P38 questions

[Waveski]

I plan to acquire a P38 a few months down the road. I have been doing my homework ; learned a lot in the past month.

Question : what are the practical differences between the units made by Walther , Mauser , and Spreewerke? Comparative values , condition being equal?

What is the significance of there being 5 lines open at the grip screw vs 6? (I have seen that distinction made by some brokers , especially Simpson's of Illinois...)

If I acquire a war era piece , is there any reservation about shooting it on a regular basis , threat of wear or depreciation? I do not keep a lot of safe queens.

I have little interest in the post war alloy frames , I know enough to look for matching parts , check for import marks , all that basic stuff. Answers to the above questions and any other shared input and knowledge of the iconic P38 will be appreciated.

"Ski

PS - my first war piece acquisition - Femaru P.mod.37 , Hungarian built for Luftwaffe...

 

[tipoc]

The information you are looking for may be found here...

http://www.handgunforum.net/walther/


tipoc

 

[MikeJackmin]

My understanding is that guns made late in the war might have significant quality control issues. Some were literally made with slave labor and all were made under very difficult conditions.

After the war, many guns were assembled from the remaining inventory of parts, and quality control varied from good to nonexistent.

These are not problems for collectible guns, but if you intent to shoot your pistol it's one more thing to watch for.

Also note that there are many 'Russian capture' guns on the market. These guns are typically poorly refinished, may have mismatched numbers, and (if memory serves) are often marked with a X to indication Russian ownership. Some of them can be in pretty nice shape, despite having been refinished, others not so much. The bores of these guns should be inspected for pitting and wear.

Early, matching, unmolested examples are expensive.

 

[celem]

... Femaru ...

I used to have a Femaru except mine had no manual safety. I gave it to a friend who was shipping off to Viet-Nam. I lost touch with him and don't know what happened to him or the Femaru.

 

[Jim K]

For wartime P.38's in terms of qualty, I would put Walther first, Mauser second and Spreewerke last. Anything by Walter or Mauser dated 1943 or earlier should be OK, but 43 and 44 should be checked. I would not pick a 45 unless for a comprehensive collection, they are just too late, and quality control was in the tank by that time. (Mauser didn't begin producing P.38s until 1942.)

Of course, Walthers dated 1941 and earlier would be best, but also will be more expensive. My choice would be a Walther 1942 or early 1943; by that time, the bugs had been worked out, but QC was still very high.

Jim

 

[il.bill]

Lots of great info and knowledgeable P.38 enthusiasts here: http://www.waltherforums.com/forum/classics/.

 

[S.B.]

After aquireing a Nazi proofed wartime P.38. I learned do not shoot any wartime P.38 without changing slide and locking lug. The wartime slides are prone to breakage and the lugs of wartime aren't forged. Easy fix if you to deal with, current supplies of these parts are both available(CDNN=http://www.cdnninvestments.com/wagunpa.html) and don't cost much. Just switch them out for P1 parts. Some fitting may be required of the lug but, no big deal in my case. I kept the originals just in case I later wanted to return to original.
Steve

 

[RON in PA]

It seems to me that if you want a P-38 to shoot you would be better off obtaining a P-1, especially one with the steel hex bolt in the frame. If you want a wartime example for a collection that's different kettle of fish.

 

[Waveski]

A local shop has a mismatch war era P38. Perhaps I should consider getting that for my shooter , then looking for a collectable later ...? There is also a post war model there , quite good condition , bit I think that I would prefer to shoot the steel frame.

Anyone with experience shooting the steel frame vs the alloy?

 

[S.B.]

All P38s are steel frames and are war time guns. Only P1s are post war and have aluminum frames. I have no idea what the steel hex bolt in the frame is, that you are talking about?
Steve

 

[Waveski]

If I understand correctly , the early run of post war P38s were still referred to as such , then the designation was changed to P1 . Someone correct me if I am wrong about that. The steel hex bolt - a modification to prolong the life of the alloy frame, I think? I read something about frame failures on some of the alloy P1s. I have no Idea what the steel hex bolt looks like , or where it was located in the frame.

The locking lug referred to by S. B. - is that part also referred to as locking block? You are suggesting that they were not forged , and therefor prone to failure in what way?

 

[Fremmer]

Waveki is right about early production aluminum framed p-1's being marked as p-38's; I own one.

The hex bolt and fatter slides were added to the p-1's to prevent cracking the aluminum frame due to wear issues. IIRC. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, 7:00 am at the Mirage is a rough time for a fella.

