Portuguese Navy Lugers
 

I am getting ready to add a Portuguese Navy Luger to my collection and want to make sure I have the basics of what I am looking forâ??please comment on anything I donâ??t have correct.

Two variations: from a 1910 DWM contract

First:
Crown/Anchor or Royal Portuguese Navy Crest
350 made serial numbers 1 thu 350 approximately
CARREGADA left side of extractor
Polished lower safety area
MP proof left side of receiver

Second:
R.P./Anchor or Republic of Portuguese Navy Crest
300 made serial numbers 351 thu 650 approximately
CARREGADA left side of extractor
Polished lower safety area
M proof left side of receiver

Correct magazine for both guns have Circle/Triangle proof
Spare Magazines have cal 9 M/M

Question:

In â??Lugers at Randomâ?� page 137 the RP/Anchor Luger is shown with an anchor that is different than what is shown for the Royal Crown/Anchor Luger on page 133â??are there two different types of R.P /Anchor crests? All of the anchors on the RP/Anchor crests I have seen so far do not show this variation.

Any suggestions for buying one of these Lugers would be appreciated.

Thanks

Vern

Hello Vern,

I display images of my complete M1906 Portugese Royal Navy Luger Rig in the members gallery. Without the intention of 'blowing my whistle', this pistol is the finest known to exist. The information you mention above is along the right lines including the spare magazines.

If you need any additional information or guidance, you are welcome to contact me at imperialarms@att.net.

Best regards,
Albert

Hi Albert,

Which one of the Navy Portuguese lugers should have "MP" on their receiver and not the circle/triangle stamping ???

Hi Vern,

If you let folks know the general area in which you live, you might get a more seasoned collector coming forward and willing to help you in person.

Such a Portuguese Navy purchase can be an expensive one and one we would hope you do not make a mistake.

The folks at PIA have some nice photos of Navy Portuguese chamber markings. Their offereing of the "RP" has some unique 'ticking lines" through the scrolling part of the anchor which I do not know if it is proper or not.

http://www.phoenixinvestmentarms.com/693royalpnavy.htm

Doug Smith and Ken Clark of FGS in Ohio also have some current Navy Portuguese offerings. They have a couple of RP offerings as well with photos of the chamber crests.

Most folks would certainly give FGS high endorsements; especially for a less-experienced collector buying from a retail dealer :

http://www.fgsinc.8m.com/photo.html

Finally, here are some illustrations John Walter has in his book titled "The Luger Book" on page 233 :

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

Hello Pete,

The M1906 Portugese Royal Navy Luger has the MP proof stamping on the left side of the receiver. However, it is the M2 model which is found with the circle/triangle stamping on the left side of the receiver.

Cheers,
Albert

I noticed Vern described the 2nd. gun he is considering to purchase with a "M" only on the left side, not a "MP".

Vern, might this be a "typo" in our opending posting ???

Hello Pete,

Apparently, the book 'Lugers at Random' states that the Portuguese Republic Navy (RP) Lugers only have the 'M' stamped on the left side of the receiver.

Cheers,
Albert

Thanks to everyone for their help.

I have been studying the RP/crown Lugers and there maybe a couple of variationsâ??this worries me because of so many fakes, coupled with mistakes in some references.

Lugers at Random page 137 shows just a â??M â?? proof on their example gun but states that the proof is an â??MPâ?� proof; the M is pretty clear.

Lugers at Random also on the same gun show a different RP /Crown stamp than is usually encountered , hard to explainâ??the rope is longer. Are these different variations?â??I have know idea! I have recently found another RP Luger with this same long ropeâ??but it looks suspect to me from the pictures.

In the Luger Story (2001edition) page 125 there are several mistakes, one is in the order of the chamber marks shown in the pictures and the other is in the numbers of guns produced. Really just a honest mistakes but enough to drive a new collector crazy.

Walterâ??s does say that all Portuguese Navyâ??s should have the â??â??MPâ?� proof

I do not have Stills Imperial Lugers and I would be interested in knowing what his book shows for he RP/Anchor Luger can someone help with this?

Thanks Pete for your references and suggestions. I have been discussing a couple of FGSâ??s RP Lugers and hope to see his examples and talk to them in person at their next gun show in Va.

