View Single Post
Unread 12-08-2005, 11:38 PM   #4
Pete Ebbink
User
 
Pete Ebbink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The USA
Posts: 5,919
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts
Default

This is the Randall Gibson "testimonial" write-up that accompanied the auction ad for this # 13069...

It indicated that Gibson authenticated this luger as a 1945 in 1995 even though he has # 13069 listed in his HK book back in 1980 as a 1944 dated HK...

What the hay...???

Text From Auction Ad :

"There is a large file of correspondence regarding this pistol, all of which concludes that of the handful of specimens known only five or six have a chance of being real. This was included in that tiny group. It is dated ""1945"" over the chamber and has the typical ""HK/ANCHOR/KRIEGHOFF/SUHL"" marking on the toggle link. All of the proof marks, ""eagle/2"", of various sizes are associated with Krieghoff. The magazine is an ""FXO"". A two page letter from Krieghoff Luger expert and author Randall Gibson, dated June 28, 1995, is included and the consignor reads as follows: Dear Mr. D'Agostino: I have examined the captioned Luger pistol and compared it with the 1945 date which is in my collection: SN 13158. I also did this previously in August, 1990, when Norman Smith acquired it from Ralph Shattuck. In March, 1990, I compared SN 13069 with SN 13090 in Shattuck's collection. I have also examined individually SN 13080 and SN 13122. SN's 13109, 13155 and 13156 exist in known collections but I have not examined them. I can find no fault with 13069. It conforms in every respect to the 1944 weapons production (1945 dates and a couple of 1944 dates in the 13,000 range). You seem concerned over the barrel in SN 13069 being of a different color. This is due in part to the barrels receiving finer polishing than the receivers. This is true of SN 13158, and for that matter all 1940 and later dated examples to which I have compared SN 13069. This is logical as the barrel lends itself to being polished in a lathe while the receiver cannot be finished in this manner. The barrel on SN 13069 has a faint reddish cast to it which does not bother me at all. I have observed this on other Krieghoff Lugers. The extractor in SN 13158 is decidedly red. There is a strong possibility that the barrels were blued after polishing and had a red tint to them due to too much heat in the blueing salts or an improper mixture of the salts themselves. When the barrel was fitted to the receiver the whole unit was blued, thereby re-blueing the barrel causing it to have a darker hue than the receiver. I do not know exactly the chemical/heat/process reaction, but the phenomenon has been observed on other Krieghoff Lugers. With regard to the absence of the ""thumbprint"" on the rear of the frame, the answer is simple. I have not observed a 1945 date with a thumbprint. With best regards, Randall Gibson. "
Pete Ebbink is offline   Reply With Quote