My p-1 is an accurate and fun gun. I stick to regular fmj ammo to try and go easy on the frame when I shoot it. IMHO, you're better off buying a p-1 for a fun gun, unless you're a serious collector and/or have the funds to play with for the steel framed p-38. If you go the p-38 route, spend the money on a good specimen made in the early 40's. but man, that's gonna cost a lot and you may not want to shoot it much to preserve the value. Good luck!

 

[Waveski]

" I stick to regular fmj ammo to try and go easy on the frame when I shoot it. "

Fremmer - Please expand on "try to go easy on the frame...".

 

[S.B.]

I've never seen or heard of the hex bolt? What's the fatter slide going to do for the frame?
I've never heard of problems with any of the aluminum frame guns.
YES, my mistake locking block is correct terminology.
Steve

 

[Fremmer]

Um, you're setting me up to demonstrate how little I know about my own gun, lol.

But I'll bite: IIRC, the locking lug on p-1's can cause wear on the frame; this may or may not happen with any ammo, but I won't shoot +p ammo in mine. The aluminum frame can crack after a while, so they modified the gun by adding a hex bolt and making the slide heavier. I don't know enough about the pistol to exain the specifics of how the wear occurs. Others who know more can explain.

The fatter slide was probably to correct an issue with the slide. That's probably a reasonable guess, lol.

All I can really say is the p-1 is a well made, reliable and accurate pistol. My pistol was unfired example without the hex bolt, which I don't mind because that's what I got, and I personally think the aesthetics are better without the hex bolt. YRMV.

 

[il.bill]

The steel hex cross-bolt was added to the P1 in order to eliminate excess wear on high round count weapons on the alloy frame where the locking block engages when the dual recoil springs slam the pistol back into battery after firing a shot. The hex-shaped head is clearly visible on the sides of the frame just behind the top front of the trigger guard on pistols so equipped.

The slide was beefed up (hence the term 'fat slide') to alleviate problems with cracked slides on high round count pistols. A 'fat slide' P1 is easy to spot since the cocking serrations on one will extend significantly forward of the safety / decocking lever.

Of the two upgrades, most folks consider the fat slide more important for longevity.

Walther P1/P.38 pistols seem to work very well on a diet of Winchester White Box 115 grain FMJ target ammo.

 

[il.bill]

Attached is a .PDF file in which I tried to make an illustration of a Walther P1 equipped with the hex head cross bolt and the fat slide. This was the best current picture I had. Hope this helps identify a pistol with the two upgrades mentioned.

The Bundeswehr would add one or both of the features as needed when an earlier P1 pistol came into the German armory for repairs or refurbishing. Combinations may be: a) thin slide / no hex; b) thin slide with hex pin; c) fat slide / no hex; or d) with both the hex pin and the fat slide (the way the newer P1's were manufactured).

 

[dfariswheel]

Walther produced post-war aluminum framed P-38 marked guns until 1995 when they finally discontinued the design.

The P1 was nothing more than the commercial and police P-38 as marked for the West German military who adopted the post-war P-38 as the Pistole One, or P1.
This was on the order of the military Colt Model 1911 and the commercial Government Model .45.....same gun, different markings.

 

[Quentin]

If I understand correctly , the early run of post war P38s were still referred to as such , then the designation was changed to P1 . Someone correct me if I am wrong about that...

You are correct about that. Like Fremmer, I own an alloy frame P38, made in 1957 I believe.

In regard to your earlier question, as far as having a wartime steel frame P38 as a shooter, I suppose that would be all right as long as it wasn't collectable or in excellent condition. I would hope they'd be as safe as a P08 and I've put thousands of rounds through my 1913 DWM P08 since I bought it in 1975. It's a mixed numbers gun so is considered shooter value. Over that time just one part has broken, the big axle pin, which was an easy fix. Now my matching numbers 1941 byf P08, I wouldn't think of shooting it. A shame since it has better metallurgy than the 1913 but I'd hate to break a matching part.

Now I may be dead wrong about the safety of shooting an old P38, I have heard of slides breaking and the rear section flying back into the shooter's face. Stories of this happening with the early models of the Beretta M9 too, both pistols' slides have little metal in the center around the ejection port. Definitely read up on this to be sure. I think about this when I shoot my postwar P38 since it has the smaller slide (my P1 has the fat slide). I do inspect the slides carefully when cleaning afterward. Neither frame has been upgraded with the steel hex pin so I also look at the locking area of the alloy frame.

