HK Magazine...???

Pete Ebbink · 11-29-2003, 02:15 PM

Does this look "right" to anyone...? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...&category=4078

Here are some photo scans from R. Gibson's book :

<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2a.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2a.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

The font of the "2" does not seem right and the bracket around the 2 does not seem to have the trademark "curvature"...IMO

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

John Sabato · 12-01-2003, 11:17 AM

Pete here is an enlargement of the stamp in question... perhaps it will be easier to compare with the photos from Randall Gibson's book.

George Anderson · 12-02-2003, 10:39 AM

It's one of 15 luger mags I bought at the Richmond gun show mid November. If I thought it was a fake, I would say so. Given the circumstances of the purchase and some of the other mags I am confident that it's good.

Pete Ebbink · 12-02-2003, 05:27 PM

Hello George,

I certainly was not implying you would sell something as original if you knew it was not...my apoligies if you read my opening post as such.

I was just trying to figure out, technically, if the markings on the magazine were consisent with photos in Gibson's book and what I have seen on a few pieces...

If your markings are indeed correct, can you let me know, technically, what supports your opinion ?

I was struck with the fact that the font of the "2" is a bit odd and the "bracket" surrounding the 2 seemed to lack the "curvature" that seems to be common with this HK E2 stamping.

I was hoping folks with similarly-marked magazines might post a photo or two for comparison...

Best Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

George Anderson · 12-02-2003, 06:03 PM

Pete, no need to worry, I did not take your posting as anything but a legitimate question. My position on originality are pretty much bsed on the nature of the buy; both price, seller and other items. Other items included Navy mag, real bone grips, KH grips, walnut grips, various tools and cleaning rods. A real mish mash of good stuff cheap.

Given what I have seen in Imperial luger markings, subtle variances seem normal. Consider variations in Erfurt proofs as dies are worn or damaged.

drbuster · 12-02-2003, 11:58 PM

George, I am delighted to say that I am the new owner of this HK proofed magazine!

Pete Ebbink · 12-03-2003, 11:53 PM

Okay...now I am really confused...

Per the photos on e-Bay, this is a type "B-2-B" magazine; using the Gibson jargon (i.e. fxo code, blue extruded, with P-08 and E37 stampings. Per page 56 of Gibson's book, this magazine should have a full serial number on the bottom with an up-side-down LWaA 1st, Stage 1, Early proof stamp above the serial number.

But this magazine seems to have a LWaA 1st, Stage 1, Late proof stamp that is right-side-up...which Gibson mentions rarely occurs on some type "B-2-D" magzines (i.e. 122 code)...but this is not a type B-2-D magazine...

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

John D. · 12-10-2003, 02:39 PM

Oh - that's an easy one..... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Yes - it is original... That same exact die has been noted on several post-war pieces - BOTH on mags and the cannon/frame. There are 2 give-aways...

1) See the "semi-circle" imprint - almost like the die is worn away? On one holster - that same die carries almost the entire circle, and on another frame - the semi-circle is at the botom of the proof (can you say "worn out"

) That's clue number #1.

2) The "2" is exactly the same as used in several post-war rigs (one holster I know of) and actually on one cannon.

I wish I had a copy of Gibson at the office - because I think he shows a picture of that somewhere (I don't think it's the mag passages nor in the "Stage Acceptance" section? It may be in the post-war passages???)? I'll try to find it tonite, if you are interested (and if that's where I saw it published..!)..??!!

I can also tell you that the mag should not be serialized - so Doc, you should not see any "flat grind" marks on it nor any evidence of removal of previous serial numbers.. Can you verify that that is the case???

Best to all...!!!!

Pete Ebbink · 12-10-2003, 06:34 PM

Thanks, John D. !!!

One learns something new every day...and I always learn something new each time you post.

I have a comfort level with the contract 10,000 HK lugers...but that "wild & crazy" post WWII HK stuff throws me every time... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

Appreciate your help !!!

