Inconsistencies in Third Reich Lugers

[Heydrich]

From the Van Halen album Diver Down

Where Have All The Good Times Gone

All my life Iâ??ve never stopped to worry `bout a thing,
Open up and shout it out, an' never try to sing,
Wondering if Iâ??ve done it wrong,
Will this depression last for long, wont you tell me,
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Once we had an easy ride and always felt the same,
Time was on our side and we had everything to gain,
This could be like yesterday,
Is that me with your happy days,
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Ma and pa look back on all the things they used to do,
Never had no money and they always told the truth,
Daddy didnâ??t need no little toys,
Mommy didnâ??t need no little boys, wonâ??t you tell me,
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Ow!
Yesterday was such an easy game for you to play,
Ah but then lets face it, things are easier today,
Yes you need some bringing down,
Get your feet back on the ground,
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone.
Where have all the good times gone

Copyright 1981 Warner Brothers, Records, Inc.

Addendum: I consider my observations to be the truth. Whatâ??s ironic is that Iâ??d actually recommend this interesting book to any collector or historian.

[Edward Tung]

DAMN....you got some sharp eyes!

[Doug G.]

Ok, nothing personal, but I think you are being very critical here. Jan Still admits that he has errors, less than some books! I will take issue with the following though.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 37 rig. That rig doesnâ??t seem collector grade. The probable vet who brought it back (A Mr. Rowe) carved his name all over the holster. God knows what else he did to it. Iâ??d of left at least the holster out. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">It looks pretty good to me I'd take it. Can't controll what the vet's did! Why not show the holster even though damaged the holsters on Police guns were often numbered to the gun.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 85 issue. Still claims that the E/135 inspector came into the Mauser Oberndorf system in â??late 1941â?�. I donâ??t think so. More likely 1942. Iâ??ve never seen a 1941 byf Kar.98k with an E/135. And according to Weaverâ??s book, E/655 was still being used on 1942 G41(M) receivers (p. 333). He also has a photo of an extremely late 1941 (2467 of estimated 2500) G41(M); itâ??s got an E/655 on it (p. 15).
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">My byf 41 Sn. 712a, 4318v & 6057s are all E/135 proofed

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 91 issue. I find the claims of â??out-of-sequenceâ?� and â??non-standardâ?� explanations for deviant P.08 examples dubious. These days, some such examples are likely partâ??s guns that mischievous collectors put together. The one on page 95 glares of a frame that some dude might of put a hokum toggle on. The whole section is possible fodder for a con artist. Examples p.92-96 are right out IMO. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I can't say for sure, but I do know that a country fighting for it's life would not throw parts away because they aren't marked right!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 130 rig. Thatâ??s the cleaning kit for a naval issue Mauser rifle, not a pistol. Check out the length of the pull-through chain please. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">It clearly states that it is a cleaning kit for pistols rifles and machineguns.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 74 Luger: Iâ??ve never known a single collector who doesnâ??t think those 42 code Lugers are fakes. No Japanese officer would have put the mum on his purchased pistol, and as far as anyone can tell, those â??imperial familyâ?� characters are gibberish. Maybe Daffy Duckâ??s or Bugs Bunnyâ??s family though. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I believe that Still states that some have doubts to the credibility of these being real. By the way the Chrysanthemum was the symbol of the god emperor Hirohito. No one can say that a gung ho officer would not want the symbol of his "GOD" on his gun!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 56 photo. First time Iâ??ve ever heard the expression, â??mechanized warfareâ?� used for ships. Was popularized via armored and motorized divisions. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">What exactly would you call a 42,000 ton ship? A popsicle! I think mechanized is an appropriate term for a ship of this size!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Page 117 photo: The remark about horses being â??replacedâ?� by the motorcycle in the photo description is misleading. The Germans actually used more horses in WW2 than they did in WW1.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Read it again, "the motorcycle replaced the horse for FORWARD RECONNAISNANCE.

