Quote:
Originally Posted by spangy
Thats exactly right Jerry ... It has never seen a lick of solder in its life.
So why the brass plate ??? Was it to deceive and get extra money in a hard sell ??? Were these some of the things running through Gudabeg's mind the second the plate fell off ?? He had already read that they should have been brazed on in Phoenix so why wasn't his ??.
My mentioning that IMO it was an original Dutch pistol was said to alleviate my fellow member Gudabeg's mind in case he was thinking that he had been taken by a complete 'fake' ... something that seems to happen a lot more recently. 
I felt his pain and tried to ease it if I could Ed ... I would do the same for any member here.
As for soldering here are the temperatures were talking about :
I would go the Pliobond 20 route as the only one who will know is you AND there is no heat involved with all the additional problems that that can cause. By the way no one solders an expensive firearm for free and indeed in Canada the jeweler/plumber would require a firearms license.
Re-glue it and be done with it knowing that YOU fixed it.
Good luck Gudabeg |
That sounds like a good idea! I think cement will be better than brazing simply due to the lower risk of harming the bluing or other parts of the gun. It would be nice to have it on the "right" way, but when 2 methods work equally well, one of them could damage the gun, that same one costs more, and no one can tell the difference without taking the part off ... better to use the safe option (of course I'll record it was done so future people know). No reason to risk harm for perfection when good will do just as well.
Looking at both parts, the finish on the gun appears to be less worn where the plate was, and there is some finish removed in that area. It doesn't have the large silver surface from having the unit plate removed (like the first link), but its finish isn't as uniform as the 2nd link (and looks more like it was peeled off or rubbed off, and there are darker patches on the brass plate and finish, but that could be grime).
The brass plate also lacks the silver, and looks like it was just epoxied. It might be fake, but someone else who had a Luger with a unit plate from the same unit saw my original post and didn't remark on that in his comment. (He said the odd marking indicated the unit, and I'd imagine if it was a fake he'd have mentioned it looked different from his unit plate). I'll send him a message and ask.
The wear pattern on the pistol also seems to sort of match where the plate was (at least on first glance). There is wear under where the unit plate would have been, but the lack of finish doesn't seem to correspond to a one handed grip. Maybe it was roughed up to make the epoxy easier to apply? But it is in a strange pattern if that was what was done, because if I were to do (and didn't care about marring the finish) then I'd make a much larger pad for the epoxy. If I did care about the finish I likely wouldn't have added the unit plate without at least noting the fact for others.
It also seems strange for it to collect enough wear in a collection to have a pattern that shows the unit plate did protect it a bit, but then have the unit plate come off after a few rounds (under 10 rounds of Norinco 9mm that was saved from the 90's, as a side note the Luger seemed to like it besides for 2 times it didn't feed the initial round quite right).
Is it possible the solder was re-flowed and removed? Or would the original solder have formed an alloy that can't be easily removed without leaving obvious damage on the gun?
https://simpsonltd.com/dwm-1906-dutch-d32026/
https://simpsonltd.com/dwm-luger-dutch-navy-rig-d32042/
Are there any known guns where the unit plate was epoxied? Or are all known examples soldered so it's likely the unit plate was "added on" by someone later down the line?
Is it true many guns didn't receive plates? Was that due to shortages, or did only officers get them, or some other reason? If that is the case, would it be a good idea to give the plate a "new life" (because I doubt it's original host exists, and if it did I'm unaware of any way to find its serial number) on this Luger and simply note that I did so and use a reversible method? (e.g. epoxy and then leave a note under the grip panels or in the case for the gun).
For my purpose (collecting a Dutch firearm for connection to family heritage, and to compliment my KNIL Carbine) the Luger itself is the important part. In a perfect world it would be great for that plate be original to the gun, but if it's not authentic to this particular Luger, it's also cool to have 2 pieces of history (have one gun and a plate from another).
It's also interesting to try to piece together the history of how the gun came to be in it's present state (whether through repair or other motivations). I think that's part of the adventure of collecting history, as well as being able to have that history in your hands rather than be a picture in a book.
Thanks for all the help and advice, it's really nice to have this sort of community to go to.