PIAâ??s web site is a favorite mouth watering area I visit often, but glamour does not make a gun collectableâ??they have some absolutely beautiful guns though!! To many it doesnâ??t matterâ??they just love beautiful Lugers touched up or not.

One observation I have made:

The MP proofs often have a very very faint P associated with them, with age the P almost disappearsâ??this might explain the gun in Lugers at Random the P may have been blotted out with the flash of the camera.

If someone has an explanation for the long and short roped Chamber markings I would love to here it?

Thanks again, wish me luck!

Vern

Vern,

I did a quick flip through my copy of Still's IL last night...I do not see any mention of Portuguese lugers.

I donâ??t want this post to get out of hand, I am just seeking information.

Attached is a picture of the two types of RP Luger chamber markings I am encountering.

I am calling them Type One and Type Two

Type one is like the one shown in â??Lugers at Randomâ?�, it has a long rope and the cross bar at the top of the anchor has a flat bottom/more square.

Type Two has a short rope and the cross bar is rounded at the bottom

I know some of the forum member own RP Lugers from your other posts, could you please describe your Chamber Markingsâ??Type One or Type Two?

Thank you so much!

Vern

Vern,

A couple of additional questions you might pose for owners of a RP Portuguese luger :

1. Is it proper for the "MP" to be run together and have the two letters share the right-hand leg of the "M" for the backbone of the "P" ???

I think I see this on one of the vendor's web site...

2. The right-hand "leg" of the "R" in the last two photos you posted vary; maybe that is significant as well. The photo on the right has a "base" at the bottom of the right leg. The photo of the left has a tapering end to the right leg that flairs away to the right...with no base. Which is proper ?

Photo details from the FGS web site :

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

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/fgs_porto_1.jpg

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/fgs_porto_2.jpg

I have been looking at this thread and trying to sort out what is being presented.

Pete, from what I can see on my tired old Portuguese Royal Navy, the "MP" is cojoined on the right leg of the "M".

For the life of me, I can't see the "long rope" difference. I have been studying the images for a couple of days and there is nothing in the photos shown that, to me, offer any differences in the "RP" images that can't be attributed to wear/damage/corrosion and differing camera angles.

The crossbar on the anchor is segmented and depending on the crispness of the photo and the angle observed, it may seem to be varying in the photos presented. I think they are all pretty much the same in the examples shown. If there is any question about a Luger under consideration for purchase, a crisp photo of the chamber marking of that Luger would be much more beneficial than second guessing whether it is right or wrong based on other examples.

Just so everyone knows what I am talking about; I have included a small scan of the chamber marking from Lugers at Random. It is hard to get clarity from a small picture in a book but you can see the extension on the left side.

Now I would like to invite everyone to use a jewelers loop of at least 10 power and examine the Type One picture in the original post, you can do it directly on your computer screenâ??what you will see is a very detailed chain attached to the left side of the cross bar.
I called it a rope before but was mistaken, I apologize for the misleading information..
I can see 3 links plus the attachment to the cross bar very clearly using this method.

I have no preconceived thoughts as to what is right or wrong with the two different chamber markingsâ??they might both be correct for all I knowâ??that is my question to the members of this forum? .

I am gathering information only in this post, it should not be used to analyze specific gunsâ??that will come later in a separate post.


Albert & Pete have been great in helping me get it straight as to what I should be looking for, thank you Albert & Pete!


Thanks to Everyone!

Vern

Now I see what you are talking about. That is the part I was referring to as "damage" because it should not be there. It does sort of look like chain links but it is not part of the original crest. I am virtually positive that the illustration in "Lugers at Random" and the photo that you posted as "Type One" are the same gun, only the white filler in the crest is not present in the "Type One" photo.

I think Ron may be correct; that the two Type One guns are the same and not necessarily correct.

Ron; I have a couple of questions for you:
1) Below is part of your frame post; can you confirm what type of frame the Royal & Republic Navyâ??s should have?
Am I correct in saying that it should be the Type V for both?

2) Have you examined your R. P. Luger for any other markings/proofs; front & rear frame wells, back of side plate, back side of grips, frame under grips? I would be very interested in the breechblock as well, particularly on the section under the lever?

