Faked- Boosted
 

Fellow collectors
Note; The .45 carbine is not mentioned in my post "Forum closure ...paranoid...". However some members felt obligated to defend the carbine even if it was not the subject of the posting.

Lugers fakers and boosters ply their trade in secret. New collectors are an easy target. In the real world collectors have little to protect themselves from unscrupulous dealers. Most of the time there is no absolute proof. Impressions concerning the dealer (sometimes reports from fellow collectors), advice from an experienced friend, or a vague impression that this luger is not quite right or too good to be true (new condition) have saved many a new collector from a bad purchase.

My posting "Forum closure or paranoid old conservative" resulted from conversations with two members of the Forum. Both are new collectors. Based on information supplied by long time collectors (and their own hard work) both forum members determined that at least half of the Lugers obtained from the same dealer were faked or boosted. Among the faked or boosted Lugers were three Imperial Navies, and a byf 42 reblued over pits. Both feel that this Forum favored the seller over the collector. Both of these collectors are upstanding people and would be a credit to collecting. Tragically both are discouraged and this may end their collecting careers. This should be of great concern to all collectors, moderators and owners on this Forum.
Jan C. Still

Well said Jan, there is an old saying that went something like this ' A theif may steal everything that you own, but he will never steal your knowledge.' I see that you can't sleep either. <img src="graemlins/sleep.gif" border="0" alt="[sleep]" />

Well of course that would be a concern Jan, no one should feel they are being ripped off, and it would appear to me that if Half of the guns sold by this collector were boosted or faked, I would imagine that they soon would not have much business. If not, then that is a real shame.

From your previous posting on this same subject, you stated that many of the forum members appear to favor sellers over buyers.
I think this is a wrong impression, but that impression was given by those two people denigrating the seller in their postings and they were told that this was not acceptable and so their flaming was stopped and therefor it appears the seller was being protected.

I am not saying the seller did not deserve it, but simple statements about the seller went into flames and attacks.

If a person starts to name names of certain sellers, and use hearsay, isn't that getting into libel?

If YOU have had a bad experience, and name your problem, then there is not a problem, but when you start to name hearsay or what others have said, then it is a problem. I believe that the moderators and administrators of the forum have tried to keep that kind of thing from happening and this does appear to censor free speech and I am afraid that is true for those kinds of instances.


I don't want any new collectors turned off or burned, as I myself am fairly new at Luger collecting, so any practical advice is welcome.

Edward,
There is a dealer in another type of military pistols that has pretty well become the butt of jokes among knowledgeable collectors. A pistol that has has been boosted is said to have been "------ized". He has sold and continues to sell boosted pieces as well as out and out fakes of rare pieces, yet this has been going on for years and he is still in business with no lack of customers. On one of the forums someone posted an ad from him for a "shooter grade" pistol with the serial number noted in the ad. On the same post he posted an ad of about a year later of a pistol of the same make and serial number but the pistol was now a 99% pistol in the original shipping box. If you are not satisfied with your purchase the dealer will make a no questions ask refund. If you find that you have a refinished pistol sold at a collector grade price, you would be most happy to just get your money back rather than try to get through our court system.
Recently someone posted pictures of a beautiful military pistol for all to admire. Someone commented that they thought the pistol had been in a recent auction, and later posted the ad from the auction catalog which indicated the serial number and percent of original finish. The pistol was now a beautiful 99% specimen.
These are just two examples of where irrefutable proof has been demonstrated, and are in no way isolated cases. The sad thing is that who will know this 50 years from now. These boosted pieces will have naturally aged, and who will remember seeing them in a catalog before they became reborn virgins.

Sad, very sad.

I too would like to have 'list" of bad dealers [img]mad.gif[/img] , but it is not workable or possible for this forum.

<img src="graemlins/crying.gif" border="0" alt="[crying]" />

Jan's message is, I believe, a gentle reminder that the buyer must always beware even if the seller is reputable. It is an unfortunate human trait that where money is involved - especially large sums of money - honesty and integrity too often go by the wayside.

My interest in Lugers goes back some 50 years although I didn't seriously consider collecting them until a few years ago. The constant changing of residence that's part and parcel of a military career didn't allow me to collect Lugers.

My first experience with a long-time, high profile and well-respected collector/dealer of Lugers left me with the unhappy conclusion that the only real protection a Luger collector has is their own knowledge and instincts. The Luger in question is an Erfurt and I was assured on the telephone that it was original and all-matching. A nice, 90% piece and great collectable.

