Prototype's dies
 

Hello to all the members. I am trying to assemble some comparitive photo's of Prototype die stamp's on 100xx numbered lugers (bbl.) In the process of proving up one in my posession. I have noticed flaws in 0's of the bbl. die stamps. Mr. Wood emailed my a photo of another that seems to have the same charactoristics..Does anyone here have or have access to a prototype that a good close-up of the bbl'. 100xx serial number could be used in my study??....Thanks...Harry

Harry,

I can't help... and I am sure that there aren't an abundant number of members who have prototype Lugers to assist, but hopefully those who do, will supply photos...

...in any event, Welcome to the Lugerforum, and good luck with your interesting study... please let us know the results when you are done.

Thanks John, I know its an uphill climb. I have had a number of Lugers over the last 40yrs, but none have I encountered as outstanding as this one. (email me for set of photo's-atkinsgoldnglory@aol.com) being a presentation piece as well, it of course has the GL die stamp also. I am somewhat surprised no-one has done a study of dies used to mark these rare examples, it would limit questions as to fake or not. This piece has never been publicly offered for sale and until recently been in the family of the G.I. that brought it back. He was a demolition man assigned with his "squad" to demolish an estate, I imagine for tacticle reasons, at any rate the home had a walk in safe which the men blew the door to and this Luger was found inside. The gun was presented to Alfred von Tripitz, whom I am sure you are aware was prominent in that first military order (Navy) of Lugers. I would rate it in the top 3-5 desireable Lugers known. you my not agree but the fact being prototype and presentation to Tripitz adds enormous historical value to it as well..Condition is as new..Again thank you for you email....Harry

Harry,

The SE NAPCA event is coming up this Friday/Saturday in Chattanooga, TN.

Any chance you might be coming and could bring this piece along ? I know there will be many Navy luger floks there...including Tom Knox, sr.

Link to the previous discussion about the AvT Navy luger on Jan Still's Gun Boards :

http://luger.gunboards.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4938

Pete, thanks for your email.. I wish I could, I work for the Gov. and schedualed to work 6 days this comming week. I am planning on Vegas in Feb. retiring this year and will have lots of time to travel (thank God)..you can email for professional photo's of this Luger address here on board....Thanks ..Harry

I might add..I moved away from the other board listed above as discussions went from informational to negitivity by a very few members. my desire is to share information in a serious manner...Thanks...Harry

OOp's jus noticed I spelled Tirpitz name wrong...I'll blame it on the morning coffee...harry

Hi Harry,

I was following (and participating in...) the technical discussion on Jan's Board about your AvT luger. The discussion did stray a bit when it diverged into that other discussion about the "legal ownership" and the "spoils of war" debate...

Maybe this time, it will just focus on your luger and attributes...

Would appreciate any photos...please send to me at :

"pebbink@pacbell.net".

If you would like to post some of your photos on the Luger Forum, let me know and I can lend a hand getting them posted for you...if not, I will just keep any you send to myself...

Will do Pete...and you can post them for the other members here...harry

Here are Harry's photos (thanks for allowing us to post them, Harry ! ) :

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_1.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_2.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_3.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_4.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_5.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_6.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_7.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_8.jpg

Last set of Harry's photos :


http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_9.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_10.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_11.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_12.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_13.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_14.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_15.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_navy_16.jpg

Wow, what an impressive piece! This could be the only model 1900 type fitted with a Navy rear sight. It has a proper grip safety (half way), GL monograms on the rear toggle back AND magazine bottom. And the condition is almost 100%. I'm sure this piece will be criticized and have to be defended, but it looks to be of the same pedigree as the Hiram Maxim carbine. Is there a stock? If you don't mind, Harry, how did you acquire this "gem"?

What you don't see is the 6" bbl. The gun came through an estate lawyer, no stock. best I can learn there was not one with the gun when found..It was obviously given as a token either before or after the Navy contract was signed....Harry

Sombody a lot smarter than me will have to criticize this georgous Luger! Harry< There is no real clear photo of the Gold monogram on the receiver. I hate to trouble anyone but it sure would be nice to see! Thanks for sharing this wonderfull find, You are one lucky guy! Jerry Burney

Hi Harry,

The thumb safety lever looks really odd. The diced/checkered area looks really thick...???

From the photos of the "GL"...the stamping looks odd...maybe double-struck...??? Not sure if it is double-struck, but it is hard to imagine it would leave DWM in the early days like that...???

