But Dave, you were just telling him the truth.....


As he was, it is probably listed by Mitchell as $4500, just amazing how folks buy things without knowledge, at least when I buy without knowledge I admit it

 

It happens everywhere. I just saw one guy claiming a replica Chinese 45ACP C96 worth $8000, which was available in checkpointcharlie.com $600-$700 just a few weeks ago

 

One on Gun Poker :

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=113918623

 

That stainless steel AIMCO Luger made in Houston, TX is not the same thing as Mitchell's Mausers Lugers . Totally different. The Texas made stainless Luger is a copy, not exact, made in the 1990's, and variously sold under the brands of Stoeger, Mitchell, and Aimco. The repros have some differences in internal design than the originals, were made of softer steel (stainless) than the blued original German guns, plus were not hardened properly in the critical areas as were the German Lugers, then overbuffed. Function was problematic, on the three I used to own.

Mitchell's Mausers are original Lugers (and other Mausers ) from Germany, newly re-worked and supplied in fancy presentation boxes. Their re-work is truly poor, using lower grade condition Lugers, force re-numbered parts, over-buffed and then re-finished but not accurately. Their work (the two Mitchell's Mausers Lugers I have seen in person ) is not nearly up to professional restoration standards.

I doubt that the two companies, Mitchell Arms, and Mitchell's Mausers are the same, but the guns are definitely not to be confused.

 

here is the link:

http://www.mauser.org/Pistols/P08 Luger/index.htm

 

Mitchell Arms and Mitchell Mausers are two separate companies. Mitchell's Mausers are reworked Lugers which - well being new to the forum I'll leave my opinion private. Mitchell Arms and later Stoeger both sold under the Luger name however both were made by AIMCO out of TX. Mitchell Arms sold them initially however these were notorious for metallurgical problems, they would beat themselves apart. Legal problems also immerged as Stoeger still held the US patent rights and took Mitchell Arms to court. Stoeger won and through lawyer manipulations took over control and sales. Stoeger allegedly corrected the metallurgical problems however the market just wasn't there and was discontinued.

I do own one of the Navy model Stoeger Luger and it’s never jammed nor has any functioning problems. It is incredibly accurate and looks impressive. If anything ever happens to it on the range, I won’t be out as much as if it were my 20 DWM or Byf 42.

 

Drachenstein.... Welcome to the Forum. I appreciate your low key approach.

 

Thanks, it's my intent to learn as much as I can from all of you.

 

I surely wish at least one of the three Stoeger stainless Lugers I owned had been satisfactory. All three were problematic.

 

Problematic? You should try the Erma LA22 Luger, slightest powder fouling and it jams more than a smuckers jar. With the rising cost of ammo I hate to get rid of any .22 Cal. though. The days of plinking with 9mm and 8mm are tightning up, 7.65,,,,,,,forget it.

What problems were you having with your Stoegers?

 

I had the opportunity to examine one of the 6 inch Stainless Steel Stoeger a month ago. In my opinion these badly made guns should be banned from shooting even the lightest loads.

The gun was so burred and deformed that the magazine was almost impossible to remove and that a normal takedown was impossible without using a lot of force.

A nice looking, shiny turd is still a turd.

 

Any abused firearm could fall into that catagory. Other than finding them, I've had no issue with magazines, take down and cleaning is a breeze. I don't know, maybe I was lucky. Are you sure it wasn't a Mitchell that had already beat itself to death? Both look the same unless you have calipers or a magazine.

 

It said 'Stoeger' on the side, that helped

 

Yep, that's usually a good indicator,,,,,,,,,,,, but at least there was no rust on it.

I guess I got lucky. I see a lot of trash at gun shows from people who attempt to restore pieces (especailly nickeling), or people who don't know how to store a weapon. I know a lady who keeps her late husbands PO8 in a plastic bag on a shelf under the basement stairs, I've tried to rescue it but no doing. I know another who shoots but doesn't clean any of her pistols - her husband use to do that for her. I'm waiting for her now to put his match grade .22 Cal up on an online auction. I can't see paying that much for a .22 but when your competition shooting I guess it's worth it.

I was reading your research on the post war PO8 mausers from Interarms. What's your opinion of it's quality?

 

The overall quality of the Postwar Mausers is actually very good. The changes in production methods they made were well researched and the changed components are of overall good quality as a result. They had a lot of issues getting the 9mm versions to cycle correctly, because their variation was based on the Swiss 7,65 design which had a completely different interia and spring setting. Another issue was to get the magazines going, this again caused a lot of head aches.

The bolt and receiver are both machined parts, the rear and mid toggle are investment castings, as well as other smaller parts like the side plate, takedown lever, trigger, safety, etc.. They actually managed to create parts with such exact tolerances that they eventually did away with pre-blue assembly and test fitting altogether. The only parts that needed to be 'mated' before blueing were the rear toggle and the receiver.