REmember that no one is perfect. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[Roadkill]

Heydrich, you are to be complemented on your eye for detail and desire for correctness in historical observations. However, it is only by the research and efforts of historians such as Mr. Still and their actual publication of materials for enjoyment, history, profit, and critical review is it possible for these observations and discrepancies to be noted and corrected. The subject of gross historical misrepresentation has been discussed here frequently; from History Channel, history books, to movies and completely innacurate Veteran Bring Back stories to include flat out lying. I do not think it was Mr. Still's intent to mislead or misrepresent in any manner. I personally wish only to demonstrate the dignity, grace and demeanor to give these authors, producers, directors, publishers, ect. their credit where it is due and to keep these unintended,inevitable, and in some cases opinion based discrepancies which have minimal impact on the overall endeavor in the correct perspective. In my very limited view(I don't get out much) its like a VW in Texas, ain't no big thing.

rk

[Edward Tinker]

Actually the posting was NOT deleted on the other site, as I moved it to "Book Reviews" even tho it isn't a review but more of a slam. BTW, I think that you are temporarily unable to post and that is due to Jan has a long memory and right before he quit this forum, you evidently said some crappy things about him and his books, so he felt it hard to accept your comments in good faith. Of course, maybe Jan is confusing you with someone else from that time period?

What was the purpose of posting it publically instead of to Jan? It appears it was to try and embarass the author? Helpful comments are nice, but your comments were not very helpful and I feel not germain in many regards?

Ed

[John D.]

Is there a reason that this is posted in this Forum? Your thread was NOT deleted from Jan's site - in fact - I replied to it yesterday, when I first noticed it (after Jerry posted a reply - along with numerous other folks, including Jan).

You may not like reading the replies, but I'm not ashamed of my post which appears there (and copied below).

++ Originally posted yesterday on Jan's site, copied to this Forum today ++

I wrote this earlier today â?? and it was much longer in length â?? and was, shall we say â??somewhat terserâ?�?. Below is the â??kinder & gentlerâ?�, albeit condensedâ?� version of that earlier postâ?¦..
---

Nietzsche posts: â?¦.As are one or two remarks on the Kreighoffs, but thatâ??s another matterâ?¦.

I am somewhat mystified by that comment? Frankly, I applaud Mr. Still for an excellent presentation of Krieghoff manufactured Lugers in THIRD REICH LUGERS. Further, I also believe I am correct that the HK section was done in conjunction and cooperation with other noted Krieghoff collectors. Personally, while the HK section is abbreviated - I found the information presented by Mr. Still well researched, concise and â??updatedâ?� in several regards as compared to even Mr. Gibsonâ??s presentation contained within his excellent efforts (to which Mr. Still often defers in his book).

(Edit/delete of some good stuff hereâ?¦) I take a contemptuous view of a public post such as yours. In short, it appears as a veiled attempt to disgrace and discredit a noted researcher and author â?? and frankly, based on such trite issues as whether Stukaâ??s had bombs in itâ??s racks, or â??ROWEâ?� scratching his name in his personal war souvenir (I believe he was entitled to do so, as he put his life on the line each day to acquire it.), or the count of motorcycles versus horses, as well as other trite and trivial â??inconsistenciesâ?� to which you refer.

Exactly what do any of those â??inconsistenciesâ?� you noted have to do with the huge tome of factual Luger information and research presented within THIRD REICH LUGERS? Or perhaps you could share with us as to why we should even care whether there were propaganda photos used in the publication?

(More edit/deletions of some more good stuff here, tooâ?¦) I would think, should you have had a question regarding E/135 stamps or out-of-sequence production or Japanese Lugers (out of your entire diatribe, I believe those were the only relevant questions pertaining to the actual reference subject?), perhaps a question to the Forum would have served the purpose better â?? rather then a â??Book Reviewâ?� focusing on trite and inconsequential trivia which has no bearing on the primary book topic?

(HUGE DELETION of some â??commentsâ?� here, too.â?¦)

To Mr. Still:
I have never met you. We have never spoken in person. For that, understand how much we appreciate your efforts, your work and your research. And while Iâ??m at it â?? and appreciate this Forum which you provide. Yes, I use three volumes of your books on a regular basis and find them to be excellent and accurate references. While my copies are less abused then Pancho's â?? I find them equally as valuable albeit slightly less battered and tattered then Panchoâ??s copies.

John

BTW: My only self-serving suggestion would be â?? would you consider moving the Krieghoff section to the front of the book, please (insert smiley here)? You see â?? in getting to that last section in your book â?? Iâ??m often diverted by the other Luger variations I see when flipping to the HK areaâ?¦..