Thanks

Vern

Vern,
Yes, the frames for both are Type V. Unfortunately I can't provide any information on RP markings since I have only a Royal Portuguese Navy. It is a nice early serial, #85, but it shows the effects of use and less than proper storage for many years.

Vern,

I would certainly question if the one RP chamber marking on the PIA website I listed above is proper.

It is the 1 RP chamber marking that is shown side--by-side with another Portuguese chamber marking. The one I am questioning is the right-hand photo of the 2 chamber marking photos shown.

The rope is a double line with more width than other photos in books show and the middle of the rope seems to be shown with perpendicular 'ticking" lines across the thick rope. More like a rope ladder.

Pete,
I suspect that someone "freshened up" that RP that didn't know what they were doing and tried to make a chain rather than a rope. Maybe they thought it looked better that way! :p

Pete/Ron

I agree with you on PIAâ??s picture of the R.P Crest and thatâ??s not all thatâ??s wrong with the two comparisons.
One of the lessons Albert taught me was how detailed, a stamping, roll dies make.
Knowing that; now take a good look at the PIAâ??s Royal crest and then compare it to the Royal crest from FGS you posted previously. Now tell me which one is correct?
There really is no comparison!
Albert is correct when he says roll dies make very detailed stampings- a very big lesson learned for me.

Vern

Actually, in my estimation both the FGS and the PIA Royal crests are correct. Chances are really high that the PIA has been restored, but I believe it is an authentic gun.

With such terms used in the sales ad as "collector grade" and "excellent" and "a jewel", one should note the term "factory original finish" or similar is not included in the attempt to sell it for nearly $ 4900 asking.

I am pretty sure a refinish and collector-grade are a bit mutually exclusive.

Pete,

I know where you are coming from, but it sems to me that with items of sufficient rarity as Portuguese Navys originality of finish is not really a collector-grade issue, only cost.

--Dwight

Hi Dwight,

The FGS folks have a decent, original finish and matching Portuguese Crown luger for sale at $ 4500.

http://www.fgsinc.8m.com/photo.html

I understand that some of the rare lugers even refinished are still desireable.

I would think a refinished piece would still command less market-value than an original finish piece that is all matching or at least should if I were a buyer.

I guess the trick is to read such sales ads for the words and phrases that are absent in the ad and take meaning from that.

As a new collector am I allowed an opinion?

Ahâ??what the heck.

I too believe that the PIAâ??s Royal Navy is truly a Royal Navy; except for the frame ( look closely) the fancy art work and the out of sequence serial number it looks completely legitimate.

I think I am going to go for the untouched ones for my collection, they made very few Portugal Navyâ??s, and with all this rework going on even a real doggie thatâ??s original has to go up in value. Ron hang onto your Royal Navy tired or not

Vern

Pete and Vern,

Very well considered.

--Dwight

This is an information gathering post and I wanted to share some information I gained yesterday at the Nations Gun Show.

I talked to Ken of FGS, and he informed me that FGS was one of the original importers of the Portuguese Navyâ??s.â??good lead Pete.

Ken told me a couple of things of interest to all collectors:

1) That not all the R P Lugers he had received had the â??MPâ?� proof on themâ??so this will require more research to determine why, when it was dropped, or if another proof was substituted in its place..

2) He informed me that someone came by their table to talk of Portuguese Lugers and said they were writing an article â??I have more than a passing interest in these guns; does anyone know who this is and who the article is for?. I want a copy pretty bad.

FGS was kind enough to bring 3 RP Lugers for me to look at; 2 in the 400 serial range 402 & 446 & 1 in the 300 serial range SN: 365

365 & 402 had the MP proof but 446 did notâ??now 446 had been refinished but not buffed to death by some amateur, very nicely done- I looked at this gun with both a 10 & 20 power jewelerâ??s loupe there was no indication that an MP proof had ever been applied.

402 had an un-serialized side plate but as noted above still had the MP proof-- interesting

All 3 Lugers displayed the same chamber marking without the chain extension on the left noted in Lugers at Random.

I purchased Serial Number 365, RP Luger from FGS and will post that gun for review later this week. on a different post. It has some features I noticed that that you will find interesting.

