Bogus '04 pistols

Navy · 07-21-2003, 09:09 PM

All,
Here is a reply I got from Jan Still concerning some comments I made on this forum. I think his comments are completely appropriate and as usual, on the money. This dialogue, on this forum was NEVER intended to disparage Jan's wonderful work of a lifetime and I hope that no one on the forum or elsewhere took it that way.
Following is a direct quote:

"Thanks for supplying the 9 photographs (1-9) and two cards of rubbings (A & B). Your cover note states that Ã¢?? Their contents speaks for itself.Ã¢?Â For the most part these photographs and rubbings do not contain previously unpublished or unknown information and their discussion on this Forum will not be adverse to anyone. What do these 9 photographs and two cards with rubbings tell us.
Photographs 1 and 2 are of the same1904 Navy Luger, serial number 51, shown in Imperial Lugers (1991) on page 165 and 166. These photographs are dated Aug. 82 and are marked Ã¢??Nr. 51 LEE SCHREIBERSÃ¢?Â These photographs indicate that this Luger was in the same condition in 1982 as it was when photographed by Sturgess for Imperial Lugers in 1990.

The photographs 3 to 9 show a Luger in the process of being made into a replica 1904 Navy. Most or all of these photographs are of the same Luger. It is in the white.. The photographs show the exact same C/M added above the lanyard and to the bottom of the barrel. These proofs have the crown well down into the M and the crown leans to the left. These proofs are markedly unlike those on 1904 serial number 51. The proofs (C C/M C/M)on the left receiver have the crown just above the M and are stamped with a different die than the proof above the lanyard and on the bottom of the barrel.. There is nothing in the photographs of the 1904 Navy in the process of being fabricated (3 to 9) to indicate a connection to either of the 1904 Navy Lugers shown in Imperial Lugers ( page 165,166 serial number 51; and 167 serial number 772). It is probable that all of these photographs (3-9) are of serial number 48 described below.

The note on photograph 7 (shown below) indicates that this is Paul WestenbergerÃ¢??s (deceased)Luger, serial number 48. This Luger was made up for Westenberger by a known craftsman. It was never a secret. When I was researching Imperial Lugers Tom Knox informed me about it. He said that Westenberger said that he knew he could never afford an original 1904 Navy and had a replica made up. At the time this was general knowledge. Reportedly the barrel was made from a turned down rifle barrel. Any proofs applied to this replica barrel are clearly bogus. Which, clearly establishes that the proof on the bottom of the barrel shown below (figure 1) is a replica or fake. Originally the frame had a 4 digit number and the first and last digits were removed to leave the Ã¢??48". Paul Westenberger did not live to see this project completed. (Tom Knox 1989 and 2003) The serial number Ã¢??48" does not appear in the data base on page 162 of Imperial Lugers because it was a known replica.

Card (B) shows rubbings from Tom KnoxÃ¢??s Navy Luger, serial number 772. This Luger is shown on page 167 of Imperial Lugers. It has no proofs, has 60 degree knurling, a square end to the extractor, has been refinished, an improper toggle lock, the barrel profile undulates, and is almost certainly a replica. At the time I put itÃ¢??s photograph in Imperial Lugers, its owner (Tom Knox) and I believed that it was an arsenal refinish/rework. I did not realize that it was a fake until after Imperial Lugers was published. This realization was not a secret. I pointed this out when I was a guest speaker at one of the National Automatic Pistol Collectors Association conventions. I have stated to any number of collectors that any 1904 Navy over serial number 200 is certainly very suspect and probably a fake.

