LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post

Jan C Still · 01-19-2005, 08:19 PM

Bill, Frank, Heinz, and John

Excellent, sharp eyed analysis of the questionable (fake) Mauser-KM-K date. It would be hard to get such a fake past you guys. As you folks have covered quite a bit. I will confine my remarks to the right receiver. (Note: it is serious business when helping a fellow member of this Forum evaluate a minty-rare Luger for sale at a price of $12,000.)

I have attached a photo of the right receiver of a proper First Variation K Date, serial number 1056 ( see page 17, Third Reich Lugers, also see page 21 and 25). Note the position and shape of the scriptic Ã¢??SÃ¢?Â, the details of the test proof (eagle) and the details of the two acceptance stamps (B90 S91). Compare these to the right receiver of the Luger in question, serial number 2021, KM 0.1750. The acceptance stamps on serial number 2021, are incorrect for the serial number. They should be Ã?? 37, Ã?? 37. Notice how well defined the acceptance stamps on sn 1056 are compared to those on 2021. The feathers on the test eagle proof (eagle) on sn 2021 are stubbier and thicker than those on sn 1056. Also, the scriptic S on serial number 2021 is scrunched and smaller than serial number 1056. Not only are the right receiver stamps on sn 2021 unlike luger sn 1056 but they are unlike the many K date lugers that I have examined over the years.(also, as previously pointed out Navy property number 0.1750 is listed as having serial number 2113 on page 162 of Axis Pistols)

In summary(on the right receiver of sn 2021), the shape and size of the S stamp, the type and definition of the acceptance stamps (B90 S91 verses Ã?? 37 Ã?? 37) and the feathers of the test proof are unlike serial number 1056 and also unlike any other K date that I have examined. This together with the observations of Bill, Frank, Heinz, and John and a few other anomalies yet to be mentioned suggests that this Luger is not a correct/proper K date much less a Navy K date. Jan

Click on the following links to see detailed information on K date Lugers.* Franks K Date pictures, S/N 3648. Weimar_Police
------------------------- http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=335
* S/42 CODE-K DATE, sn1056 Jan C Still
------------------------- http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=283

01-19-2005, 08:19 PM	#50
Jan C Still User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Box 240188, Douglas, Alaska, 99824 Posts: 463 Thanks: 0 Thanked 52 Times in 32 Posts	Bill, Frank, Heinz, and John Excellent, sharp eyed analysis of the questionable (fake) Mauser-KM-K date. It would be hard to get such a fake past you guys. As you folks have covered quite a bit. I will confine my remarks to the right receiver. (Note: it is serious business when helping a fellow member of this Forum evaluate a minty-rare Luger for sale at a price of $12,000.) I have attached a photo of the right receiver of a proper First Variation K Date, serial number 1056 ( see page 17, Third Reich Lugers, also see page 21 and 25). Note the position and shape of the scriptic Ã¢??SÃ¢?Â, the details of the test proof (eagle) and the details of the two acceptance stamps (B90 S91). Compare these to the right receiver of the Luger in question, serial number 2021, KM 0.1750. The acceptance stamps on serial number 2021, are incorrect for the serial number. They should be Ã?? 37, Ã?? 37. Notice how well defined the acceptance stamps on sn 1056 are compared to those on 2021. The feathers on the test eagle proof (eagle) on sn 2021 are stubbier and thicker than those on sn 1056. Also, the scriptic S on serial number 2021 is scrunched and smaller than serial number 1056. Not only are the right receiver stamps on sn 2021 unlike luger sn 1056 but they are unlike the many K date lugers that I have examined over the years.(also, as previously pointed out Navy property number 0.1750 is listed as having serial number 2113 on page 162 of Axis Pistols) In summary(on the right receiver of sn 2021), the shape and size of the S stamp, the type and definition of the acceptance stamps (B90 S91 verses Ã?? 37 Ã?? 37) and the feathers of the test proof are unlike serial number 1056 and also unlike any other K date that I have examined. This together with the observations of Bill, Frank, Heinz, and John and a few other anomalies yet to be mentioned suggests that this Luger is not a correct/proper K date much less a Navy K date. Jan Click on the following links to see detailed information on K date Lugers.* Franks K Date pictures, S/N 3648. Weimar_Police ------------------------- http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=335 * S/42 CODE-K DATE, sn1056 Jan C Still ------------------------- http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=283 Attached Thumbnails