View Single Post
Unread 11-14-2015, 09:16 AM   #15
Norme
Always A
Lifetime Forum
Patron
 
Norme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,417
Thanks: 226
Thanked 2,607 Times in 933 Posts
Default

Hi Dwight, I have no opinion one way or the other about the subject pistol, but I would like to correct one point. There is a legitimate 1921 property mark, it is very rare, and in my opinion was likely applied in error by an armorer shortly after Jan 1st 1921. The example shown below is on a P08 Navy (4" barrel), one of a rare 150 gun contract made in 1913/14. There is no reason to believe that the 1921 was applied by some booster as it certainly does not add to the gun's value.
Best regards, Norm
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC_8719.jpg (77.2 KB, 277 views)
File Type: jpg DSC_8709.jpg (89.4 KB, 295 views)
File Type: jpg DSC_8571.jpg (100.7 KB, 317 views)
File Type: jpg DSC_8684.jpg (72.6 KB, 303 views)
Norme is offline   Reply With Quote
The following 2 members says Thank You to Norme for your post: