This 1899 Parabellum sold for a huge amount of money today...

[Guisan]

It's from a test series of 20 pistols in the serial range 10-29, this is #21 and it is said to have been a present to a member of the pistol-commission.
Today this gun sold for 316,400 francs including auction fee at the Kessler auction in CH and that is $298,984.= !!!

Guisan.

[Vlim]

And that for a used gun

Any idea who the parties involved were (buyer / seller)?

[Guisan]

Nope, all I know is this...
http://www.kesslerauktionen.ch/

...and I know what goodies I won but I was not there myself.

Guisan.

[Vlim]

Ah, that makes sense. It seems they are flogging the factory collection from SIG.

Just read Datig's 1992 account about the factory collection being secured by one of the staff members after the management wanted to 'discard' the collection. He succeeded in hiding them somewhere, saving them from a rather grim fate. It seems that now that collection is being auctioned off.

At least it's better than the 'scrap them' approach they had in the early nineties.

[Ron Wood]

Incredible item!! One of the treasures of Lugerdom. Nice write-up in the catalog, but two things of note. They state that the cross-in-starburst chamber marking is pantographed…it isn’t, it was hand stamped. They also cite #20 in the Rock Island Arsenal auction as another surviving example of the commission presentation series. Number 20 has been discussed at length on the forums, and while a beautiful piece, it is a counterfeit.

[policeluger]

Ron, were there fisrt few Luger chambers hand engraved....or roll stamped....thanks

[Ron Wood]

Neither. The chamber marking was created using 18 (not sure of the number off the top of my head) individual stamps for the rays, The "dot" in the middle of the cross is thought to be an indexing point for the fixture that held the ray stamps. The pattern was repeated around the cross until the starburst was complete. Several earlier references speak of "hand engraved" on these early pieces but a lot has been learned since then. It is also a tip off on fakes that do have engraved chambers.

[alvin]

Wow!

Shouldn't people being able to buy COLT Walker buy this one? It's more historical IMO... well, at least more specific.

[alvin]

Looks like Swiss Test Gun's trigger width is narrower, or that's my illusion?

[Vlim]

It seems that there is also a fake #21 around. Charles Whittaker reports (and shows) one labeled as Borchardt/Luger #21 on his Land of Borchardt site.

That one has plain checkered grips without borders and no visible toggle / sideplate wear marks in the blue.

[MFC]

Holy %*#@!!! I mean Holy Grail!!!
This thread actually motivated me to check my lottery tickets, to see how many numbers don't match.

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by Guisan

Nope, all I know is this...
http://www.kesslerauktionen.ch/

...and I know what goodies I won but I was not there myself.

Guisan.

Guisan - Did you win the 1839 anvil???

[Guisan]

No 1832 that was, it still sold for 833 francs including fees.
I was lucky to win a couple of bayonets, manuals and a SIG Stgw90 suitcase.
The real nice and rare items sold for way more as estimated.

Guisan.

[alvin]

This gun clarified one thing in John Walter's book "Luger Story" page 51. He was not sure "nos. 21-26 or 23-28" were tested in Britain.

According to the condition of s/n 21, it's impossible being tested in Britain. What went to Britain must be 23-28.

[drbuster]

Hate to stir up more controversy as no one from the period has survived to clear up questions. I know how Ron Wood feels about #20. We went over it at the recent Reno show. The blue had a fine patina evident by shining a flashlight on it. The "GL" monogram was scalloped properly and not flat out like so many previous faked GL's. The Swiss Cross was interesting. It was larger than those hand engraved ones on the later alleged "pre-production" models. It appeared engraved as some of the rays were of different depth to my eye (unless the hand stamp was made this way). The rear toggle was flat and of proper thickness, it did not appear to have been shaved. Also the blue on this surface demonstrated fine patina. The squared rear toggle link looked OK as the the rear toggle itself. I am told that this thickness of the so called wings on the front face of the rear toggle varied in thickness. I wonder if these dimensions on BL#5 and BL#6 are identical. In summary, despite Ron's concern, which I feel are well taken, this #20 looked as genuine as can be. If not, it is a clever fake, well done by a fantastic machinist many years ago. By the way, a defininte (in my opinion) fake #21 was also at the show in another presenter's show case.

[Navy]

So who had #21?

Tom A.

[Imperial Arms]

Hello Ron,

After reading your comments (and your added correction) regarding the M1899 Swiss Test Trials Luger serial #21 which was auctioned by Kessler Auction in Switzerland, I wish to make a correction about some of your points and opinions.

This particular Luger pistol serial #21 ‘drops the bomb’ on the opinions and theories of Geoff’s article ‘From Borchardt to Parabellum – An Anglo-Swiss Connection’ which you tend to heavily believe as well as Charles Whittaker. In the serial range table of this article, serial #21 is listed but not much is said about it.

In the auction description, it mentions that this pistol was one of the pistols given as a gift to a member of the Swiss Commission which is plausible. However, according to Geoff’s article, he states that all twenty M1899 pistols delivered to the 1899 Swiss Trials were returned to the DWM factory after the trials for modification and afterwards ten (10) went back to Switzerland for gifts to the members of the Swiss Commission. If there were twenty pistols delivered to the 1899 Swiss Trials in the serial range 1-20, how does serial #21 fit into the whole picture assuming that it is a correct pistol? Maybe the DWM factory had a few extra pistols lying around on the shelf and decided to add this pistol to the small lot that were going back to Switzerland!! Do you really believe that pistols (which were purchased by the Swiss government) had to go back to DWM for modification, and the factory was so ill equipped to make or assemble additional Lugers for trails in other various countries without forgetting that Geoff also states that some (probably six) M1899 pistols were modified and sent to the British in April 1901? Your belief that the DWM factory would have had to renumber some M1899 pistols from Switzerland to be delivered about 18 months later to the British is meaningless in my opinion. There is no way that the DWM factory would have taken the difficult task of locating those M1899 Lugers in various parts of Switzerland in the exact sequential serial range #21-#26, or any other serial range which maybe redefined from today onwards.

It is interesting to observe that the characteristics of serial #21 are similar to serial #19 which is reported to be a pistol used in the 1899 Swiss Trials. But wait a second – it is reported that serial #21-#26 were British Test Trial pistols, so how do we explain two Lugers with the same serial number, one being a M1899 and the other being a M1900 with some improvements? Maybe serial #21 took a different route – it went from the DWM factory to the UK and then continued on to Switzerland! Maybe that explains why we see serial #21 with a polished/ milled safety area which none of the original M1899 or pre-production M1900 Lugers show. It is my opinion that those pistols given to the Swiss Commission were in a separate serial range after the 1899 Test Trials using old and new parts in stock. Do not forget that the DWM factory (including the Mauser factory) would have made enough parts on hand to supply pistols when there was an order. For your information, the DWM factory was larger and politically stronger than the Mauser factory and both companies were owned by the Loewe empire. It would have been ironic if the smaller Mauser factory would have already had a better and faster marketing strategy in place over the DWM factory for military contracts and commercial sales. I do not think that DWM management with Isador Loewe in command would allow them selves to fall behind the pace of the Mauser factory.

There has been some debate on the Swiss crest on the pre-production Lugers, so maybe you can explain why pistols serial 10, 19 and 21 do NOT have an indexing dot in the middle of the cross and the only pistol which shows this dot is the M1900 British Trials pistol serial #26. Maybe the dot is so faint on all the other M1899 pistols causing us not to see it, but serial #26 was hit pretty damn hard to make a rather pronounced dot, therefore, making morons like Geoff believe that a dot was necessary to execute each individual ray in the Swiss crest. I doubt that the Swiss would accept a pistol with a national cross being defaced by a dot. I am certain that a German engraver in the DWM factory from that period would have been able to engrave any design on a curved surface without having to use an indexing dot. Sometimes collectors jump to conclusions to fast with insufficient data. Whether it was hand engraved or hand stamped can still be debated.

I do not understand why some collectors what to believe the bull**** that one person wrote instead of using their own common sense and logic. Collectors need to gain knowledge about the high engineering skills and standards of German inventors and workers as well as understanding their heritage, discipline and pride before writing ridiculous stories.

Albert

[Ron Wood]

Herb,
If memory serves me correctly (and it often does fail!) you posted during the earlier discussion on #20 that Mike Krause also agreed that it was not authentic. What has changed?

[drbuster]

Ron, I think I know what you are referring to. Mike Krause had never examined #20 in person, despite it having been at previous Reno shows. After taking a very close look and inspection this time (He was not allowed to handle it before by a strict representive of RIA but Judy Voss kindly let us examine it all we wanted to this time), he held to opinion expressed above.

[Vlim]

making morons like Geoff believe

Albert, can we try and keep the conversation civil and based upon arguments.

We know that you and Geoff are not the best of friends, but this kind of name calling doesn't help.

Thanks for an otherwise interesting contribution.