Quote:
As a relatively newcomer to lugers, when I heard this from two different folks (who seemed to be advanced collectors...), I certainly was not brave enough to say they were wrong. <hr></blockquote>
>
posted 12-01-2002 14:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Let me state this up front : My intent here is not to stir up the controversy surrounding the .45 luger carbine and its debatable authenticity.
However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period.
[/QUOTE]
Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's...
Where in my statement did I say that any one was wrong?----No where,
My statement was simply to the effect that the lack of ability in this case was not a source of evidence to prove that the weapon in question could not have been machined at that time.
That not only was the ability present at that time it was also easily demonstrated many years later on the same vintage machinery, and was, and still is, easily demonstrated by the state of the art as practiced by other artisans of the period working in parallel fields.
No accusations made and no accusations intended to any party concerned, I was merely makeing a statement of the facts as I know them to be, Let the chips fall where they may.
ViggoG