E-bay ad stock lug

[jamese]

E-bay ad

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=2184362036

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">This Luger pistol #7528 was a Simson rework; as part of the rebuilding process the German company Simson ground off the stock lug prior to rebluing. Such a procedure was performed on a small number of Luger pistols refurbished and/or rebuilt during the 1930s. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Any truth about Simson removing the stock lug, or
another BS story ?

[John Sabato]

I know of no practical reason why a stock lug would have to be removed... and if it was done during the 1930's when Germany was re-arming itself somewhat secretly... I can't imagine why they would have this done... since it would take the guns out of military specifications...

I hope someone else has some insight on this question. I have queried the seller about a reference for his statement about the Simson modifications to the Luger.

[Navy]

This mod is what Graybeards refer to as a "New York Cut". Seems that during the 1930s-40s, it was commonly believed that the 1934 law making machine guns and sawed off shotguns Title II weapons made pistols which could have a stock affixed likewise controlled.
Soooo, owners frequently and mistakenly ground off stock lugs and welded up stock slots. A real tragedy, but it happened a lot. I have seen many over the years.
Tom A.

[policeluger]

This lug removal is not of original German re-work, As Tom stated it was done here in the U.S. I also remember gun smiths in the 50's grinding off stock lugs, believing otherwise the gun would be illegal. Even today I hear sometimes of someone grinding off a lug and worse throwing away a shoulder lug attachment or the entire shoulder rig. Sadly a 6" naval holster/stock was tossed several years ago here where I live by a widow who didn't want too get in trouble. Seems prior too her husbands passing he told her he was concerned about the gun, and wanted no trouble for her.

[John Sabato]

I thought as much... but if the report had some validity... I was attempting to find some logic in the removal of the stock lug by Simson...

I have not had a reply from the seller. If I do I will post it here.

[John Sabato]

FWIW, here is the reply from the seller... It contains some speculation but no reference...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> There is no published reference that I can site about this statement. The owner of the certificate purchased the luger in question about 20 years ago, owned it for about 1 year and sold it, he was also given this certificate at that time. He examined the Luger carefully at that time and specifically recalls now:

1. That it was a Simson rework, as indicated by the proof marks that were stamped on the Luger (which proof marks he then compared to a compendium of Luger proof marks and found those to be of Simson during the early 30s) 2. He was surprised that the lug for attaching the shoulder stock was ground because he had never seen that process before on a German military Luger. 3. He checked several references (books on Luger pistols) and found that that procedure was followed in some cases.

It was clear that the Luger had been factory reblued after the lug was ground off and that this was not some backyard job done by an American after the war with touchup blue. The lug was clearly professionally ground off and refinished. Incidentally, the holster that came with the German Luger was not a standard military holster but a variation of a German police holster without an extra clip pocket.

Thanks for looking, any further questions please ask,
David

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 8:52 AM
Subject: Question for seller -- Item #2184362036

&gt; Can you please provide a published reference for your statement regarding the Luger pistol about which this document is concerned?
&gt;
&gt; "This Luger pistol #7528 was a Simson rework; as part of the rebuilding process the German company Simson ground off the stock lug prior to rebluing. Such a procedure was performed on a small number of Luger pistols refurbished and/or rebuilt during the 1930s."
&gt;
&gt; Thanks,
&gt;
&gt; John Sabato
&gt; Site Administrator
&gt; Lugerforum.com </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">

[Edward Tinker]

I saw this on e-bay and was interested, except for the price!

A bit high for documentation that is available otherwise, as I have picked up documentation like it and you see it on e-bay for less than $20.00 many times. IF I had that Luger, it would be worth the money, but as a thing to hang on the wall....

I don't think so,

Ed

[policeluger]

I own several Simsons (rework and new manufacture) all police connected. None have the lug removed, nor would I accept one as original with it removed. Yet it would be hard to believe that police used a wood shoulder stock, and I have never heard of one in police work. I do not believe that the lug was an issue with the German rework or new construction pistols. I believe that the lug, with few exceptions, alway was, so "we will still build them that way". In my shop today I can, I won't, but I can, very professionally cut off the lug and rust or hot blue along with strawing, all which I've done for 28+- years....but it would not be original.

[Doubs]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Tom A:
<strong>This mod is what Graybeards refer to as a "New York Cut". Seems that during the 1930s-40s, it was commonly believed that the 1934 law making machine guns and sawed off shotguns Title II weapons made pistols which could have a stock affixed likewise controlled.
Soooo, owners frequently and mistakenly ground off stock lugs and welded up stock slots. A real tragedy, but it happened a lot. I have seen many over the years.
Tom A.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Very true. My father explained to me back in the mid-1950's about the stock lug grinding because of the mistaken belief of people that the lugs were illegal under the 1934 National Firearms Act. As I recall, it was also reported at various times in "The American Rifleman" in response to questions asked by NRA members.

About 1967 I bought a very nice "Alphabet Luger" of the 1920's..... DWM, 7.65mm, 3 7/8" bbl, about 98% finish, excellent bore...... and a lug that had been ground just enough to ruin it. I sold it a few years back and wish now I hadn't. It never failed to function properly as long as the load was stiff enough to work the action and it was exceptionally accurate. I paid $70 for it in a Seattle pawn shop.

