug did not affect the dimensions of the frame bottom very much. It just was 'stuck on'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Gerben -

Dwight points out that one of his two 1900AE Lugers ("1900AE #2104--Thick (!)") has the thick rear grip strap; the other thin, so the confusion was present even before the 1904 drawings.

Luke
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top