Interior marks..??
 

I posted 2 more pice of the inside of this luger I got. (You guys must be getting tired of me spongein' by now)


They're at the bottom of the page with the referance marks off to the side. This pistol's gettin to be more and more intrestin'.....



http://www.eandrenterprises.com/luger

Re: Interior marks..??
 

An interesting perspective... we don't get many internal shots here. Thanks.

Re: Interior marks..??
 

Tinman,


I sure wish I could see the photos, but when I click on the link, I get a "Forbidden" notice from my work computer. My company has certain "objectionable" sites blocked by a firewall I can't get thru. Can you describe the stamps, they sound interesting?


Marvin

Re: Interior marks..??
 

Luger Variations by Harry Jones has some listings for "frame well" markings. Marvin gave me this very nice (though some of the info is "dated")book. If someone else doesn't research for you, I will try and do it tonight! I am up to my ears in putting together a K date for Lonnie Zimmerman and packing Don Leverty's Artillery for shipment! Oh, the joys of LIFE! ~~THOR~~

That doesn't sound like...
 

a man who's sitting at home with nothing to do!!!

Sounds like...
 

a labor of love to me. Thanks for the research offer. I'm living at the library lately......no luck yet....

Re: Interior marks..??
 

Tinman, the only thing I found was the circle N indictes (By Harry Jones, dont shoot the messanger) a DWM ARTILLERY, the other single letter stamps are surely individual inspectors marks when one part of the assembly was completed and verified as acceptable by the indiviual inspector. The 8,83 is the land diameter in mm of the bore, the 970 is part of the serial number. Good luck and wish I could tell you more! ~Thor~

Circle N mark
 

Hi,

The circle N is almost always found on 1920 commercial Lugers. Apparently it was used before also. The fake navy that I think I mentioned awhile back was made up of a 1920 commercial and had the cirle N in the interior. Apparently what they do is use the frame, toggle, and strawed parts of a 1920. I've seen K-dates and Imperial Navy's messed with this way, as well as a 1938 Banner Army. Whenever you see the circle N in the interior, you want to be careful and really look things over.

Thanks Thor & Bill..
 

Sounds like I've got a nicely done "shooter" artillery rebuild. Another source tells me it might be a police rework. I know all this is based on photos but I really appreciate the way all of you came together and helped me out on this.


Off to the range..{:o)

One thought came to mind.. I thought all artillery models had the 6 or 8" barrels.. Also, if this was originally an arty can I put a stock on it?



http://www.eandrenterprises.com/luger

Re: Not Artillery Luger
 

Don't think you Luger was an artillery, no flat spot on top of the receiver where the sight rested.

Re: Thanks Thor & Bill..
 

Hi,

I just looked at your pictures closely and wondered what the number was on the left frame rail in front of the side plate? Also, as someone mentioned before, the frame and grips looks like they have the remains of a magazine safety that has been clipped. If that is the case, then the receiver should have a sear safety on it, which it does not, or a whole where the sear safety was pinned, which it does not appear to have. Since the frame looks like it came off of a police Luger, are there any front grip strap marking or grind marks?

Re: Not Artillery Luger
 

Tinman, I agree and like many said you need to understand my source is the ONLY one I have and it is OLD OLD OLD and that is one reason I waited for others to respond that MIGHT have something more definitive, but I didnt want you not to get any answers. Sometimes you have to stick your neck out to get responses yanno! I would say definetly if your Luger didnt come with the proper rear sight and barrel, DONT attach any stock to it! I have never studied the subject of frame markins so I have a LOT to learn! Glad you are getting some responses! Thor

OK.. No stock....
 

That's what I wanted to hear... Thanks for the heads up.. I read the thread on building up a artillery repro so I know what you mean.... I have no desiree to reside at club fed....

No..
 

I didn't see any evidence of a mag saftey or a sear safety... No strap markings of any kind or any grind marks,flat spots, thinned straps. As far as the number you asked about I'm not seeing a number...But I am beginning to think that I have a junked together shooter that was cobbeled from differant guns with the same last 2 numbers or maybe repro parts stamped to match.. Oh well,,, I hope it's at least a good shot.

Re: No..
 

Tinman; if this is to much for you, I will be glad to take it off your hands for $500.


Lonnie

HA..HA..HA..
 

That's funny....(meant in good humor)

Magazine Safety
 

Hi,

Your picture shows the left grip with a notch cut out of it in the upper front corner and what looks to be the clipped part of a magazine safety, but perhaps it isn't? Sure looks like it though. From what I think I am seeing, I'd say you have a Luger made up of two different Lugers. The barrel and receiver is from one gun and the frame is from another. Just guessing though from the pictures, and the crown N.

Re: HA..HA..HA..
 

Same here!!! I love both movies!

Re: Magazine Safety
 

Nope, Nothing under there.... All the numbers match but a few here agree with you. It's still a well fitted piece and the action is smoother than my Kimber. It should shoot well.


Thor, Get ready for another refinish job. Maybe a new barrel too.....

