By Request; The KU luger!

[Matt Weber]

This subject started on a another thread, and by request, I'm starting up this thread to discuss this subject further.

First off, this thread subject is on the "KU" luger, and will simply be referred to as the KU luger. The Ku luger is a very interesting and puzzling variation in luger collecting. The reason why it is so puzzling, is because to this day, nobody knows for sure what these were for, who made them, when they were made, and why they were made?

Since there is no concrete evidence on these rare lugers, consiquently there are several stories, or theories that have surfaced and circulated amongst the collecting comminity.

I'll try and explain each theory and it's reasons for explaining these lugers, but before I do so, let's get one thing clear.
These are just theories! These are not facts! and I don't really believe any one of these 100% just yet. So don't start emailing me, and telling me that I'm full of ****, and don't know what I'm talking about. These are just theories, and if anyone else has another theory that I haven't mentioned, please post it up here for discussion as well. Perhaps we can prove or disprove some of these theories right now?
I'll number each theory so that when we discuss them later, you can simply refer to the number (like say, "I dis-agree with theory #2 because,....")

1. First story that I heard on these, and probably the most common one, is that these pistols were completed by Krieghoff, using parts from Mauser, to complete a Luftwaffe contract order for a certain number of lugers that Krieghoff was unable to complete using thier own parts.
This theory is stated due to the Luftwaffe, "Luftampt" proof markings on them, and that the "K.u." is some term for Krieghoff.

2. Second story I've heard that is probably just as common as the first one. This is that these pistols were assembled by Mauser for a military contract sale to the German Coastal Flying Corps. The German name for this is; "Kustenfliegerstafflen", and that the "K.U." is an abbreviation for this name. This would also give good reason for the "Luftampt".

3. Third story is very simular to the first one with one twist. It is believed that these pistols were assembled by Mauser, and finish by Kreighoff, so that Kreighoff could so that Krieghoff could meet it's military contract with the Luftwaffe.

4. Fourth story is that these were assemble by Mauser using left over or replacement parts, and were completed to fulfill a requested contract with the Luftwaffe. This theory states that the "K.U." stands for "Kummerer", which means "substandard" (this is because of the supposidly replacement parts used to make these).

5. The final story is the same as number 4. However, the date of manufacture is argued in this version. Number 4 above usually states that the date of manufacture is 1941, since all the KU lugers are dated "41" above the chamber. This theory however, suggests that since these were assembled with left over/replacement parts left over from the Mauser production line after the production of the luger was cancelled, in light of the P38 production, That assembly of these actually took place later in the war to fulfill a Luftwaffe contract for a certain number of pistols. The reason for this is because the finish of the Ku lugers is not the same quality as a standard 1941 Mauser production luger.The dates of production for this theory can be between 1942-1944.

Well, that is about all the stories I've heard about these. Anyone got any thoughts? any other stories?

Lets get to the pics now!

Matt

[Matt Weber]

This picture shows us a close up of the "K.u." markings.

This pistol is all matching, with one matching magazine. It's finish is not the greatest, but is about 85% I would say, with some slight pitting on the right side of the slide and on the side plate a bit.

The KU markings can either be a suffix or prefix to the serial number.

[Matt Weber]

Top of the luger. All KU lugers will be dated "41" on the chamber. However, there are three different maker codes seen on these, such as; "S/42", "42", and "byf".

This one of course is the "byf" code.

[Matt Weber]

Here is the right side of the KU luger. All the KU lugers will have a "Luftampt" on the them as seen here. There is also a smaller one on the barrel.

Notice that there are no Mauser waffenampt markings on the left side like a standard Mauser Production 1941 luger has!? There is a "eagle/655" proof marking on the barrel however!

[Matt Weber]

All right, now let's first list the facts here.

Fact, I think we can all agree that these are assembled with parts from Mauser. The codes on the toggles are all Mauser, and barrels have "eagle/655" Mauser waffenampt. Also, just about all of these KU lugers have at least one part that is a "42" or "S42" coded replacement part!

Another fact, that I think is fairly convincing is that these KU lugers do not have as high of quality finish as other 1941 issued Mauser Lugers, or Kreighoff lugers. (this could be argued though I guess, but I feel this is true)

One other fact is that they don't have the "eagle/655" on the right side of the reciever like all standard issued Mauser Lugers have? If they were completed at Mauser for a military contract, wouldn't they have this?

Well, that is about all the facts I can come with as well. Any thoughts?
Let's discuss this in depth, and see what we can decide. I'm keeping a totally open mind on this subject, as I don't agree with any of the theories 100% just yet!

Matt

[phild]

All right, now let's first list the facts here.

Fact, I think we can all agree that these are assembled with parts from Mauser. The codes on the toggles are all Mauser, and barrels have "eagle/655" Mauser waffenampt. Also, just about all of these KU lugers have at least one part that is a "42" or "S42" coded replacement part!

