Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Beautiful Swiss produced Luger # 27005 from late '27. The front sight blade is irregular but I've seen similar on other Swiss Lugers.
The serial numbers or abbreviations are marked in more areas than I suspected. Besides the normal full #'s on the barrel and lower receiver I found: 005 on the breach block/ grip safety (under grip)/recoil lug on the upper receiver/ and 05 on....back toggle and both wood grips. The clip/mag is the proper one pin wooden base. xx4.JPG xx7.JPG xx8.JPG xx6.JPG
There are numerous very small Swiss Crosses stamped about and the inspector was M. The bore is excellent and the action very tight....couldn't be more pleased. I have a later 06/29 ('38) arriving shortly.

I am new to this hobby and if you have any info on the irregular front sight I'd be very interested. I'll post holster pics later...

xx1.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
You have a beautiful W+F P'06 Luger. It was made in the final days of 1927 as the last serial number for that year was 27020. The last three digits of the serial number being stamped on the small parts is consistent with a Swiss Luger made at that time.

The front sight looks to be a standard Luger type used on German pistols. The correct sight would be the undercut style normally seen on Swiss Lugers. While there's no way to tell when or who installed your sight, it could have been done by the previous owner because they preferred it or because the original was damaged and that's what they had available. It's impossible to know for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks for the info on the sight...there is a +. stamp on it on the right hand side base when looking straight down at it and no line that would correspond to the sight base alignment/zero line of the barrel mount.
I like the plum barrel (weak bluing salts I'm told as the barrel was blued separately) and the fact it has not been refinished. I am amazed at how tight the action is...the tolerances are excellent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I may have an answer to the front sight...I am new to this hobby but love to read so a little debate here about correct sights.....in Fred Datig's book... The Swiss Variations 1897-1947...he makes a note on page27 about factory modified sights....changing the V to a U at the factory and then stamping a small cross in the vicinity of the modification.
This was his, and others, observation when cataloging Lugers stored at the Bern factory.
The modified front sight on my Luger has a very small but clear Cross stamped on it.....

Anyone with real experience think this might be the case?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
I may have an answer to the front sight...I am new to this hobby but love to read so a little debate here about correct sights.....in Fred Datig's book... The Swiss Variations 1897-1947...he makes a note on page27 about factory modified sights....changing the V to a U at the factory and then stamping a small cross in the vicinity of the modification.
This was his, and others, observation when cataloging Lugers stored at the Bern factory.
The modified front sight on my Luger has a very small but clear Cross stamped on it.....

Anyone with real experience think this might be the case?
When Datig spoke of changing the V sight to a U, he was speaking of the rear sight. My 1900/06 has been done the same way. The U offers a better sight picture than the narrower V notch.

You can clearly see how the rear sight on mine was changed to a U notch.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
^^^Yes...I know....I have that too and the + on the front sight.... interesting... I am told that in Bobba's book he discounts this marking as factory. That all sight mods were done by an individual....on the early pre /29 models.
I have not read it but if you have what does he offer to back that up?
Datig was cataloging pistols at the Factory for the Bern factory when he concluded the mark was a valid factory mark indicating a modification.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
I'm not quite sure what it is you're asking but I'm pretty sure that the + and - markings on front sights have been discussed here before. The Germans made their front sights in three heights. I can't find a reference for the + or - markings but I "THINK" it was decided that they indicated the height of the sight blade while no marking was the standard blade in between the other two in height. Do not quote me on this as I can't find a reference for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Ah...being a newby to this I have no idea...but I will do the research... the front sight is marked +. with a dot inline with the horizontal cross arm...anyways shot it today.... what a fine piece they are. My original magazine is not conducive to shooting and with the wooden bottom not something I'd like to use....93 years old and a tad weak in the spring ... at 93 who isn't.
What are the best aftermarket mags for the 7,65 round.... I am told any 9mm mag is good to go...your experience?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
Ah...being a newby to this I have no idea...but I will do the research... the front sight is marked +. with a dot inline with the horizontal cross arm...anyways shot it today.... what a fine piece they are. My original magazine is not conducive to shooting and with the wooden bottom not something I'd like to use....93 years old and a tad weak in the spring ... at 93 who isn't.
What are the best aftermarket mags for the 7,65 round.... I am told any 9mm mag is good to go...your experience?
Mec-Gar mags are the go-to aftermarket magazines for shooting. They are offered by many sellers. I bought my last ones from CDNN Investmets but others also sell them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Yup...I picked some up....btw, do you have Bobba's book? I posted on the Gunboards side in the Swiss section and a gent said the sight mod and cross stamp is not a valid factory mod..... personally done reducing the value etc....
As Datig was at the factory cataloging Lugers I give his comment weight..... what does Bobba offer to debate that...any idea?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
Sorry, I don't have the Bobba book.