Re: Magazine Safety
 

Tinman; just tore my 1917 down and it has the N on the same places that you do but the other numbers are different but in the same place. It is in the ns numbers so is a lot earlier. But maybe your frame and cannon are original.

I think so. Lonnie

I so confoosed..... (EOM)
 

Re: Magazine Safety
 

I just tore my 1918 apart - and I see the same as you Lonnie - circle N as well an the N and the other markings. THe grips, as I mentioned in my first post - were cut out for a mag safety - but I didn't think then - nor do I now that they were original to the gun (no sear cut/rivet hole)..


I still think Tinmans gun is correct (except for the grips).

Re: I so confoosed.....
 

I am sure you are. Do any of you forum members live close to him so you can look at it. It sure looks original to me!! Lonnie

Re: I so confoosed.....
 

Actually I think that 66 mustang anf Bill (deauce10@home.com) live in Seattle/Tacoma.......

Re: Magazine Safety
 

Hi,

Tinman states that what I thought was the remains of a clipped magazine safety is just a reflection and that no remains and no hole is drilled in the frame. The grip does have a notch in it. From this information I agree with John and Lonnie.


When I look at the pictures, on the 10th one, the one that shows the left receiver and frame -- just below the 970 on the frame rail, especially below the "0" there is a number. Is this on the gun or is it some shadow. The last 3 digits are 325 or 375? Can anyone else see it?

Re: Magazine Safety
 

Hi Bill...


Yep - I now see what you are looking at.. On my monitor (LCD) - it looks like a "moire" pattern in the photo, maybe?? I can't make out that it an actual number, though..


Tinman - do you see what we are talking about? Is there a number or mark there (and don't tell us we need glasses )!

Huh..???
 

This one??




http://www.eandrenterprises.com/luger/Luger011.jpg

Well.. I think
 

we did it again Bill..


Given the length of time it is taking to get a reply from anyone on this question - I think we have all the members of the Luger Forum now field stripping all their Lugers looking for marks/proofs like Tinman's...!!!


LOL!!!!!

Yea....
 

that's the one.... I think it's a moire effect or a flash bright spot.. After staring at it for a while - I thought I could see a small number "6"...? When I stared at it a while longer still - I thought I could also see the face of my ex-wife... Got'ta be an anomoly...

Yep
 

Go down from the "0" and there is what looks like a 325 to me and more numbers in front of those, but I can't make them out. Glad John saw something also as I already wear glass's.

Re: Yep
 

and the small "6" is just to the left of the top of the "3".. And yep - I see both the "32" that bill sees (but can't make out the 5..?)...


Hmmmmm. it's got to be a flash effect, cause on another picture - 12 (showing Geladen) - the rail looks to be unmarked and correct (and is closer to an original blue)..

Re: Well.. I think
 

John, I hate to be the one to inform you, but yes, that is a stamping of the image of your ex-wife and if you reverse the image in Photoshop you will see that there are two mules walking backwards with one of the pyramids in the background. I have enhanced this picture several thousand times and using three different 'artistic' filters have found not only Abraham Lincoln's birthdate but also a profile of JFK. I know this is probably hard for some of you to believe but we are talking micro-pixels here (that have 128 bit encryption) and are seldom seen on some of the lower end monitors. Threads like this enhance the meaning of true collectors.

Re: Well.. I think
 

Oh ....brother!!!

Downloaded on my computer it said "ELVIS LIVES" (EOM)
 

Well I have a Macintosh...
 

with a crystal clear monitor with 3200 x 2400 resolution, and i can quite clearly see that in the saddle bags on one of those mules there is a painting of our Lord Jesus and the last supper. This is definitely a revelation! Thank you you for bringing thios to the world's attention, the Pope will undoubtedly be contacting you, to confiscate your Luger as a religious relic! God Bless You My Son!


Dok

Twice in 24 hours i will have to concur with Bill.
 

Naw really, I too have done some photo enhancement, enlargement and although I see what you guys have been seeing (except for the mules, the image of John D.'s wife is plain as day! -very tastefully done!) I vote that the image is just pixelization of the flash on a mighty finely finished Luger...


No Number there as far as I can tell by the photo.


-John

Re: Interior marks..I See Them!
 

A big thanks to Dok, John and Ed for sending my "jpg" files of the stamps! Since I had a firewall, these guys were great to let me see whst this discussion has been about.


I wish I was home so I could look at my pistols for the stamps and have reference books to look at, but, alas, I don't any with me so I can't help at this time. It also looks like it will be Christmas before I get home again.


Marvin

Is it being implied.....
 

that these are "touched up" photo's? I assure you that the only editing on these was to lighten dark photos. Any doubts about that let me know, then contact Bill (deauce10@home.com) or 66 mustang.


From their posts I surmise they live in my area. I'll be glad to meet them somewhere and they can see for themselves and everyone can get an independant opinion.

Marvin you should buy yourself an old Brin
 

So you could carry your collection around with you! Sort of a C&R Recreational Vehicle!


-John

Re: Is it being implied..... NO Tinman... no such implication
 

That is just the very sophisticated and dry humor that is common on this very gentile discussion forum!


Sorry if it confused you.