Navy Luger?

[Parabellus]

This DWM 4inch Navy Luger, double-date 1917/1920 with Navy (Crown M) proofs is on GA.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976738104.htm

What makes it a 'Navy' Luger? Is it the unit marking? I don't see that it has Navy-style rear sight. I want eventually to get an authentic Navy P04 so I need an education (so what else is new?) I like those with six or seven-inch barrels anyway.

Russell

[Pete Ebbink]

Russell,

I will let our Navy guys help you out...I do think this is a Weimar-era rework of a previous M1914 Navy.

The G-A seller is actually a nice gun dealer named Bob Adams out of NM. He has a solid, good reputation amongst folks.

Here is a link to his web site and you will see the same 4" Navy rework offered there as well.

http://www.adamsguns.com/0p.htm

[John Sabato]

Russell,

An authentic Navy P04? You must have deep pockets... The last authentic P04 that I am aware of sold for $30K+

There aren't too many of them... most of them went down in the WW1 submarines.

[Parabellus]

Friends,

This is why I need an education.
Obviously I have my nomenclature all messed up.
What are the Navy Lugers typically going for a paltry $4K?

Russell

[Ron Smith]

Russell,

The "Cheap" Navy Lugers are the 1914 ( year of design ) variation dated 1916 and 1917. The 4'" that Bob is selling is a Weimar rework. Mandated to have the barrel shortened or replaced with 4" barrel post WWI. Most had the barrel replaced with a standard barrel and rear toggle.

Ron

[policeluger]

But I am still with Para, how can we still call this a navy? there is very little "navy" about it any more...this thread shows we must educate ourselves before buying.

[Navy]

Guys,

The piece started as a Navy; with better pix, I could perhaps shed more light on it...but it has been rebarreded,,,So how can we still call it a navy? Very simply because the property mark on the front strap indicates service in the Weimar Navy. It was very likely used by the Kreigsmarine, but there are no obvious indications.

Two tours in German naval service should constitute a sufficient pedigree to warrant calling the piece a navy, despite the Versailles-era mods.

Tom A

[Parabellus]

Fare enough Folks,

I too concur than Naval service should be the final arbiter of what is 'Navy'. That must weigh in favor of the weapon's collectable value. I'm learning.

That said, I see that Simpson's has had seven Navy Lugers displayed for some weeks. All appear to have Navy sights and 6-inch barrels, be 9mm DWM production between 1906 and 1917, and are offered in the price-range between just under $3K to well over #6K. Ignoring my use of the word â??authenticâ??, are these P04 Lugers?
Depending on the answer, I am between one and ten years from ever affording one.

But I do see how this all works. I have been a compulsive collector all my life. It drives my wife up the wall. Hughâ??s tagline really hits home, â??There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness".â??

Thank you all for furthering my obsession--uuuuh--education.

Russell

[policeluger]

Very good Tom...thanks

[Ron Wood]

P04 is the German designation for the Navy Luger since it was adapted by the Kriegsmarine in 1904, just like the army Luger is called a P08 since it was brought into service in 1908. Therefore, any Navy Luger is generically a P04, whether it is a Model 1904, 1906, 1908 or 1914. So I guess the generic answer to your question "are these P04 Lugers" is yes.

[Parabellus]

Thanks Ron,

That puts me a lot closer to one year than ten.
I take it this means that mainly the Model 1904s are the ones that now rest in Davy Jones's Locker.

And thank you Pete, John, Ron, Tom, and Howard. You fellows along with Terry, Herb, Don M, Dwight, Ed, Gerben, Big Norm, Jerry, Thomas, Bob, Jack, Rick, and many others who's contributions are giving me a foothold on the landscape of firearms, their function, their history, and the history surrounding them.

Sincerely,

Russell

[Pete Ebbink]

I think the left side of the receiver show some faint Crown/M proofs as well...

[Parabellus]

Fair enough on the reworked Navy.

What about this one supposedly 'original and unaltered'? No Navy sight, no numbers or markings discernable, the barrel appears dark, and the front sight looks to be the wrong shape.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976743639.htm

Thanks again for looking. Iâ??m just trying to learn something.

Russell

[Ron Wood]

Nice shooter. Only about $2800 overpriced (at least). Darned if I can see that "two position rear sight".

[Parabellus]

Thank you Ron,

You all are helping me get better at this.

Russell

[Parabellus]

Now, this one looks like a halfway decent deal. Re-barreled.

http://www.simpsonltd.com/product_in...oducts_id=4449

Still nowhere near buying, Just dreaming.

But would a Navy guy pay $2500 for a shooter and repro rig?

Russell

[Dwight Gruber]

Three Navy magazines, if they are straight goods, would be a significant percentage of this rig's value.

--Dwight

[HerbZ]

A very nice looking rig, but with this degree of restoration, replacement and reproductions; is this rig a pricey shooter, or a true collector's item?

And also for the sake of argument and our education, if the three Navy magazines were subtracted or replaced with reproductions, what would this rig be worth?

[George Anderson]

The magazines do not appear to be original navies so figure them at $50 each. The cleaning rod is worth $130 and the stock holster about $200. As we have seen, the rear sight is worth $300 -$700.

[Dwight Gruber]

George,

I agree that the mags look 'hinky', hence the "if". Your value assessment of them is spot-on, although actually buying a mag like that for that price is going to be a nearly hopeless endeavour. I'll bet Simpson's values them a -lot- more.

--Dwight