Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I own 761,769 which has these grips and The Pancho Collection (on line) shows identical grips on 761,071. This serial range falls within Marshall’s second variation, ring hammer sub-variation, that began around 756,000 and extends into the 770,000’s. Guns before these all have the heavy X grips which start near the beginning of production to about 756,775 corresponding to Marschall’s first variation, guns with flat heavy hammers and 2pc firing pins. Later guns (>770,000’s) have weighed grips.

These grips show their age, have identical mold marks to the earlier heavy X grips, and the front of the grips looks identical to other Walther grips. Further, these are found only in the ring hammer variation and are two guns 700 SN’s apart suggest these are authentic.

Does anyone own a ring hammer variation with these same grips and if so what is the serial number? Does anyone have a pair for sale?

new york 0913 038.jpg new york 0913 039.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
My gut feeling is that these grips actually pre-date the "heavy X" grips. The reason that I state this is that the particular PP variation appears to use a prototype PPK hammer. It is my opinion that these guns were "using up" prototype parts, namely the hammer and grips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
This is a really interesting theory! I get your drift that "pre-date" may refer to the part not the gun production. It also explains why the earlier grip is a better grip. Your perceptive link to the early PPK variation is also intriguing. This also fits the "Swabian" view of Herr Walther as a miser where no good part goes to waste. Thanks for thinking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Thanks for the compliment! Mine is 760XXX. My grips are warped more than the heavy X grips on two others that I have. So I don't consider them to be "better". Also, they must be weaker due to less reinforcement. I'm guessing that even the heavy X ones were prone to breakage, so they went to the steel inserts, which of course seem to cause cracking over time.

Don: I can't figure out how to reply to your PM. The process appears to be much more complicated than many other sites. If you would like more info, please send me your email address.

Regards,

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
I have to dig it out of the safe,but it does look like it is indeed a 754113- just dug it out,its 754115 sorry for mix up read off wrong line in printout
Here is a left side pic,will check number

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Thanks! To complete my research can you tell me: is the receiver blued or white?; confirm it has a 2 piece firing pin; is there an indicator pin?; scribe marks inside slide match serial number; are the rear corners of the firing pin cover rounded or square?; any markings on the tang well floor? -Don Riker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Hi Don,
the receiver (you mean frame correct?) is blue
there is no indicator pin
there are scribe marks (last 3 digits match)
rear corners square on cover (see picture)
no marking on the well floor



hope that helps
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Dave, thanks. What I mean is the external surface you see through the ejection port often called the barrel support, or receiver, into which the cartridge goes. Is that white or blued? Also I believe the Crown/N marks are on the slide and below on the frame. Also should have a C-spring which you can just see the top of below and to the right of the hammer. Thanks again. I will confirm variation when I get this info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Hi Don
The barrel chamber that show through slide is blue.
The proof marks are the early one(have a PPK like that too) on the slide and just under on the frame.

I do not see a c spring below the hammer on right side-here is a picture with grip off.Does that show what you are looking for perhaps?If not I will try and take another.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Dave, I think we are good. Looking at the pictures and your information your gun has all the features of a first variation PP and is correct for the serial number with the one exception of the magazine which is not slab sided and has a banner plus PP marking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Thanks Don,

I knew the mag was incorrect when I bid on it (and I suspect the holster) but I bought it right (antique auction-not a lot of gun buyers) and thought a early PP would be nice to add to the others.Whats the earliest PP you have in the research ?
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top