Super pistol, I would be proud to have it in my collection! thanks for the photo shoot. John

I agree that the super low serial number enhances the price. That, and the condition is also a major factor. This has both. Really nice pistol.

By that math, there were thirty-three # 98 Lugers (without suffix) made. How is that anything really rare??? :confused:

I'm not disparaging your purchase; it seems very well preserved. I just can't see it being worth more than a comparable condition three or four digit number. :( There's going to be a no-suffix # 98 every year they were made.

Not first issues.

I agree while not “really rare” it won’t be common and for me while very low serial numbers could be interesting depending on the model I wouldn’t pay a premium for a Luger marked as such for that reason alone. The OP’s Luger has a lot going for it and the low number is a nice little extra something! I’m sure there are collectors out there that hunt for low serial numbers but I’m not one of them.
Jim

If a Luger P08 could be positively identified as the first ever year-1908 issue # 98 then I could see a collector with hundreds of Lugers (and there are several on this forum) paying more for a 'first hundred'. There was a guy here years ago collecting the same serial number across different years, for some reason. :rolleyes:

But just because it is in the first hundred of a particular year (other than the year the Luger was first adopted by the army), I just can't see paying anything more... :(

But I'm sure there are gun-show hucksters asking more and convincing new Luger buyers that a low number is a rarity and you should buy it now... ;)

If a Luger P08 could be positively identified as the first ever year-1908 issue # 98 then I could see a collector with hundreds of Lugers (and there are several on this forum) paying more for a 'first hundred'. There was a guy here years ago collecting the same serial number across different years, for some reason. :rolleyes:

But just because it is in the first hundred of a particular year (other than the year the Luger was first adopted by the army), I just can't see paying anything more... :(

But I'm sure there are gun-show hucksters asking more and convincing new Luger buyers that a low number is a rarity and you should buy it now... ;)

I do happen to like this Luger but because it has a nice clean bore, unlike the sewer pipes I usually buy... :D

I agree with JTD. The 1st Issue Number 98 ns is one of the first 100 Lugers adopted by the German Army. The rest of those "thirty-three" Number 98 ns Lugers has a specific year chamber stamp. That sounds pretty "positively identified" to me.

It's all about perception!
 

Hi to all! It's all a matter of perception, or lack of it? Most Lugers, regardless of, "born on date" look the same. Most couldn't tell you who made it much less when it was made, or in what order? We know, so it is obvious to us it is rare and unusual, but again, not to all, or even most as it plays out. P.38's don't have that problem, the first ones were Walther zero series and are distinctly different from the rest of production! PP's and PPK's and we are right back to just numbers being different, and again, most don't know or care until they are enlightened right after an impulse sale at a gun show. :eek:
I really like early guns, so I'm a little subjective when it comes to numbers. Again, super nice unit, a collection unto itself! Best to all, til....lat'r....GT.....:cheers:

Do they??? Maybe they did originally, but over the years they could have received replacement parts; new barrel, different barrel extension, etc. :)

I like lively discussions. I'm always happy to play devil's advocate. :D

Whatever...............................

It’s condition AND one of the first 100 that made this one worth more. In my opinion.

If it were a 1910 #98, 1911 #98 etc., I might admire it, but I wouldn't have bought and paid the same premium for it. IMO it's not in the same ballpark.

Have you seen the HUGE premiums Colt collectors pay for an early revolver with a 2 or 3 digit S#?

To each his own I guess.

I wonder if the same controversies about numbers would also rage if we counted in base 13. Seriously, our species is generally innumerate. Society seems unable to handle numerical perspectives on not much more than an emotional basis. We have immense trouble relating to immense numbers, distances, and time frames. We think things are less likely/coincidental than they actually are.

Oh. There's a good book about it. https://www.amazon.com/Innumeracy-Ma...s%2C208&sr=8-1