Interesting Artillery on GA.com

[DavidJayUden]

Have a look at this one, and I'll be interested in hearing from the experts.
I'm not trying to pick on Mr. Luger. But my initial concerns are that it is a 1917 Erfurt artillery(?), a very thin and questionable set of leather, and I can't see if it is relieved for the rear sight. Your thoughts?


https://www.gunsamerica.com//9210460...AZINE.htm?wl=1

[John Sabato]

Poorly reproduced holster and mag pouch---not original... sorry-- the seller doesn't know what he is talking about. The magazine is questionable as to the numbering. The pistol has been reblued. $1100 tops... not $3500.

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by DavidJayUden

and I can't see if it is relieved for the rear sight.

I can't tell either [pic attached] but they are fine-tune sights F&R...

Also, the page in Jones is for a 1914 Erfurt artillery. I don't think you can use a 1914 anything to verify a 1917...

Nice big pics, BTW...2928 x 1707...He ain't hidin' nuthin'...

Jones had a comment on Erfurts being poorly finished...and looking at this toggle, he wasn't foolin'...

(I actually have trouble believing the toggle is machined, looks filed to me)...

[George Anderson]

The leather is all fake as is the magazine. The pistol is a mixed parts gun; 1917 DWM receiver with Erfurt toggle train. Erfurt made LP08s in 1914 ONLY.

[Ron Wood]

Originally Posted by George Anderson

The leather is all fake as is the magazine. The pistol is a mixed parts gun; 1917 DWM receiver with Erfurt toggle train. Erfurt made LP08s in 1914 ONLY.

George,
I magnified the receiver image and I think the inspector marks and the firing proof are Erfurt. So it looks to me like a DWM barrel added to a 1917 Erfurt.

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by Ron Wood

George,
I magnified the receiver image and I think the inspector marks and the firing proof are Erfurt. So it looks to me like a DWM barrel added to a 1917 Erfurt.

Ron, what do you & George (and others) think about the toggle??? Were there Erfurts that crudely machined/fabricated???

[George Anderson]

Originally Posted by Ron Wood

George,
I magnified the receiver image and I think the inspector marks and the firing proof are Erfurt. So it looks to me like a DWM barrel added to a 1917 Erfurt.

Right you are Ron. It appears to be a standard 1917 Erfurt P08 with an LP08 barrel added. It's the only magazine I've ever seen with a crown/RC stamping.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by George Anderson

Right you are Ron. It appears to be a standard 1917 Erfurt P08 with an LP08 barrel added. It's the only magazine I've ever seen with a crown/RC stamping.

I agree, that is why I mentioned the receiver stamping in post #5.

I did find this 1918 Erfurt on GB yesterday, crown does not seem to be broken, and it is a matching pistol.

[DonVoigt]

I suppose it could have started as a "normal" 1917 Erfurt, and grew the barrel at a later date. Erfurt proofs on the receiver, but DWM on the bbl/rear sight base. Strange that the all important picture of the bottom of the barrel markings is missing. Condition of the rear sight leaf does not go with the rest of the piece. Someone either re-numbered or got lucky in finding the rear sight base with a "26" though.

Holster looks just like my indian reproduction, just aged a little, the "square" shape to the mag pouch is identical, and the square top strap is carefully tucked under. The straps also have the metal plate attached, and as someone said are quite thin.

He likely told the truth that this was the first 1917 Erfurt he had seen!

[DavidJayUden]

Thank you all. You have confirmed my suspicions.
dju

[alanint]

A 1917 Erfurt toggle stamp would have the broken crown lobe by then, wouldn't it? The stamp looks amazingly crisp compared to overall toggle condition and the small cross on the top of the crown migrating into the radius cut on the edge of the link all look either bogus or "freshened" to me.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by alanint

A 1917 Erfurt toggle stamp would have the broken crown lobe by then, wouldn't it? The stamp looks amazingly crisp compared to overall toggle condition and the small cross on the top of the crown migrating into the radius cut on the edge of the link all look either bogus or "freshened" to me.

Is it a fact that Erfurt only had one toggle crown stamp?
I would have thought for their volume of production they would have multiple stamping stations.

I guess another way to ask is: do all late Erfurt examples have a broken crown?

That said the stamp is quite heavy and clear, maybe a replacement for the broken crown?

[John Sabato]

This is an early ERFURT toggle because the crown is complete. It is my belief that they never replaced the stamp after it broke... and all late toggles have the broken edge on the top right of the crown. If you have information which disproves my hypothesis, please post it.

[Sergio Natali]

Originally Posted by John Sabato

This is an early ERFURT toggle because the crown is complete. It is my belief that they never replaced the stamp after it broke... and all late toggles have the broken edge on the top right of the crown. If you have information which disproves my hypothesis, please post it.

I think you must be right, in fact I enclose a picture of my Erfurt.

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by luger.parabellum

I think you must be right, in fact I enclose a picture of my Erfurt.

Sergio, I can't make out your chamber date - Is it 1918???

So it's the extreme right side of the crown that has the chipped/broken die imprint???

Is there any evidence of what year this occurred???

Sergio, your toggle looks orders of magnitude better than the one on GA. Doug's comment on the stamp impinging on the radius is well taken. I think someone has a nice new Erfurt stamp. But they need a finer tooth file.

Edit: The GA Erfurt stamp is not centered lengthwise either.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by John Sabato

This is an early ERFURT toggle because the crown is complete. It is my belief that they never replaced the stamp after it broke... and all late toggles have the broken edge on the top right of the crown. If you have information which disproves my hypothesis, please post it.

how about this one?
Pictures are not the best, grabbed from a GB auction.

[Sergio Natali]

Richard
Yes it is, 1918 doubledate.
I've got no evidence of when that exactly happened mine is # 2904

[wlyon]

I have an all matching 1916 Erfurt with the right side broken mark. I had a 1917 Erfurt and it was even more pronounced. . Bill

[cirelaw]

Who actually writes the description? Does the broker actually review it before posting and allowing such inaccuracies?

[wlyon]

Richard: In Jan's Central book he shows: 1914 with a broken die., A 1916 without a broken die, a 1917 and 1918 with the break. So ????? Bill