![]() |
my profile |
register |
faq |
search upload photo | donate | calendar |
![]() |
#1 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: york co., va
Posts: 153
Thanks: 27
Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
I''ve recently acquired a 41/42 luger, that is all matching and the bluing is about 95%. S.n. is 6106n. I assume that the 41 is the date that this pistol was manufactured. It has the 655 acceptance marks on the rt. side of the receiver and the E/S proof on the barrel, the receiver, and on the forward toggle link. The bore is very good and it has been fired, but the overall appearance of the pistol is close to excellent. There is a slight ding on the front left of the muzzle, but no major scratches and no signs of rust. Internally the piece looks like it might have been made last week. The grips are not numbered but do have the 655 proof marks. The magazine does not match, it is numbered 4182n with a +. It also has the number 122 stamped on the mag. frame and is proofed 37.
I'm a little concerned about the finish, does it look to be original or is it possibly refinished? I notice some of the plum color on the receiver and a slight amount on the barrel, which makes me lean toward original finish. As always, I would appreciate any information that any of you would care to share. I have enclosed a couple of photos. Thanks, barr. http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/4142_lft.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/4142_rt.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/receiver_top.jpg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3,843
Thanks: 132
Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts
|
![]()
barr -- Pictures are too small to tell anything.
Plum color by itself does not mean much. Even some modern H&K P7 has plum or purple color, it's not a wartime-only feature. Inside looks newer than outside is a good sign, IMO. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 288
Thanks: 20
Thanked 34 Times in 19 Posts
|
![]()
barr,
Congrats on your new pistol! The pictures are in deed too small to say much about it. 42 is the production code for the Mauser factories. It very much looks refinished to me, but I'll leave it for somebody more knowledgeable than me to make a verdict. Balder |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3,843
Thanks: 132
Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts
|
![]()
Not only the size of the picture is important, the background and lighting makes big difference as well. I have two sample pictures here for the same gun (sorry, not Parabellums).... same big 1024x768 size, both are sharp, but reveal different level of details.
Which one should I post on an online auction site when I sell it..... maybe both. http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/type542.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload...ight_copy1.jpg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: york co., va
Posts: 153
Thanks: 27
Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
Sorry, I screwed up the photos. Here are some larger image files.
Alvin, I posted a photo of the back of the bolt for that 1920s commercial, that you had asked about previously. It's under the commercial site. barr http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/right_1_copy1.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/right_1_copy2.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/right_1_copy2.jpg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3,843
Thanks: 132
Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts
|
![]()
barr, all three pictures are same. Have you checked the encircled area under a loupe?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: york co., va
Posts: 153
Thanks: 27
Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
I must have messed up again! Here is another try.
No, I have looked at this area under magnification, I'll check it. Hope these work out better, thanks barr. http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/left_1_copy1.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/right_1_copy3.jpg http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/top_copy15.jpg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Lifer
Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sonoma County CA
Posts: 244
Thanks: 5
Thanked 34 Times in 17 Posts
|
![]()
Looks good to me but I am still a newbie. I lighten up your photos.
Jerry |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Lifer
Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sonoma County CA
Posts: 244
Thanks: 5
Thanked 34 Times in 17 Posts
|
![]()
more
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Lifer
Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sonoma County CA
Posts: 244
Thanks: 5
Thanked 34 Times in 17 Posts
|
![]()
again
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: york co., va
Posts: 153
Thanks: 27
Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
I believe Alvin and Tac are correct. I believe it has been reconditioned, unfortunately. I hadn't noticed that area under the back of the upper frame, you have good eyes Alvin. I had noticed a little bit of pitting on the right side of the frame just above the trigger, that's why I had questioned the bluing. It was probably done several years ago, because it looks to have some age to it.
Well, like you say, it is still a nice looking piece, just a high dollar shooter, I suppose. Thanks guys, I'll just have to pay more attention and use a light and some magnification on the next on. After looking at it more closely using a light and some magnification. I can see a lot to indicate that it has been re-blued. barr |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Moderator
2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso
Posts: 7,040
Thanks: 1,106
Thanked 5,257 Times in 1,724 Posts
|
![]()
It may have been refinished, but if it has, it is more of a high quality restoration than your average refinish job. Usually a refinish isn't that crisp and uniform overall, and the fact that it has an interior that is in the same state of preservation as the exterior indicates it is an original or an expert restoration. I wouldn't write this one off too quickly. I would be much more satisfied if someone that knows Lugers well could examine this one in hand and not try to assess it from photos on a computer screen. It is a relatively scarce variation and deserves careful scrutiny. I agree with tac (even though I am not a real big fan of these "repros"
![]()
__________________
If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: york co., va
Posts: 153
Thanks: 27
Thanked 35 Times in 21 Posts
|
![]()
Again I thank you folks for your input. I guess I can write it off as a learning experience. From what I've read on the forum, it is somewhat of a rarer variation, so that being said and the fact that everything matches and even the magazine is correct for this variation, from what I have read, I suppose I didn't fare too badly. It is a nice looking restoration, next time I'll try and be more aware. Sometimes it does get difficult to be discriminating when it comes to buying things you like. I suppose desire gets in the way of intelligence. barr
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Lifer
Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 979
Thanks: 1
Thanked 272 Times in 100 Posts
|
![]()
Barr,
I have found a fool proof method of finding out if your Luger is refinished or not; find a very high powered light. I use an old 8mm home movie lamp, but I would suspect one of the more modern flashlights would work just as well. Shine it on the grip straps, both front and rear or any other part of the Luger you suspect has been refinished and then use a jewlers loupe to get a really close up look. If the finish is original you will see tiny specks of rust showing through the blue. If it has been refinished, there will be solid blue with no oxidation present. Give it a try. Mike |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3,843
Thanks: 132
Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts
|
![]()
There are a few areas that I feel suspectible. But I have not owned a Mauser Luger yet (if not counting repro of repro, a.k.a. Interarms
![]() 1) The serrate head of the thumb safety looks worn, but the supposed "arc" under the safety is faint... almost does not exist. 2) The joint area of barrel and receiver is suspectible. The triangle shaped edge on receiver does not look sharp enough. 3) The muzzle band edge does not look sharp. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Patron
LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 322
Thanks: 0
Thanked 25 Times in 15 Posts
|
![]()
Alvin is probaly correct,plus there is no white paint in the Gesichert marking..
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Patron
LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 322
Thanks: 0
Thanked 25 Times in 15 Posts
|
![]()
Mais Tac.....Vos deux Lugers Etait "Commande Special" direct de la usine ,fabriquer selon votre directive...n'est pas?....would,nt want that white paint reflecting in the moonlight on a covert mission....
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 135
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
![]()
Regardless, we should keep in mind it is a unique part of history, and it is still a Luger.
__________________
W David |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3,843
Thanks: 132
Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Moderator
2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso
Posts: 7,040
Thanks: 1,106
Thanked 5,257 Times in 1,724 Posts
|
![]()
tac,
"Suspectible" is the future pluperfect subjunctive tense of "suspect" ![]() Alvin, Your graphic observations are good and very likely correct. Excellent teaching points in any case. Thank you.
__________________
If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|