New Member with New Luger & Questions

rjk-bw42 · 02-06-2011, 01:37 AM

Well, after a life-long desire to add a Luger to my collection, I finally got one. I've been longing for a Black Widow (I know that hits a nerve with some members) and purchased one last week. It is a 1942 Mauser complete with holster, two black bottom fxo magazines and a tool. The holster is marked "eof" over 1941 with a WaA 195 inspection stamp. The Luger is serial number 1744d with a bore gauge stamp of 8.81. All parts are correctly numbered. Here are a couple photos with a couple of questions. The grips look like the original bakelite to me, can someone confirm? The waffenamts seems to be lightly stamped. Is that unusual?

rjk-bw42 · 02-06-2011, 01:43 AM

Jason L · 02-06-2011, 09:24 AM

Hi Randy,
Nice looking rig! I see no issues from the pictures. The grips look good. Here is a link to gunboards where we had an interesting conversation about black grips, and I got some good tips on how to test for originals.
http://luger.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=19714
Regards,
Jason

wdavid431 · 02-06-2011, 09:55 AM

Very nice Luger. Looks very good to me. Congrats.

mrerick · 02-06-2011, 09:59 AM

Hi Randy,

Welcome to the forum, and congratulations on your rig.

The depth of stamp strikes does vary from Luger to Luger and probably relates to the steel hardness as well as the worker's strength at that moment.

The edges of the WaAmt stamps should be crisp - basically as sharp as the dies that struck them. This was 1942, and after heavy use dies do wear, but your picture does show both the initial E/135 strikes and the final acceptance stamp in similar soft edge state.

I've attached a picture of a 42 date Luger that I know was refinished and buffed. You can see in my picture where they got carried away toward the front, abrading off the Late Test Eagle.

I can't tell if there is a focus problem or something with the lighting, but is there a color difference on that area of the receiver (it looks darker at the bottom, below the proof marks).

The combination of soft edges on the stampings and the color difference could indicate that the Luger was refinished in this area.

Marc

Lugerdoc · 02-07-2011, 10:28 AM

Marc, I agree that there's been some refinishing. TH

rjk-bw42 · 02-07-2011, 11:00 AM

Marc, Thomas,

I'll try to get a better picture of that area and resend. That darker streak at the bottom of the photo may be some oil that I left near the rail or could indicate something was "done" in the past. Since I still have this in an inspection period, I'd really like to know. Thanks for your help.

rjk-bw42 · 02-07-2011, 07:10 PM

Another shot with a bit more detail and better lighting

sheepherder · 02-07-2011, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjk-bw42

Another shot with a bit more detail and better lighting

The proofs look buffed...but the chamber edges are nice & sharp, and the lengthwise striations look original...Tough call...

How do the other proofs/numerals look???

Good looking Luger, though...despite there being no such thing as a "Black Widow"...

rjk-bw42 · 02-07-2011, 07:56 PM

Everything else looks just fine. The serial number stamps are all crisp and the pistol has uniform color and wear except for that one location.

lugerholsterrepair · 02-07-2011, 08:25 PM

Randy..Got to agree with Lugerdoc here. These have been worked over by someone sometime. These stamps are put on in 3 different testing procedures and inspections. No way these all look the same. One might be light but the others? All of them..NOT.
These are altered from original.

Jerry Burney

rjk-bw42 · 02-09-2011, 09:10 PM

I want to thank all of you with a keen eye. The area in question was definitely buffed to remove the inspection stamps. This is confirmed when viewing the receiver edges from the muzzle toward the breech of the barrel. Why is my current question. Could someone have been offended by the eagle / swastika stamps and elected to have them removed? It's the only thing I can think of.

mrerick · 02-09-2011, 09:43 PM

Randy, It's possible, but unlikely.

The work actually didn't remove the final acceptance stamp (which has the Nazi symbol under the eagle) and they didn't appear to have touched the barrel stamp (clearly visible in your picture).

My best guess is that there were some finish issues on just the area on the right of the receiver, and the owner wanted it to look good.

One possibility is that the area had blood splatter which removes the bluing. That could have bothered the owner.