Upon arrival, the incongruity of the glowing description and the reality was obvious. The side plate and locking bolt were both replacements. The Erfurt inspection stamps on the two parts are actually engravings of a crown! The breechblock had cold bluing on it and the extractor, while bearing a stamped matching number, wouldn't allow a cartridge to chamber! The finger at the rear of the extractor had never been fit to the pistol and had too much meat on the bottom. It wouldn't permit the hook to override the rim because it bottomed out. The remainder of the pistol is original.

While I was offered my money back, I decided to keep it for several reasons, not the least being a constant reminder that I need to always be vigilant for fakes and misrepresented pieces.

The collector/dealer in question continues to conduct business as before and I find this interesting because in most fields the word would have gotten around and the individual would be shunned. Personallity and reputation seem to have shielded the individual from questionable dealings. I choose not to be blind to dishonesty and will not do business with this person again.

The other thing that baffles me is why someone with the talent to fool even the experts would waste their time fabricating fakes. They could offer their expert services to restore Lugers that have otherwise lost their collector value. Maybe it's the thrill of having fooled the experts or maybe the money is so good it isn't worth it to go legit. Money does strange things to some people.

When two individuals such as described by Jan are lost to the Luger collecting community through the dishonesty of one person, it is tragic. How many more will become victims of that dealer before truth overcomes the reluctance to see what's really happening? We may be our own worse enemies.

Jan,

<img src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" border="0" alt="[soapbox]" /> I take exception to your comments about a "defense" of the .45 caliber carbine in the responses to your 'paranoia" posting... mine in particular.

Please revisit my words quoted here carefully because there is no defense of either the carbine or the dealer here:

[quote] The largest controversy that has arisen in the last year or so concerns the .45 caliber Lugers. There has been much speculation about them, their numbers, their locations, and their origin. Your posts have not been particularly subtle expressing, that in your opinion, that the newly discovered and made public .45 caliber carbine currently in the possession of Ralph Shattuck is likely a fraud. I submit that it is difficult to justify a position on either side of this argument. Just because no previous research has ever documented the existence of such a piece, doesn't mean that one could not have been made and kept out of the public eye until now...nor is it impossible that such a piece could have been tediously fabricated and artificially aged to look genuine.

I have not seen any credible evidence that has been made public on this forum to substantiate either idea.

Could it be a fraud? Could it be genuine? The evidence is not yet in... will it ever be in? Unless authenticated documentation is discovered and made public, I doubt that anyone will ever be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the gun is either genuine or a fake...

I know of no forensic tests that could be performed without damage to the gun and it's accessories that could provide that proof. Without evidence to the contrary, I can only conclude that the gun exists... it's authenticity or fraudulence cannot be proven at this point in time, and until such time as it can be proven one way or the other, it is unique in the world of Lugers... it wouldn't matter which dealer possessed it... It is currently one of a kind
<hr></blockquote>

This was not a defense, but a criticism that the authenticity of the item has previously been disparaged without evidence of any kind. There is no evidence one way or the other on whether this gun is genuine. Yet there seems to be a theme amongst long time collectors that if they never heard it was possible, then it couldn't possibly be so...

I believe that the due process of the passage of time will provide substantive evidence for one argument or the other... and I also don't feel that anyone will step forward and buy this item until that happens...


Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) has been a prudent standard practice for sales transactions since the very first sale ever took place. If people have questions about something they are thinking about buying... They can ask more than just the dealer of the item, they can ask knowledgeable folks here on this forum.

If they have questions about how a long distance (or in this case, an internet) transaction can safely be accomplished, they can ask...

If they don't know any better than to ask several sources about something they have no in-depth knowledge about before they fork over their money... Then they shouldn't be buying anything...

I don't believe that anyone on this forum will sit idly by while unscrupulous practices are taking place. But there is a right way and a wrong way to provide a warning.

Advice is freely available for the asking about how to determine the authenticity of Lugers and Luger parts on the forum and how to protect yourself against authenticity mistakes and fraud... And the advice that is provided doesn't have to have anything to do with any particular person or dealer.

Admittedly fraud can happen in any sales context, but IMHO it is no more rampant in the Luger collecting field than in any other field of collecting...

This forum is in the business of establishing the truth about the history, manufacture and use of the Luger pistol... Nothing more, and nothing less. The information that is exchanged on this forum is for the benefit of all luger enthusiasts whether or not they are collectors. The lugerforum is neither the internet or gun auction police.

If you see something wrong about some item being sold or offered for auction? Or if you have a good tip on how someone can keep from being fooled by a fake? You are free to state what you feel is wrong and base it on known fact, not supposition, and not hearsay...

but it is unethical and improper to allege that just because an item is being sourced from a specific dealer that it has been "boosted" or faked. To do so makes you no better than a person you are accusing of some form of impropriety...

As SGT Joe Friday on the Dragnet TV sercies used to say years ago... "Give me the facts Maam, just the facts..."

Second hand experiences or opinion and other forms of hearsay should carry no weight in this context or on this forum when it comes to personalities...

Comments are invited... <img src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" border="0" alt="[soapbox]" />

I find it a little difficult to get distressed about a toy. No-one's life is in jeopardy over a Luger. The money spent on these what some choose to be extremely expensive toys is obviously not essential for important things or it would not be spent on an unnecessary item. I quit playing poker cause I kept on losing. Cost too much for the pleasure of the game. If you can't risk losing then you'd best not sit down at the table. The action of desiring a non essential toy and the willingness to pay a lot of money for it creates the environment for deceit. Don't misunderstand, I love my guns. I love to shoot and discuss them. I love to display and play with them. But essential, nope. Defining me as a person, nope. Status in the eyes of my friends & family, nope. So if these items are toys, then what is the value other than that placed on them by those who wish to and those who do own them?
Ego? Naw, couldn't be that.

RK

Well said Roadkill. Lugers are just toys. Real neeeeat toys. Maybe one gun (probably a 1911) is a necessity in this increasingly violent world, the rest are big boy's toys.

All; most of you may know that I am one of the luger newcomers to the Forum and to the field of luger hunting. Having only been in the game for 6 months.

I want to report an incident that I use to merely demonstrate that this newbie is getting pretty disappointed with this issue of "fake & boosted" lugers.

Here is the story :

On 6-22-02, Dr. Fisher posted (in the Early Lugers section) that he saw an interesting luger at Mike Krause's shop with Mexican makings on the barrel. The luger's serial number was reported in that post.

The only reply post was from Johnny Peppers who recalled previously documenting that same luger (in the past) and stated that the previous sighting of this gun did not say one way or the other whether the barrel had any markings or not.
I gathered this meant no confirmation one way or the other that Mexican markings existing on this luger at the time of the previous citing.

This post ended after only two exchanges.

A day later, I received an unsolicited, "anonymous" post to my private e-mail at home from a Forum member. (My private home e-mail was avaiable to all on the old Forum.)

This anonymous post basically implied that this luger at Mike Krause's shop was "not right" and was just another example of a luger that had been "messed with".

My reply to this anonymous party was :

1. I did not want to continue to receive e-mails from a person who remains anonymous and yet has free reign to make accusations without allowing the accused to know his/her identify and without giving the accused a chance to debate/defend a luger in question.

2. I also replied that I did not see anything the in two posting by Dr. Fisher or Johnny Peppers that supported the allegation that this luger was "not right".

3. In a previous e-mail from this same person, I was told by this person that he/she wished to remain anonymous so he/she could continue to buy "legit" lugers from the same folks he/she accuses of being in the fake & boost business. My reply to this e-mail was I thought this was a bit unethical...having ones cake and eating it to.

I suspect I will not get any more e-mails from this person.

I relay this story just to illustrate how "frightened" this luger newcomer is becoming and how my enthusiasm is beginning to decline.

I appeciate those expert collectors that have taken some of us beginners under their wings to help us stay out of trouble. But I think every luger and every sale needs to be evaluated on its own merits, fairly.

Anonymous accusations just do not show character, in my opinion...

First, with all due respect to some of the opinions stated here, Lugers are NOT my life, but I find them interesting and worth collecting. I am especially fascinated by the historical relationship of the Luger with the 20th century.

As a relative newcomer to Luger collecting, I too have become somewhat discouraged with the large number of fake and boosted Lugers, and I fully understand Pete's comments, above.

When I first got involved I bought all of the more useful reference books such as Still, Kenyon, Walter, Jones, and others. These books are helpful reference tools that provide a great deal of information about the different Luger types, but they do not prepare a newcomer for the plethora of modified, boosted and fake Lugers on the market. I have found no publication which deals with this subject. Caveat Emptor is a nice term, but it is meaningless without a mental database from which to operate.

All that I know about the devices, techniques, and practices of Luger boosters and fakers has been gleaned from postings by more experienced collectors on this forum, and I am sincerely grateful for your help.

When this new forum opened, Jan Still suggested a topic area to deal with these subjects. I am afraid that his suggestion was viewed with apprehension by some, as it was feared that it would become a sub-forum for much dissension and name calling. And, that could easily happen.