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

John D. · 12-10-2003, 06:41 PM

Hey Pete,

Awww - my pleasure - but thanks for your kind words... In a lot of ways, the Post-War are probably the most "virgin" of any HK variation - as for years - they were eschewed and passed up by collectors as "parts guns" - so there wasn't any reason that many were faked for "higher resale". In fact, my guess is more "Post War" HKs were cannibalized and re-emerged as "Real" HKs (in other words: "Really Fake" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )... 'Course - you can get really burned as well - as all it takes is adding a stray HK part and claim it to be a "Post-War HK" and an un-suspecting buyer or HK newbie to be suckered in. For me - I'm glad folks ask first on the LugerForum - it's what it's all about.....

Anyway - as in any variation - it just takes some time and research to know what to look for, as you know.. For that - I'd be lost in any variation but HKs and a few specific WW2 types. As for what you specialize in, or Ron, or Frank, or Tom, or.. Well - most of you - I'd be the one asking the questions!!

Best to ya!!!

drbuster · 12-10-2003, 11:27 PM

Yes, John D., you are right. I received the magazine from George Anderson just today and there are no grinding marks on the bottom at all, just as you say. Was this supposed to be a general replacement magazine?

John D. · 12-11-2003, 09:28 AM

Hey Doc,

It was most likely at the factory as an unused spare or frankly, could have been in the parts area - most likely this was left over when they moved away from the rolled nickel mag type in the 1936 timeframe. Since "1936" had both types of mags, and your's was not "Accepted" until after the war with that die - it simply means it wasn't issued with a wartime production HK. However, it doesn't detract from it's originality, and quite frankly - is a terrific example of the post-war proof. Good for you - and Congrats!!! <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" />

drbuster · 12-11-2003, 10:21 AM

Thanks, John. The mag was rough inside and needs a good oiling. The follower sticks near the top of the tube and is rough fitting into my HK. Anyway,it is a piece of history and not a "shooter" magazine. And thanks George Anderson, for finding it and putting it on e-bay so I had the good opportunity to get it!

12-01-2003, 11:17 AM	#2
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,154 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,306 Times in 1,097 Posts	Pete here is an enlargement of the stamp in question... perhaps it will be easier to compare with the photos from Randall Gibson's book. __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-29-2003, 02:15 PM	#1
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	HK Magazine...??? Does this look "right" to anyone...? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...&category=4078 Here are some photo scans from R. Gibson's book : <a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a> <a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2a.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/hk_e2a.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a> The font of the "2" does not seem right and the bracket around the 2 does not seem to have the trademark "curvature"...IMO Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

12-02-2003, 10:39 AM	#3
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,530 Times in 787 Posts	It's one of 15 luger mags I bought at the Richmond gun show mid November. If I thought it was a fake, I would say so. Given the circumstances of the purchase and some of the other mags I am confident that it's good.

12-02-2003, 05:27 PM	#4
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello George, I certainly was not implying you would sell something as original if you knew it was not...my apoligies if you read my opening post as such. I was just trying to figure out, technically, if the markings on the magazine were consisent with photos in Gibson's book and what I have seen on a few pieces... If your markings are indeed correct, can you let me know, technically, what supports your opinion ? I was struck with the fact that the font of the "2" is a bit odd and the "bracket" surrounding the 2 seemed to lack the "curvature" that seems to be common with this HK E2 stamping. I was hoping folks with similarly-marked magazines might post a photo or two for comparison... Best Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

12-02-2003, 06:03 PM	#5
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,530 Times in 787 Posts	Pete, no need to worry, I did not take your posting as anything but a legitimate question. My position on originality are pretty much bsed on the nature of the buy; both price, seller and other items. Other items included Navy mag, real bone grips, KH grips, walnut grips, various tools and cleaning rods. A real mish mash of good stuff cheap. Given what I have seen in Imperial luger markings, subtle variances seem normal. Consider variations in Erfurt proofs as dies are worn or damaged.

12-02-2003, 11:58 PM	#6
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	George, I am delighted to say that I am the new owner of this HK proofed magazine!