[John Sabato]

Doubs... I have never sold a gun that I didn't regret selling... never again!

examples:

- A Remington Model 51 .380 automatic that was so small that it would fit in the back pocket of my jeans and had all rounded edges like a Colt model 1903 only much smaller... boy do I miss that one.

- A .22 caliber High-Standard Model HD-Military with a 6" barrel with two magazines.

- A Colt New Service revolver in .45 Long Colt

- One of the first batch of S&W Stainless Steel Chief's Special sold to my brother as a hideaway gun when he was a police officer... (RECOVERED 20 years later when he left the force and changed careers!)

- Several Colt Gold Cup .45 ACP's and the elusive .38 Special wadcutter...

-One of the first batch S&W Model 19 2.5" round-butt revolvers in .357 caliber... carried it in an upsidedown Safariland rig... gosh that was a sweet shooter and it disappeared under my suit jacket!

- A S&W K-38 with a 6 inch barrel that would cut groups that looked like a ragged hole at 25 yards...

- A Weatherby Mark V in caliber .22-250 that could shoot sub MOA groups... killed a woodchuck with it at 450 yards!

I don't think I can go on... I think I just ruined my afternoon. <img border="0" alt="[crying]" title="" src="graemlins/crying.gif" />

[Frank]

John, I wish I could say the same. I sold a S&W model 29, long barrel and am sooooo pleased to get rid of that piece of crap. It was a mess!! I only hope the gent that bought it was as pleased to have it as I was to get rid of it!!!

[John Sabato]

I Do have one of those Frank, bought it back about 1969 or 70 as I recall... with the 6.5" barrel... Finest trigger of any gun I own... and performs well with factory or hot reloads...

I won't be getting rid of that one... or anything else for that matter... Sorry you had a lemon...

[Jim Keenan]

Probably everyone knows, but...

Pistol and stock attachment lugs were ground in the mistaken belief that a pistol with a lug was illegal or that a stock with an attaching "iron" was illegal. Neither was nor is.

But, possession of both a pistol with a lug and a compatible stock with an intact "iron" IS illegal unless the combination is registered as a short barrel rifle under the National Firearms Act.

There are exceptions; almost all C96 Mausers with ORIGINAL stocks have been removed from the purview of the NFA, as have some Lugers. The list is at:

http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/curios/sec3.htm

Note that this should NOT be confused with designation as a "curio and relic", either specifically or under the "50-year" rule. The "C&R" designation does not change the status of a firearm under the NFA. For example, most Thompson submachineguns are now in the C&R category, but they are still NFA firearms and NFA rules apply to possession and transfer.

Jim

[John Sabato]

Thanks to all for their input...

[Ron Wood]

I could be all wet, but as I understand it, if you own an intact sholder stock you had better have the correct Luger to go with it. In other words, if you own a short barreled Luger with a stock lug and have an intact artillery stock, you are in violation of the law just by the possession of both UNLESS you also have an artillery Luger in your collection. Unlikely anyone is going to come knocking at your door to do an inventory, but if some circumstance came about that required an investigation and the non-exempt combination was discovered, you are in violation. Bottom line, if you own a stock... have the proper Luger to go with it. Picky, picky, picky

[Doubs]

John, too true! Selling guns you like is never a good idea and there are more than a few I wish I had back. Too soon old.... too late wise!

Ron, I believe that you are technically correct and one muct be careful about the stock and gun mating. It's a no-no to have an Artillery Luger and a Naval stock or the reverse. The stock must be matched with the proper gun.

BTW, what is a fair price for an original Artillery stock? I see a couple for sale at $450 and a couple at $550. Is that reasonable?

[Jim Keenan]

Ron, you are correct. BATF used to say that if you had a stock and the "wrong" pistol you were in violation even if you also had the "right" one. But they got slapped down in court on presumption of innocence in a couple of cases so they now sing a different tune.

The Mauser C96 situation is pretty clear, but the Luger is still muddled. I suspect that if they were asked to remove all Lugers, or at least all original artillery Lugers, with original German-made stocks, from the NFA, they just might do so. I don't think they would open up to repro stocks and the like, though, as that would about negate the law, something they can't and won't do.

Some folks think BATF changes the status to C&R or removal from the NFA on its own. Not true. Someone (usually with a gun for sale) writes and asks that such and such a gun be assigned to a different category, and provides letters and documentation that that item is of museum interest, is rare and valuable, unlikely to be used as a weapon, etc. Then BATF MAY reclassify it. But Congressional intent was clearly that stocked pistols were to be brought under the law, so BATF does not have a lot of leeway to just exempt all stocked pistols or something like that.

FWIW, if anyone owns a Luger or any other stocked pistol that is registered and has now been removed from the purview of the NFA, I suggest writing to the NFA and ask that that individual gun be removed from the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Registry (NFRTR). Assuming they do so (and they will if you are correct about the changed status) their response will be all the proof you need that NFA rules no longer apply to your pistol and that it can be transferred as a pistol rather than as a short barrel rifle.

Jim