Russian DWM Luger

[CharolayAnitua]

In reply to my learned friend Albert - of no fixed abode - we don't take the p*** - for British read English - but we would say "you ****!"
Kind Regards
Harry

The only cross you were about to receive is a cross on your grave!! . Don't worry, Norman, "I can take the p***" as many British would say!


email: Section5supply@aol.com
website: http://www.collectible-arms.de/home/index.html

[LugerVern]

Originally Posted by Pete Ebbink

Posted this in the past...showing the variations of some of the "Russian" guns here in the USA :
.
.
.

Pete

I am still not convinced that a third party is not involved in the story of "Russian Lugers", if we are honest with ourselves with the physical evidence, it sure points in that direction.

I like the new theory that Albert has presented and it will now become part of the Russian Luger research each time the topic comes up.

The Russian Lugers are in fact going to be with us for a long long time

Vern

[CharolayAnitua]

Further to guns3545 comments regarding above - these pistols all fall in the serial number range C23000 and C89000.
For a detailed analysis of this interesting contract see Charles Clawson "Colt .45 Service Pistols"

Harry

email: Section5supply@aol.com
website:http://www.collectible-arms.de/

[guns3545]

Originally Posted by CharolayAnitua

Further to guns3545 comments regarding above - these pistols all fall in the serial number range C23000 and C89000.
For a detailed analysis of this interesting contract see Charles Clawson "Colt .45 Service Pistols"

Harry

email: Section5supply@aol.com
website:http://www.collectible-arms.de/

If you get a chance to read Clawson's treatise on the famous English Order Colts for the Russians, you will note a side bar to the main article on the production of the 1911 Government Models. It turns out that New England Westinghouse was also manufacturing Model 1891 Moisin Nagant rifles for them and Russian Inspectors were present in their works. Winchester was also manufacturing their Model 1895 for them. Colt was also supplying machine guns. All of these weapons were stamped with with the personal cartouche of the Russian inspector or with a circular inscription of the English order stamp. See pages 153 to 157 of Clawson's big book.

But as previously noted, all these deals fell apart when the Czar abdicated in March 1917 and a lot of the guns never reached Russia due to weather, diversion, theft, seizure because Russia's credit collapsed apart, the West's discomfort with the Bolshevists, etc..

Now, all this was happening more than a decade after the deals with the Russian/Bulgarian whatever Lugers was going on but it is a historically interesting set of events in what were really troubling times.

Fast forwarding to more modern times, in WWII as part of Lend Lease, we sent several thousand Light Tanks to the Russians. Each of those tanks had a Colt Thompson Model 1921 or Model 1927 Sub-machine mounted inside. Since the Russians did not have .45 cal ammunition for them, they took them out and put them into warehouses where a lot of them sit to this day. Some are finding their way to the West, literally NIB

[Pavlov]

...Since the Russians did not have .45 cal ammunition for them, they took them out and put them into warehouses...

They had .45 through the ubiquitous Lend-Lease. I recommend the memoirs of the Russian colonel Dmitri Loza, who was commander of a M4 "Sherman" tank during WWII ("Командир 'Эмчи'", "The M4 Commander"). He has some very entertaining stories about the Thompson SMG and the .45 ammo in particular.

[LugerVern]

This is a very long discussion, but I will make a suggestion on why the crossed rifles have varying angles on the Russian Lugers and hope it doesn't get lost in the depth of this string.

This has been a black cloud over them for awhile now and there maybe an explanation available to us.

In studying the Portuguese M2, I discovered that the crest is two parts and that at least three sets of dies were used and also mixed to make the various M2 crest we see.

It could be that the Russian crest was applied with two dies, like the M2 causing the varying angles we see. We have some physical evidence that suggest that the Russian Lugers were produced between 1908 and 1909 and this fits the production date of the M2.

Hope you find this interesting

Vern

[sonnyboy]

Originally Posted by LugerVern

It could be that the Russian crest was applied with two dies...

Hope you find this interesting

+ 1

[Vlim]

Nothing much to add to this thread, but a picture of, what I believe to be, a Bulgarian 9x19 ammo box.

I hope our expert on the Bulgarian language can do a translation / confirmation (Pavlov? )

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by Vlim

I hope our expert on the Bulgarian language can do a translation / confirmation (Pavlov? )

Cool box, it is Bulgarian. The text is:

D.V.F. [acronym for State Military Factory]
16 ball pistol cartridges [the literal translation would be "battle pistol cartridges"]
"Parabellum" 9 mm
Loaded: Sept. 1942
Kazanluk

Where Д.В.Ф. = Държавна Военна Фабрика (D.V.F., Darzhavna Voenna Fabrika) = State Military Factory in the town of Kazanluk.

