odd ball KU

[phillyriverrat57]

picked up a 1937 s/42 Ku marked luger off a vet for $500, the gun has the letters KU stamped on the receiver, waffen stamps 63 and same on barrel and what appears to me the mauser eagle stamped on the receiver and barrel( not matching serial number?) barrel has zeroed out serial number with another serial number under it, that does not match the frame. what puzzles me is suposedly all Ku lugers were thrown together for the luftwaffe out of substandard parts and should have a 1941 chamber date. here are a few pics of the gun

[Edward Tinker]

It is best to post pictures here on the forum.

Welcome to our place

Ku'S are interesting, and Gibson said in krieghoff Lugers that "some" Luger were mismatched, and or that it is not uncommon to find them this way, I have sold two or three of them and one was mismatched and the others were matched, if I remember right.

I don't remember it saying only 1941, but a 1937 and the barrel being replaced sounds odd to me.

Ed

[phillyriverrat57]

[phillyriverrat57]

tinker, i keep trying to post pics, but they are not working right for me

[mrerick]

Hi Harry,

There are several members studying the Ku marked Lugers.

A range of chamber dates has been observed on these pistols, including your receiver's year. While 1941 was the last year observed, it's not the first.

It's unlikely that these were made from sub-standard parts in any way.

Its very possible that these pistols were made at a depot level armory out of a range of available parts, particularly as the German armed forces switched to the P.38 pistol and Luger parts stocks could have been considered or declared surplus. So far, no factual documentation confirming this has been found.

I'd very much like to see your pistol. PM me if you need to Email them to me to get them posted.

Marc

[phillyriverrat57]

Mark, send me a e mail at [email protected] and i will send you some pics

[phillyriverrat57]

if you do research in the current gun blue book it states that Ku lugers should be marked 1941 on the chamber. i do tend to find these books to be wroung alot as i have a 1862 colt pocket navy in 95% condition and every discription for this gun states they had silver plated backstraps..military models didn't..once again experts being wrong.. that why i like lugers so much, they are unusual and tend to turn up with unusual markings on them from time to time.
i won 3 other lugers, a 1917 DWM with natzi barrel( not matching serial number with waffen stamp and natzi eagle with swatstika putting it into the 1934 to 39 rebuild period
a 1920 dwm commercial with no germany stamp on it
a all matching 1937 mauser S/42, right down to the FXO mag in it

[William Hull]

Harry,
A 1937 S/42 would not have come with a FXO magazine.

William

[Edward Tinker]

Originally Posted by phillyriverrat57

...
i won 3 other lugers, a 1917 DWM with natzi barrel( not matching serial number with waffen stamp and natzi eagle with swatstika putting it into the 1934 to 39 rebuild period
a 1920 dwm commercial with no germany stamp on it
a all matching 1937 mauser S/42, right down to the FXO mag in it

Is the 1917 a police?

It would make sense in receiving a replacement barrel during that time period - I am always leery of 'rebuilds' but you are correct in that many were rebuilt.

Ed

[phillyriverrat57]

will every book i have on the 1937 s/42 mauser states they should have a FXO mag with a waffen inspectors stamp of 37 and many have unnumbered bases, with pin in the round mag area, should also be marked P08 on it, this includes Jan stills book on lugers

[Norme]

Hi Harry, William is correct. 1937 S/42 P08's came with Type 2 Army mags, as in the first two photos. The fxo Type 3's came later, about 1940. Regards, Norm

[mrerick]

Pictures of the Ku Luger from original poster. I let him know we can post higher resolution if they become available.

Marc

[phillyriverrat57]

Tinker the 1917 is not a police luger, there are no other markings on it other than the normal WW1 marks on the left side of the reciever with prussian eagle. only natzi markings are on the barrel...anyway, leats stay on the KU luger for now.

[Lugerdoc]

Marc, THanks for photos. IMHO, a not so well done forgery of a KC. TH

[pitsword]

Tom, what is a KC?

[phillyriverrat57]

luger doc, you seem to speak allfull quick that something is a forgery? i have had 5 gun shops in philadelphia look at it and we even conpared the markings on another Ku marked luger, they are the same, so what you are basicly telling me all KU lugers are forgerys

[John Sabato]

You are more than welcome to participate in this Luger collectors forum.

All Luger enthusiasts are welcome on this forum... you don't even have to own a Luger to a member here.

The answer to your specific question is No.

What LugerDoc is trying to tell you is that even with the poor quality focus photographs you have provided, it is obvious that the serial number on the side of the upper receiver has been re-stamped, changing the number.

The machine marks on the side of the receiver where the original number was mostly removed before the re-stamping are obvious even in the poor quality focus of the photo.

The number of gunshops in the Philadelphia area that you have been to, has no bearing on what level of expertise they have in Luger identification. Having "similar" markings isn't the same as having identical markings.

This forum has been in existence for almost 15 years and the internationally recognized Luger historians and advanced collectors who are members of this forum (which include Jan C. Still just to name one you are familiar with) are more that willing to assist you, but if you are not willing to be open to their opinions and expertise, then you are wasting your time asking questions.

[phillyriverrat57]

when it comes to lugers, i have heard it all, most dealers don't know what they are talking about, and most people are ready to down something really fast. the markings were compared to 2 other lugers in a very well known gun shop, the owners father has been in buisness since the 1930's and heis son now runs the shop, he brought in 2 KU guns from his peosonal collections, the marks were the same, as far as the serial number, it is what it is, but i do not give a opinion when i do not know, and i get defensive when people jump right away and state something is fakle. i got this gun off a ver who is 92 years old, have been a family friend for morw than 60 years, and he is currently looking for the US goverment bring back papers for it...i guess the goverment was lieing in the 1940's too

[pitsword]

The latitude given to the Brotherhood here is to be emulated or perhaps replicated on any board. We seek, we learn, we share. Thanks for being here for me, for all.

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by phillyriverrat57

when it comes to lugers, i have heard it all, most dealers don't know what they are talking about, and most people are ready to down something really fast. the markings were compared to 2 other lugers in a very well known gun shop, the owners father has been in buisness since the 1930's and heis son now runs the shop, he brought in 2 KU guns from his peosonal collections, the marks were the same, as far as the serial number, it is what it is, but i do not give a opinion when i do not know, and i get defensive when people jump right away and state something is fakle. i got this gun off a ver who is 92 years old, have been a family friend for morw than 60 years, and he is currently looking for the US goverment bring back papers for it...i guess the goverment was lieing in the 1940's too

Perhaps you should get together with myky and compare Krieghoff's...His is an original, too...