++ End Copied Post ++

[Thor]

These were my comments on Jan's books from the other forum.
I cant tell you how much I have enjoyed all Jan's books. Especially Third Reich Lugers. They contain a wealth of information. As more documents surface and additional information becomes documented they will be even better. Remember, no body knows all about these guns, look at Kenyon's Lugers at Random and Jones Luger Variations, great books but they are now dated. Jan provides the most accurate data I knoow to the current time frame. If they are other books better I would like the titles. Jan's book cover a HUGE spectrum of weapons, time frame and details. I just love them. I use them all the time, and look something up almost daily. The technical information is more than in most other books. Serial ranges, proofs for each variation and sub variation are just not shown in such detail in other books. They have made my hobby and business much more enjoyable. Thanks Jan!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thor

[lugerholsterrepair]

I cannot believe this Gentleman has the unmitigited gall to perpetuate this attack on Jan Still's excellent publication, Third Reich Lugers ,on this Forum. It was bad enough the first time he did it on Jan's Forum but this is too much! This is not an educated review but a childish attempt to cast mud on a man and his work. This is malice in it's basis form. Curt, you should be ashamed.

Below you will find a copy of Jan Stills reply to this.

Posted - 02/04/2004 : 5:20:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Curt
Thanks for your review of the â??inconsistencies in Third Reich Lugersâ?�
Page 145: ....â?�not K98...obviously have the 29 inch barrels, not the 24 inchers.â?�
JS: I used the term in a generic since and am not knowledge enough to make a barrel length determination from such a photograph. However, it is clear that some of the rifles have shorter barrels than others.
â??Is that a BAR on the lower right?â?�
JS: I am not an expert on the BAR but the pistol grip, rear sight and forward curve of the magazine do not suggest a BAR.

Page 37 rig. â??That rig doesnâ??t seem collector grade.â?�
JS:This was the best I could find at the time that I put the book together and it does show all the characteristics of the 1935 dated police holster. Third Reich Lugers has been out for over 15 years (I have had thousands of comments on it) and this is the first time that I have been attacked for the condition of the lugers or accessories shown. (Curt, you must have a much better rig in your collection)
JS: As a personal note, I do not attack collectors pistols or accessories based on condition. Some collectors cannot afford the few pristine examples or are satisfied with less than perfect. I expect the same consideration from fellow collectors. This includes you Curt.

Page 85 issue. â??Still claims that the E/135 inspector came into the Mauser Oberndorf system in â??late 1941â?�. More likely early 1942. Iâ??ve never seen a 1941 byf Kar.98k with an E/135.â?�
JS: I have examined late production 41 byf Lugers that bear the E/135 stamp. They occur in the ns and â??aâ?� suffix blocks. (See page 66, Third Reich Lugers.) Curt, donâ??t jump to conclusions concerning Luger production and dates based on a single data point from a Kar. 98.

Page 91 issue. I find the claims of â??out-of-sequenceâ?� and â??non-standardâ?� explanations for deviant P.08 examples very dubious.....The one on page 95 glares of a frame that some dude put a new toggle on. The whole section is possible fodder for a con artist.â?�
JS: I am convinced that the out of sequence production Lugers shown and described on pages 91 to 96 are valid production Lugers. However, many collectors (including myself) do not collect such oddball Lugers. I also agree, that such out of sequence production Lugers, have become fodder for con artists.

Page 130 rig. â??Thatâ??s the cleaning kit for a naval issue Mauser rifle, not a pistol. Check out the length of the pull-through chain please.â?�
JS: Please read the photo caption. It states that the Reinigungsgerat 34 cleaning kit is for pistols, rifles, and machine gunsâ?�, not just pistols as your misquote indicates above.

Page 263 photo. Captain Witzig didnâ??t lead or even take part in the raid proper on Eben Emael. His glider developed problems and had to turn back.
JS: My information contradicts yours and at this point I will tend to rely on the expert that supplied the photograph.

Page 270 photo. You state that the Stukas in this photo are out to, â??hunt for Russian armor.â?� What, without bombs? Propaganda photo. The only thing they are hunting for is a photo op.

JS: Perhaps the caption should read Stuka dive bombers â??returnâ?� from hunt for Russian armor. I have a recollection that some German pilots used the cannon on their plane (in some cases) to destroy Russian tanks.

