1906 Portugese army crest removed - Page 2

Ron Wood · 11-26-2007, 12:26 AM

Here is one of the last photos that shouldn't take too much manipulation to see the halo, and there is no evidence of a Swiss cross.

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 09:05 AM

Hi Ron, Pete,

Thanks to both of you for this insight. Unfortunately, the limit of my camera on close ups is what you see.

Looking at in in the flesh clearly shows a halo around the barrel and frame proof. The one on the barrel does not completely surround the proof as one would expect since it is on a curved surface. It is most heavily evident on the left left side of the proof where the imprint is deepest and thus most metal displaced. PB250005.jpg shows this.

The one on the frame surrounds the proof, but heavier on the top where the imprint is deepest (PB250006.jpg).

Curiously the receiver proof shows no halo, but reflecting light clearly shows raised metal around the perimeter, so the metal in that are has not been tampered with. I'm gong to take an educated guess here and say that it looks like the serialization is done in the white, but the proofing is sometimes done after rust. Thus the receiver may have been proofed before rust.

Question: Using a loop to examine the surfaces reveals a grain type pattern everywhere. Is this the metal surface finish prior to the rust process, or the residual brush strokes from painting on the bluing chemical prior to the rusting process? PB250002.jpg shows what I mean.

Also, do the grips look original? They are of the correct type.

Best...

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 09:43 AM

If I did this right, here are the photos:

Dwight Gruber · 11-26-2007, 12:22 PM

Peter,

Please post -all- your pictures on the Forum. It is much easier to access them (I have not been able to access your off-Forum site for the entire duration of the discussion) and pictures on remote sites have the tendency to disappear sooner rather than later.

Thanks.

--Dwight

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 12:34 PM

I'd be happy to if someone could advise me how.

Does the below link not work?

http://gallery.mac.com/petergalloway#100013,

Mauser720 · 11-26-2007, 12:49 PM

pgalloway -

Well, it's not working for me. I get a sign that says "This Album Is Not Available"

I'm not qualified to comment on some of the questions you are raising; however, if I can't see the pictures, it is likely that the experts can not see them either.

Mauser720 - ron

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 12:54 PM

Oh, try:

http://gallery.mac.com/petergalloway

Ron Wood · 11-26-2007, 01:02 PM

Peter,
You have gotten the "upload photo" process right, but there is one more step. Rather than use the "Post a Quick Reply" box and pasting in the url of the uploaded photo, use the "ADD REPLY" button at the lower right hand corner. This pops up a new window that has an "IMG" function. Clicking on that link pops up a small window where you paste the url of the photo. That replaces the "[url]" control on the photo to "[IMG]" and the photo becomes visible in your message. Because I have moderator privilege on this topic I edited your posts above to make this change and the pictures are there for all to see.

P.S. I am able to access your gallery and can see the pictures, but it is very slow to initialize and somtimes I also get that "This Album Is Not Available" message. A slow dial-up service would likely never be able to access the gallery before it timed out. That is why we really like to have the photos posted here.

Edward Tinker · 11-26-2007, 01:03 PM

peter, try posting them here on the forum. you did so on previous tries. I personnaly do not like to go to someone elses website; I work as a security IT professional and going to unknown websites is inadvisable; besides the reasons Dwight pointed out above.

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 01:28 PM

Okay, the last three posted should be visible in earlier in this thread. Are they?

Pete Ebbink · 11-26-2007, 01:29 PM

Thanks, Peter...for the great follow-up photos.

If the concensus is that your gun has its original finish, then the defacement of the chamber crest is most unfortunate...as Ron Wood said...your gun is a remarkably well-preserved M2.

On many M2 guns, you will see a "bruise" in the wood along the right-side grip panel...just to the left of the magazine release spindle. This is usually caused by the gun being in the AE holster and having contact with the back-side of the metal closure stud on the inside holster body.

The reason for why the M2 crest was removed is still the mystery and I still think it would narrow the collector-interest in your gun...

The sequence of when proofs are applied and whether before or after bluing is quite a volatile area of study.

I do not think DWM applied the same methodology to all the guns they made.