Timing and marketing killed off the Mauser Parabellum, not the build quality. Trying to sell an expensive Swiss style pistol to a community which was used to and had access to the P08 design cheaply was not a smart thing to do, but a brave attempt nonetheless.

 

My three stainless Stoeger Lugers had feed problems, stovepipes .... and often would have partially ejected shell jammed up with incoming bullet from magazine. ...rarely could get thru a complete magazine. 'Took one to a gunsmith, he was unable to adjust it.

I noticed alot of toggle ramp peening, as if many thousands of rounds ... on the new stainless steel. ... Not hardened sufficiently.

Cosmetic complaints ....The fit was poor, front of frame did not align with front of barrel extension or "slide".
The flats were buffed wavy, the edges rounded.

'Gave up on them, even though I would have liked to have one as a shooter. After realizing that shooter-grade classic Lugers would work so well, I haven't looked back.

The following photos are not of my own gun, but show the same finish and fit quality (-lack of) as mine.

 

Allow me to recommend another completely different ERMA in the .22LR caliber ... the Erma KGP69. This smaller Erma .22 is somewhat smaller than a P08, and alot more solid than the larger LA, EP etc. Ermas. Whereas the larger EP, La -type is a bit larger than a P08, this KGP69 Erma .22 has better proportions, much more Luger-like, and has some mechanical improvements on the larger Erma.
A true hold-open, identical operation to a P08, instead of the LA Erma's fake hold-open mechanism depending on the mag follower to catch the bolt. On a La Erma, provided that the hold-open does acutally succeed in working on any given expample, the bolt will slam shut when the magazine is pulled out, unlike the regular Luger system.
...The KGP69 Erma has a magazine safety, that acutally works well, with a different design than the failed P08 Police variant tried in the inter-war period. The KGP69 Erma mechanism has a small actuator in the frame that senses the round base of the inserted magazine, and blocks the trigger when the mag is removed.
... The KGP69 is made of better metal, denser steel maybe, seems tighter in fit, uses less alloy, than the LA -type models. The barrel, sliding extension and toggle train are blued steel, while the frame is steel that has some sort of paint finish, which seems more durable than the LA versions.
The improved internal design of the KGP69 (introduced in 1969 ?) gives it a better feel, and more reliability.
....I currently have four, and am keeping them. I think they are pretty good approaches to the German quality of the P08, scaled back for the .22 cal. and scaled down to the 3 to 5 hundred dollar price range.
....Parts availability is dwindling, and the most often needed replacement part, the extractor, has been the hardest to find. I returned one of these guns to the seller because it was missing the extractor, and I couldn't find those repacement parts. However the guns I have are holding up well, and are really satisfying to shoot. Fortunately, magazines come up frequently for sale online, both the original mfg. Erma branded ones with the black plastic base, and also Triple K mags, with silver aluminum bases. I think the Erma mags are better made, thicker metal, and better formed, but the sheet metal 3-K mags work fine aslo.

The take-down is a bit more difficult than a P08, with some oddly similar parts. Where the P08's take down lever is instead a rounded block that is removed from the KGP frame, which allows sliding the upper back, and then the rear axle pin is slid out of the toggle behind the frame, something a P08 doesn't do.
Then the toggle train can be pulled out the back, and the upper is slid all the way forward out of the frame. There are some typical Erma firinig pin and guide rods that were also held by the now removed axle pin. Re-assemly is the tricky part, getting the axle pin back thru the upper, the toggle link, and the two pins holes at the same time. I found that a tapered pilot pin was useful in lining everything up prior to putting in the axle pin.

It was after using the KGP69 Erma to sate my Luger .22 interest, that I was able to give up on the Erma conversion kits, and sold them finally (at no loss, fortunately) after some memorable attempts with springs etc. and going thru several kits, trying different combinations etc. Some members may recollect the threads, and had given me various encouragement and discouragement. The kits, good for collecting, but - shooting - 'forget that.

Beeman made (and still has available) some really nice wooden grips for this KGP69, which are an improvement over the standard plastic grips and without their thumb shelf, which is comfortable, but not in keeping with Luger style.

Erma also made an even smaller Luger copy as a .380ACP, (9 Kurz) and as a .32 cal. they being called KGP68 and KGP68a, not sure which is which. Not all parts are interchangable, of course, especially the grips, which are oddly just a bit larger on the .22 model KGP69. I have never had nor fired one of these centerfire KGP Ermas, but I have held one and seen several.

 

Alx,
I have both the Erma-Werke Mod.KGP 69 (.22cal.) and the Erma-Werke Mod.KGP 68A in .380cal. They are identical in all respects except the one in .380cal. is of a much smaller scale, maybe one third smaller. This is strange since it's a much larger cal. The Mod.68A(.380) is tough to find. The few I have seen were all a smaller scale than the .22cal. The model in .380cal. is VERY temperamental to fire and subject to frequent loading problems. I haven't found a good .380 round yet that it will smoothly cycle.
Tim H.