Marc

JTD · 02-11-2011, 12:04 PM

Randy, looking at the pics, I am not so sure about touch up in this area. I agree the proofing is a bit washed out, but may well be worn dies. Look at the whole gun overall, and look for minute variations in finish in this area. High res pics in daylite may show up beter. It would be nice to find one really close to this ser# to compare the stamps. It seems to me that alot of the later salt blue guns had weak proofing.

Norme · 02-11-2011, 12:58 PM

I have to agree with John (JTD) and believe this gun's finish to be original. I too, have seen several salt blue Mausers with weak marks, like the enclosed 1940 42. Regards, Norm.

Neil Young · 02-11-2011, 02:01 PM

Here's a byf 42 with fairly light marks too.

Neil

Nomadr · 02-11-2011, 08:20 PM

IMHO that area has been refinished. They are far weaker then the stamps in Norme's and Neil's photos! They look to rounded over to me!

Maybe one or two proofs being weak...but all three???

Still a nice rig!

Bob

barr44 · 02-12-2011, 12:06 PM

This is an interesting discussion. I have a '42 byf in the 'k' series that also has a weak stamping in this area. I don't believe that my gun has had any refinish on it at all(but I could be wrong). Overall mine seems to be about 95% original and came with a holster and two fxo mags and the proper tool. It has some holster wear but all of the other marks are crisp and clear.
Please feel free to offer opinions.
barr

barr44 · 02-12-2011, 12:26 PM

Sorry, having a little problem posting the photo. Hope this works.
This image should go with my previous post.
barr

rjk-bw42 · 02-12-2011, 01:01 PM

Barry, one big difference is that you have two stamps that are sharp and clear and I have zero. I definitely can tell mine's been messed with, unfortunately. Thanks.

02-06-2011, 01:37 AM	#1
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	New Member with New Luger & Questions Well, after a life-long desire to add a Luger to my collection, I finally got one. I've been longing for a Black Widow (I know that hits a nerve with some members) and purchased one last week. It is a 1942 Mauser complete with holster, two black bottom fxo magazines and a tool. The holster is marked "eof" over 1941 with a WaA 195 inspection stamp. The Luger is serial number 1744d with a bore gauge stamp of 8.81. All parts are correctly numbered. Here are a couple photos with a couple of questions. The grips look like the original bakelite to me, can someone confirm? The waffenamts seems to be lightly stamped. Is that unusual?

02-06-2011, 01:43 AM	#2
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Added grip photos

02-06-2011, 09:55 AM	#4
wdavid431 User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Arkansas Posts: 135 Thanks: 0 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	Very nice Luger. Looks very good to me. Congrats. __________________ W David

02-06-2011, 09:59 AM	#5
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,919 Thanks: 1,377 Thanked 3,135 Times in 1,518 Posts	WaAmt Stampings Hi Randy, Welcome to the forum, and congratulations on your rig. The depth of stamp strikes does vary from Luger to Luger and probably relates to the steel hardness as well as the worker's strength at that moment. The edges of the WaAmt stamps should be crisp - basically as sharp as the dies that struck them. This was 1942, and after heavy use dies do wear, but your picture does show both the initial E/135 strikes and the final acceptance stamp in similar soft edge state. I've attached a picture of a 42 date Luger that I know was refinished and buffed. You can see in my picture where they got carried away toward the front, abrading off the Late Test Eagle. I can't tell if there is a focus problem or something with the lighting, but is there a color difference on that area of the receiver (it looks darker at the bottom, below the proof marks). The combination of soft edges on the stampings and the color difference could indicate that the Luger was refinished in this area. Marc Attached Thumbnails __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

02-07-2011, 10:28 AM	#6
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 737 Times in 484 Posts	Marc, I agree that there's been some refinishing. TH __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 lugerdoc@charter.net

02-06-2011, 09:24 AM	#3
Jason L User Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: CT. USA Posts: 66 Thanks: 2 Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts	Hi Randy, Nice looking rig! I see no issues from the pictures. The grips look good. Here is a link to gunboards where we had an interesting conversation about black grips, and I got some good tips on how to test for originals. http://luger.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=19714 Regards, Jason

02-07-2011, 11:00 AM	#7
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Refinish possibility Marc, Thomas, I'll try to get a better picture of that area and resend. That darker streak at the bottom of the photo may be some oil that I left near the rail or could indicate something was "done" in the past. Since I still have this in an inspection period, I'd really like to know. Thanks for your help.