Another fact, that I think is fairly convincing is that these KU lugers do not have as high of quality finish as other 1941 issued Mauser Lugers, or Kreighoff lugers. (this could be argued though I guess, but I feel this is true)

One other fact is that they don't have the "eagle/655" on the right side of the reciever like all standard issued Mauser Lugers have? If they were completed at Mauser for a military contract, wouldn't they have this?

Well, that is about all the facts I can come with as well. Any thoughts?
Let's discuss this in depth, and see what we can decide. I'm keeping a totally open mind on this subject, as I don't agree with any of the theories 100% just yet!

Matt

You have done an excellent job of laying out all of the ground work on this model. I will provide some of my input later today when I have more time. Maybe collectivly we can break some new ground on these. I only have one example that I currently own. I have examined a number of them and I will need to get my notes and collect my findings. Again, a great job in getting this started.

[Matt Weber]

Thanks Phil. Believe it or not, I did this all for you!

Please post some pics of your KU luger as well. The more example we can see, can allow us to compare and contrast the different findings and perhaps dis-prove or prove one of these theories.

I too have to run right now, and get ready for work!

Matt

[stevezz1]

Hi Mat,

Many thanks for showing the KU. and for all the info.
Very nice pistol, congrats to you.

Steve.

[gew98]

The Luft Ampt marked P08 I had handled was a code '42' , no date some E/655's on some parts , gorgeous condition , mismatch magazine .Some other small parts on it were marked S/42 and small case font '42' , which indicate these were supplied as spare parts by Oberndorf.
Being the german HzA depot system assembled a fairly large amount of 98k's in 1940 through 1941 from spare and some salvaged parts at HzA depots as needs became desperate , I surmised then and still think that the luftwaffe armorer's did no less in time of need when spare parts on hand were plentiful and literally enough on hand to assemble complete arms.

[phild]

Ku Lugers

OK I'll make a stab at kicking this ball a little further down the field.

As I said earlier, Matt presents the known facts and chief theories surrounding the Ku Lugers very well. There is one more theory that has received some attention in the last 20 years or so that dovetails into a couple of the scenarios presented by Matt and that the Concentration Camp assembly theory. The proponents of this thinking are sparked by a reference in Albert Speer's book, "Infiltration", in which he addresses pistol assembly as having been successfully conducted in one of the camps (KzL's). It has been decades since I have read Speer's book, but I believe that the camp he refered to was Neugamme (sp?).

I just wanted to throw that out as it may come into play later in this thread and hopfull discussion.

As to the Ku Lugers themselves, let me list a few observations and do so with the understanding that I may repeat some of Matt has already said, but I will keep that to a minimum.

1. Ku Lugers can be broken down into two groups, regardless of the toggle marking, these groups are the ku suffix and the ku prefix.

2. All Ku Lugers are found without any letter suffix on the frame. Serial numbers are reported from #146 to about 4700 ( give or take a few). I personally have never seen a three digit Ku, but Jan Still references one (146 ) in his lower serial number reporting range. All of the Ku Lugers that I have first person knowlege of fall between about #1500 and #4500, the point being we are looking at no more than about 5000 produced.
Ku as a suffix will be found up to about the 3100 range and then the Ku marking will be seen as a prefix to the right side serial number from about 3100 to the 4700 range. Keep in mind that I use the terms prefix and suffix only to describe the location of the Ku marking in relation the the serial number rather than to imply the Ku marking is a part of the serial number...as a letter might be used, no one can say at this time one way or the other.
3.I think that the prefix/suffix position of the Ku marking is worth mentioning because there is a relationship between the quality of finish, use of oversized serial number fonts. What is interesting is that the later toggle code of Byf is found almost exclusivly on the first 2300 of so Ku Lugers, followed by the 42 coded toggles on the mid to last part of the Ku Lugers and with a few early S/42 toggles used on the very last Ku Lugers....confusing is isn't it?
I should also point out that at least two different sizes of Ku stampings can be found as well.
Some Ku Lugers, at least the later serial numbers can be found to have some major part without any serial number. My example is in the 3700 range and has no serial number on the barrel nor rear toggle link, but these parts are original to the pistol and the barrel is Luftampted proofed and e655 proofed as Matt stated is correct.

My goal in describing the above details is to illustrate that these Lugers were assembled as a batch or a run. This is not to say that the assembly was continuous or that only one assembly line was used, but rather to show the assembly effort was syncronized and that the assembly was not random.

I will go into what does and does not make sense with the various theories sometime tomorrow. I will leave you with this fact: The parts are all Mauser, but the serial dies, care in marking application, care in finishing (at least the later serials) and the proofing styles mirror neither Mauser or Krieghoff in those firms typical output.

[leondes]

OK I'll make a stab at kicking this ball a little further down the field.


1. Ku Lugers can be broken down into two groups, regardless of the toggle marking, these groups are the ku suffix and the ku prefix.

Hi phild,

Does this one qualify as a "Ku"?

http://lmd-militaria.com/page540.html

Regards, Leon

[Strider]

I don't have any knowledge about these Kü Lugers but thought I'd throw in a couple of comments, for what they are worth?