I still feel that such a discussion area could be very helpful to both newcomers and experienced collectors alike if:

1. Only technical subjects are discussed.
2. No names, personalities, or innunendos are allowed.
3. We stick to the subject.
4. We remain objective in our comments
5. Finally, we respect each other.

For me, the whole concept that someone would sell me a "bill of goods" that is not what I paid for (and I wouldn't have the where-with-all to know the difference) is what keeps me out of collecting.

But my love of the Luger is every bit as strong as the most ardent collector, so I chose to buy a mismatched shooter, with a wonderful history (as evidenced by the stamps) and then have that beautifully reworked by Ted Green so no one woould ever be confused about its originality.

It is my "pride and joy" and I lavish all my attention and care on it, and I cherish it for the engineering work of art that it is, and the joy that it brings me. And I know I got exactly what I paid for. The world is a scary place, and there are lots of unscrupulous people out there, and sometimes "Caveat Emptor" is just NOT enough.

Dok [img]frown.gif[/img]

Dok,

I agree with you also (as well as RK). Lugers are neeeeat toys, but not my life. I have admired them for 50 years, but like most things, I wouldn't spend outrageous $$ for rare ones. I first bought a real clean shooter and learned a lot. Now Ted is redoing a WWI DWM to suit my purist tastes.

I also have a number of 1911s (not A1s) acquired over many years that have been reworked to suit me and I wouldn't trade them for the rarest collectible. They do what I want and look like they should (to me).

More power to the real collector and historian--but that's not me. I wouldn't own a Nazi holster, flag, or other such stuff, but Lugers, SAAs, old T-birds, etc. are neeeat.

Thanks AGE,

All the classic firearms are just wonderful...
(I'm a 1860 Army man myself)

http://members.northrock.bm/~lcenter...s/1860Army.jpg

just to own one is reward enough.

Dok [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

Dok,

Wish I had a way to post neat pictures. No digital camera and my guns won't go through my scanner-printer combo. I was out shooting around noon with my grandson. First the SAA in .45 LC, then the Luger (9mm), then an accurized 1911 (wow-a 3# trigger and 1-2" groups), finally my 3914 S&W (little gun, big group). It's great to be retired--just so SS buys enough ammo and components. I love to own and look at them, but if they don't shoot, out they go.

Sorry for the double post. I'm learning (I hope). (Edited and corrected by JS)

[quote]Originally posted by Wm. Pete Ebbink:
<strong>
I appeciate those expert collectors that have taken some of us beginners under their wings to help us stay out of trouble. But I think every luger and every sale needs to be evaluated on its own merits, fairly.

Anonymous accusations just do not show character, in my opinion...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Pete -

I agree with you. Every Luger has to be evaluated on its own merits. And if we don't learn about the "problem pieces" or the "iffy pieces", how will we learn. I probably have learned more by looking at one "not right" gun than by looking at 20 righteous guns.

Evaluations have to be factual, objective, and based on personal and/or verifiable knowledge. Not this "my cousin's uncle's wife's brother's ...".

Along the same lines, questions can be and should be posed in a non-acusatory manner. And remember, everyone makes mistakes some time, let's not jump to the conclusion that every mistake in word or deed is an attempt to defraud or discredit someone.

Other than that - enjoy the 4th. One Nation under God, by God.

I am now seeing a few salt blued WWI Erfurts and DWMS that the were probably sold to the owners as mint condition guns. These typically have a little higher finishing polish prior to bluing. Sometimes well done, sometimes not. When buying what you think is an original rust blued Luger ALWAYS look at the muzzle and inside the reciever rails for white or tarnished white steel and always look for worn strawed parts. Look for wear on the top of the sideplate and sides of the muzzle and end of the frame rails. If this gun was used in a war, it was put in a holster and should look like it! Many of the internal parts should also be white. And also look for a WWI vintage firing pin (no vents) Most strawed parts that are old will have some of the original strawing on the part of the part that is inside the gun. Rust bluing is a different color than salt bluing. Before you buy an Erfurt or DWM that is original you need to go see a few at gun shows or dealers and when you start seeing orginal ones you will see the color difference. If is sometimes hard to explain, but the original rust bluing was greyer and bluer than salt blues. If you buy a gun that has over 95% strawing it PROBABLY was "touched" up. Strawing is just not that durable a finish.....especially on a 80 yr old gun. <img src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" border="0" alt="[soapbox]" />

Here is a Krieghoff story. I think I can convey it because I was personally involved with the seller, so this is not just 2nd. hand gossip :

A few months back on one of the Internet sites, an early S-code HK luger was advertised as all original. Photo showed a very decent matched serialed gun but with brown Ritzmann grips.