12-03-2003, 11:53 PM	#7
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Okay...now I am really confused... Per the photos on e-Bay, this is a type "B-2-B" magazine; using the Gibson jargon (i.e. fxo code, blue extruded, with P-08 and E37 stampings. Per page 56 of Gibson's book, this magazine should have a full serial number on the bottom with an up-side-down LWaA 1st, Stage 1, Early proof stamp above the serial number. But this magazine seems to have a LWaA 1st, Stage 1, Late proof stamp that is right-side-up...which Gibson mentions rarely occurs on some type "B-2-D" magzines (i.e. 122 code)...but this is not a type B-2-D magazine... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

12-10-2003, 02:39 PM	#8
John D. Administrator & Site Owner LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Little NE of Somewhere... Posts: 2,651 Thanks: 477 Thanked 515 Times in 128 Posts	Oh - that's an easy one..... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> Yes - it is original... That same exact die has been noted on several post-war pieces - BOTH on mags and the cannon/frame. There are 2 give-aways... 1) See the "semi-circle" imprint - almost like the die is worn away? On one holster - that same die carries almost the entire circle, and on another frame - the semi-circle is at the botom of the proof (can you say "worn out" ) That's clue number #1. 2) The "2" is exactly the same as used in several post-war rigs (one holster I know of) and actually on one cannon. I wish I had a copy of Gibson at the office - because I think he shows a picture of that somewhere (I don't think it's the mag passages nor in the "Stage Acceptance" section? It may be in the post-war passages???)? I'll try to find it tonite, if you are interested (and if that's where I saw it published..!)..??!! I can also tell you that the mag should not be serialized - so Doc, you should not see any "flat grind" marks on it nor any evidence of removal of previous serial numbers.. Can you verify that that is the case??? Best to all...!!!!

12-10-2003, 06:34 PM	#9
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Thanks, John D. !!! One learns something new every day...and I always learn something new each time you post. I have a comfort level with the contract 10,000 HK lugers...but that "wild & crazy" post WWII HK stuff throws me every time... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> Appreciate your help !!! Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

12-10-2003, 06:41 PM	#10
John D. Administrator & Site Owner LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Little NE of Somewhere... Posts: 2,651 Thanks: 477 Thanked 515 Times in 128 Posts	Hey Pete, Awww - my pleasure - but thanks for your kind words... In a lot of ways, the Post-War are probably the most "virgin" of any HK variation - as for years - they were eschewed and passed up by collectors as "parts guns" - so there wasn't any reason that many were faked for "higher resale". In fact, my guess is more "Post War" HKs were cannibalized and re-emerged as "Real" HKs (in other words: "Really Fake" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )... 'Course - you can get really burned as well - as all it takes is adding a stray HK part and claim it to be a "Post-War HK" and an un-suspecting buyer or HK newbie to be suckered in. For me - I'm glad folks ask first on the LugerForum - it's what it's all about..... Anyway - as in any variation - it just takes some time and research to know what to look for, as you know.. For that - I'd be lost in any variation but HKs and a few specific WW2 types. As for what you specialize in, or Ron, or Frank, or Tom, or.. Well - most of you - I'd be the one asking the questions!! Best to ya!!!

12-10-2003, 11:27 PM	#11
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Yes, John D., you are right. I received the magazine from George Anderson just today and there are no grinding marks on the bottom at all, just as you say. Was this supposed to be a general replacement magazine?

12-11-2003, 09:28 AM	#12
John D. Administrator & Site Owner LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Little NE of Somewhere... Posts: 2,651 Thanks: 477 Thanked 515 Times in 128 Posts	Hey Doc, It was most likely at the factory as an unused spare or frankly, could have been in the parts area - most likely this was left over when they moved away from the rolled nickel mag type in the 1936 timeframe. Since "1936" had both types of mags, and your's was not "Accepted" until after the war with that die - it simply means it wasn't issued with a wartime production HK. However, it doesn't detract from it's originality, and quite frankly - is a terrific example of the post-war proof. Good for you - and Congrats!!! <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" />

12-11-2003, 10:21 AM	#13
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Thanks, John. The mag was rough inside and needs a good oiling. The follower sticks near the top of the tube and is rough fitting into my HK. Anyway,it is a piece of history and not a "shooter" magazine. And thanks George Anderson, for finding it and putting it on e-bay so I had the good opportunity to get it!