Walther LP52 pistol

[greenwayjames]

Walther LP52 air pistol
These are the views on the above of an experienced pistol shooter remembering his previous ownership of an example. Now long gone these, his, words are now 45 years old so unfortunately there is no chance of getting him to confirm, unless someone has a ouija board. The source is good and can reasonably be taken as proof that at least three existed in the UK. These are the shooters words.
"The only modern pistol whose looks I like. It has a reputation for accuracy. In this I was disappointed; it was the most erratic pistol I ever handled. It's power was erratic even with sized Diablo pellets and friends to whom I lent it all agreed with this facet, though one person was surprised as he had found his to be good. I sent it back to be overhauled but it was little better then. Also the backsight broke- a cheap alloy casting.. The ball to retain the sight came out. So I finally got rid of it. It also had a vicious kick that cut and bruised your hand under the overhang of the grip. In short my model was rubbish!
(I know a man who only shoots this pistol. With it he can call his shots and do remarkable things. Amongst his mods. are to trim the overhand. The unusual recoil puts my shots high with his pistols.


Of interest?

[Garvin]

Walther LP52 air pistol
These are the views on the above of an experienced pistol shooter remembering his previous ownership of an example. Now long gone these, his, words are now 45 years old so unfortunately there is no chance of getting him to confirm, unless someone has a ouija board. The source is good and can reasonably be taken as proof that at least three existed in the UK. These are the shooters words.
"The only modern pistol whose looks I like. It has a reputation for accuracy. In this I was disappointed; it was the most erratic pistol I ever handled. It's power was erratic even with sized Diablo pellets and friends to whom I lent it all agreed with this facet, though one person was surprised as he had found his to be good. I sent it back to be overhauled but it was little better then. Also the backsight broke- a cheap alloy casting.. The ball to retain the sight came out. So I finally got rid of it. It also had a vicious kick that cut and bruised your hand under the overhang of the grip. In short my model was rubbish!
(I know a man who only shoots this pistol. With it he can call his shots and do remarkable things. Amongst his mods. are to trim the overhand. The unusual recoil puts my shots high with his pistols.


Of interest?

LP52 or 53? It's an easy mistake make. Of course we'll never know...

[greenwayjames]

I'm not sure what you mean.The deceased shooter was referring to his previous ownership of an LP52. He went on to review other airpistols he had owned including the LP53, which he liked.
Perhaps he had a pre -production model to evaluate and referred to that as an LP52? As you say we'll never know.

[Jerry Cornelius]

?? Surely he means lp53? To have a pistol that no one knows exists, and to think it’s fairly common (“reputation for accuracy” , and the other man who had one) and to find that contrary to Walthers usual standards it’s rubbish, all seem less likely than a slip of the tongue/finger to me.

[ccdjg]

This reminds me of a dialogue with Tom Gaylord that took place on his website some 16 years ago when reviewing the Walther LP53. He concluded his review by saying:

"There is also a very rare LP52 that was made for only one year."

This prompted a swift response, saying that he was incorrect, and that the existence of the LP52 was a pure myth. These were Tom Gaylord's replies in the argument that ensued:

**********************

"The LP 52 is covered in the Blue Book and I have held one.
The Walther company in Ulm, which I visited this year, has a very small museum. They freely admit they do not have many of the guns they made, nor do they serve as the source of information for them, due to lost records."

**********************

"Sorry pal, but you’re not going to shout me down on this. I have held an LP 52– and I don’t care what urban legend you have been listening to. It was brought to the Roanoke airgun show several years ago and the owner looked me up to show it to me.
Had I known then that there would be a controversy I would have taken a picture."

**********************

"This is the last comment I will answer. I held the gun in my hand. I don’t know why you cannot comprehend that.
The Walther FACTORY historian told me in 2006 when I toured their museum in ULM that their knowledge of Walther is full of gaps from WW II."

*********************



If only people kept better records of such events, then we wouldn't have all these endless controversies.

[greenwayjames]

Dear Mr Cornelius
It was copied directly from a short article written 45 years ago by someone talking about a great many pistols he had owned and used in the past some of which he had modified to shoot better in his hands. Why would he tell porkies, unless you are accusing me. That would be a case for pistols at dawn
When he said it had a reputation for accuracy that would have been some 25 years before he wrote the article. No one has mentioned about it being "fairly common" except you. The Walther brand have, until recently, always had a reputation for quality and accuracy. This would have been the case in the early 1950's.
Some of the other pistols he gave his opinions and modification tips on were. Webley Senior, Webley Mk1, Target MkIIand other straight grip models, Premier Ist model, Junior MkII, Hurricane, Warrior, Acvoke, Hyscore.
I detect a touch of aggression in your post. My only reason for posting was to let others in on information that is on record, albeit 45 years old. Whether members believe it or not is their choice. It matters not to me.