Card (A) shows rubbings from Lee Schreibers (deceased, now in the collection of Dr. Sturgess) 1904 Navy Luger. These rubbings show the square pattern toggle knurling, the proof above the lanyard, the front frame serial number Ã¢??51", the right receiver proofÃ¢??s C C/M, and the crescent shaped extractor end. Expert and World known Luger collectors John Pearson, Don Rousseau, Robert Hogan, Robert Simpson, Doug Smith, Dr. Sturgess and Charles Whittaker consider that these are characteristics of a proper 1904 Navy. They all vouch for the credibility of this Luger. I have recently discussed the credibility of this Luger with Pearson, Rousseau, Smith and Whittaker. All considered it original and were credulous that someone implied that it was a fraud.
The exact same rubbings that you sent to me (A, serial number 51) were published in AUTO MAG (Volume 19 page 138) over 15 years ago by Jim Cate. He states Ã¢??I offer these to the membership because it has been well established that LeeÃ¢??s 1904 navy luger, # 51 was the only completely original factory unaltered example known.Ã¢?Â See Cates original comments published in AUTO MAG below (figure 2).

This is a good opportunity to modify a list of reported1904 Navy Lugers shown on page 162 of Imperial Lugers. Observations and information gleaned since Imperial Lugers was published indicates that this data should be modified. This data base shows 10 reported 1904 Navy Lugers between serial number 273 and 1148. These serial numbers should be deleted from this list. Also, Charles WhittakerÃ¢??s, serial number 79, that is identical to serial number 51 (except unaltered safety) should be added.

Tom thanks for supplying the photographs. It has prompted me to clear up some obselete data in Imperial Lugers, restablished the credibility of 1904 Navy serial number 51, and will help fellow collectors better understand and appreciate the importance of these rare 1904 Navy Lugers.
Jan"

Unfortunately, I could not figure out how to attach the pictures.
In any event, I want the world to know that my comments were in no way an impeachment of Jan's work; rather they were a caution to be very careful in dealing with rare and pricey Lugers.
Tom A.

John Sabato · 07-22-2003, 09:24 AM

Tom thanks for this great info... Please send me the photos in as large and detailed a format as you have and I will post them!

Send them to lugerforum@yahoo.com

I am notified every time an email arrives there.

Pete Ebbink · 07-22-2003, 09:11 PM

Hello Tom A.,

Thanks for posting this very interesting info. on the real '04 Navies...

Can your direct me to the thread in which '04 Navy # 51 was indicated not to be real. I cannot seem to find this thread...

p.s. Am glad to hear '04 Navy # 138 is on the "good" list...

Regards,

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

Jimbo · 07-23-2003, 01:38 AM

Pete, my reading of Tom's post is that SN#51 was an authentic 1904 Navy and not a fake.

Edward Tinker · 07-23-2003, 02:03 AM

In talking to several of the "experts", # 51 is one of those considered as good and that the other one in Imperial Lugers is a known repro (not really a fake as it was known at the time to be a copy). Any 04 OVER # 200 is considered suspect in their opinion.

Slip of the mind Ron, that is what I meant, see why i don't get into these intelecktual spars...

Ed

Ron Wood · 07-23-2003, 02:49 AM

Ed,
Any 04 OVER #200 is suspect in their opinion. I have encountered records of about 27 1904 Navy serial numbers and almost half are above 200. That makes for a bunch of bogus 04s.

Edward Tinker · 07-23-2003, 03:06 AM

Changed what I said, I meant what Ron said, <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

Pete Ebbink · 07-23-2003, 10:04 AM

Jimbo,

Maybe it was a "mis-read" on my part. From this sentence : " restablished the credibility of 1904 Navy serial number 51 ", I assumed someone along the line of the discussion had questioned the authenticity of # 51...

Others,

Is there any speculation as to what "donor gun" would have been used to make up these reported bogus '04 Navy pistol with numbers higher than # 200...?

Or are they thought to be made up as a "clone" piece, from scratch...?

Regards,

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

Big Norm · 07-23-2003, 11:54 AM

Pete,
my notes and emails indicate that the original post that started this was made by me in late May 2002. At the time I though that I had found a 1904 navy and asked how I could tell the difference between an authentic one and a fake. Maybe this thread was made on the old Lugerforum. Alas, the one that I was looking at was a fake. Tom A, Ron Wood and Jerry Burney saved me $8000 plus. For this, I am very thankful to the above gentlemen.
Big Norm

John Sabato · 07-23-2003, 12:49 PM

Norm... just a note to let you know that the OLD Lugerforum closed it's web doors in June of 2001...fostering the re-birth of the Lugerforum in this format that same month/year.