[Luger1900]

Bearing in mind the useful input and facts that have been mentioned in this marathon discussion, I wish to present a simple experiment which will further dilute the beliefs of those critics who want to have faith in the ‘Russian theory’ instead of the logical and strong ‘Bulgarian theory’:

There is an experiment where three rather intelligent men from the US, Russia and Bulgaria are examining three Luger pistols displayed on a table in an attempt to quickly identify each pistol’s ‘nationality’, namely a M1906 AE Commercial, a M1906 Bulgarian and a ‘M1906 Russian’ Luger. Of course, the American and Bulgarian man will quickly identify the Luger sold/delivered to their home country as a result of each pistol having certain clear national and language characteristics (i.e. the coat or arms or state/national emblem on the pistol’s chamber as well as the safety marking in the correct language on each gun). However, it is very likely that the Russian man will be baffled because the ‘Russian Luger’ does not follow the same pattern/relationship as compared to the other two Lugers. Then, an observer of the experiment decides to speak out and tell the Russian man (and maybe the uncertain American) that it is a ‘Russian Luger’ – he will become even more confused because there is absolutely nothing on the exterior of the pistol which will ‘jump out’ and say to him “I’m a Russian Luger”. If it has taken collectors and historians over 60 years to reach only this far regarding the mystery of the ‘Russian Luger’, how could it be explained that a Russian man (past or present) would be unable to tell us (present collectors) that it is a ‘Russian Luger’ in less than 60 seconds?!

If this ‘identity’ puzzle would have been the actual situation, the DWM factory would have screwed up in a big way by sending a contract of mis-marked and confusing Lugers to Russia – and, moreover, an order from the Russian government would have not requested for a safety marking in the Bulgarian language. I am sorry to disappoint those critics that such a grave mistake by the DWM factory would have NOT occurred when there was no other foreign contract with the same irregularities. Everything was marked in a certain way for a reason, and although the DWM factory (and Mauser factory) did not throw away any parts in inventory, nobody at the DWM factory would have decided to shuffle through a pile of upper receivers and (Bulgarian) frames and make the careless suggestion “let us try and put together some new model Lugers with Bulgarian markings for the Russian government/forces who we hope will become a very important customer (like the Swiss)”.

Ironically, there are collectors who simply accept uneducated and inaccurate information like a parrot which has been written or spoken in the past regarding the notion of ‘old Russian text’ to explain the text/word on the safety marking and extractor when in fact both words are actually 100% BULGARIAN, and the Bulgarian word ‘ЗАРЯДЪ’ on the extractor happens to have the same translation/meaning in the Russian language. Based on the language and the interpretation of the historical events mentioned in my first article, there are obviously very strong ties to a Bulgarian ‘nationality’ instead of a Russian one.

So, for the ‘drowning’ collector who wishes to continue believing a ‘Russian theory’, the only ‘floating object available in the water’ is whether or not the model of the crossed rifles on the chamber are Mosin-Nagant (M-N) rifles – not much of a ‘life-saver’ for a ‘Russian theory’ (for those English critics, a Life-Saver used to be (or is) a circular multi-colour sweet/candy with a hole in the middle, and this ‘plain-flavour’ theory has – a big hole!). If the critics want to rely heavily on the accuracy of the outline of the crossed rifles on the chamber believing that they are M-N rifles, my question is why are the fixed bayonets missing on this (organizational) emblem? And do not tell me that the roll-die maker/designer at the DWM factory had to exclude the fixed bayonets on the M-N rifles in order to preserve or enhance the rest of the details on the rifles. If the ‘Bulgarian theorists’ give the benefit of the doubt to the ‘Russian theorists’ regarding the M-N crossed rifles, a logical explanation of the crossed rifles on the chamber is to express thanks to the Russians for selling 50,000 M-N rifles to Bulgaria – in secret – who was preparing for war against the Turks. And what better way to say "thank you for the M-N rifles!" by adding M-N rifles on the Luger pistols intended for issue to both Bulgarian and Russian officers in the ‘54th His Majesty the Tsar of Bulgaria's Minsk Infantry Regiment’ which was part of the Russian 14th Infantry Division, 8th Army Corps, 1st Brigade in addition to the same pistol being issued to other officers in Bulgarian infantry regiments! Without putting much weight on the importance of the type of rifles on the chamber, I am 95% confident that it simply represents an infantry connection in the Bulgarian Army.

With reference to Ron’s post #142, point #2 (on the Jan Still Forum), he agrees (with my theory) that “it (the crossed rifles) most likely indicates an infantry unit connection”, and towards the end of his article (post #179), he states “But as for me…it’s Russian!”, then according to his way of mistaken thinking, he is saying that this Luger was delivered to an infantry unit in Russia which is incorrect because there are no records or information at all which reveals such a national Russian link, especially if the Bulgarian safety marking is not ignored.

For those critics who still do not yet understand the ‘Bulgarian theory’ which has been presented, it explains that these contract Lugers were delivered to Bulgaria and not Russia. Considering all the various points which have been raised in this discussion, not one single part of the ‘Russian theory’ can challenge the Bulgarian position because there was no previous contract between DWM and the Russian government, whereas there was a few thousand Luger pistols sold to the Bulgarian Army since 1903 – every thing about the ‘Russian theory’ is ‘bla-bla’ and inconsistent, and the Russian government was never mentioned in DWM sales records as a buyer. I cannot imagine the Russian government accepting to issue any firearm to their officers with Bulgarian markings. Therefore, trying to maintain its identity as a ‘Russian Luger’ is extremely weak.

So, after weighing all past and present valid opinions and contributions, I believe that there is a majority of collectors who will likely accept the ex-Russian Luger as a M1908 Bulgarian Infantry Officers Luger which was a contract Luger that was sold and delivered to Bulgaria and any other ‘Russian theory’ to satisfy ones imagination (or ownership) still remains sketchy at best. If any critic can present a stronger case based on persuasive information and data instead of making queries, step-up to the firing squad.

Respectfully,
Albert

Ron, where do you want your ashes spread?