The abbreviation for Küstenfliegerstafflen would no way be Kü, more something like KüFS or KFS I would have thought? Plus it seems odd the "Kü" being positioned with the serial number if it donates that these pistols were intended for the Küstenfliegerstafflen.

Isn't the abbreviation "Kü" more likely be for the word "Kürzen"? Which means "shorten", "cut-down", "slashed", etc. It would seem to me that the Kü just indicates that shortcuts were made in their production. E.g. being assembled from various existing parts, poorly finished, lacking proper stampings, etc.

This, however, tells us nothing about who or when they were put together.

As I said these are just observations based on no previous knowledge of these pistols.

Lee
www.psywar.org

[P08]

Excuse me for asking perhaps a really stupid question, but could it be that the K is part of the serial - like on P38s letter suffix?

If the Ü was to stand alone it could mean a number of things. Just a silly thought.

Another idea: If it's made by Krieghoff using parts received from Mauser the Kü could stand for Krieghoff Überführung? (krieghoff transfer).

[Matt Weber]

Leon,

That is a very interesting luger, and in outstanding condition I might add!

It certainly displays some of the qualities of a Ku luger. It has the "41" date, "42" toggle code, and I see that some parts are "42" coded replacement parts.
I don't see a serial number on the bakc of the toggle though? Is it there?
I'm really wondering why the "Ku" is missing then? Serial number is 4 digets though, and falls into the range that Phil just mentioned.

I don't have any explination for this one Leon, but it is a very nice piece!

P08,
The Ku is not part of the serial number, since it can be either a prefix or a suffix. Also letter suffixes are lower cased, and different style than these.
The theory of the Krieghoff assembly is one of the theories listed above. This is Theory #1.

Phil,
Very good information about the serial ranges. Yes, I've looked through Jan Still's book before about these, and I think he explains theory #4 in the book I believe?

Another interesting theory you mentioned. We'll call this one #6; concentration camp assembly.
I'm going to have to put a huge doubt on this one though right away. I've heard many other stories about pistols being assembled in concentration camps, or made for concentration camp SS guards, and don't believe any of them are true. (such as the "deaths' head" luger and "KI" luger)
How would totally unskilled labor, (an no experience in making firearms) be able to assemble 5000 lugers in a concentration camp? True, some K43s were assembled in a camp, but this was very late in the war. It took a long time to set up. It took a long time to get started, and the end result was a very poor and unreliable weapon at best. I don't think you could do this with a luger, and come out with a quality item that we see here.

Can you post some pics of your Ku luger Phil?


Gew98,
Another interesting theory. We'll call this one #7; Depot level assmebly.
I personally don't think that a field depot would have time or parts to assemble 5000 lugers. If so, then these would also have the "HzZ" stamp on them, which they do not.
Could you post pics of your Ku luger?

I think out of all the theories mentioned so far, I tend to believe theory #5 the most. I think that it is entirely possible that Mauser assembled these for a Luftwaffe contract after the production of the Luger was suppose to be cancelled.
The facts are that the managment at the Mauser plant was not happy with closing the luger production lines, and was not happy with producing another gun makers design (the P38 in this case).
They continued to produce luger until 1942, even though the army ordered luger produciton to cease in 1940! They also supplied a contract to Portugal as we all know in 1942 as well. So why not do a small contract for 5000 pistols to the Luftwaffe then?
The Luftwaffe (along with the Kriegsmarine), always got the short end of the stick when it came to weapons delieveries. The army demands were always met first.
So, I believe that it is entirely possible that the Luftwaffe contracted directly with Mauser for 5000 lugers, and Mauser assmbled delivered these. I wouls guess that these were completed between 1942 and 1943. When P38 production was just getting started, and the luger lines were still operating. Finish seems to match that of early made P38s of this time.

Again, let me say, that this is just my opinion, and I have no concrete evidence to support this theory. It is just the theory that I think makes most sense so far. I'm still not 100% convinced of this, but I would say about 75%. I wish I had a "smoking gun" here on this. (pardon the pun! )

Matt

[gew98]

Matt ; I don't mean to infer field level luftwaffe armorer's. Depot level , maybe one large depot in particular - that's a whole huge cat in the bag difference. Being the large amount of mauser armorer's parts it is very possible these pistols were simply assembled from spares the luftwaffe had on hand - or bought from mauser with the intent of assembling even.
I would have liked to believe that maybe this was oberndorf divesting itself of large amounts of parts on hand in 1942 , but the finish of the pistols is better than the Byf 41's and 42's mauser made.
The district depot assembled 98k's I have owned and handled followed a rather typical pattern with little deviation and were all district ( roman numeral ) marked. The only difference of major consequence in comparison to these luftampt P08's is the rifles assembled at district HzA depots ranged from new old stock gew98 receivers on hand to Vz24's salvaged into 98k's.
Oh well more soup for thought.