First Luger - info & comments - New Photos added
 

Looks like it's in nice shape. Any education is appreciated.

Numbers seem to match #6651 with matching magazine.


http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera031.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera002.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera001.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera010.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera014.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera003.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera004.jpg

Thanks for your attention!

I have seen mint examples before that were real, but they really need to be looked at closely.

So, question to yourself; where did it come from, i.e. what dealer?

There is no wear, which is highly unlikely, but possible.

Take a small flashlight and shine it at the finish, it should show kinda a slight rusty look, to be missing this is a sign it might be reblued; as any gun over 55 yrs old is going to have patina.

The magazine serial number, I'd like to see it where I could blow it up and look at it?
Further, a picture or two from the sides, it is either photo trickery, or its been ground and restamped.

We actually prefer pictures to be hosted here on the forum, as photobucket pictures usually disappear after a while...

Welcome to the forum,

Ed

Hi Rand, Welcome to the forum. Posted guns are subject to consensus review on this forum. My one vote says your Luger is in superb, original condition. Regards, Norm

My vote sides with Norm.

Well, I was just wondering guys! ;)

I noticed the clean lines, and all, although were mausers this smooth on the rear area originally? No swirl marks?

And I'd like to see the mag still, but overall, I think I'd like to look at it in real life, but she is nice!


ed

Silly newbie question. Should it have P 08 on the frame?
Thanks for your patience.

No P08 on the side for another year. Are the grips numbered/marked?
Very nice.
dju

I vote with Norme. VERY, VERY nice. Exceptional. I'd like to see it in person too! Right in my gun safe.

1940 42s, estimated 135,700 made from the Z block to the N block. The P.08 on the frame wasn't until 1941, then the four digit date was changed to two digits.

I like it too!

I'm pretty sure FNorm meant 1940, not 1949!! :D
After all, he missed the proper key by one!! :D

Looks like FNorm fixed it -- GREAT!!! :D

No. I vote professional restoration. A nice one. :)

Edit: As Ed mentioned, there are no end mill cutter marks on the frame ears. In fact, that area looks almost blasted...

I think it is a very nice job...Maybe even one of Thor's...

I say original...

I'm not 100% onboard with the mag and barrel numbering, and the checkering on the grips seems a bit course, but I really can't say. Actually several numbers seem less than perfect, but who can say. Also a bit more of a brushed look to the metal prior to bluing, but not over buffed.
Is the mag a wrap-around body or extruded. Seems like we should see the bottom hanging out a bit more on this late of a gun.
Postino, why do you vote no?
I vote "I don't know" and will sit back and see what the experts say.
dju

Condition
 

I had to look at my 1941 byf to see what you experts are referring to. The fine scratched in lines seen here are not on mine. My just has a general sheen under or in the blued areas.

I would be proud to own that one also. Too perfect.

Mine has the tool marks in the ears area.

I traded for mine in 1988 from the guy that traded it from a German officer in Germany in 1945.

He never fired it. I have after cleaning. I like shooting it.

Don't understand the percent of finish judgements? Mine has very light wear on the rear and side of the barrel and the side plate and a few pits on the bottom of the barrel under the sight area.

Beauty marks to me.

Matching but mag. Nice grips.

Just feels good in your hand.

Really informative stuff here. How do I post pictures?

Mauser was in obendorf? Same as h&k? Like my 911?

Newby bob

I say extremely nice restoration. No visible wear on trigger plate or side rails for a 69 year old gun, not too likely.

Excellent piece though.

I think this one would have to be fondled a bit before I gave an opinion. It looks good ,but the pictures are really not good enough to be certain. IMO the mag looks OK, but the ears look like they have some grind marks on them .....could be a red flag.

Shouldn't this one have the extruded mag. body and the pinned bottom?
dju

dju, this magazine is correct for an early 1940. The E/655 magazines were used along with 122 magazines from the no suffix block through the D-Block. They were pretty much phased out by the F-Block.

I keep looking at the " one" on the frame SN and it just worries me along with the perfect finish.

I actually see a messed with "3" , there should be no doubt on a perfect gun.

Pretty gun though, just needs to be looked at very carefully buy any buyer ( always good advice)

Vern

dju, this magazine is correct for an early 1940. The E/655 magazines were used along with 122 magazines from the no suffix block through the D-Block. They were pretty much phased out by the F-Block.

Frank:
Are you saying that the bottom is correct (unpinned) or that the wrap-around body is correct? I'm no magazine guy so I'm trying to learn here. Seems to me that this one should have the extruded mag. body that hangs down a bit in front.
Thanks;
dju

Hi David, The crimped, blued steel mag (Type II Army) was phased out between the n.s. and d blocks, and replaced by the extruded steel mag with the squared off bottom (Type III Army). Here are photos of a y suffix 1939 42 with Type II mags and an h suffix 1940 42 with a Type III. Regards, Norm