I guess you could say that this here Lugerforum is born-again!

Pete Ebbink · 07-28-2003, 12:49 AM

Hey John,

Are you sure about that date ?...I thought the new Forum opened in June 2002...(???)

Regards,

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

Herb · 07-28-2003, 12:58 AM

Pete, correct, it was June 2002.

Navy · 07-28-2003, 02:19 AM

Big Norm,
I am very gratified, sir, to have been a part of some small service.
Tom A.

John Sabato · 07-28-2003, 03:39 PM

Pete and Herb you are correct... it was a typo on my part and the year of the transition to this forum format using UBB was June 2002.

John Sabato · 07-28-2003, 03:46 PM

Big Norm... here is the link to the message thread you discussed earlier about the 1904 Navy model you had wanted to buy...

Search the old forum message posts is still possible... just use the link on the left of the homepage...

http://boards.rennlist.com/cgi-bin/l....pl?read=27498

John Sabato · 07-29-2003, 05:59 PM

The photographs sent by Tom Armstrong to Jan C. Still for his evaluation and comment have been submitted to the Lugerforum and are now available for viewing in a Member Gallery Album...titled:

The Creation of a Bogus 1904 Navy Luger

Comments about these photographs are welcome...

The Member Gallery link is located on the left frame of the Lugerforum Homepage... the link to the homepage is at the bottom of this and every discussion page.

Big Norm · 07-29-2003, 09:35 PM

John
thank you. I am still friends with the guy who wanted to sell me that 1904 navy. He was badly hurt when I showed him copies of emails I had received and of the posts on the forum. He had that gun for a long time and truly believed that he had a real one for a number of years.

At first, we talked about selling/buying it for $8000. Then he saw that Shattuck sold one for $10,000 and then Simpson came out with one for $35,000. Simpson emphasized that his 1904 had the "short" rabbit ears on the extractor. Thats when I got on the forum to learn more. I didn't think that there would be that many just floating around.
Big Norm

Pete Ebbink · 08-04-2003, 03:32 AM

Does anyone know what serial number the '04 Navy that Chuck Whitaker has on his web site? It does look like it has 90 degree checkering on the toggle(s)...

Self-Edited on 8-5-03 : Found it in Still's write up...gun is # 79...

Regards,

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

Pete Ebbink · 10-04-2003, 06:50 PM

Found an interesting passage in the book "The Navy Luger" by Gortz/Walter on page 25 :

"...Many of the surviving interim-model navy Parabellums, however, are now found with 60 degree-cut toggle-grips and the three-piece toggle-lock. These are generally dismissed as fakes, but some caution is advisable; though some are indeed suspect, produced by fitting genuine Pistolen 1904 (which I think is the 1906 Navy model) with Old Model toggle-links, there may have been two manufacturing patterns. DWM could easily have changed the toggle-grip style duiring the period in which the interim models were being made - All New Model guns display 60 degree dicing - and the spring-steel toggle-lock may have proved so ineffuctual that a reversion to the three-part assembly was authorized...".

Maybe some of the "above # 200" pistols could be explained both by some bogus guns and some 2nd. variation guns; if you agree with Gortz/Walter speculation...

If all above # 200 are suspect, someone sacrificed a lot of decent 1906 Navy pistols and some 1900 Old Model pistols to end up with these bogus 1904's...accroding to Ron Wood's count of over # 200 pistols, this would mean 14-1906 Navy and 14-1900 Old Model lugers were donated to make alot of 1904 Navy "creations"...

Regards,

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

07-21-2003, 09:09 PM	#1
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Bogus '04 pistols All, Here is a reply I got from Jan Still concerning some comments I made on this forum. I think his comments are completely appropriate and as usual, on the money. This dialogue, on this forum was NEVER intended to disparage Jan's wonderful work of a lifetime and I hope that no one on the forum or elsewhere took it that way. Following is a direct quote: "Thanks for supplying the 9 photographs (1-9) and two cards of rubbings (A & B). Your cover note states that Ã¢?? Their contents speaks for itself.Ã¢?Â For the most part these photographs and rubbings do not contain previously unpublished or unknown information and their discussion on this Forum will not be adverse to anyone. What do these 9 photographs and two cards with rubbings tell us. Photographs 1 and 2 are of the same1904 Navy Luger, serial number 51, shown in Imperial Lugers (1991) on page 165 and 166. These photographs are dated Aug. 82 and are marked Ã¢??Nr. 51 LEE SCHREIBERSÃ¢?Â These photographs indicate that this Luger was in the same condition in 1982 as it was when photographed by Sturgess for Imperial Lugers in 1990. The photographs 3 to 9 show a Luger in the process of being made into a replica 1904 Navy. Most or all of these photographs are of the same Luger. It is in the white.. The photographs show the exact same C/M added above the lanyard and to the bottom of the barrel. These proofs have the crown well down into the M and the crown leans to the left. These proofs are markedly unlike those on 1904 serial number 51. The proofs (C C/M C/M)on the left receiver have the crown just above the M and are stamped with a different die than the proof above the lanyard and on the bottom of the barrel.. There is nothing in the photographs of the 1904 Navy in the process of being fabricated (3 to 9) to indicate a connection to either of the 1904 Navy Lugers shown in Imperial Lugers ( page 165,166 serial number 51; and 167 serial number 772). It is probable that all of these photographs (3-9) are of serial number 48 described below. The note on photograph 7 (shown below) indicates that this is Paul WestenbergerÃ¢??s (deceased)Luger, serial number 48. This Luger was made up for Westenberger by a known craftsman. It was never a secret. When I was researching Imperial Lugers Tom Knox informed me about it. He said that Westenberger said that he knew he could never afford an original 1904 Navy and had a replica made up. At the time this was general knowledge. Reportedly the barrel was made from a turned down rifle barrel. Any proofs applied to this replica barrel are clearly bogus. Which, clearly establishes that the proof on the bottom of the barrel shown below (figure 1) is a replica or fake. Originally the frame had a 4 digit number and the first and last digits were removed to leave the Ã¢??48". Paul Westenberger did not live to see this project completed. (Tom Knox 1989 and 2003) The serial number Ã¢??48" does not appear in the data base on page 162 of Imperial Lugers because it was a known replica. Card (B) shows rubbings from Tom KnoxÃ¢??s Navy Luger, serial number 772. This Luger is shown on page 167 of Imperial Lugers. It has no proofs, has 60 degree knurling, a square end to the extractor, has been refinished, an improper toggle lock, the barrel profile undulates, and is almost certainly a replica. At the time I put itÃ¢??s photograph in Imperial Lugers, its owner (Tom Knox) and I believed that it was an arsenal refinish/rework. I did not realize that it was a fake until after Imperial Lugers was published. This realization was not a secret. I pointed this out when I was a guest speaker at one of the National Automatic Pistol Collectors Association conventions. I have stated to any number of collectors that any 1904 Navy over serial number 200 is certainly very suspect and probably a fake. Card (A) shows rubbings from Lee Schreibers (deceased, now in the collection of Dr. Sturgess) 1904 Navy Luger. These rubbings show the square pattern toggle knurling, the proof above the lanyard, the front frame serial number Ã¢??51", the right receiver proofÃ¢??s C C/M, and the crescent shaped extractor end. Expert and World known Luger collectors John Pearson, Don Rousseau, Robert Hogan, Robert Simpson, Doug Smith, Dr. Sturgess and Charles Whittaker consider that these are characteristics of a proper 1904 Navy. They all vouch for the credibility of this Luger. I have recently discussed the credibility of this Luger with Pearson, Rousseau, Smith and Whittaker. All considered it original and were credulous that someone implied that it was a fraud. The exact same rubbings that you sent to me (A, serial number 51) were published in AUTO MAG (Volume 19 page 138) over 15 years ago by Jim Cate. He states Ã¢??I offer these to the membership because it has been well established that LeeÃ¢??s 1904 navy luger, # 51 was the only completely original factory unaltered example known.Ã¢?Â See Cates original comments published in AUTO MAG below (figure 2). This is a good opportunity to modify a list of reported1904 Navy Lugers shown on page 162 of Imperial Lugers. Observations and information gleaned since Imperial Lugers was published indicates that this data should be modified. This data base shows 10 reported 1904 Navy Lugers between serial number 273 and 1148. These serial numbers should be deleted from this list. Also, Charles WhittakerÃ¢??s, serial number 79, that is identical to serial number 51 (except unaltered safety) should be added. Tom thanks for supplying the photographs. It has prompted me to clear up some obselete data in Imperial Lugers, restablished the credibility of 1904 Navy serial number 51, and will help fellow collectors better understand and appreciate the importance of these rare 1904 Navy Lugers. Jan" Unfortunately, I could not figure out how to attach the pictures. In any event, I want the world to know that my comments were in no way an impeachment of Jan's work; rather they were a caution to be very careful in dealing with rare and pricey Lugers. Tom A.

07-23-2003, 02:49 AM	#6
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	Ed, Any 04 OVER #200 is suspect in their opinion. I have encountered records of about 27 1904 Navy serial numbers and almost half are above 200. That makes for a bunch of bogus 04s. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

07-23-2003, 03:06 AM	#7
Edward Tinker Super Moderator Eternal Lifer LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: North of Spokane, WA Posts: 15,916 Thanks: 1,992 Thanked 4,507 Times in 2,081 Posts	Changed what I said, I meant what Ron said, <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> __________________ 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

07-23-2003, 12:49 PM	#10
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,152 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Norm... just a note to let you know that the OLD Lugerforum closed it's web doors in June of 2001...fostering the re-birth of the Lugerforum in this format that same month/year. I guess you could say that this here Lugerforum is born-again! __________________ 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..."*

07-28-2003, 12:58 AM	#12
Herb User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Utah, in the land of the Sleeping Rainbow Posts: 1,457 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, correct, it was June 2002. __________________ Utah, where gun control means a steady trigger pull

07-22-2003, 09:24 AM	#2
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,152 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Tom thanks for this great info... Please send me the photos in as large and detailed a format as you have and I will post them! Send them to lugerforum@yahoo.com I am notified every time an email arrives there. __________________ 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..."*

07-22-2003, 09:11 PM	#3
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello Tom A., Thanks for posting this very interesting info. on the real '04 Navies... Can your direct me to the thread in which '04 Navy # 51 was indicated not to be real. I cannot seem to find this thread... p.s. Am glad to hear '04 Navy # 138 is on the "good" list... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

07-23-2003, 01:38 AM	#4
Jimbo User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SF CA Posts: 167 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Pete, my reading of Tom's post is that SN#51 was an authentic 1904 Navy and not a fake.

07-23-2003, 02:03 AM	#5
Edward Tinker Super Moderator Eternal Lifer LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: North of Spokane, WA Posts: 15,916 Thanks: 1,992 Thanked 4,507 Times in 2,081 Posts	In talking to several of the "experts", # 51 is one of those considered as good and that the other one in Imperial Lugers is a known repro (not really a fake as it was known at the time to be a copy). Any 04 OVER # 200 is considered suspect in their opinion. Slip of the mind Ron, that is what I meant, see why i don't get into these intelecktual spars... Ed __________________ 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

07-23-2003, 10:04 AM	#8
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Jimbo, Maybe it was a "mis-read" on my part. From this sentence : " restablished the credibility of 1904 Navy serial number 51 ", I assumed someone along the line of the discussion had questioned the authenticity of # 51... Others, Is there any speculation as to what "donor gun" would have been used to make up these reported bogus '04 Navy pistol with numbers higher than # 200...? Or are they thought to be made up as a "clone" piece, from scratch...? Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