I e-mailed the seller with my interest, asked my typical 6-7 condition questions, and also asked a question whether Ritzmann grips were "proper", since I read in R. Gibson's book that Ritzmann grips appeared in the midddle and late S-code series. I was not being skeptical, I just thought I did not have the most recent info. as to when Ritzmann grips appeared

I never got a reply after sending the same e-mail several times; so decided I would pass on the luger.

Then a few weeks later the same gun is again for sale (I had recorded the exact serial number) but this time around it is sporting what are described as HK wooden grips...price went up by $250, as well. But I did not see those typical flat diamonds typical on HK wooden grips...

Not sure if experts consider this a "boost" or was this just an "historical correction".

But I did learn a bit here...and maybe the seller did too. But if the new grips are not original HK's maybe they did not learn enough... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Jan,
I too share your concern about the authenticity of a .45 caliber Luger Carbine, although I have not personally inspected the gun in question.

I have already written to this forum about how rare Lugers are created from common donor guns. A .45 caliber Luger Carbine would have to be created from a .45 Luger donor (the .45 has a larger frame, larger parts, etc.) Any other Luger could not be converted to a proper .45 Carbine.

Until now, .45 donor guns have not been available to boost. Now the .45 Luger is being manufactured again. It seems odd that a Carbine version of this gun suddenly appears at the same time the only potential donor gun is introduced? How coincidental?

Is there any historical evidence that a Carbine version of the .45 was made?

Might a Navy or Artillery version soon appear?

I have already told this forum about the only known 1941 Dated Krieghoff that appeared during the production of Randall Gibson's "Krieghoff Parabellum." It is featured on page 179 of that book.

The gun had been photographed earlier and it appears as a 1940 Krieghoff on page 175 of the same book (get out your copies of "Krieghoff Parabellum" and look if you don't believe me!) The serial number is the same, and you can see from the number alignment that it is the same gun. The condition gets nicer when it becomes a 1941. Imagine that?

Here we have published evidence of a common donor gun transformed into a rare one of a kind mint Luger.

Who do you think submitted the 1941 Krieghoff/ex 1940 Krieghoff on page 179/175 of "Krieghoff Parabellum"? Would you believe the same guy who now has the only known .45 Luger Carbine? Imagine that? [img]confused.gif[/img]

This is an interesting thread. I really liked Dok's Colt. The REAL Army Colt. :-)

Ont he topic of Luger fakes/boosts. Although I must speak as a very new collector I believe that the high values placed on "mint" conditions and rare proofs create a real opportunity for fakes. Look again at Dok's Colt. Nobody expects 1860 Colt's to be "mint" and all are very suspicious of guns without honest wear. Reblues and reworks(in Lugers) are available and I think are a good are for the beginner. At least the seller is being honest about that much.

Condition that is "extraordinary" may be just that, or may be from later touch ups. Even on this forum we see people searching for matching numbered parts and magazines. How real is that? If the Luger has a mismatched magazine what difference does it make when it is part of the gun's history. Is matched number that may be off a different letter run preferable? Some of the Luger fakery we may bring on ourselves by unrealistic expectations.

Just my opinion, Heinz

Heintz, The way I figure it is if I have a luger that is numbered 2129z and the magazine is mismatched and someone has the 2129z magazine, why would this not be the original magazine for this weapon? I really don't think that this is 'boosting' it is matching original parts to the original weapon. What bothers me is the number of original magazines that are being sold on E-Bay that are unnumbered, I feel that these are the ones that are being 'boosted' to fit a mismatched gun.

[quote]Originally posted by Herb:
<strong>Heintz, The way I figure it is if I have a luger that is numbered 2129z and the magazine is mismatched and someone has the 2129z magazine, why would this not be the original magazine for this weapon? I really don't think that this is 'boosting' it is matching original parts to the original weapon. </strong><hr></blockquote>

How would you know what year magazine 2129z was made? If you have gun 1915 2129z, how could you be certain that the mag you "match" to your pistol wasn't for 1914 or 1916 2129z?

Doubs,

The "match the magazine" to your Luger can happen, and does on occasions from Don Hallock's Luger Magazine listing.

The reason you can be reasonably sure if the magazine is correct or not is that the inspectors stamps, type magazine (nickled, blued bodies, etc.) the type bottom all fit into a certain time period. With this, a magazine with a particular serial number and letter suffix can be matched to a certain pistol.

Don Hallock has a very good explanation for how each magazine can be matched correctly in his magazine listing. There are some folks that don't believe this, but it is proven that it can happen. it is still like finding a needle in a haystack, but I know one gentleman who did find the proper magazine that was originally with his pistol.