Page 268 photo. â??Here, these Stukas are â??strafing in support of a tank formationâ?�. Thatâ??s a staged photo if I ever saw one. If what you claim is true, theyâ??re strafing their own cameraman and troop positions. (Check out the orientation of the German tank.)â?�
JS: The strafing may have already occurred or may be about to occur. I do not see anything in the photograph that strongly contradicts the statement that came on the photograph.

Page 74 Luger: Iâ??ve never known a single collector who doesnâ??t think those Jap 42 code Lugers are not fakes. No Jap officer would have put the mum on his pistol, and as far as anyone can tell those â??imperial familyâ?� characters are gibberish. Maybe Daffy Duckâ??s or Bugs Bunnyâ??s family.
JS: The end of the caption statesâ?�Some researchers have serious reservations about the credibility of Japanese Lugers. It is shown to let the reader make his own judgement.â?�
I agree that I should have made a stronger statement. It is now my opinion that all the Mauser-Japanese Lugers are fakes. A better statement would be â?? All or almost all researchers agree that the Mauser-Japanese Lugers are fakes.â?�

Page 64 Luger. That Croatian 369 checkerboard stamp looks suspicious to me, and to claim the pistol once belonged to a Croat in that exact unit seems like a big leap of faith. (As are one or two remarks on the Kreighoffs, but thatâ??s another matter.) The screw holding the grip on looks like itâ??s from the local hardware store. That stamp looks like the logo for State Farm Insurance too, but they probably didnâ??t possess it either.
JS: I would suggest that you read Buxton Volume I. He describes and shows Walther HPâ??s that bear a similar crest. Klaus Schad conducted research on a similar Luger for sale in Europe. The Croation 369th fought with the Germans on the Eastern front and had special permission to put the Croation 369 crest on their helmets. .

Page 117 photo: The remark about horses being â??replacedâ?� by the motorcycle in the photo description is misleading. The Germans actually used more horses in WW2 than they did in WW1.
JS: I did not make the statement that you claim. The complete caption statement is â??During World War II, the motorcycle replaced the horse for forward reconnaissance and dispatch riding and was an important component of the lightning war.â?� That is a correct statement.

Page 71 photo. There is no indication that the generic members of a German WW2 machine gun team were issued pistols, either in part or whole. Some certainly came by them, but according to all the German veterans Iâ??ve talked to, non-commissioned troops got a Kar rifle issued ubiquitously and pretty much exclusively. The Germans had a different tactical doctrine than anyone else in WW2; it was the job of the riflemen to support the machine gun, not the other way around.
JS: German World War II veterans are not always a reliable source of information. Most are in their 70's and 80's and do not necessarily remember the details. Period photographs (see page 48, Third Reich Lugers.)and manuals (latest dated 1931) support the statement made on page 71 of Third Reich Lugers concerning the pistol armed members of the Machine gun crew.
Whittington on page 288 of â??German Pistols and Holstersâ?� states that issue â??9mm, 7.63mm,and 11.25mm pistols.....generally issued to units..expected to be engaged in or near front line operations. Examples of such units are: Infantry units (machine gunners and others)â?�

Curt
I find that some of your criticism is well founded, much is half baked and reflects your lack of knowledge and study, and some is smart aleck and obnoxious and has no place on this Forum. Please do not post on this Forum if you cannot refrain from the latter.
Jan C. Still
(I remember your comments when I left the old Luger Forum, you said something like â??pissing on the candles of your birthday cakeâ?�)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan C Still
Site Owner - Operator

[MarkC]

I think it is odd that someone takes a beating one day then asks for more the next. I don't believe the comments made about Mr. Still's work are productive.

[Navy]

All,
While hearty debate is a good thing, petty quibbling is not. A legitimate difference of opinion among gentlemen should not sink to the level present in these posts.
John D. please exercise your authority and delete this unpleasant thread.

Tom A

[John D.]

Hi Tom,

When I first saw this post rising its ugly head in this Forum - my first reaction was to delete it. On reflection - no.

Rather - I'm a keen believer in having someone take responsibility for their actions, or in this case "post". A simple concept, to be sure. Difficult to adhere to - more to the point.

Depending on Curt's reply, this can go in several directions. The best case being that this thread is "closed". The worst case is â?? well, we'll see what where it goes.

