1921Reichswehr Unit Marked DWM

[Ron Smith]

This came in yesterday. I got it from a collector who is selling off his collection. Because of alittle glitch we had concerning a 1937 S/42 on GB. He offered me this at a greatly reduced price. Needless to say I took the offer. A 1921 unit marked DWM in approx. 95%. All matching except, un-numbered grips, and transitional wood bottom, blued tube mag. Firing pin and the hold-open, which may be armorers replacement, also match.Since I haven't been able to locate a copy of Weimar Lugers. I need help filling in the gaps. I'm assuming this is a Reichswehr Army issued pistol, considering the unit marks.
All opinions,eagerly accepted and welcome.
Thanks! Ron

Sorry Folks, I just realized I inadvertently put the wrong grips on it. These are off of my 1936 S/42. In the dreary confines of my laboratory. I got the grips mixed up. Thought these looked familiar.Correct grips are similar cond. Not as much figure in the wood.

The unit marks are struck over a previous mark. A faint 15 can be seen under the R. a different style 5 under the 5 in 15, and a different style 3 under the 3. And a slanted colin between 15 and / .

[John Sabato]

real NICE Ron, but the armorer was a little heavy handed on the unit mark stamps !

[Ron Smith]

John, It appears that maybe he did'nt have it set on the mandrel correctly when the 15 was struck. And re-adjusted for the rest of the mark. If he was even using a mandrel. An old mark has been peened out, and overstruck. Could be a field
expedient marking?
Thanks! Ron

[saxman]

Nice Weimar. Just like my 1920, except nicer, and I don't have any unit markings. The date stamping is in the same place as mine and of the same style. I have been told it's a property mark, but I now believe it's a date mark. The 1920 property marks I have seen were done with different dies and are usually uneven.

[Ron Smith]

Saxman, The 1920 property stamps are a different size and configuration. And the numbers are usually spaced farther apart. Here for comparison are my 1921 Reichswehr and my 1921/1920 police re-work. You can see the obvious difference.
Kind of nice to find out you may have something alittle more special than you thought. Thanks for looking. Maybe if you could post a photo or two of yours?
Ron

[Dwight Gruber]

See Still's "Weimar Lugers" p.104 for an example of a 1920 dated, 1920 property marked Luger, shows the difference in maraking style.

--Dwight

[Edward Tinker]

The marking is not always obvious, here is a 1917 / 1920 I have;

[Ron Smith]

Dwight and Ed, You'er right. I should have said "usually". That's the one thing about this hobby(madness/obsession). There are very rarely, if ever, any absolutes.I keep forgetting that.
Ron

[Edward Tinker]

Well, Ron, that is the major reason many people do not like to collect Weimar era, as there are toooooo many if's ands or buts.... So, they are always afraid they'll buy a piece of junk, that john smiffer told them was an acceptable "variation".

And all I meant by my piccies was to show the differences in the numbers. Mine has die stamps that are very much alike, and yet, there is no way that is possible.
ed

[Ron Smith]

Ed, On the contrary! Thanks for bringing that fact to light. I am in the learning process, and just trying to ease the burden, on some of the moderators. Never hesitate to correct anything I say, if it's not quite accurate. Just be nice. I'm sensitive.
I'm not like the self proclaimed "Navy" expert, that Jan had to set staight on his forum, a few months ago. That guy could have done some serious harm,and cost some of the uninformed alot of money and grief.Myself included.
Ron

[saxman]

I was wrong about the location of my '1920' stamp - it's centered in the chamber top. The numbers are imperfectly spaced but appear to be the same dies as Mr. Tinker's 1920 mark. I have the three eagles as per #31 in the proof marks, 'some 1920 police and military reworks'. There's another one on top of the barrel near the chamber. The barrel and frame numbers match, but have different suffixes (4084l, 4084h). Some external parts have been forced from '83' to '84'. Okay, you say, an obvious parts gun. Maybe, but there are still traces of straw where it should be and fire blue on the springs, and the pistol is rust-blued with matching color and wear on all parts. http://www.hunt101.com/?p=209654&c=548&z=1

[Ron Smith]

Saxman, A force matched rework is'nt necessarily a parts gun. In my opinion a parts gun is one that somebody slapped together to have or sell a shooter. A rework, is a rebuild. And holds far more interest and value, and has history. Just my opinion.

Ron
Adendum: Even Jan Still, considered one of the foremost experts and collectors in the world. Is as equally as facsinated by the history of a piece. As he is by the quality and condition. Just look at his Imperial Lugers book. It's as much a history book as it is a/the, top notch reference for WWI era Lugers. History is half the obsession for alot of collectors. Like Ed and me.

[Edward Tinker]

My opinion too. Period bluing, same stamps, acceptance marks or proofs, you have to take it all together and decide if it is a rebuild/rework or bubba!

And Saxman, I'll give you a low-ball parts gun shooter price for yours!

Ed

[saxman]

Thanks for the opinions. I'm starting to think it's a Weimar rework rather than a 'put together'. Or, should I say, maybe it was 'put together' by the government out of parts/sub-assemblies not previously used. I have been thinking of refinishing it, but now perhaps I'll leave it alone. Doesn't look too bad. The take-down switch and mag release have been blued, so maybe I'll re-straw them. It has no cuts on it for extra safeties, so maybe it was done for the Reichswehr. These '1920s' are definitely hard to figure sometimes, and certainly have a history as you say.

[Ron Smith]

Saxman, I think it's just a good honest rebuild from what I have seen. The safety and take down could have been replaced by an armorer during WWII. Some of these pistols, if not all were issued and re-issued, clear up until 1945.

Ron

[saxman]

I'll buy that. Everything is properly fitted, very little play in the upper-to-lower and everything works. The barrel witness mark is perfect and the one on the front sight is lined up. I got this one for $450 a couple years ago, and it looks like I could have done worse. I really appreciate all the insights and information you guys have posted. This is probably the most civilized and helpful gun board there is. So, what's the consensus? Is the '1920' a date or property mark?

[John Sabato]

Because of the unevenness of the number spacing, it would be my OPINION, that this "1920" is a property mark on an otherwise non-dated receiver...

I would be interested to know how others feel about this theory...

I can't say that I have ever seen a "date" stamp with number spacing so carelessly applied, but a large number of the "property" stamps for what are incorrectly called "double-dates" Lugers do exhibit this workmanship.

...Sort of like the difference on how cars assembled in the middle of the week seem to be carefully made and most of the lemons are produced on Mondays and Fridays...

[Edward Tinker]

Its the "2" that makes me think it is a Reichswehr stamping and not a date... I believe that date stamps were not individual stamps, or if they were, they were held together as they stamped, but property stamps were done by each armorer, so the variation is higher.

Ed

[policeluger]

Ed your right, this is not a date stamp. Ron, I believe that in the Weimar period to much is attributed to correct period armorer rework then is due. If it is without rework type proofing, E/6..C/RC and such, the gun should be considered and graded less the 100% correct. Too many Lugers are slapped together, and unsupecting buyers are taken, one must be wary, and unwilling to accept less. Now on the other hand, at $450 it was a deal, a good shooter gun deal.

[Ron Smith]

Howard, I will submit to your superior knowledge,and expertise as far as the subject of Lugers. However, I still feel that the uniform finish wear and close fit of the components, belies the parts gun theory. It still looks like a period rework to me. If it is a parts gun, it was assembled very proffessionaly. And with great care in matching up the parts. And if refinished? Was done along time ago. Just my opinion, based on 40 yrs of owning and studying various old firearms. I cannot claim to be a Luger expert, and would not proport to be.

Ron