It is very likely the M2's (maybe in the under 1000 SN range) had some of their proofs applied after bluing and other guns in the later contract had their proofs applied before bluing.

On some of the DWM-Swiss guns, you will always see the chief inspector's stamp on the left side of the receiver done before bluing, but you will see other smaller Swiss cross stamps and EB stamps applied after bluing.

On guns with "Germany"...you will see M1900 and M1906 guns with both halo and no-halo around those "Germany" stampings. Which is right and indicates an original finish ? ( I think both may be right...).

I think the variablity in stamps with halos and without halos may have been dependent on whom the inspectors were (either in-house at DMW or coming from a foreign country) or if an outside proof house was used or where the batch of guns in production were on the assembly line and if the inspector could be scheduled in time to do his/her inspection before the next production steps, which may have been the bluing process.

Lots of variables to consider.

BTW...if I owned your gun...I would be in the dilema of trying to decide whether I would have the M2 crest recreated by a talented engraver and have the rust-blue finish blended back in. (Of course, I would tell the next owner of this restoration work when I re-sold it...)

When I see your lovely gun, I cannot help to think..."what an absolute shame...".

p.s. Dwight asked a relevant question of whether you can see bluing deep in the pits (and I would ask in the bottom of some of the dent/dings on the gun). If bluing is present, it would likely indicate some bluing touch-ups have ocurred.

pgalloway · 11-26-2007, 01:38 PM

Pete, Ron, Vern et-al.

You guys have been great to spending the time to enlighten me on this. I've learned a lot from this discussion.

In the final analysis, regardless of the defacement, this gun is a thing of beauty to look at. I guess this why I purchased it to begin with.

I'll close by quoting Ed Tinker in an earlier forum by saying "Any Luger is a good Luger".

Thanks again.

11-26-2007, 12:26 AM	#21
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 6,988 Thanks: 1,067 Thanked 5,099 Times in 1,676 Posts	Here is one of the last photos that shouldn't take too much manipulation to see the halo, and there is no evidence of a Swiss cross. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

11-26-2007, 12:49 PM	#26
Mauser720 User Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 535 Thanks: 18 Thanked 49 Times in 33 Posts	pgalloway - Well, it's not working for me. I get a sign that says "This Album Is Not Available" I'm not qualified to comment on some of the questions you are raising; however, if I can't see the pictures, it is likely that the experts can not see them either. Mauser720 - ron __________________ Mauser720 - Ron "Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it."

11-26-2007, 01:02 PM	#28
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 6,988 Thanks: 1,067 Thanked 5,099 Times in 1,676 Posts	Peter, You have gotten the "upload photo" process right, but there is one more step. Rather than use the "Post a Quick Reply" box and pasting in the url of the uploaded photo, use the "ADD REPLY" button at the lower right hand corner. This pops up a new window that has an "IMG" function. Clicking on that link pops up a small window where you paste the url of the photo. That replaces the "[url]" control on the photo to "[IMG]" and the photo becomes visible in your message. Because I have moderator privilege on this topic I edited your posts above to make this change and the pictures are there for all to see. P.S. I am able to access your gallery and can see the pictures, but it is very slow to initialize and somtimes I also get that "This Album Is Not Available" message. A slow dial-up service would likely never be able to access the gallery before it timed out. That is why we really like to have the photos posted here. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

11-26-2007, 01:03 PM	#29
Edward Tinker Super Moderator Eternal Lifer LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: North of Spokane, WA Posts: 15,915 Thanks: 1,989 Thanked 4,506 Times in 2,080 Posts	peter, try posting them here on the forum. you did so on previous tries. I personnaly do not like to go to someone elses website; I work as a security IT professional and going to unknown websites is inadvisable; besides the reasons Dwight pointed out above. __________________ Edward Tinker ************ Co-Author of Police Lugers - Co-Author of Simson Lugers Author of Veteran Bring Backs Vol I, Vol II, Vol III and Vol IV