Ken has promised me a listing of the serial numbers of the RP Lugers they still have in stockâ??with FGSâ??s permission I will post the numbers here and on Ronâ??s original post of about serial numbers of Portuguese Navyâ??s.

Thanks

Vern

Hi Vern,

Glad you were able to secure some more Portuguese luger info. Doug and Ken have been helpful to me with Swiss info. even though I might not be buying anything from them at the time.

Look forward to seeing your new luger when you have time to post. And any further Portuguese research you uncover.

Vern,
Glad you got your RP! The #365 was my pick of the litter.

Ron

Could you do me a favor, look under the left grip of your Royal Navy, on the frame center rail, and tell me if you have the inspector mark letter â?�Fâ?� at the top and the letter â??Pâ?� about half way down the center rail?

I would also like to know what if any inspector marks you have at the bottom left and right?

If anyone else with a Royal or RP Navy would do the same it would be appreciated, I think I am seeing a trend that spans the two models but need more data.

Thank you

Vern

Vern,

The left grip frame is a veritable "vegtable soup" of markings. Starting at the top there is your "F". About 1/2 inch below that is a "B" (at first I thought it was a "P" so check yours carefully). A little further down at the mainspring web there is an "N". At the very bottom below the pivot point for the grip safety there is a "2" and just below that a "V". At the bottom on the toe of the grip is a "D". All of the marks, except for the "B" are "upside down", i.e. the base of the character is at the top.

Nothing that I can see on the right hand side.

Hope this helps.
Ron

Thanks Ron:

Yes, your information helps to clarify what I am seeing. There are so few examples though a proper conclusion is not forthcoming; as of yet.

Your second letter â??Bâ?� is not the same as the Letter â??Pâ?� I am seeing on the RP Lugers, so that must have changed at some point or may not be consistent.
I did not expect the other inspector marks below the first two to be of use as they appear to be random in nature.

That letter â??Fâ?� at the top may be the point to watch for.

One other question for you: Does your Royal Navy display an Early DWM barrel inspector proof in the front frame well? This proof is shown at the top of page 189 in Costanzoâ??s World of Luger Proof Marks referenced as 106. It appears as a shield with a slash across it.

Any information is always appreciated


Vern

Vern,

No proofs in the front frame well, just numbers...1, 3, 6 and 8. The 1 is about twice the height of the other numbers.

Interesting marking on your RP. I have never seen that mark anywhere but on a barrel. Doesn't mean it isn't rignt. More than likely it just means that that is the stamp of the inspector that checked out the frame that day.

Ron

Thanks Ron

Yes, interesting DWM proof, and I think youâ??re correct in that it is just the inspector for that part and nothing more..

Interesting about you number â??1â?� being so big, I have a large number â??3â?� along with a normal â??9â?�.

Thanks for all your help; I will leave you alone now, while I do more research.
I am still waiting for FGS to supply me with the remaining R.P. serial numbers and will post when I get them.

I will post some good pictures of the chamber marking and that proof when I get my camera backâ??never loan any thing good, it comes back slowly.

By the way, PIAâ??s Royal Navy has that â??Fâ?� inspector mark also, go have a peek if your curiousâ??I can not tell if the second letter is a â??B or Pâ?� or something else, maybe your eyes can make it out.


Thanks again

Vern

I would like to add a couple of pictures to this post for information; as most references are of pretty poor quality.

The chamber marking is of interest as it shows 3 chevrons in the center 3 sections, and two on the outside sections on the upper portion of the anchor. Please note how the rope winds around the anchor and how the rope stops before it intersects the lower portion of the anchor.

The serial number on the barrel and the â??MPâ?� proof have a halo but not the frame serial number. The complete serial number is stamped on the bottom on the receiver.

Research indicates that the â??MPâ?� proof stopped around the 500 serial number on the RP Lugers. It is not clear as to why this happened. This is exactly mid way in RP Luger serial numbers and raises several questions.

Any information on this would be appreciated?

I hope this post helps those who may be interested in purchasing one of these Lugers.

These Portuguese Navy Lugers are not thoroughly researched, if anyone has additional information please forward to me and I will share likewise.

Thanks again for everyoneâ??s help!

Vern

MP Proof