Your thoughts...

[Norme]

Hi Tim, Navy Luger #329 is previously unrecorded. I caution you not to deduce too much from "witness marks". They are not a witness to anything. On Imperial Navy Lugers they were marks that were applied separately to the receiver and barrel, and were used as an aid to accurate alignment.
Regards, Norm

[Cleveland4V]

Originally Posted by Norme

Hi Tim, Navy Luger #329 is previously unrecorded. I caution you not to deduce too much from "witness marks". They are not a witness to anything. On Imperial Navy Lugers they were marks that were applied separately to the receiver and barrel, and were used as an aid to accurate alignment.Regards, Norm

It was a mark apllied (by factory workers) after the barrel was fitted and used to realign the barrel and receiver after finish machine work was done.
With that in mind, I'm thinking that's as far as this peice went in the assembly line (no s/n or proof) and was thrown in the parts bin for later use.

Question; I'm curious, why did you state this was not a Navy barrel? If my previous statement is correct. Why would a factory worker mate a Navy receiver to a non-Navy barrel?

I don't mean any disrespect and I know I could never prove this gun was a factory put together, but I'm here to reseach the possibility.