11-26-2007, 09:05 AM	#22
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Hi Ron, Pete, Thanks to both of you for this insight. Unfortunately, the limit of my camera on close ups is what you see. Looking at in in the flesh clearly shows a halo around the barrel and frame proof. The one on the barrel does not completely surround the proof as one would expect since it is on a curved surface. It is most heavily evident on the left left side of the proof where the imprint is deepest and thus most metal displaced. PB250005.jpg shows this. The one on the frame surrounds the proof, but heavier on the top where the imprint is deepest (PB250006.jpg). Curiously the receiver proof shows no halo, but reflecting light clearly shows raised metal around the perimeter, so the metal in that are has not been tampered with. I'm gong to take an educated guess here and say that it looks like the serialization is done in the white, but the proofing is sometimes done after rust. Thus the receiver may have been proofed before rust. Question: Using a loop to examine the surfaces reveals a grain type pattern everywhere. Is this the metal surface finish prior to the rust process, or the residual brush strokes from painting on the bluing chemical prior to the rusting process? PB250002.jpg shows what I mean. Also, do the grips look original? They are of the correct type. Best...

11-26-2007, 09:43 AM	#23
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	If I did this right, here are the photos:

11-26-2007, 12:22 PM	#24
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,890 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,282 Times in 424 Posts	Peter, Please post -all- your pictures on the Forum. It is much easier to access them (I have not been able to access your off-Forum site for the entire duration of the discussion) and pictures on remote sites have the tendency to disappear sooner rather than later. Thanks. --Dwight

11-26-2007, 12:34 PM	#25
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I'd be happy to if someone could advise me how. Does the below link not work? http://gallery.mac.com/petergalloway#100013,

11-26-2007, 12:54 PM	#27
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Oh, try: http://gallery.mac.com/petergalloway

11-26-2007, 01:28 PM	#30
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Okay, the last three posted should be visible in earlier in this thread. Are they?

11-26-2007, 01:29 PM	#31
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Thanks, Peter...for the great follow-up photos. If the concensus is that your gun has its original finish, then the defacement of the chamber crest is most unfortunate...as Ron Wood said...your gun is a remarkably well-preserved M2. On many M2 guns, you will see a "bruise" in the wood along the right-side grip panel...just to the left of the magazine release spindle. This is usually caused by the gun being in the AE holster and having contact with the back-side of the metal closure stud on the inside holster body. The reason for why the M2 crest was removed is still the mystery and I still think it would narrow the collector-interest in your gun... The sequence of when proofs are applied and whether before or after bluing is quite a volatile area of study. I do not think DWM applied the same methodology to all the guns they made. It is very likely the M2's (maybe in the under 1000 SN range) had some of their proofs applied after bluing and other guns in the later contract had their proofs applied before bluing. On some of the DWM-Swiss guns, you will always see the chief inspector's stamp on the left side of the receiver done before bluing, but you will see other smaller Swiss cross stamps and EB stamps applied after bluing. On guns with "Germany"...you will see M1900 and M1906 guns with both halo and no-halo around those "Germany" stampings. Which is right and indicates an original finish ? ( I think both may be right...). I think the variablity in stamps with halos and without halos may have been dependent on whom the inspectors were (either in-house at DMW or coming from a foreign country) or if an outside proof house was used or where the batch of guns in production were on the assembly line and if the inspector could be scheduled in time to do his/her inspection before the next production steps, which may have been the bluing process. Lots of variables to consider. BTW...if I owned your gun...I would be in the dilema of trying to decide whether I would have the M2 crest recreated by a talented engraver and have the rust-blue finish blended back in. (Of course, I would tell the next owner of this restoration work when I re-sold it...) When I see your lovely gun, I cannot help to think..."what an absolute shame...". p.s. Dwight asked a relevant question of whether you can see bluing deep in the pits (and I would ask in the bottom of some of the dent/dings on the gun). If bluing is present, it would likely indicate some bluing touch-ups have ocurred.

11-26-2007, 01:38 PM	#32
pgalloway User Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Pete, Ron, Vern et-al. You guys have been great to spending the time to enlighten me on this. I've learned a lot from this discussion. In the final analysis, regardless of the defacement, this gun is a thing of beauty to look at. I guess this why I purchased it to begin with. I'll close by quoting Ed Tinker in an earlier forum by saying "Any Luger is a good Luger". Thanks again.