07-23-2003, 11:54 AM	#9
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	Pete, my notes and emails indicate that the original post that started this was made by me in late May 2002. At the time I though that I had found a 1904 navy and asked how I could tell the difference between an authentic one and a fake. Maybe this thread was made on the old Lugerforum. Alas, the one that I was looking at was a fake. Tom A, Ron Wood and Jerry Burney saved me $8000 plus. For this, I am very thankful to the above gentlemen. Big Norm

07-28-2003, 12:49 AM	#11
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hey John, Are you sure about that date ?...I thought the new Forum opened in June 2002...(???) Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

07-28-2003, 02:19 AM	#13
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Big Norm, I am very gratified, sir, to have been a part of some small service. Tom A.

07-28-2003, 03:39 PM	#14
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,152 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Pete and Herb you are correct... it was a typo on my part and the year of the transition to this forum format using UBB was June 2002. __________________ 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..."*

07-28-2003, 03:46 PM	#15
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,152 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Big Norm... here is the link to the message thread you discussed earlier about the 1904 Navy model you had wanted to buy... Search the old forum message posts is still possible... just use the link on the left of the homepage... http://boards.rennlist.com/cgi-bin/l....pl?read=27498 __________________ 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..."*

07-29-2003, 05:59 PM	#16
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,152 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	The photographs sent by Tom Armstrong to Jan C. Still for his evaluation and comment have been submitted to the Lugerforum and are now available for viewing in a Member Gallery Album...titled: The Creation of a Bogus 1904 Navy Luger Comments about these photographs are welcome... The Member Gallery link is located on the left frame of the Lugerforum Homepage... the link to the homepage is at the bottom of this and every discussion page. __________________ 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..."*

07-29-2003, 09:35 PM	#17
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	John thank you. I am still friends with the guy who wanted to sell me that 1904 navy. He was badly hurt when I showed him copies of emails I had received and of the posts on the forum. He had that gun for a long time and truly believed that he had a real one for a number of years. At first, we talked about selling/buying it for $8000. Then he saw that Shattuck sold one for $10,000 and then Simpson came out with one for $35,000. Simpson emphasized that his 1904 had the "short" rabbit ears on the extractor. Thats when I got on the forum to learn more. I didn't think that there would be that many just floating around. Big Norm

08-04-2003, 03:32 AM	#18
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Does anyone know what serial number the '04 Navy that Chuck Whitaker has on his web site? It does look like it has 90 degree checkering on the toggle(s)... Self-Edited on 8-5-03 : Found it in Still's write up...gun is # 79... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

10-04-2003, 06:50 PM	#19
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Found an interesting passage in the book "The Navy Luger" by Gortz/Walter on page 25 : "...Many of the surviving interim-model navy Parabellums, however, are now found with 60 degree-cut toggle-grips and the three-piece toggle-lock. These are generally dismissed as fakes, but some caution is advisable; though some are indeed suspect, produced by fitting genuine Pistolen 1904 (which I think is the 1906 Navy model) with Old Model toggle-links, there may have been two manufacturing patterns. DWM could easily have changed the toggle-grip style duiring the period in which the interim models were being made - All New Model guns display 60 degree dicing - and the spring-steel toggle-lock may have proved so ineffuctual that a reversion to the three-part assembly was authorized...". Maybe some of the "above # 200" pistols could be explained both by some bogus guns and some 2nd. variation guns; if you agree with Gortz/Walter speculation... If all above # 200 are suspect, someone sacrificed a lot of decent 1906 Navy pistols and some 1900 Old Model pistols to end up with these bogus 1904's...accroding to Ron Wood's count of over # 200 pistols, this would mean 14-1906 Navy and 14-1900 Old Model lugers were donated to make alot of 1904 Navy "creations"... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />