[jcoe]

This 1937 P08 3058s is standard early 1937 mauser product, all matching and showing minimal use. It was brought home from europe in 1945 by an Army Dentist, who had acquired it in a card game.


Download Attachment: leftside3058.jpg
42.56 KB


Download Attachment: serialno3058.jpg
53.2 KB


S/42 3058s is interesting because it has a matching Krieghoff magazine .

Download Attachment: magbottom3058.jpg
31.94 KB


Download Attachment: magleft3058.jpg
54.79 KB
The magazine is an extruded type, mid machining-unmarked, classified as BIB by Gibson. Basically an unmarked Haenel that was used for Krieghoff lugers starting in 1937 around serial 6000.The mag bottom bears the early LWaA acceptance mark upside down. As noted in TRL, page 91, about 16%(or more) of Mauser military P08 were routed to the Luftwaffe, however actual records of procurement before 1939 were not available. In contrast to Kriegsmarine or Police lugers, identification of Luftwaffe issued Mauser lugers is usually not possible,as they were not marked in a specific manner. The matching Krieghoff magazine with S/42 3058s suggests that it was a Mauser luger used by the Luffwaffe .
John

 

[Jan C Still]

John
Excellent and very interesting presentation of a Luftwaffe 1937 S/42.
Thanks
Jan

 

[jcoe]

Thanks Jan,
The question arises if other matched Krieghoff mags been observed with Mauser P08s and if this was a common practice by Krieghoff? If so, it could result in a number of aberrant Krieghoff mags , that is, where the serial range number does not match the Krieghoff proof or the construction of the magazine body(assuming that bottom was original to the body). Perhaps the Krieghoff mag experts could comment on the frequency of aberrant Krieghoff mags.
John

 

[John D]

Hi John..!

I apologize that I missed your post, but thank you for your Private Message asking me to take a look!

As the MAG is "matched" (serial number) to the P 08, it appears to be a unique attribute. While some Mauser production was indeed routed to the Luftwaffe as you note, it is very plausible that yours might have been routed to that branch of service.

If that is true, then it would be conceivable that the LWaA mark (LWaA 1st Acceptance- S1) would have been applied by that Luftwaffe Inspector, BUT his “employment” would have been with the Luftwaffe, representing that branch of service as an “Inspector” - rather then a Krieghoff or Mauser “employee”. And without further ties in to Krieghoff, it might be more correct to note your MAG as Luftwaffe Accepted, rather then a "Krieghoff" magazine, if you see what I mean?

On your 1937, are their any other marks that might tie it into an HK rework, or other LWaA proofs/stamps? I would be especially interested in any stamps/digits as they might appear under the right grip panel, or on the right of the receiver?

Just to note, and similarly, some collectors have looked at the LA and LWaA 2 marks on "Kü" variations/holsters, and tried to use that as the "tie into" Krieghoff manufactured/reworked/issued. I don't believe that is the case at all (without opening a long Kü dissertation). Rather, the LWaA 1st Acceptance- S1 on your MAG is proper for the Luftwaffe Acceptance stamp in use at that time – but, and however - it does not determine that Krieghoff had any role in it's production or rework, including the MAG itself, again given absence of any other HK specific markings on the piece.

So - with that background - and back to your original question - how rare is that?

Unfortunately, Mauser production is outside my original area, but, I believe it's uncommon for any marks found anywhere (including the magazine base, as noted) that could be used to identify a Luftwaffe issued Mauser from those issued to the other branches. In your case, however, I believe yours can be tied into a Luftwaffe issued. Furthermore, the Mausers I've typically seen with the LWaA 1st-S1 are mismatched to the Luger, and/or are un-numbered, and therefore, were most likely not issued with that piece.

In your case, again - it would appear that this is the correct MAG, as accepted and originally issued with that specific Luger, but again, does not represent that the MAG passed through the Krieghoff facilities. At the same time, while again I'm not a Mauser expert, the only thing I would also note is that I thought Mauser would have stamped your MAG with the letter suffix "s" as well, under the digits?

I hope this helps, and perhaps some collectors better versed in Mauser production then myself, might add their input as well.

My Best to you,

John

 

[jcoe]

Thanks John for your definitive examination, and for your correction that the LWaA inspection mark is of course a luftwaffe acceptance mark rather than a Krieghoff mark. The close association of the two can lead to some controversial areas such as the ku luger arena that you mentioned.
I can find no other definitive marks anywhere that would indicate HK work or LWaA acceptance. On right frame there is an odd proof, dissimilar to marks found in that area on other mauser P08 of mine, however certainly not the typical numeral 7 of Krieghoff. (fig1).


Download Attachment: s42mark.jpg
52.42KB

Yes, you are correct that a 1937 Mauser mag would have the scriptic “s” and E/63 proof.
Best Regds, John

 

[John D]

Hi John,

You are most welcome! I hope it assists - and you have a wonderful S/42. I've been thinking about your's throughout the day and with the Luftwaffe Acceptance on the MAG, and where the MAG matches the serial number, and you know the original VET and how it was acquired - my personal feeling it is correct, and may be one that can be traced from Mauser to the Luftwaffe. Interesting in and of itself, to be sure!

As well - I want to congratulate your post for two other reasons. First - the photos are excellent. More importantly - in my mind though.....

I admire you for taking a picture of *exactly* the area I was interested under the grip - and correctly guessing what I was looking for... Something tells me you have spent quite a bit of time researching both this piece and other Luger variations. For that - you have my admiration and respect. Some view the Internet as providing all the answers without doing their own primary research. You - however - have done an excellent job of not only anticipating what I would ask, but knew what I was looking for and posted back on both accounts...

John - it has been a pleasure to assist you. Should you have any Krieghoff questions - please feel free to ask. It would be my pleasure.

My Best to you,

John

 

[Jan C Still]

JohnC and JohnD
Thanks for your informative posts.
It is reasonable to estimate that the Luftwaffe procured Lugers from Mauser during 1937.

If a 1937 S/42 Luger procured by the Luftwaffe was missing a magazine, a Luftwaffe procured and inspected magazine would certainly be a potential replacement with the serial number being added by Luftwaffe personnel. I doubt that the Luftwaffe armorer was concerned if the replacement magazine was of Mauser(Army) type or Krieghoff(Luftwaffe) type or if the suffix was added to the magazine.

I am not aware of Luftwaffe stamped magazines of the type used on Luftwaffe procured Krieghoffs being matched to Mauser Lugers. However, many collectors have observed more Mauser Lugers than I and might have some interesting information to add.
Jan