02-07-2011, 07:10 PM	#8
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Another shot with a bit more detail and better lighting Attached Thumbnails

02-07-2011, 07:56 PM	#10
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Everything else looks just fine. The serial number stamps are all crisp and the pistol has uniform color and wear except for that one location.

02-07-2011, 08:25 PM	#11
lugerholsterrepair Moderator Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Arizona/Colorado Posts: 7,775 Thanks: 4,995 Thanked 3,133 Times in 1,439 Posts	Randy..Got to agree with Lugerdoc here. These have been worked over by someone sometime. These stamps are put on in 3 different testing procedures and inspections. No way these all look the same. One might be light but the others? All of them..NOT. These are altered from original. Jerry Burney __________________ Jerry Burney 11491 S. Guadalupe Drive Yuma AZ 85367-6182 lugerholsterrepair@earthlink.net 928 342-7583 (CO & AZ) Year Round 719 207-3331 (cell) "For those who Fight For It, Life has a flavor the protected will never know."

02-09-2011, 09:10 PM	#12
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks for the assist I want to thank all of you with a keen eye. The area in question was definitely buffed to remove the inspection stamps. This is confirmed when viewing the receiver edges from the muzzle toward the breech of the barrel. Why is my current question. Could someone have been offended by the eagle / swastika stamps and elected to have them removed? It's the only thing I can think of. Attached Thumbnails

02-09-2011, 09:43 PM	#13
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,919 Thanks: 1,377 Thanked 3,135 Times in 1,518 Posts	Randy, It's possible, but unlikely. The work actually didn't remove the final acceptance stamp (which has the Nazi symbol under the eagle) and they didn't appear to have touched the barrel stamp (clearly visible in your picture). My best guess is that there were some finish issues on just the area on the right of the receiver, and the owner wanted it to look good. One possibility is that the area had blood splatter which removes the bluing. That could have bothered the owner. Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

02-11-2011, 12:04 PM	#14
JTD User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: PA Posts: 428 Thanks: 218 Thanked 410 Times in 151 Posts	Randy, looking at the pics, I am not so sure about touch up in this area. I agree the proofing is a bit washed out, but may well be worn dies. Look at the whole gun overall, and look for minute variations in finish in this area. High res pics in daylite may show up beter. It would be nice to find one really close to this ser# to compare the stamps. It seems to me that alot of the later salt blue guns had weak proofing.

02-11-2011, 12:58 PM	#15
Norme Always A Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 2,417 Thanks: 226 Thanked 2,607 Times in 933 Posts	I have to agree with John (JTD) and believe this gun's finish to be original. I too, have seen several salt blue Mausers with weak marks, like the enclosed 1940 42. Regards, Norm. Attached Thumbnails

02-11-2011, 02:01 PM	#16
Neil Young Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Scottsboro, Alabama Posts: 546 Thanks: 565 Thanked 443 Times in 168 Posts	Here's a byf 42 with fairly light marks too. Neil Attached Images __________________ Neil The hurrier I go the behinder I get. Sometimes it takes me all day to get nothing done.

02-11-2011, 08:20 PM	#17
Nomadr Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 276 Thanks: 16 Thanked 28 Times in 22 Posts	IMHO that area has been refinished. They are far weaker then the stamps in Norme's and Neil's photos! They look to rounded over to me! Maybe one or two proofs being weak...but all three??? Still a nice rig! Bob

02-12-2011, 12:06 PM	#18
barr44 User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: york co., va Posts: 153 Thanks: 27 Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts	Questionable marks? This is an interesting discussion. I have a '42 byf in the 'k' series that also has a weak stamping in this area. I don't believe that my gun has had any refinish on it at all(but I could be wrong). Overall mine seems to be about 95% original and came with a holster and two fxo mags and the proper tool. It has some holster wear but all of the other marks are crisp and clear. Please feel free to offer opinions. barr

02-12-2011, 12:26 PM	#19
barr44 User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: york co., va Posts: 153 Thanks: 27 Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts	Photo to go with previous post. Sorry, having a little problem posting the photo. Hope this works. This image should go with my previous post. barr Attached Thumbnails

02-12-2011, 01:01 PM	#20
rjk-bw42 User Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9 Thanks: 10 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Barry, one big difference is that you have two stamps that are sharp and clear and I have zero. I definitely can tell mine's been messed with, unfortunately. Thanks.