Trying to find info on new luger purchase

dtu2179 · 03-15-2009, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingvarg

It would be interesting to se some pic underneath the barrel, and on top of the front sight blade to see if that has been replaced.

Actually there is a marking on the front sight (see photos) but I cant make it out. Also something oon the right side of the frame (see photos) but again, I cant make it out.

Ingvarg · 03-15-2009, 03:14 PM

Thanks.

The proof mark on top of the front sight base means tha the front sight has been replaced, most likely at the same time the hold open was added. There are no ser# on the barrel and the alignment mark at the front sight is missing which tells us that the barrel is likely a reaplacement.
On couple of those pics it looks like there is a faint proof mark on the right sight of the chamber which is correct.
Also it is possible this pistol has an early reblue as the pin for the hold open should be in white, not blue. That could also explain the faint proof marks.

Please correct me if IÃ?Â´m wrong.

dtu2179 · 03-15-2009, 07:47 PM

Just by looking at it, it looks like it has been re-blued at some point a while ago. Although the dealer claimed that it had not. The dealer clearly misrepresented it to me, which is disheartening. I'm hoping to ballpark a year of manufacture just for my information.

Ingvarg · 03-15-2009, 08:49 PM

Well: At least the frame is 1909-1913 military, as can be seen by the added hold open and replaced front sight, which was done in 1913, but the top makes it a bit confusing. 1909 is the only year not having the year stamped on top of the chamber, but then the proof marks should be on the left side of the chamber. Also most of the numbered parts should have the numbers "hidden" for that year.
In 1910 the proof marks are moved to the right side, and the year stamped on top of the chamber.
I am not sure about the serial numbers for 1910-1913 but as far as I know yours could fit in the 1909 ser# range.

If you look at my album you can see how the markings are suposed to be on 1909 P08
http://forum.lugerforum.com/album.php?albumid=60

dtu2179 · 03-15-2009, 09:46 PM

Thanks for all the information Ingvarg,

It doesn't look like anyone removed any of the markings, I don't know why they would anyway. I wonder if it was "doctored" in any way. At any rate hopefully it will shoot ok.

Ingvarg · 03-16-2009, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtu2179

Thanks for all the information Ingvarg,

It doesn't look like anyone removed any of the markings, I don't know why they would anyway. I wonder if it was "doctored" in any way. At any rate hopefully it will shoot ok.

As you say, possible it has been "doctored" but that is likely an early factory work as most of the ser# stamps looks orginal.

And with right ammo IÃ?Â´m sure it will shoot great. After at least 25 years as a wall hanger mine worked perfectly after a clean up ,as well as a frends 1906 navy there had been sitting for 30-40 years. Just a qick inspection and a couple of drops of gun oil, and then I shot around 70 rounds through it without a single falure.

dtu2179 · 03-16-2009, 10:24 AM

Thanks for all of the info guys. Glad to here that I didn't get ripped off. Other than the sparatic rust spots, it looks ok. The other day I took it apart completely, cleaned it, reassembled it, and it seems to function fine. We'll see how it does at the range if I can ever get a free day to go. I was planning on reloading cast bullets for it, so I expect a trial and error period. I figured that the cast lead would be gentler on the barrel than the copper jacket ones hopefully extending the service life of the barrel. Do you guys think I should have it re-finished again, or is it not really worth it? Since it has probably been re-finished in the past, it shouldn't have any furthure affect on value I'm guessing.

03-15-2009, 03:14 PM	#2
Ingvarg User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Iceland Posts: 103 Thanks: 9 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Thanks. The proof mark on top of the front sight base means tha the front sight has been replaced, most likely at the same time the hold open was added. There are no ser# on the barrel and the alignment mark at the front sight is missing which tells us that the barrel is likely a reaplacement. On couple of those pics it looks like there is a faint proof mark on the right sight of the chamber which is correct. Also it is possible this pistol has an early reblue as the pin for the hold open should be in white, not blue. That could also explain the faint proof marks. Please correct me if IÃ?Â´m wrong. __________________ Regards: Ingvar

03-15-2009, 08:49 PM	#4
Ingvarg User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Iceland Posts: 103 Thanks: 9 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Well: At least the frame is 1909-1913 military, as can be seen by the added hold open and replaced front sight, which was done in 1913, but the top makes it a bit confusing. 1909 is the only year not having the year stamped on top of the chamber, but then the proof marks should be on the left side of the chamber. Also most of the numbered parts should have the numbers "hidden" for that year. In 1910 the proof marks are moved to the right side, and the year stamped on top of the chamber. I am not sure about the serial numbers for 1910-1913 but as far as I know yours could fit in the 1909 ser# range. If you look at my album you can see how the markings are suposed to be on 1909 P08 http://forum.lugerforum.com/album.php?albumid=60 __________________ Regards: Ingvar

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-15-2009, 07:47 PM	#3
dtu2179 User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 38 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Just by looking at it, it looks like it has been re-blued at some point a while ago. Although the dealer claimed that it had not. The dealer clearly misrepresented it to me, which is disheartening. I'm hoping to ballpark a year of manufacture just for my information.

03-15-2009, 09:46 PM	#5
dtu2179 User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 38 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks for all the information Ingvarg, It doesn't look like anyone removed any of the markings, I don't know why they would anyway. I wonder if it was "doctored" in any way. At any rate hopefully it will shoot ok.

03-16-2009, 10:24 AM	#7
dtu2179 User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 38 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks for all of the info guys. Glad to here that I didn't get ripped off. Other than the sparatic rust spots, it looks ok. The other day I took it apart completely, cleaned it, reassembled it, and it seems to function fine. We'll see how it does at the range if I can ever get a free day to go. I was planning on reloading cast bullets for it, so I expect a trial and error period. I figured that the cast lead would be gentler on the barrel than the copper jacket ones hopefully extending the service life of the barrel. Do you guys think I should have it re-finished again, or is it not really worth it? Since it has probably been re-finished in the past, it shouldn't have any furthure affect on value I'm guessing.