If the gent on the Gunboards site was speaking of your front sight, he is likely correct that the sight wasn't a factory modification but as to reducing value, it's so minor IMO that I wouldn't worry about it. The front sight can always be replaced with the proper type.

If, OTOH, he's speaking of the small Swiss Federal Cross as found on the back of the frame, that most certainly is correct and original. Inspectors stamped that cross only after the pistol was proof fired and accepted as fit for service. See Gortz & Sturgess, page 549.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Sorry, I don't have the Bobba book.

If the gent on the Gunboards site was speaking of your front sight, he is likely correct that the sight wasn't a factory modification but as to reducing value, it's so minor IMO that I wouldn't worry about it. The front sight can always be replaced with the proper type.

If, OTOH, he's speaking of the small Swiss Federal Cross as found on the back of the frame, that most certainly is correct and original. Inspectors stamped that cross only after the pistol was proof fired and accepted as fit for service. See Gortz & Sturgess, page 549.

He was speaking about the rear sight U mod from the original V...and stated that in Bobba's book the modification/stamp was not a factory mod at all but a private ind owner one....

I agree about the value as these weapons were all privately owned and any mods by the soldier / owner are part of the history.

his site.

https://www.swisswaffen.com/?LP=H3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,203 Posts
He was speaking about the rear sight U mod from the original V...and stated that in Bobba's book the modification/stamp was not a factory mod at all but a private ind owner one....

I agree about the value as these weapons were all privately owned and any mods by the soldier / owner are part of the history...
A couple of things. Military weapons were not privately owned per se. They were the property of the Swiss army, but upon retirement/discharge the individual officer/soldier could request to keep his weapon. If granted, the Luger was “privatized” and marked with a “P” and usually the year date of privatization.

The conversion to a “U” rear sight of a military Luger was done at the request of the individual officer/soldier and performed by the Swiss armory and marked with a “+” to indicate an authorized modification. A Commercial Swiss Luger sight modification would/could be made by a gunsmith or the owner himself, but would not be marked with the official “+”.

At least, that is the way I understand it! :) And I agree, it is part of the history.
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
A couple of things. Military weapons were not privately owned per se. They were the property of the Swiss army, but upon retirement/discharge the individual officer/soldier could request to keep his weapon. If granted, the Luger was “privatized” and marked with a “P” and usually the year date of privatization.

The conversion to a “U” rear sight of a military Luger was done at the request of the individual officer/soldier and performed by the Swiss armory and marked with a “+” to indicate an authorized modification. A Commercial Swiss Luger sight modification would/could be made by a gunsmith or the owner himself, but would not be marked with the official “+”.

At least, that is the way I understand it! :) And I agree, it is part of the history.
Ron

Ron,
That make complete sense...when I said 'owned' I meant in the possession case as issued weapons would/could be stored at home by the guard soldier.
The U is much more realistic as a sight picture aperture imo. You see many for sale (like mine) with a modified front sight too that is thicker than the stock sharkfin....it would be hard to center as it would fill the V.
What is your opinion on front sight changes...the same as the above?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
A couple of things. Military weapons were not privately owned per se. They were the property of the Swiss army, but upon retirement/discharge the individual officer/soldier could request to keep his weapon. If granted, the Luger was “privatized” and marked with a “P” and usually the year date of privatization.

The conversion to a “U” rear sight of a military Luger was done at the request of the individual officer/soldier and performed by the Swiss armory and marked with a “+” to indicate an authorized modification. A Commercial Swiss Luger sight modification would/could be made by a gunsmith or the owner himself, but would not be marked with the official “+”.

At least, that is the way I understand it! :) And I agree, it is part of the history. Ron
I think Ron has pretty well explained it. The U notch could also have been done by the owner after a military pistol had been privatized. I suspect that's how mine was done as it doesn't have the + stamp. Mine was also privatized prior to the date stamp being included. From what I read, a lot of the rear sights were modified. I suspect it was because target shooting with the Luger was quite popular in Switzerland and the U-notch gives a better sight picture than the V-notch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I can see why the German's passed on the grip safety and the Swiss extended it on the '29 model modifications. In 1906 guise it is not overly user friendly... it requires a too deliberate 'grip' that is not combat focused imo.
OTOH, it sure is sweet to shoot.
The pistol pictured in my OP is 'dead balls on' as the saying goes.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Here is the holster from '23 marked J.BLASER BERN ...all stitching is in place and solid...very nice piece. They do fit like a glove so I put a 'pull' on the Luger.... IMG_0288.JPG IMG_0291.JPG IMG_0293.JPG
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top