[jcoe]

The C/RC or RC stamp previously called a “rework” stamp is now referred to as a “Revision Commission” stamp (Goertz). It was applied at the factory to imperial P08 parts during production and indicated a flawed but useable part. The RC mark is usually associated with Erfurt factory proofing because it is so frequently seen on Erfurt P08 parts. Costanzo(WOL) observed that on Erfurt P08s the RC mark could “be noted on any luger part”. He also found the RC mark on two parts of DWM P08s. Were these original issue imperial DWM P08s or reworked DWM P08s refitted with (RC marked) Erfurt parts, a common practice? Remember that Costanzo considered that the C/RC was a” rework, repair or reissue proof”. At any rate, the occurrence of the RC mark on original imperial DWM P08s is uncommon and has not been clearly defined. The Revision Commission’s function at Erfurt was described (Gortz and Bryans page 118, Imperial Lugers,page 62) however, the ability of a private contractor such as DWM to reclaim defective parts in a similar manner is not clear and has been questioned.


Download Attachment: leftside.JPG
49.07KB


Download Attachment: rtside.JPG
53.29KB


Download Attachment: proofs.JPG
60.16KB


Download Attachment: 1913.JPG
50.14KB


Figure1,2,3,4. P08 serial number 528b, is an all matching1913 DWM (except mag), with factory installed holdopen, and original long sear. DWM proofs are present on receiver, toggle and barrel.


Download Attachment: front view.JPG
39.84KB


Download Attachment: crc.JPG
15.67KB


Figure 5,6. P08 528b bears a C/RC on the forward aspect of the trigger guard. The C/RC is struck at an angle, and shallow; it was almost removed during finishing. This P08 shows little use, and is other wise unremarkable except for a Bo24 marked barrel. No other parts are C/RC marked and there are no signs of reworking.


Download Attachment: erfurtrc.JPG
38.28KB

Figure7. 1918 Erfurt #8976n bears a deeply struck C/RC at very top of trigger guard, a typical location in my experience. In contrast, the DWM RC mark is positioned lower on the trigger guard. Comparison of various Erfurt RC marks to the single DWM RC mark did not reveal any unique features that would distinguish the Erfurt from the DWM RC stamp. However Erfurt RC marks are typically deep and difficult to compare to this shallow RC DWM mark .
So where did 528b get its C/RC mark? Perhaps the RC somehow was applied during an Erfurt factory visit (a Costanzo flashback), yet there is no evidence of Erfurt reworking or Erfurt parts on 528b. Also the RC location was not typical IME for Erfurt. Was the RC mark applied at DWM factory by their Revisions Commission? If this is a DWM RC, why is it such a rare mark on original imperial DWM P08s? Did DWM have newer/better machines than Erfurt? Or Sleepy RC inspectors at DWM ? Or were DWM defective parts actually discarded or the RC mark removed during finishing?
Well, this is much ado about one RC mark, but perhaps will bring forth some illuminating discussion about the RC marked DWM P08s
John

 

[Edward Tinker]

Very interesting, thanks for compiling all this,

Ed

 

[Ron Smith]

John, It could be that quality control was set to a higher standard at DWM than at the Erfurt Arsenal. Consiquently fewer parts failed to pass inspection. This could be evident in the fit and finish of DWMs compared to Erfurts of the same year. I have a 1917 Erfurt with the C/RC on the barrel, rear toggle and on the trigger guard.

Ron

 

[Ron Wood]

I can't provide any information on the DWM C/RC markings, but I do know I LIKE your Luger! I am a big fan of 1908 pattern Lugers and this one is a really nice example. Thanks for the pics.

 

[Jan C Still]

John
I have a 1906 Navy with a C/RC stamp on the left side of the frame. It is an anomaly and I have no idea why it was used except for the explanation in Gortz Bryans page 118. I will post photographs the next time I take pictures.

It is almost an anomaly to find a later Erfurt without the C/RC stamp.
Jan

 

[Heinrich]

John,

This is the original (1882 edition) instruction, of the revolver inspection manual, when and under which circumstances the RC- stamp has to be strucked.
This part of the instruction was transfered word for word to the 08- instruction and all other weapons inspection instructions of that time.
The text is written in a rather complicated (old-fashioned) German and I try to translate it:

Parts with defects or faults, if possible to finish them by rework, have to be brought back to the workers.
Are there any daubts of the utilization of a piece, or will be
a part considered to be only slightly out of tolerance, without exspectation that this part will have later disadvantages in working together with other parts, such a part has to be submitted to the inspection's supervisor or his deputy.
Will be this part accepted by the Sub- director(sic!), the part must be marked, beside the normal inspection stamp, with the R.C. marking, to avoid to call later the inspector to account.

Though particularly not mentioned in the instruction, the marking RC was always applied directly to the place where the defect or deviation was found. In your case it seems to be that one of the dimensions (thickness, width) of the trigger guard have a deviation. Because the set of drawings of the 08 pistol was available some years ago, it would be possible to check precise which deviation it was.

Download Attachment: RC Stempel 1.jpg
26.11 KB

Download Attachment: RC Stempel 2.jpg
82.58 KB

 

[jcoe]

Ed,
Thanks.
Ron,
DWM finishing certainly was better than Erfurt’s and I have heard that DWM’s machines were superior so that after initial tooling the parts should have been closer to specifications.
Ron,
Thanks, certainly an attractive luger made at that time.
Jan,
Thanks for your additional RC stamped Navy. I quess the big question is if there was a Revisions Commission (full or part time) at DWM? Can anyone provide any evidence for or against?
Heinrich,
Thanks for your direct translation. Do you have any information if these instructions and Revisions Commission were present at DWM in addition to Erfurt?
John

 

[Heinrich]

John,
I'm convinced that the instruction for the quality inspection was at first used at DWM in Berlin for production and the there established inspection. After Erfurt set up a production line for the Pistol 08 in 1911 a new instruction (probably revised) was issued in 1913. An original of this manual (Signatur ASV 73/16) is stored in the "Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv" in Munich.

 

[jcoe]

Heinrich,
Very interesting. Do you think that the Revisions Commission was operating at DWM during the whole time of DWM imperial P08 production? And under the same rules/standards as followed by Revisions Commission at Erfurt after 1913? The enormous disparity of RC markings on DWM and Erfurt P08s would suggest a significant difference in the function of the Revisions Commission at the two factories.
John

 

[Jan C Still]

Download Attachment: 1910P081D94CAVR 136.jpg
49.44 KB
Heinrich and John
C/RC stamp on a 1906 Navy sn 3004. Have looked at many hundreds of DWM's and have only seen one other with a C/RC. I have always questioned this stamp on a 1906 Navy. This series of posts helps answer this question.
Thanks
Jan

 

[jcoe]

Jan,
Very nice. Your extensive experience and many years of critical observations do indeed attest to the rarity of the C/RC on the imperial DWM P08. Perhaps there is a real answer to this conundrum.
John

 

[Heinrich]

John,

I think there is a clear answer:

The quality of DWM was simply better!

 

[jcoe]

I asked Reinhard Kornmayer earlier this week if he had any information in his library about the RC commission at DWM. Reinhard Kornmayer and the former Joachim Gortz are well known luger historians/collaborators, and Reinhard now has the Gortz archive in his library..
In his fax this AM, Reinhard said that “DWM as private producer didn’t have an official RC commission” and he provided the following translation:
“On pistols of DWM production, you can find the marking RC (stamped by the Royal Gun Factory Spandau) seldom or never. The reason for this is the treaty with the DWM. Pistols which did not meet exactly the gauges were rejected automatically and the producer had to replace it by pistols of absolutely perfect quality. Such rejects were then sold to the commercial market or to officers and officials of the army who had to care themselves for their guns. This elegant way was not allowed to the factories of the government.”
John

 

[jcoe]

Jan
The previous information from Kornmayer that DWM P08s received the C/RC proof at the Spandau factory sounded rather strange to me until I noted a sentence in “Imperial Lugers” on page 63, under Spandau P08. You quoted a Gortz 1990 correspondence stating that “All DWM-made Lugers were tested and accepted for the government by inspectors from the Spandau factory”. With such a close relationship between the two factories, a Spandau stamp on a DWM product does not seem unreasonable. Spandau also used their C/RC stamp rather frequently on their own lugers.
John

 

[Jan C Still]

John, Heinrich, Ron, Ed
There are photographs of Dreyse needle-fire revolvers and M/79 and M/83 Reichrevolvers (military contract Dreyse and Erfurt) with the C/RC stamp shown in Harders excellent new book "Der Reichsrevolver und seine Varianten". Observations (above) also indicate that it was very rarely used on DWM Lugers and commonly used on Erfurt Lugers.

Apparently the C/RC stamp was used over a long span of time on a variety of small arms by various manufacturers. I would guess that the stamp would indicate some sort of RC commission (or group of inspectors performing that function)at the time the stamp was applied.
Jan

 

[Heinrich]

Friends,

Some remarks:
The use of the R.C. stamp was a usual operation in case of deviations and executed by the government inspectors at the factories as described above.

The groups of inspectors were commanded specialists and independent of the factories. There was no difference where they were working in private or government plants.
It is fact that the quality of the DWM pistol parts were much more better compared with those in Erfurt.
There was the rate of complained parts higher.

Concerning the Reichsrevolvers I found a similarity between the Consortium Suhl and the Dreyse factory. The last one had permanent quality problems and the reason for cutting the orders from 30 000 down to
19 000 by the Prussian Government. The difference was transfered to the Consortium.

I case of the Dreyse needle- fire revolver we have an other situation. All the officially by Prussia purchased revolvers were marked wit the R.C. stamp.
In this case it was not an indication for a quality complain but a marking for their approval without a written instruction for the quality check.
It was in this sense also an act of sanctioning.

 

[lugercollector]

Gentlemen....quite a coincidence but I acquired a DWM 1918 last week....upon examination I noticed a Crown RC stamp underneath the trigger guard......I also noticed the the frame is not as "full" as it should be at the RH back top section....see photos.....I presume this is why the stamp is on the frame...

Download Attachment: MVC-508F.JPG
44.95 KB

Download Attachment: MVC-509F.JPG
48.08 KB

Download Attachment: MVC-510F.JPG
46.72 KB

Download Attachment: MVC-512F.JPG
40.01 KB

Download Attachment: MVC-515F.JPG
54.33 KB

Download Attachment: MVC-521F.JPG
77.16KB