Regards,

Pete...

Is there any additional paperwork or paper trail with this gun?

The Tirpitz story and the state of the gun raise a lot of questions. My first impression is that of a fairly recent creation, not a vintage presentation gun.

A GI story without any additional background information is not worth much, I'm afraid.

I would imagine, anything new brought to light is going to raise questions..But to the doubters of real or not I will put up $500.00 that is real, thats a standing offer. The GL is not double stamped. As to a paper trail..how many of you out there have lugers that were brought back by G.I's and have no trail..sad to say this just happens to be an exceptional piece, but same problem as many of the others out there. That is why in my first post I said my search was for other prototypes to compare those 100xx bbl. dies. lastly, if this gun is a fake then just about all the others out there could be fakes as well.the effort to create this would be huge and the price it was aquired for would have little paid to have the dies made..so that leaves us ego, was this gun created just for ego and then sold at a "very" reasonable price. There is not a Luger collector out there that has ever seen or been offered this gun before it came into my hands. If anyone then suggests I made it.Thank you, If I had that ability I would be selling lesser models by the basket full. I think this is a case of "I never seen it before so it must be fake..heaven help us if anything else supurb should surface..just a thought, my father who fought in Germany is 85 years old..these guys are passing on every day..how many other unknown great guns will surface after they are gone??..and if you found one would you assume "unknown must be fake" ..As collectors, we should all work together to assist in proving-up the unusual. Inspiring keeps the hobby alive for the ones that follow..alright I'll hop off my soap box..thanks

Harry
In the lengthy post above, you did not answer any of the serious questions raised (on both forums) about this Luger.
Jan

Thats funny Jan, I just re=read it and seem to have done exactly that..No paper trail..GL NOT dbl. strike,and first impressions...well is that how does one answer that.. i suggest you make a quick $500 and PROVE this gun is not as stated..my first impression is :that if you discovered this gun it would be hailed as a great find on your part...why is someone like you not instead, saying hmm, what can i contribute to help document this piece,who might i know that has a prototype to compare die stamps, thats a reasonable idea..This is the same trend I saw on your forum, from information (facts) sharing to negitivity..Unless you can offer spacifics " this is not right for period . ect.) why support innuendo

Pete, I will correct my last statement Took a glass this am and studied the GL on toggle It DOES appear to be dbl. stamped..My question is does anyone have another GL marked piece to compare die stamps of the GL. From photo's I have seem it appears to be original in detail..The angle of the safety in photo's puts the piece at a 30-45 degree prosepctive to the camera. Also of course it is not the issue Navy safety. I think this gun was a prototype that was submitted for Navy approval and then given as a presentaion..though the die stamped areas show no sign of being polished over, and this has a high polish/ finish to all surfaces. From photo's, other prototypes do not appear to have this finish..Have you seen any close up?.My logic, in what is turning into a debate, far from my original questions on dies is this. Why would someone create a masterfull fake with the expence it would take and part with it for a VERY reasonable price, I received this gun from a walk-in at a gun show who traded an Atty for a gun in the (4) figures. I have not made any real effort to sell it, I have had offers to buy at a large amount of money..but I have pursued documenting this instead the best I can ..throught the dies themselfs..if others (prototypes)
have the same die bbl. die flaws then all are real or all are fake..makes sense to me..

As I posted on Jan's Forum, many questions have been raised, all to no real conclusion. No one can say for sure what this interesting piece is. I, for one, am very happy that Harry presented it as a piece such as this NEEDS to be presented. I propose that Harry try to contact Charles Kenyon, have him examine it, and hopefully Charles would present his take in his regular section in the Gun Report. He did a masterful job with Robert Beers' 1910 Erfurt a few years ago.

Harry
Harry said:â??But to the doubters of real or not I will put up $500.00 that is real, thats a standing offer.â?�
JS: Throwing $500 at the questions about this Luger will not answer them or stop the honest questions from being asked about this Luger.

Harry said: â?? lastly, if this gun is a fake then just about all the others out there could be fakes as well.â?�
JS: I do not understand how the lack of credibility of this Luger affects all the others out there??? Attacking all the other Lugers out is not the road to establishing the credibility of your Luger.

Harry said: â??As collectors, we should all work together to assist in proving-up the unusual.â?�
JS: Why should any honest collector that has serious doubts about this Luger be obligated to prove it up?? Commenting on the questionable aspects of this Luger are as important as the positive. By pointing out the defects members of this forum recently exposed a fake Kreigsmarine K date, with an asking price of $12,000 and helped save a new collector from getting stuck with a fake.