[Jerry Cornelius]

Dear Mr Cornelius
It was copied directly from a short article written 45 years ago by someone talking about a great many pistols he had owned and used in the past some of which he had modified to shoot better in his hands. Why would he tell porkies, unless you are accusing me. That would be a case for pistols at dawn
When he said it had a reputation for accuracy that would have been some 25 years before he wrote the article. No one has mentioned about it being "fairly common" except you. The Walther brand have, until recently, always had a reputation for quality and accuracy. This would have been the case in the early 1950's.
Some of the other pistols he gave his opinions and modification tips on were. Webley Senior, Webley Mk1, Target MkIIand other straight grip models, Premier Ist model, Junior MkII, Hurricane, Warrior, Acvoke, Hyscore.
I detect a touch of aggression in your post. My only reason for posting was to let others in on information that is on record, albeit 45 years old. Whether members believe it or not is their choice. It matters not to me.

I’ll leave it to others to decide if there was any aggression in my post

I will observe though that “saying something that is not accurate” and “telling porkies” are not synonyms. Honest mistakes exist

[Garvin]

I'm not sure what you mean.

This is a long-running debate, James...

https://forum.vintageairgunsgallery....walther-lp-52/

Who knows what your experienced pistol shooter was really talking about? But it's surely reasonable to doubt that three LP52s actually existed in the UK when only one pistol so marked has ever turned up anywhere in Europe in 70 years.

There is absolutely no suggestion from anyone that your reporting is not in utterly good faith, I can assure you.

[greenwayjames]

Thanks for that. It does seem a bit odd. I will have a good read of your link.
I wasnt arguing a case for or against its existance just putting forward some information I was given that may be of interest anyone enjoying our hobby.

[greenwayjames]

I’ll leave it to others to decide if there was any aggression in my post

I will observe though that “saying something that is not accurate” and “telling porkies” are not synonyms. Honest mistakes exist

Thinking about it the words I should have used were a touch of animosity not aggression. I agree we can all make mistakes it just seems out of character for someone whose Mastermind chosen subject would have been air pistols. Especially as he later had experience of the LP53 which he liked. Perhaps the writer of the article made a typo when he quoted from a letter sent by the pistolero? Lets settle for that.
We will never know.

[Jerry Cornelius]

Certainly no animosity was intended and I apologise if that was unclear. It would be exciting if an LP52 came to light. Stranger things have happened

At the risk of more animosity I do almost despair of Tom Gaylord apparently holding one and not documenting it. You’d think he certainly would know what he was looking at and that it’s existence was unproven, but I guess all we can say is no one can be an expert on everything.

[Garvin]

It would be exciting if an LP52 came to light. Stranger things have happened

Er, one has.


https://forum.vintageairgunsgallery....walther-lp-52/

[Jerry Cornelius]

Er, one has.


https://forum.vintageairgunsgallery....walther-lp-52/

Yes, sorry, I know. I’m with “sceptical this example is genuine”

Edit: sorry , I didn’t realise it was yours. Look, what do I know? very little. Could be the real deal

[Garvin]

Yes, sorry, I know. I’m with “sceptical this example is genuine”

Edit: sorry , I didn’t realise it was yours. Look, what do I know? very little. Could be the real deal

No problem, I welcome scepticism. I shared it to be honest, until I had the chance to examine it thoroughly. I'm pretty sure it left the factory this way and Keith Bayliss also handled it at length and said that he thought it was probably genuine. John Griffiths' 'pathway' to its authenticity is:

This is my favoured interpretation: The frame could have been one of the 800 or so that were made in 1952 and it is possible that although they were serial numbered they were not immediately stamped with any model number. In late 1952 some of these frames were taken randomly and stamped with LP52 to produce a small number of pistols for sale in 1952. By the beginning of 1953 any of the frames that had not been stamped with a model number would have been stamped LP53 and absorbed into the production run for that year.

However it is possible that a few of these early frames that had aleady been stamped LP52 did not manage to get made up before the end of 1952 deadline, and so rather than overstamp them they were mothballed. This scenario fits in with John Walters recollection of being told by Peter Hoffmann of Walther that the earliest guns were not marked 'LP 53', but that the designation was added once they attained a measure of success.
If at a later date, perhaps at a time when production was having difficulty keeping up with high demand, some of these mothballed frames may have been called into service and made up with newer parts. The LP52 stamp mark would have been left as it was, assuming that no one would probably notice, or care.

This would explain why the serial number of this LP52 pistol is later than that of the early LP53 pistol of serial number 1345, why it has a mixture of early and later features and yet has a clearly factory stamped LP52 mark.

[Jerry Cornelius]

It’s one of those difficult cases where all the possibilities are improbable but still, one must be the truth

I admit I also find it hard to imagine someone took a lp53 and did such a good job of changing the markings in his shed, especially since there was then no attempt to make a huge song and dance about it and stick it in Holts with a £2000 reserve.

What would seal the deal for me would be something on paper, anything really, a leaflet from 1952, a letter to a retailer saying exciting news, our new air pistol will be with you before Christmas, etc

But I dare say they had more to worry about in west Germany in 1952 than keeping such things