Marvin

Gentleman, My point was not that there was anything dishonest or dubious about magazine matching. What I was noting was the increased value this gives to the Luger concerned. Historically we have changed the gun's provenance, yet the value is increased?? This seems to be inviting some of the problems we experience.

And I certainly meant nothing personal to present company.

Heinz,

I agree with what you say! Many Luger collectors want the absolutly mint pieces and when they are found, they are expensive. But, have these MINT pistols been reworked, restored, enhanced, etc.? Some are so good I can't tell. A good example of this is a P.38 "0" Series a friend has; this pistol was restored and the job so good, I could tell it from a mint piece except that it seemed to be in too good of condition to be original. I guess that the only thing we can do is rely on our knowledge to recognize an enhanced firearm. I don;t see anything wrong with enhancement as long as the seller notes this to the buyer, but years down the road, we will never know the truth about that enhanced piece and it's enhancement will be lost forever.

When we see any Luger/weapons that is in absolutly mint condition, we need to check it very carefully. If it truly is original, where has it been over the past 50-80 years; in a desk all this time? If a pistol has been carried much at all in a holster, there will be some blue wear from the movement in the holster. The pistol will have a mint bore, nice color to the blue, little to no mechanical wear, but there should be some tell-tale sign of being in a holster.

Tough questions to answer and so many opinions! <img src="graemlins/icon501.gif" border="0" alt="[icon501]" />

Marvin

About 22 years ago, I acquired an absolutely beautiful restored 41/Banner police from Mike Krause in a trade. I sold the gun to Dave Sorroco as restored. He sold it to someone as restored.

Dave reported back that the new owner sent it to a world famous luger dealer/collector for appraisal who had certified it as being 100% original.

The new owner elected to accept that appraisal as the truth instead of what he had been told by the previous owners!

So much for honesty when money is involved!

Orv Reichert

Similar thing happened to a friend. He owns a telecom company and travels all over selling systems to who ever. He also loves guns. A bank chain with a branch office in a small town of about 10,000 in N. Alabama decided to upgrade phone systems. The old bank building was built in about 1920. Harold goes, in makes survey, writes up bid, and asks "Got any guns?". Sure did. Went back to the now unused vault with an ancient clerk showing the way, opened a drawer, pulled out a mint 1911 Colt 45. It had been bought by the origonal owner in 1920 and had never left the building, never been fired, had origonal ammo with it. Harold never told me what it cost him but you would argue passionately it had to have been reworked because of the condition. No wear whatsoever. And how will the collectors know the difference between a 1860 Colt Army made in 1860 and one made in 1985 in 2525?

RK

Marvin, while I don't doubt that there are isolated instances of matching a mag to the original pistol, IMO it's neither common nor possible to be 100% certain in many cases.

Beginning in 1912, according to Jan Still in "Imperial Lugers", DWM made essentially the same mag until, by 1918, the bright finish gave way to an unfinished surface. Exactly when the change over took place is unclear. But, I think it safe to say that DWM made the same mags for a period of no less than 4 - 6 years. i.e., 1912 to possibly as late as 1917. Even if the period was only 4 years, the possibility of the mag being original to the gun is only 25%. If the period is extended to 6 years, the odds drop to less than 17%. The only exceptions to this would be if a sufix letter block of pistols were manufactured in some years but not others. I believe I've read that some LP-08's made by DWM later in the war were issued with as many as six magazines serialed to the gun. That would put the odds in a tail spin for some pistols while improving them for others.

Unless there exists specific and detailed information about magazine production numbers, finishes etc. that I'm unaware of, to remove the guess work, the best we can do in most instances is play the odds.

IMO, it's just not possible *in MOST instances* that a mag separated from it's original gun can be reunited with 100 percent certainty that they were issued together. That's just my opinion.

[quote](I'm a 1860 Army man myself)
<hr></blockquote>

Dok,

......myself....!

(this is a scan, so there is no quality)

http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/1860.jpg

The numbers on matching magazines would not be repeated until 270,000 Lugers were manufactured. This is calculated on 10,000 Lugers in a production run using the 26 letters in the alphabet plus the 10,000 Luger magazines in the first run that had no suffix letters. There are the matching spares but they had the number '2' added, so I don't count them. Since the magazine design changed over the years, from nickel with wood bases, to blue with aluminum bases, plastic bases, different types, stamped, extruded, etc., I seriously doubt that 'several' magazines of the correct period existed. If, in fact, several magazines with exactly the same number/letter combination were made in each of the different periods of evolution then how can anyone be certain that any 'all matching' Luger does in fact have the exact magazine it was originally issued with, or did some fortunate individual locate a correct mag with the correct number for his Luger from the 'several' out there? <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" />

Niether of my wooden based magazines has a letter suffix, just the 4 digit serial number. Should mags have a letter suffix??