However - that being said - as some know, I have a quick fuse for unfounded comments and attempted character assassinations - whether it pertains to dealers, collectors - or more especially in this case, a leading authority, author and collector of note - who also has done more then 99.99% compared to other collectors. A person who has advanced and shared their knowledge and research through published work - and for which, the rest of us remain incredibly grateful.

Perhaps more so in the latter case, do I have an exceptionally "quick fuse".

The "ball" is now in Curt's court to take responsibility for his comments and post. Letâ??s see how he executes on that same concept as outlined above.

[Heydrich]

Well bloody hell, looks like I got a bit carried away. The smart-ass remarks were meant as a shameless attempt at clever humor, not be a slam. This sucks. I knew listening to Van Halen and David Lee Rothâ??s petulant lyrics in the 80s would bring about something like this! I stand by the positive things I wrote: the book is indeed an interesting and good read, and I recommend it to any collector or historian. Curse the smart-ass quips. I canâ??t help it, as a kid I once wrote a scathing review of Shakespeareâ??s Julius Caesar, even though I actually liked it. Iâ??d delete the post, but I guess the die is already cast.

[John D.]

â?�â?¦listening to Van Halenâ?�. I listen to Van Halen frequently. I havenâ??t posted a thread such as yours â?? or a reply such as the one found above. Please, donâ??t blame Van Halen for your post(s)(either posts, twice â??on two different Forums).

â??Clever humorâ?� . Where? I missed that as well. So, apparently, did other folks.

â??This sucksâ?� . Really? So you wrote a book, and had someone listening to Van Halen casting disparaging remarks on you? Tell me the title of your book.

â??The positive things I wroteâ?� . When? In the initial post â?? or the post above? I have failed to see what is â??positiveâ?� â?? anywhere â?? in any of your original posts on this subject. But â?? Iâ??m old, perhaps I missed them, but I doubt it.

â??Curse the smart-ass quips. Why? Those are what you wrote. Not me. I presume â??Van Halenâ?� wasnâ??t impersonating you, typing at your keyboard â?? or whispering in your ear? If not â?? then â??youâ?� wrote them. And seeking some tacit endorsement from this community when they werenâ??t endorsed from Janâ??s community â?? you reposted your note here, several days later. If you seek endorsement for your views â?? you failed on this Forum as well.

â??I canâ??t help itâ?�. Huh? Then I would suggest you get some help â?? or not post. Either is fine. If you feel that you canâ??t help but to post â?? I can also fix that for you. That would be your choice as well.

Why it that all your â??quipsâ?� above are â??excusesâ?� for your actions?

Iâ??d be riveted by an unfettered â??apologyâ?� â?? but perhaps that isnâ??t forthcoming. That is your decision and your action (or inaction, as the case may be).

Further â?? while you stood on stage in front of nearly 2,000 people here and posted your note with the conditional â??I canâ??t help itâ?� reply â?? you only slightly offended me and those 2000 in this audience on this Forum. Not to mention another 800+ on Janâ??s Forums.

How, when, where and to whom â?? do you actually plan to make an apology? You know â?? the words â?? which have yet to appear in any of your comments that simply include â??I am sorryâ?�. I believe that has been absent? But again â?? perhaps Iâ??m old and missed it â?? but, I donâ??t think so.

You see - I respect "humility, honor and dignity", not always in that order â?? so Iâ??m pretty convinced you have never posted three little words: â??I am sorryâ?�.

For that, I would suggest that the recipient of a private or public apology should be Mr. Still â?? not me. You might want to try those same 3 words (â??I am sorryâ?Â�). Should you deign an â??excuse freeâ?Â� reply â?? please feel free to copy me in at [email protected] â?? until such time, I stand only cautiously optimistic that a genuine â??apologyâ?Â� might ever be forthcoming. But, that would be â??yourâ?Â� choice.

And moreâ?? I wouldnâ??t expect a reply from either Mr. Still or myself on this matter. That would be â??myâ?� choice.

Good luck to you.

[John D.]

I noticed you edited your original post after my post above - and without a reply. How incredibly stupid - and cowardly.

C'ya..... <img border="0" alt="[bigbye]" title="" src="graemlins/xyxwave.gif" />

John

[Edward Tinker]

Ya know John, I think we just want to talk Lugers? And someone can be critical, without being rude or incredibly abrasive and this could have been carried out better by Curt?

Ed