Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

Correct Tool

7K views 26 replies 8 participants last post by  lugerholsterrepair 
#1 ·
Gentlemen,

I recently purchased a blank chamber Simson, SN 99XX. I was wondering what proofed tool would be correct for this particular luger.

Also, since the purchase didn't include a holster, could you recommend a manufacturer and proof/date that would be period correct?

As usual, thanks for the help!
 
#2 · (Edited)
Your Simson will have three different eagle/6 acceptance marks. We can find these on some "Weimar" tools. There are only a few holster markers during the Simson period. It seems that all holsters of the Weimar time were accepted by WaA 18. I know only 1926 and 1928 dated new holsters. Many of the "Weimar" holsters were altered Imperial holsters.
The photos are showing the tools and some holsters.
Regards Klaus
 

Attachments

#4 ·
Mike, I would love to get the information from this Simson; I only have 9992 in my database in the 99xx group of numbers.

Would like full serial number, right hand side proof and acceptance, stock lug marking (eagle 6 eagle 6 or eagle 33 eagle 33 or blank) and if it is a police w/ sear safety or if any unit markings.

ed_tinker@hotmail.com


As Klaus said, I have only seen Waa18 marked 1926 and have only seen 7 or 8 holsters marked this date by 3 different manufacturers. I have two 1926 holsters, although not looking to sell any. Two of the three I have owned were norweigian adapted and then "fixed" and belt loops put back onto them.

Ed
 
#6 ·
Since Ed did not outright mention his excellent Simson book.. http://www.simsonlugers.com It is an excellent read and if you have a newly aquired Simson you might as well read all about it!

Klaus, Impressive!

Jerry Burney
 
#10 ·
Mike, I don't know if I have seen (in person) a SU25 marked tool, I HAVE seen it on a number of pistols.

Some say it is Simson, personally I am not sure, if it is, then it is really early or really late. I am more inclined to beleive it is a reworking mark by a military type unit.

It has been discussed here several times; do a search of SU25

Dwight Gruber said; SU25 is the mark of the Heers Zeugamt (Army arms depot) at Spandau.

Ed
 
#12 ·
Mike, I don't know if I have seen (in person) a SU25 marked tool, I HAVE seen it on a number of pistols.

Some say it is Simson, personally I am not sure, if it is, then it is really early or really late. I am more inclined to beleive it is a reworking mark by a military type unit.

It has been discussed here several times; do a search of SU25

Ed
I think Dwight Gruber is correct- it means Heereszeugamt Spandau.
We can find the SU25 (without eagle) also on holsters- I had a 1926 dated Weimar Navy holster of Franz Cobau with M/anchor and SU 25 on the leather.
I have several eagle SU25 accepted tools and know also SU 50 accepted tools (without eagle!).
The die is broken on most E/SU25 tools as on this one of the added photo. (I hope that the last sentence is correct English).
 

Attachments

#17 ·
I have a R. Larsden holster that is not dated but WaA18 accepted and I have observed one holster maker marked Adalbert Fischer dated 1927 and WaA18 accepted. Also, something that may be of interest to Simson collector's is an E/6 accepted cleaning rod (pictures attached) that came in one of my 1926 dated holsters.
 

Attachments

#19 ·
For Jim Kemp:

I have a 1926 C. Pose A.G./Berlin/1926 WaA18 holster in excellent original condition. It came with a 1925 (dated) Simson, SN 73. It has storage space for both a tool (a correct one came with the holster) and a cleaning rod. However standard length cleaning rods (be they small loop, large loop, steel tipped, brass tipped, early production, pre-WW1, WW1, or post WW1) are too long and (for the large loop ones) interfere with the storage of the spare magazine. Questions:
1. What is the overall length of the one you posted in the picture sent that had the DE/6 stamp?
2. What is the diameter of the steel rod from which it is made?
3. It it steel tipped?

Right now I have modified (shortened) a reproduction cleaning rod with a brass tip to fit, but I really want to find an original that fits correctly.

Any help would be appreciated.

William Guion
 
#22 ·
Almost no matter how you do these they are squished in. I wanted to see the leather inside. I have seen the rod tube re positioned over to the right making it impossible to fit a rod into the harness. This happens when the tube falls off and someone puts it back in in the wrong place. This short tube must be as far left as it can get that when the top is closed the tube does not hit the left holster front edge as it closes. This tube is somewhat critical for fit. If it is over too far to the right it pushes the bent handle over onto the top of the magazine and you are unable to close the top.
 
#24 ·
Jerry,

I have attached some photos of my holster and cleaning rod for your viewing. I don't see any evidence of the stitching that holds on the rod tube having been redone, but I'm no expert. I cut the reproduction cleaning rod so it works with the tube and the hold-down strap but, because it has a large loop, it does indeed hit the spare magazine when you try to close the lid. On page 1244 of "Borchardt and Luger Automatic Pistols" by Gortz and Sturgess (top right) is shown a holster with an identical layout inside the top cover as the holster I own. Note the tube is in the same location as my holster, not all the way to the left. The overall length of the modified rod is 137mm. Original cleaning rods for 100mm barrels are about 150mm, regardless of whether they have a large loops or a small loops. A small loop would fix the interference problem, but the straight part of the rod would need to be about the same length as my modified large loop cleaning rod, making the overall length even smaller.
If the stitching has not been redone, then I would rather shorten a small loop steel tip cleaning rod than modify the holster.

William

 
#25 ·
William, Your rod sleeve is positioned too far to the right. But you have solved the problem. Cut off the cleaning rod.

Correct sleeves are set to the left so that when the lid is closed they will still fit into the holster body. Essentially it rests on top of the stock lug. But it must clear the holster edge. Your appears to be a half inch off.

These can be either sewn in on the existing stitching line of the hinge or seperately. This one appears to be on the hinge line. The stitching looks awfully bumpy on the top. I suspect this holster has been re stitched. If the stitching were original it would be flat and worn. This tube may have been misplaced when it was re stitched.
 
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