Heintz, both of my wood bottom mags have a suffix letter, the nickel one is 7421a and the tin plated one is 5883l (L) Yours must be those of the first run, or the ones falling into the first 10,000 numbers of the run which would have no suffix letters.

Military Mauser magazines are defined by construction, both the alpha-numeric AND the acceptance marks. It is doubtful that two legit magazines could possibly exist for the same Luger, except for the spare (+ marked). <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

[quote]Originally posted by Herb:
<strong>The numbers on matching magazines would not be repeated until 270,000 Lugers were manufactured. This is calculated on 10,000 Lugers in a production run using the 26 letters in the alphabet plus the 10,000 Luger magazines in the first run that had no suffix letters. There are the matching spares but they had the number '2' added, so I don't count them. Since the magazine design changed over the years, from nickel with wood bases, to blue with aluminum bases, plastic bases, different types, stamped, extruded, etc., I seriously doubt that 'several' magazines of the correct period existed. If, in fact, several magazines with exactly the same number/letter combination were made in each of the different periods of evolution then how can anyone be certain that any 'all matching' Luger does in fact have the exact magazine it was originally issued with, or did some fortunate individual locate a correct mag with the correct number for his Luger from the 'several' out there? <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I refer you to page 15 of Jan Still's "Imperial Lugers" where observed serial number blocks are reported. There is no evidence, based on the shown information, to indicate that the full alphabet was ever used by either manufacturer in any given year. Note also that with the beginning of each year's production, the serial number sequence started all over again with 1, no suffix. If 1915 ended with the letter "l", as indicated in the chart, the first production of 1916 did not continue the sequence with "l" or follow with "m". 1916 began with number 1, no suffix. In no year did production actually reach your theoretical 270,000 Lugers. (Note that there is no letter "j" as the letters "i" and "j" interchange in the German alphabet.) Also note the estimated production for each year; only three of the years actually exceed 100,000 units..... a far cry from 270,000. In fact, estimated TOTAL production by DWM during the Imperial years is little more than twice 270,000 at 588,000.

As there should be no confusion between DWM and Erfurt produced mags because of the different way in which each manufacturer marked the mag base, I'll concentrate on DWM. Note that in 1915, standard Luger production and LP production overlapped on two blocks; no suffix and "a". Therefore each DWM ns and "a" production pistol has 4 serially matching mags out there. In 1916 the overlap extends to block "b" and in 1917, the overlap is a whopping 14 blocks! Every DWM Luger produced in 1917 from ns through "n" has 4 matching mags! 1918 only overlaps 6 blocks.

So, not only do we have identical serial numbers year after year from 1912 through 1918, we also have duplication within many of those years.

Kenyon, Still and Jones all agree that throughout production of Imperial Lugers, ALL magazines were made of crimped sheetmetal with wooden bottoms pinned at the rear. In other words, they were all made the same. However, Still reports that the semi-polished finish of 1912 gave way to an unfinished mag by 1918. Exactly when the change took place is unclear but certainly we can expect the semi-polished finish to have been through 1916 and possibly 1917. Therefore, how do you tell if a magazine was made in 1912, 1913, 1914 etc? I don't think anyone can with any degree of certainty.

Military issue matching spares used the "+" symbol and not "2". Police issue mags used "1" and "2". The magazine marked "+" is also numbered to, and issued with, the pistol so why wouldn't you consider it to be a "match"? Is a pistol with a "+" marked mag less desireable than one with a mag that is without the "+"? If it's one of the two mags issued with the pistol, it's a matching mag.

I've remained in the Imperial period because it's what I'm familiar with. Mauser produced Lugers may or may not be easier to mag-match with greater certainty. I'm really not up to snuff on them but I think it's clear that the chance of matching an Imperial Luger with precisely the mag the gun was issued with is less than favorable based on the odds.

Doubs, pretty good. If the information you have has any authenticity, then my chances of finding a matching mag has increased, not that it is important, the two I want are for referbs one of which has been 'sporterized'. I tend to disagree on one point, the numbering by year. Example, DWM is given a contract in 1912 for 22,000 Lugers, serial nembered 10,000a thru 10,000b sufixes plus the 2,000 without suffixes. Regardless of which letters weren't used they would continue the consecutive numbering until the end of the contract, without regard to the year of completion, perhaps 1914. I don't see how else this could have been managed by the procurement office. They surely didn't just let each company pick their own numbers, the would have to have been assigned. While I know of no comprehensive serial number listing, there are aparently records of who got a contract for how many at what point in time, DWM, Mauser, Erfurt etc., to make it more confusing there are the special contracts, Navy, Police, and others scattered around in there.

