Mauser vs Luger

The Relationship Between Paul Mauser and Georg Luger:

Its Impact on the C96 and Parabellum Development

by Danny

Based on research from the Paul Mauser Archive, Paul Mauser His Life, Company, and Handgun Development 1838 – 1914, Gerben van Vlimmeren, and Mauro Baudino’s lecture from the 2017 ICOMAM

Paul Mauser and Georg Luger are two of the most famous and recognizable German firearms designers of the Twentieth Century. They introduced essential firearms innovations critical to future development. However, the relationship between the two men suffered as a result of somewhat unscrupulous business practices and competing agendas in the firearms industry. Ultimately culminating in lawsuits, legal battles, and irreconcilable differences between the two inventors.

Georg Luger was introduced to Paul Mauser in a letter in October 1891 from Ludwig Loewe’s commercial manager Max Kosegarten and Oskar Oliven, the son-in-law of Isidor Loewe. Previously, Georg Luger had worked under the tutelage of Ferdinand Mannlicher and knew the ins and outs of the Mannlicher rifle design. This gave an advantage to Loewe and Mauser in their competition against Mannlicher for Italian military acceptance. Luger also spoke fluent Italian, making him an excellent candidate to represent Loewe and Mauser in Italy. Although this effort ultimately failed, Georg Luger’s place in the Loewe firm was solidified.

Over the next few years, Luger followed the Mauser rifle developments while simultaneously on his own rifle designs. In February 1894, Mauser sent over a batch of rifles to Loewe’s main office. These rifles were intended for foreign demonstrations with three going to the United States and three going to Sir Joseph Jonas in the United Kingdom. It is important to note that these rifles were not intended for the German market, and all had a rudimentary “third lug” present on the bolts. Luger noticed this addition and decided to file a patent for this feature calling it a ‘Gebrauchsmuster’, or ‘utility model’. Luger was awarded this patent sometime in 1894 and almost immediately he began to seek royalties.

Upon hearing from Luger’s patent lawyer, Mauser was outraged. Most of the gunsmiths working for Mauser knew of the existence of the “third lug” on various Mauser designs and even other rifle markers used more than 2 lugs. Fidel Feederle loudly contested this with Luger, as he was able to find an example of a bolt with an extra locking lug produced by Mauser for tests in the late 1880s. Mauser was determined not to give up easily and took Luger to court. Feederle and even Borchardt were among those who testified in court. However, in April 1898, the court sided with Luger but only on a technicality. German patent law required that the idea had to be in use within Germany. Since the rifles that used the third lug were all sent abroad, they were technically not in Germany and did not count as being “in use” in Germany. Therefore, Luger was permitted his patent since it was not in use within Germany and since he was the first to associate the third lug with the safety of the shooter.

Even before this court ruling, Mauser was frustrated by the response from Loewe about Luger’s patent. In 1895, when the C96 pistol design was ready to be patented, Mauser took out the patent in his own name, instead of the Mauser company which was owned by Loewe. In his own words, Mauser expressed his frustration with Loewe in the following way:

"The second motive was the observation that an employee of the company Ludw. Loewe & Co., Mr. Georg Luger, made it his life’s work to intervene in my patents. I will not mention the other movements of this man against me, which were not hidden to me. About the character of the man, I will not mention a word here. I only remember in which way his transfer to Ludw. Loewe & Co. went. That this man, whose vast number of patents on different ‘inventions’ were not paid for from his own pocket, was used to diminish the value of my inventions, is without doubt to me, since I have not forgotten that I am ‘too Expensive’ according to certain members of our Advisory Board. Here I get to the crux of my explanation required by the events…"

With the patenting of the C96 in his own name, Mauser demanded that his pistol would only be produced at his Oberndorf factory. This would obviously leave the Loewe/DWM factory out of the loop when it comes to pistol production. This cut both ways however, as Loewe did not provide support for the development and marketing of the C96.

Georg Luger had a somewhat special relationship at Loewe, where the company would let Luger develop his own designs that competed against his coworkers. As an employed engineer, Luger worked on various firearm designs. Loewe allowed competition within their company as a way of encouraging innovation, knowing that they will benefit from the production rights of whoever wins. As Luger began to show interest in the Borchardt pistol design, and since the C96 was now exclusive to the Oberndorf plant, Loewe was all too happy for a new pistol design.

As we now know, this interest in the Borchardt pistol led to the development of the “Parabellum” Luger pistol. As the C96 was unsuccessful with attaining a major German military contract, the Luger pistol succeeded where the C96 faltered. With the German naval contract of 1904 and the army contract of 1908, the C96’s fate as a second rate military handgun was sealed.