P.08 Holster 42 dated Ku and K.A.5 Marked ?

[1933 FORD NUT]

Any thoughts on this unit marking ?? Holster came with a 41 byf Ku Luger .

[phild]

IMO the holster itself is a recent fake/reproduction. Of course it is almost crazy to state that based on one photo, but the leather looks like water buffalo and the markings do not look correct.....also not impressed with the thread, stitching or wear....hence my opinion at this point.

More to issue, there would be no reason to mark a holster with the Ku stamp as it was to denote the facility that assembled these Lugers from left over Mauser made parts.....it was not a unit or property mark.

[1933 FORD NUT]

Couple more pics . This is from another forum and I am looking for any thoughts on it . We have one " repo-fake " so far . Anyone else ?

[1933 FORD NUT]

And another . Really looking for thoughts on the K.A.5 marking ?

[Craig W.C. Brown]

Looks like there's room for something more than K.A.5 in the stamp box.
Special Series No.12, 1943, German military abbreviations gives the following for KA:
Kraftfahrabteilung
Küstenartillerie
Luftkriegsakademie (allegedly shoulder strap imnsignia. (?)

[FestungSpanien]

I would say original holster with added stamps though the Ku and KA5 look legit

[Matt Weber]

This is simply bogus markings on a bogus holster. Nothing more.

Matt

[phild]

the front looks a little better, but I will stick to my original opinion. I'd say this one was made 25-30 years ago and that is about the same age or more(!) that original items were when I started seriously collecting.......gosh I'm getting old, my point is this looks sort of old and it is! The real material that I was buying in the later 60s and early 70s looked the same way in terms of age, but not quality!

[HAF]

this holster in question is reproduction...good try must be old made ,but still bad

[1933 FORD NUT]

OK then we have a decision here . Not liked . This one bad also ?

[phild]

I like it much more. I can not say 100% that it is original but it is the right type of leather, the WaA number is correct for this maker (the first one posted is not) stitching, thread and stamp fonts all look very correct too me.

[jonathanseverin]

The second one looks good to me.

[tharpo]

If the code stamp on the first one is dtv than WaA 279 is correct. Page 214 in Bender's holster book.

[phild]

If the code stamp on the first one is dtv than WaA 279 is correct. Page 214 in Bender's holster book.

So it is. I mis-read both the code and the number! Of course when correct it make it through gate, but most fakes have the right code and marking. The way to tell good from bad if the quality and age is convincing is to compare with same code and year holsters for similar details. I do not think that I own a dtv code, but the leather grain looks more Indian/Pakistan type of hides than German IMO.

[robert]

dtv 42

The holster looks good to me. I could say better with it in hand but the construction, stitching, fonts and placements of the markings are identical to an original dtv 42. the thing i like the best is the type of thread used, real raw and course looking - often seen on later war stuff. Todays repros use finer thread.
also many repros use fantasy codes and waffenamts, it's quite common but I'm sure there are a few real codes used too.
as for the leather, it does look a little off - some areas of perforation like minute pores or hair follicle holes.

I would say not to dismiss it or sell it off cheap until you have someone good with this kind of thing look at it. Post it on the Jan Still luger forum on gun boards.

also if this is a REAL holster then the markings could be quite significant and may hold some clues to the meaning of KU on lugers.