JS: You have ignored the question about the barrel band asked on the other forum. Based on your photographs, the barrel band and front sight appear to be a separate add on to the barrel. I have never examined a DWM manufactured Luger that did not have the barrel band milled from the barrel block.
Jan

Blowup of a GL-stamp on a magazine.

Borrowed from John Walter's 'Luger story', page 66. Original Photo is from dr. Rolf Gminder's collection.

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/gl.jpg

Harry,

Do not have a gun to photograph...but here is a photo scan of a page from Walter's book "The Luger Story" on page 68...

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/presentation_1.jpg

And here is a close-up of one of the photos of your luger you posted on Jan's Gun Board...I think the style of the "1" and the "2" are quite different between the two photos...

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/harrys.jpg

Harry,

Here is a bit better photo scan of a "GL" hallmarked magazine from Walter's "The Luger Book" on page 133.

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/gl_mag.jpg

Harry,

Here is a glimpse of your "double strike" of the GL on the rear toggle.

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload...uble_stamp.jpg

I just cannot imagine either a prototype (for show and tell to prospective, important customers...) or a presentation luger (to some VIP dignitary...) could possibly pass DWM final inspection and leave the factory as a double-strike...:confused:

Jerry B.,

Here is a close-up and lightened photo I borrowed of Harry's AvT chamber marking from the postings on Jan's Gun Boards :

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/avt_chamber.jpg

I have been reluctant to weigh in on this discussion since feelings run rather strongly on both sides of the argument, however, â??fools rush inâ?¦â?�, etc. While I am not asserting that the piece is authentic, there is a possibility that it has merit. Let me propose the following scenario for folks to chew on:

It is a tool-room prototype â??experimentalâ?� piece presented to the German Navy. Consider the following passage from G�¶rtz and Walter â??The Navy Lugerâ?�:

â??It has been suggested, somewhat implausibly, that the five experimental navy pistols were actually 15cm-barreled Parabellums of the experimental B-suffix five-digit number prototype series. However, they may have had the special back sight of the type now found on Old Model gun number 10005 (probably made about a year prior to the trials), which also has a 17.5 cm barrel and a unique stock with a push-button attachment. It would have been very tempting to consider this gun as a potential navy trial piece had its caliber been 9mm rather than 7.65mm.â?�

The experimental aspects reflected in this #10024 C Luger under discussion/critical review might be the modification of the rear sight from the 5-position tangent sight of the 7â?� (17.5cm) 10000-series pieces to the more practical two position 100-200 navy sight, and cutting back the longer barrel to a more manageable 6â?� (15cm) length. I chose the term â??cutting backâ?� on purpose because that is what I believe is the explanation of the unusual front sight of this Luger. In the enlarged photo of the front barrel band, a small step in the barrel is clearly visible behind the band indicating that band is probably a separate piece that has been fitted and silver-soldered, along with an appropriately elevated front sight block, to the barrel (how many of you know that is the way a Borchardt front sight is fitted?). Vestiges of this modification are apparent in the â??03/â??04 Navy Luger â??fat barrelâ?� configuration with the quite small difference in the diameter of the barrel and barrel band.

The serial number of Luger under discussion bears the upper case â??Câ?� suffix and a chamber monogram indicative of a presentation piece. To continue my flight of fancy, I would suggest that these are an add-on to a tool-room piece. The rational�© for this might be that after the initial presentation of the experimental Lugers, this one was made pretty for presentation to butter-up the old boy, or von T might have said â??gee, Iâ??d like to have one of thoseâ?�.

Again quoting from G�¶rtz and Walter, a translation of the letter from the Secretary of State, Reichs-Marine-Amt, states: â??The pistol will be known as â??Selbstladepistole 1904â??. It corresponds to the model as tested, apart from minor modifications [authors italics]â?�. The modifications mentioned that were made to the rare 1904 Navy Luger are quite likely the ramp style front sight base (to eliminate snagging and ease use with a holster) and the reduction of the bulky dished toggle knobs to a flat-sided configuration, again for duty holster use.

I have presented these arguments not to authenticate the piece but to provide food for thought. This is in no way critical of Harry, but I feel perhaps he may not have the Luger experience or resources to present these considerations. The suggestion by Dr. Fisher that this example be submitted to the scrutiny of a recognized authority such as Charlie Kenyon or Tom Armstrong is certainly in order. I lack the credentials to evaluate this piece, but I would love to be looking over their shoulder if and when this assessment occurs.

