WW1 vs. WW2 Luger

lundbaek · 03-16-2008, 11:31 AM

I never considered any gun a piece of art, but I have to admit some guns have more or added appeal to me due to their appearance. Although engaving detracts from a gun's appearance for me. Practical, functional reliability, strength, and accuracy come first. I think outer surface cutting tool marks and lower quality or damaged blueing or plating detract from a gun's value for anybody. Then I consider a gun's usefulness (ie I don't consider .44 magnums and above useful other than for bear). So for me the Luger was a classic in its day. And I did notice at least one Luger being carried as late as 1977 by an Israeli soldier.

03-16-2008, 11:31 AM	#13
lundbaek User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Mesa, Arizona Posts: 20 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I never considered any gun a piece of art, but I have to admit some guns have more or added appeal to me due to their appearance. Although engaving detracts from a gun's appearance for me. Practical, functional reliability, strength, and accuracy come first. I think outer surface cutting tool marks and lower quality or damaged blueing or plating detract from a gun's value for anybody. Then I consider a gun's usefulness (ie I don't consider .44 magnums and above useful other than for bear). So for me the Luger was a classic in its day. And I did notice at least one Luger being carried as late as 1977 by an Israeli soldier.