What your thoughts on this one?
 

Hello

What your thoughts on this one?

Thanks, Mike

http://www.auctionarms.com/search/di...temnum=8970965

The link doesn't work, but you can cut and paste the auction number and search for it there.

8970965

I have never been able to tell the subtle difference between valid government contractor reworked gun, and parts gun. The subject is very advanced. Waiting domain experts' opinion.

===
The correct link:
http://www.auctionarms.com/search/di...temnum=8970965

Alvin,
Pardon my inexperience, but is that pistol reworked in some way?

Definitely. The most salient feature is the sear safety which is probably OK because many police guns have the feature. But this instance also has weird numbering. The magazines were forced match, etc. But, how do we know: was this done in 2008 or 70 years ago? Or, even by DDR? "Reworked" is a big umbrella, IMO.

Just because they received a sear or mag safety DOES not make them a rework. That is an old myth that is incorrrect. Not to say some weren't but MANY were not.

They were more likely forced to be reworked when the mag safety was taken off.


The weird numbering is seen every now and then; they were requried to marked them with the last 3 numbers when there was another luger in inventory that had the last two of the SN. It may be unusual, but not "rare"....


I am not sure that the serial numbers on the mags are force matched....



Ed

The toggle marking is wrong for a G date. The 42 should be in smaller font than the S on a G date toggle.

Also suspicious is the small parts having the last 3 digits rather than the last 2. The seller dosen't show the right side proofs, why?

One mag looks over stamped.

A little past the era I collect, but looks correct, mag stamping was not an art form, used mags were even restamped to match a police reissue guns, but here it looks more double struck, would get a three day inspection period to go over the gun in person, but looks good.

9502 on magazines.

9 vs 9, 5 vs 5, 0 vs 0, and 2 vs 2.

Please compare the fonts. They were not stamped together. The font on right magazine is a little bit "beefer". The stamp on right magazine also looks "healthier".

There are a few differences between the tow mags, but that is not to say that the mags are pre-1945 correct to the gun. There is no reason that the two amgs were stamped on the same day by the same person, as rework took place lots of correct period armors could have put thier hads on this gun.....I still think it looks good.....

Since these were likely stamped by hand, could they be different as shown in the Pictures? One Stamped on Monday and the other on Tuesday by a different worker?

I am new to this stuff so I am learning from you guys. Machined parts and hand fitted parts could have slight variations amoung markings, couldn't they? I'm learning while you all hash things out. I thank all of you.

I have to agree with Ron Smith on this one.
The "4's" on G S/42's toggles are usually closed topped ( the tips touch)

This gun is interesting but is most likely a parts gun, if you look at the take down lever you will see that the first two digits are small font this would be correct for this gun but the "2" is larger and was added at a different time.

There is no way of knowing when this was done however. The gun could be period but how do you prove it?


Vern

Thanks for all your help. The owner is very proud of it and wants more money than I can afford .

K & G date are rare. "Money is still money" (Jewish invester, Schindler's List, 1993). Waiting for the next one then. :biggulp:

"Those who are patient will be rewarded."(from "The Story Of My Life" Mike Dunham)

book
 

Mike where do I buy the book.

Hello Richie

I has been such a critically acclaimed success the First edition is completely sold out. I will have to contact my publisher to see about getting a second printing done.

Best regards.

Mike