Hi again, Harry...

Here is a photo I borrowed from Ralph Shattuck's WOL web site...showing the "GL" rear toggle on the .45 cal. luger carbine he has been trying to sell these past 2 years.

This gun is quite controversial in its own right...but thought you might like to see this "GL"...sorry the photo is not quite the best in-focus...

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload...ne_gl_mark.jpg

Thank you Ron, I do not claim to be a luger expert by no means, in fact they are not my weapon of choice for collecting. The input you laid out is exactly the type of conversation or material I was looking for. Again thank you. Does anyone out there know how I might get in contact with either Mr. Kenyon or Mr Armstrong who I would gladly submitt this gun to for evaluation???...

Harry,

This web page might contain a current email address for Kenyon :

http://www.lugersatrandom.com/pages/1/index.htm

I have sent you Tom Armstrong's email to your email adress...

I forgot to mention the most important "modification" for the 1904 Navy...the improved breechblock and extractor.

Tom Armstrong is one of the Moderators for the Navy Luger forum, and is one of the prominent Navy Luger collectors known worldwide. You can reach him there by using the private message feature on one of his posts (Tom A), or you can email him at catofong@aol.com

Thanks John,,I just emailed him and asked about a hands on opinion..Thanks again....Harry

I think the original question on the "0" stamps for the 10000 series asked by Harry would be very informative. Unfortunately I am in no position to answer it. This flaw in the 0s might show up in other non presentation Lugers of the same time frame. Does anyone know of it?

A couple of novice questions.

I was wondering at what stage in the production the GL stamp would have been struck.

Stamps were meant to be a makers mark to identify specific craftsman/inspectors. That said with the GL mark being used on prototype/presentation lugers almost as a prestige mark is it possible that G. Luger delegated control of the stamp and the actual act of striking the GL stamp to a senior inspector?

Does this stamp still exist in some collection?

Hi l10..!

They way I understand it, so stand to be corrected - the "GL" stamp was only used on Luger that had the personal attention of Georg Luger himself - whether in design or by actual personal attention. The "GL" stamp is typically found on "one offs", prototypes and such - so I don't think he would have delegated that hallmark to a senior inspector?

John D.

GL mag
 

Some pictures of my GL mag.
http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic...38&whichpage=2

Hi,
Really do not know much about these early Lugers, but do have a question. Just why is it that all the recent "one of a kind" Lugers that have "mysteriously just dropped out of the sky" have all been in almost mint condition? And why is it that there is no paper trail or trail of any kind to help varify these? They always seem to come as a walk in or was stuck in a cabin in some remote place for the last 100 years. One last point, these owners of these pieces sure can keep a secret or keep there mouth shut as apparently they never showed them to anyone and in turn rumors have never surfaced about any of these rare pieces. -- I have no idea whether these are real or not, but the conditon and the way they have just shown up instantly raises some questions to me as it should to you also. These pieces will eventually sell for some big money to someone sometime, so the money is always a reason for these to be accepted. There are fake carbines, fake 02 fat barrels, fake K-date navies, fake 1916 navies, just to mention a few, and the workmanship just continues to get better and better on them. If they could be built once they can be built again. Just an interesting observation, but an unknown variation of a 45 carbine shows up in mint condition, and next an unknown variation of a prototype shows up in mint condition. No history? Hmmmmm could there be a pattern here? --- Bill

Bill ..Had to respond to your post..where have they been? can't answer for all but as has been noted in another post,,many of the G.I's that brought back guns are in there 80's..as my own father. He in fact brought back a little walther .25..did you know about that..of course not its still in a box with some million mark notes he returned with..He's 86..a lot of these guys are passing away and have been over the last few years. Let me ask you , if they kept the weapons and never offered them for sale..how would you or anyone else know they existed..point of fact..I just came home after buying a Forestry Service Officers Dress dagger (w/knot) mint cond. Bought it from the son of a vet. Its real..its nice and no-one knew about it except probably mom and the kids..I would in fact be surprised not to see a number of good discoverys in the next few years and expect collections will be enhanced with ownership of them..As to my Luger..This week end Mr. Kenyon is meeting me to examine the gun, I know if even he gives it the thumbs up, that will still be not enough for some...So I guess thats why we don't all drive Fords..There is always another opinion..