[quote]Originally posted by Herb:
<strong>Doubs, pretty good. If the information you have has any authenticity, then my chances of finding a matching mag has increased, not that it is important, the two I want are for referbs one of which has been 'sporterized'. I tend to disagree on one point, the numbering by year. Example, DWM is given a contract in 1912 for 22,000 Lugers, serial nembered 10,000a thru 10,000b sufixes plus the 2,000 without suffixes. Regardless of which letters weren't used they would continue the consecutive numbering until the end of the contract, without regard to the year of completion, perhaps 1914. I don't see how else this could have been managed by the procurement office. They surely didn't just let each company pick their own numbers, the would have to have been assigned. While I know of no comprehensive serial number listing, there are aparently records of who got a contract for how many at what point in time, DWM, Mauser, Erfurt etc., to make it more confusing there are the special contracts, Navy, Police, and others scattered around in there.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Herb, my information has been extracted primarily from the books by Still, Kenyon and Jones. I also have Luger books by half a dozen, or more, other authors. I can't afford as many Lugers as I'd like so books by those who have done the research are the best option. While I bought my books by Still and a few others new, I was lucky enough to pick up books by some authorities second hand.

While I've stayed primarily with the military style of serial numbering, there's no question that production figures and the different types of serial numbering can throw a monkey wrench into the works. Jones, on page 45 of his book "Luger Variations", explains the military serial numbering system exactly as I said in my last post. However, I would agree with you that it likely wasn't as cut and dried as the system makes it seem. If there were 1914 receivers remaining at the end of the year, it's probable that they were finished and numbered as if done in the year 1914. I suppose it depends upon how far in advance the date was stamped on the receiver. If little lead time was given there would be minimal trouble finishing a year on time and beginning the new year with newly dated receivers.

Commercial and foreign contract guns supposedly had their own serial number ranges apart from military guns. Production could continue from one year to another without a problem or disrupting the serial number sequence. Domestic military production serial numbers, according to Jones, ran as I said; the first pistol of any new year was number 1 without a suffix number. It would appear that military contracts didn't call for specific serial numbers but were accepted according to the system being used. I believe the serial numbering system was by military directive as all military guns by all manufacturers used the exact same system. It wasn't devised by Erfurt or DWM or Mauser but they all had to use it. I believe German military rifle production also used the same system.

I would like to correct the figures I gave for DWM production. 588,000 total did not include 155,000 Artillery models or commercial and contract Lugers made before 1908. The total figure for DWM from 1900 through 1919 should have been between 911,000 and 914,000 depending upon the source. Erfurt production of all Lugers is estimated at 519,000.

You are absolutely correct about one thing: The military numbering system improved the chances of finding a mag with a number/letter to match your Imperial Luger. What a fascinating hobby!

<img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

Doubs, not to beat this thing to death but I was using info from one of the old masters, Fred Datig, with some bull thrown in. If you have his book, see page 15. He calculates that 12 to 15 lugers exist using the same serial number and suffix. I figured in combat losses, just plain wear, damage, etc. that would reduce this number even further, by how much I have no idea, maybe five or six remaining with the same exact number, located somewhere in the world in the hands of whoever, or in a box. I figure that finding a matching mag is such a rareity that I won't have to even consider it. Disregarding the suffixes, he figures 250-300 identical numbers exist. Whatever, it has made for an interesting exchange.

Hi Herb,

Fred Datig's book was the first real book on the Luger that I had. (Hatcher's 1927 book "Pistols and Revolvers" devotes some pages to the Luger but it's written for practical use and not collectors.) Pop bought a copy in 1962 when the newest (at that time, anyway) edition was released. The price on the fly shows $8.50! It's tattered and worn but I still have it. It's a good read and contains a wealth of information. My only criticism is that it's not as well organized as it could be but that's minor. Of course, more resent research and information gathering has taken place resulting in corrections to some of Mr. Datig's data but that's to be expected. He still did a remarkable job, IMO.

It has indeed been an interesting exchange. I'm sure we'll have the opportunity to discuss other points later. For all we know about the Luger, there is always more to be learned. I learn something new about them almost every day on this forum.

Doubs and Herb, Datig was my first Luger book too, mine cost $26.95 probably 15 years ago. I still like it very much also, [img]smile.gif[/img]