Walther Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I thought this was a 1940 commercial PPK but I don't find the number on the PPK chart. Any thoughts. Rick

This chart came the forum and does not match the Tague chart.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
The charts of Jan Balcar (later release date) and Günter Prechtl (earlier release date) are slightly different, yes. The reason is, that less than 2% (acc. to Dieter Marschall, both charts refer widely to his data base) of the guns made by Walther/ZM were documented until now and no factory documents were left after WWII. A tolerance of a few months to date a ZM-PP series gun after 70+ years is quite good!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,507 Posts
I do notice that the proof marks on the slide and frame don't seem to match, crown over N on the slide and the eagle over N on the frame. It is a little hard to tell by the picture....

I'd love seeing more images as it looks like a nice weapon even if there is the possibility that the slide and frame are mismatched.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,507 Posts
This could be an artifact of the image itself rather then an actual mismatch...hope we get to see a few more photos, not only of the proofs but the whole weapon...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
No artifact, it's readily identifiable.

Remark: But it's possible, that the parts were originally assembled by Walther. Acc. to its serial number the gun was probably made in early 1940, so made within a known transitiontime from crown to eagle proof mark. Rick could check the serial number inside the slide to confirm the togetherness.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,507 Posts
I wasn't aware that mismatched proofs were ever allowed out of the factory....wouldn't that imply the frame and slide were proofed on different weapons?

I sure would be a rare weapon indeed!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,507 Posts
How frequent was this occurrence Martin?

Also how could the slide be proofed separately...I was under the impression that proofing involved firing over charged rounds through the weapon. Were slides put on different frames for proofing or was the slide proofmark an observational marking meaning that everything "appeared" functional without direct testing.

I am in no way disputing your assertions, I'm trying to understand their process and thinking...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
Hm, how can I tell...

In Germany essential gun parts (frame, slide, barrel) had to be proofed themself before a final proof of the gun (incl. shooting) was made. If the slide in this case was made short time before the parts were 'married' there could be a difference in markings.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,507 Posts
I take it though this would be an exceptionally rare occurrence...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I have a PPK Police Eagle C circa 1940 that has the same proofs as the pistol shown in this thread. A Crown N on the right side of the slide and Eagle N on the chamber and the front of the barrel on the right side. An Eagle C on the left side of the frame in the usual place. I have the original numbered box with acc. Serial #3062XX K. Condition is 95/98.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Police Eagle C circa 1940

I cleaned the inner portion of slide, I've seen some scratches adjacent to the eject port, but I can't identify them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
Try a magnifier. I know, it's hard to read. But it's the only way to determine if the slide was changed sometimes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I cleaned the interior of the slide and used a glass, and all I see are a few scratches and can't make them out clearly. Since the pistol was made in 1940 it could be legit. fpp4440.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top