 

[Waveski]

This has been very informative and interesting. I am starting to lean away from a war era all matching piece , as I have received plenty of advice from this forum and other sources which would make me hesitant to submit such a piece to large round counts. I am not inclined at this point to commit a large sum of money for something that will mostly sit in the safe. I want a P38 to SHOOT. (As stated earlier , I already have one war piece , matching , the Femaru...)

So , let me throw this out for review : What if I bought a mix-match from a local source , Mauser upper / Walther lower , for a shooter? There are some X's which make me think Russian , but it is not dipped and the Eagles are unmolested. The seller is willing to allow a test shoot. Is this a good route to pursue for the purpose of getting a shooter? The way I look at it , I would be in all steel , and the war markings come with the package. Or , price being equal , should I take a look at a post war alloy from the same source. that one looks to be in good shape ; I have not determined the status of hex bolt and slide .

Decisions , decisions.


( P.S. : I do not wish to wind up with a slide piece in my face ...)

 

[BOP222]

Use basic FMJ ammo...stay away from any high pressure rounds. From what I read on the varied forums, not a good thing in WWII pistols.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

My understanding is that guns made late in the war might have significant quality control issues. Some were literally made with slave labor and all were made under very difficult conditions.

Does anyone here have access to records or histories of such problems? Some, perhaps MANY, weapons were made with slave labor, even early in the war, but the inspectors weren't slaves, and they were meticulous in their efforts. Their personal IDs were part of the Waffenamt marks, and if a weapon was bad it was bad for the inspector, too.

Back when I was seriously into C&R (some years ago) I read comments about quality control degrading over time and that may be true, it was true with regard to appearances in some cases, but I've yet to hear any tales of safety issues associated with guns made late in the war. Maybe I just haven't been listening closely enough?

The Germans kept very meticulous records about what was done in all areas of their military/industrial complex, even details in their slave/death camps -- and the "bad" guys who sabotaged weapons would have been found out pretty quickly. Quality problems (dangerous or causing premature failures) would have been identified very quickly, and the laborers lives were valued so poorly that the government would have had no reservations about executing those responsible for sabotaging weapons.

(Japanese weapons made late in the war similarly degraded in appearance, with short-cuts taken, cheaper materials subsituted, some things left off. Arisakas made before and early in the war are very nice weapons; the same model types made late in the war look like SKY-MART Blue-light specials, on sale! But as crappy as they were, I think they were still safe to shoot.)

Maybe somebody here can give us more proofs or documentation, one way or another.

 

[S.B.]

Walt, I'll tell you what I am aware of. Some threads are hijacked by liberals or anti gun groups, much like you did above without being held responsible for their actions. May be better to post links to your proof?

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Walt, I'll tell you what I am aware of. Some threads are hijacked by liberals or anti gun groups, much like you did above without being held responsible for their actions. May be better to post links to your proof?

Have I offended you in some way?

How have I hijacked anything? Others brought up concerns about sabotage or poor quality control for later periods of the war. Maybe they were hijacking the thread. The evidence for sabotage seems to be absolutely absent, and concerns about quality control may or may not be valid.

The things you mentioned about slides breaking and problem locking lugs had almost nothing to do with sabotage or poor quality control -- only with older technology and materials common throughout the war, not just the late periods. That is a reason for attention and concern, but not the topic I addressed.

(A friend with an older P-38 that had a slide break in normal usage; I've heard of that. His was an early P-38. I had a late-period Manurhin-made P38 that was marvelous to look at but very innaccurate.)

.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

My Dad's bring-back is a late war commercially marked Mod P38. It is one of 1800 with those markings. Things were going badly for the Germans at that point and many of these were put into military service. Assembled by slave labor? Possibly.

It has been frustrating for me trying to determine the actual production time period. About all I have been told is maybe 44 or 45.

When I inherited it the decocker would not work. I think the firing pin was installed upside down but after I got it going it would discharge when decocked. Apparently a full mag dump with one of these is not that unusual. With the help from a P38 website http://p38forum.com/ I was able to rectify that but I still won't decock it on a live round with a loaded mag in place.

All the serial numbers match but there is some pitting. It's a shooter. What's important to me is it was Dad's. I put maybe a mag a year through it.

Edit: The holster shown was not with the pistol when Dad acquired it. I found the 1944 holster on the above mentioned website and purchased it.