Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1911 Erfurt

8K views 22 replies 11 participants last post by  SR25jdiaz 
#1 ·
For your viewing, a nice 1911 Erfurt P.08. This pistol came from another Board Member to me in a recent purchase. Enjoy the photos. The holdopen has been added. Also, this one bears the Reichsadler on the head of the toggle axle.
 

Attachments

See less See more
16
#7 ·
In Jan Still's Imperial Lugers, the earliest reported 1911 Erfurt serial number is #210. This gunis not too far off. This Erfurt luger must have been made in the first month's production, as the 1910 dates may have been trial run pistols and so far only two have surfaced. The C/RC is stamped in two places, top of barrel and above proofs on the right receiver. I'm a little puzzled as to how conditional rejection parts could show up in such an early production Erfurt luger. The war was still over three years off and DWM was supplying many military lugers since 1909. I still cannot believe the C/RC is a rejection/condtional acceptance mark.
 
#9 ·
I have a thought about the C/RC mark that has not been well accepted before, but here it is again. Bureaucracy. The Erfurt Arsenal was a government run facility, unlike DWM which was civilian. It was staffed with government employees, to include members of the Revisions Commission. In government you have to do something, even if it is trivial, to justify your position. If you have to find something wrong with a gun to reject it so that you can go ahead and stamp it as being conditionally accepted in order to keep your job, then by golly there sure as shootin' will be something you can find that is less than perfect.
 
#10 ·
Here is my two-cents-worth:
The C/RC stamp was a quality assurance status indicator. It indicated that a nonconformance to specification had been found and marked for correction.
Theory 1 - If Ron's theory is correct, it is not surprising to have a C/RC mark on an early pistol as these newly-hired government employees needed to justify their positions right off the bat. I have worked as an inspector, and one can always find something to object to.
Theory 2 - If the C/RC stamps are indicators of legitimate nonconformances, it is not surprising to find them on early 1911 Erfurts. That was the first full year of production and it would be expected that some nonconforming items would appear on early pistols, especially one in the 2XX range.
Again, in my experience as an inspector, high numbers of nonconformances occur under three conditions: when production is getting started and ramped up and the line is trying to work out all the bugs; when the equipment starts getting old and worn and manufacturing tolerances, fit and finish begin to degrade; when production must be accelerated to meet demand and any nonconformance, that does not affect function, is acceptable.
 
#11 ·
If Ron's theory is correct, it is not surprising to have a C/RC mark on an early pistol as these newly-hired government employees needed to justify their positions right off the bat.
These C/RC stampings are not due to new or inexperianced inspectors but rather shoddy workmanship. Some place on this forum I quoted a report from a Bavarian army commission sent to Erfurt to look into quality issues. The substandard marking could be due to many superficial deficiancies that government demand simply over-ruled.

Crown/RC's appear on many prewar government manufactured weapons. In my collection I have a 1909 Danzig built Kar98 with at least one C/RC and two 1912 Erfurt P08's with the same.
 
#12 ·
For what it's worth, I too, have a 1912 Erfurt with C/RC stamps. No one has explained how the Revision Control system is supposed to have worked. Every Erfurt part, with the exception of springs and pins, was accepted (and stamped) by Erfurt's in house government employed inspectors. If they were approved by one inspector, why would they need to be approved a second time by another inspector? Regards, Norm
 
#13 ·
I think I will stand by my somewhat cynical thoughts. Like George says, there is nothing to suggest this was an overzealous act by inexperienced inspectors. The C/RC markings persisted throughout Erfurt production. Eventually the inspectors had to have become experienced. I can't recall seeing an Erfurt without at least one C/RC mark. But I also have a hard time accepting that workmanship was sub-par. As Norm pointed out virtually every part was accepted by Erfurt's in house government employed inspectors. Contrary to the marking being applied to over-rule superficial deficiences missed by the parts inspectors because of government demand, I cling to the thought that such superficial deficiencies would easily be passed without comment were it not necessitated by job security.
 
#14 ·
Hi Ron, I do have an Erfurt without an RC mark, it's a 1916. My question is, if a part failed inspection for superficial deficiencies or cosmetic reasons, why did the Erfurt inspector stamp it approved? If it passed inspection, why would it need to be reinspected by the Revision Control people? It makes no sense. Regards, Norm
 
#16 ·
Hi Ron, I do have an Erfurt without an RC mark, it's a 1916. My question is, if a part failed inspection for superficial deficiencies or cosmetic reasons, why did the Erfurt inspector stamp it approved? If it passed inspection, why would it need to be reinspected by the Revision Control people? It makes no sense. Regards, Norm
Consider that the part went to the Revisions Commission first, then back to the inspector who then passed it.

--Dwight
 
#15 ·
It was not my intention to promote one theory over the other - just to put some reasoning behind those two.
My experience level is not so far advanced that I can defend any particular position on this.
I do accept Jan Still's position, as defined on pg. 75 of "Central Powers Pistols". and also George's argument fits into this reasoning.

At any rate, thank all of you for the kind words regarding the pistol. I am fortunate to have it.
 
#17 ·
Hi Dwight, I don't mean to belabor this, but are you suggesting that an Erfurt inspector would fail a part, send it on to the Revision commission, who would then possibly approve it, and then return it to the first inspector, who would then stamp it? This doesn't gibe with my notions of German efficiency! There has got to be a more rational explanation. Best regards, Norman
 
#18 ·
Not exactly.

The parts which went to the RC were "questionable", that is, the part was out of spec but would not necessarily affect the functioning of the pistol.

The inspectors, upon approving a part, were personally responsible for their useability--that's why they each had their own, identifiable, stamp. Revisions Commission (pre)-certification of a part absolved the inspector from responsibility in case the part failed in service.

--Dwight
 
#19 ·
Hi Dwight, I know that this is the current theory (Stills et al), but wouldn't it be more logical for the first inspector to stamp the part "Rejected", like the
Krieghoff inspectors did with a star. The RC people could overrule this with their mark, thus absolving the first inspector of responsibility. This would eliminate one trip to the inspection table. Regards, norm
 
#20 · (Edited)
Norm,

Not a theory. Expressly laid out in the Untersichung und Abnahme von Pistolen 08 und deren Teilen, 1913 (Inspection and Acceptance of Pistols 08 and Parts Thereof, 1913). See German Small Arms Markings, Görtz & Bryans, pp 115-118.

Also, the Krieghoff star mark indicated rejection of the entire barrel/receiver/toggle train assembly due to faulty headspace (see Gibson, pp 94, 111).

--Dwight
 
#22 ·
I can't comment within the P.08 context from my experience level, however, contemporarily, we in private industry frequently have in place what is known as a Material Review Board (MRB). This group is comprised of senior management that can and does overrule a lower level rejection. Not all rejects reach this final level of disposition. Only those components vitally needed to build are scrutinized and accepted if the criteria for the original rejection does not adversly effect form, fit or function. One can easily see the utility for this in a war time environment. We never physically mark the part but record the action in a deviation document.
Take care,
John
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top