1938 Navy Holster

Pete Ebbink · 06-13-2005, 07:14 PM

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...539385875&rd=1

Tomathvl · 06-13-2005, 07:49 PM

Pete,
The stitching on the back looks goofy. Need Jerry Burney to pass judgement on this one.
Tom

lugerholsterrepair · 06-13-2005, 10:57 PM

Everything looks legit to me on this holster...except the Navy proof. If any of you have original holsters look on the back. Right where this nice crisp Navy proof, is the holster sustains a tremendous amount of wear from the belt. On many if not most holsters you can see a fair amount of rubbing right in this spot. Often it rubs away the proofs completely. Or at least flattens them untill you have to look in oblique light to see what they are.
This holster has been wet, it's shrunk up and deformed in places. This crisp new Navy proof is suspect to me. I would want to see it in person to really have a 100% negative opinion but from what I see, I don't like it. Any other opinions? Jerry Burney

Tomathvl · 06-14-2005, 11:18 AM

Jerry,
The thing that I thought strange is the bottom row of stitching appears to not go all the way across through the magazine area. I thought that I had read on a previous post you made describing how to identify a phoney was one of the features was the bottom row stitching on phoneys didn't go all the way across due to the methods utilized now verses on the originals. What am I not remembering correctly?
Tom

lugerholsterrepair · 06-14-2005, 11:56 AM

Tom, This is not a hard and fast rule...There were so many manufacturers of holsters in Germany it is not at all surprising they would do things a little differently. Generally speaking these should be stitched over into the edge. The WW1 holster was made that way. Stitched clear over into the magazine top edge.
It is important to look at the overall piece and not focus on a small specific area too much since there is some variation on many holsters.
Look for linen stitching. Looks like hemp rope twisted. Worn wrinlkey leather, rubbed dye and a general overall look of age and authenticity. Like any other antiquity, age is difficult to fake well or easily.
The photo's provided of this holster are poor at best. It may be that the stitching you are questioning has been rubbed away. I cannot see it well enough to make a determination.

Taking a second look at this mark, it actually looks pretty good and if it were almost any other place on the holster I would say it was fine. Right where it's at, it has me bothered.

Jerry Burney

Pete Ebbink · 06-14-2005, 09:14 PM

Hi Jerry,

Normally...I would agree...but it does not seem that the backside of this holster has any belt wear...so it is poissble the C/M stamping is crisp because the entire back panel saw little abrasion...???

Regards,

Pete...

Remember when a LF member from NZ was selling this Navy holster...I think it sold for $ 625 ot $ 650...this one did not have much back-side wear, either :

lugerholsterrepair · 06-14-2005, 09:43 PM

Pete, Good point and I agree, it does not seem to have any belt wear. The mark actually looks legit compared to some I have seen that were stamped yesterday. Could very well be an authentic holster. I have to admit to being wrong from time to time...Jerry Burney

Navy · 06-15-2005, 07:04 AM

It looks right as rain to me.

Tom A.

Frank H · 06-19-2005, 09:52 PM

Someone liked it enough-----SOLD---$685.00! WOW

lew1 · 06-19-2005, 11:07 PM

Now I will have to upgrade the values on mu insurance policy for those I have.

06-13-2005, 07:14 PM	#1
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	1938 Navy Holster http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...539385875&rd=1

06-13-2005, 10:57 PM	#3
lugerholsterrepair Moderator Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Arizona/Colorado Posts: 7,775 Thanks: 4,995 Thanked 3,132 Times in 1,439 Posts	Everything looks legit to me on this holster...except the Navy proof. If any of you have original holsters look on the back. Right where this nice crisp Navy proof, is the holster sustains a tremendous amount of wear from the belt. On many if not most holsters you can see a fair amount of rubbing right in this spot. Often it rubs away the proofs completely. Or at least flattens them untill you have to look in oblique light to see what they are. This holster has been wet, it's shrunk up and deformed in places. This crisp new Navy proof is suspect to me. I would want to see it in person to really have a 100% negative opinion but from what I see, I don't like it. Any other opinions? 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."

06-14-2005, 11:56 AM	#5
lugerholsterrepair Moderator Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Arizona/Colorado Posts: 7,775 Thanks: 4,995 Thanked 3,132 Times in 1,439 Posts	Tom, This is not a hard and fast rule...There were so many manufacturers of holsters in Germany it is not at all surprising they would do things a little differently. Generally speaking these should be stitched over into the edge. The WW1 holster was made that way. Stitched clear over into the magazine top edge. It is important to look at the overall piece and not focus on a small specific area too much since there is some variation on many holsters. Look for linen stitching. Looks like hemp rope twisted. Worn wrinlkey leather, rubbed dye and a general overall look of age and authenticity. Like any other antiquity, age is difficult to fake well or easily. The photo's provided of this holster are poor at best. It may be that the stitching you are questioning has been rubbed away. I cannot see it well enough to make a determination. Taking a second look at this mark, it actually looks pretty good and if it were almost any other place on the holster I would say it was fine. Right where it's at, it has me bothered. 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."

06-14-2005, 09:43 PM	#7
lugerholsterrepair Moderator Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Arizona/Colorado Posts: 7,775 Thanks: 4,995 Thanked 3,132 Times in 1,439 Posts	Pete, Good point and I agree, it does not seem to have any belt wear. The mark actually looks legit compared to some I have seen that were stamped yesterday. Could very well be an authentic holster. I have to admit to being wrong from time to time...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."

06-13-2005, 07:49 PM	#2
Tomathvl User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Milan, IN Posts: 363 Thanks: 3 Thanked 48 Times in 19 Posts	Pete, The stitching on the back looks goofy. Need Jerry Burney to pass judgement on this one. Tom

06-14-2005, 11:18 AM	#4
Tomathvl User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Milan, IN Posts: 363 Thanks: 3 Thanked 48 Times in 19 Posts	Jerry, The thing that I thought strange is the bottom row of stitching appears to not go all the way across through the magazine area. I thought that I had read on a previous post you made describing how to identify a phoney was one of the features was the bottom row stitching on phoneys didn't go all the way across due to the methods utilized now verses on the originals. What am I not remembering correctly? Tom

06-14-2005, 09:14 PM	#6
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hi Jerry, Normally...I would agree...but it does not seem that the backside of this holster has any belt wear...so it is poissble the C/M stamping is crisp because the entire back panel saw little abrasion...??? Regards, Pete... Remember when a LF member from NZ was selling this Navy holster...I think it sold for $ 625 ot $ 650...this one did not have much back-side wear, either :

06-15-2005, 07:04 AM	#8
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	It looks right as rain to me. Tom A.

06-19-2005, 09:52 PM	#9
Frank H User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: N. FL Posts: 90 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Someone liked it enough-----SOLD---$685.00! WOW

06-19-2005, 11:07 PM	#10
lew1 Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Kentucky Posts: 1,108 Thanks: 82 Thanked 204 Times in 112 Posts	Now I will have to upgrade the values on mu insurance policy for those I have.