Navy Luger? - Page 3

Parabellus · 10-01-2006, 01:13 AM

Quote:

'Come on and cheer up, they said, things could be worse,eh? So I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse.'

I don't know who said it first but my late brother said it occasionally. He would not shy away from the word 'FAKE' either. Nevertheless it would be utterly presumptuous of me, with my limited knowledge, to use such blunt language. Garfield used the word 'CRAP'.
As for Mr. Krause: he did not balk at letting me photograph this piece, knowing it would be posted here the next day. He had told me what he believed to have been replaced on it. All I had asked him for was a good 6" shooter with Navy-style sight because I could not see spending $4K on a single gun that I wanted to shoot. I never expected this to fly as a collector's piece. No one who knows anything is likely to try to fool anyone else who know anything with this bipolar Luger. I my know nothing but he knows you all know and that I depend largely on your input. If some Lugers originally stamped for Army use were then re-barreled and redirected for Navy use I would not know. If someone in Florida is able to recreate Crown/M dies to boost old guns I would not know either.
It is overpriced. So is housing here in Kalifornia. So is French cuisine. So, perhaps, are collectable firearms. I do want the best bang for my buck and I can wait.
I still depend on the expertise abundant in this Forum, how ever blunt it gets.

Russell

Pete Ebbink · 10-01-2006, 02:12 PM

Tom,

You might be right about the Navy proofs on the Greg-Martin auction house offering.

I cannot remember if on M1908 Navy lugers if the crown should be nested into the M or not.

After looking a little closer at this gun's stampings, the M does not seem symmetrical in shape...

If my work schedule allows, I might make it over there just to look her over.

Dwight Gruber · 10-01-2006, 05:02 PM

http://67.155.195.3:8050/FMPro?-db=G...ID=47867&-find

Pete,

When you ge there, please check for several specific things:

The barrel, to make sure that all the appropriate markings are there, and that it has a witness mark;

The chamber, to see if it has a chamber ring;

The area on the front of the frame under the serial number where the letter sufix is usually located;

The rear sight numbers, to see if they are aligned;

The recoil lug, to see if it is serial numbered;

The size of the rear toggle flange;

The underside of the rear toggle piece, to see if it is machined properly and if it has the proper letter stamp.

If you can, compare the left frame rail contour to a known authentic 1908 Navy and to an Alphabet DWM.

--Dwight

Jan C Still · 10-02-2006, 12:14 AM

Re 1917 Navy Luger controversal/fake
Based on all the information supplied by the experts on this Forum (not to include tacfoley), this Luger appears to have started as an Imperial military Luger. Sometime in its recent history a start was made toward making it into a fake Navy Luger. A new 6 inch barrel was added, 1917 dates were added to the left sight block and left frame, a new reproduction Navy rear sight was added, and fake Navy proofs and acceptance stamps were added to the left receiver. However, the original military proofs were never removed from the right receiver. Hence, this Luger has both Imperial Army stamps on the right receiver and modern (fake) Navy stamps on its left receiver.

What is interesting about this Luger is that it has a recent provenance. Is the current owner willing to supply information on the source of the original donor Imperial Army Luger, who added the new 6 inch barrel, the new reproduction Navy rear sight, and (most important) who added the fake Navy proofs, acceptance stamps, and the 1917 dates.

The addition of a new barrel and rear sight to an Imperial military Luger to make a shooter is understandable. However, the addition of fake Navy proofs and 1917 dates is a different matter.
Jan

Jan C Still · 10-02-2006, 01:14 AM

tacfoley
You are not includes as an expert! Please read above.
Jan

Parabellus · 10-02-2006, 02:35 AM

Tac, Jan, et al
I get the point about the Army/Navy.

Hope I get the time to go to the Greg-Martin Auction House to see that piece and, more importantly, finally meet Pete.

Russell

John Sabato · 10-02-2006, 08:35 AM

T. A. de C. Foley... you make me laugh so hard that I have frequently fallen out of my chair... it is sometimes the only exercise I get!

10-02-2006, 02:35 AM	#46
Parabellus User Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: SF Bay Posts: 195 Thanks: 16 Thanked 9 Times in 4 Posts	Tac, Jan, et al I get the point about the Army/Navy. Hope I get the time to go to the Greg-Martin Auction House to see that piece and, more importantly, finally meet Pete. Russell __________________

10-02-2006, 08:35 AM	#47
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	T. A. de C. Foley... you make me laugh so hard that I have frequently fallen out of my chair... it is sometimes the only exercise I get! __________________ 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..."*

10-01-2006, 02:12 PM	#42
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Tom, You might be right about the Navy proofs on the Greg-Martin auction house offering. I cannot remember if on M1908 Navy lugers if the crown should be nested into the M or not. After looking a little closer at this gun's stampings, the M does not seem symmetrical in shape... If my work schedule allows, I might make it over there just to look her over.

10-01-2006, 05:02 PM	#43
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,902 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,317 Times in 431 Posts	http://67.155.195.3:8050/FMPro?-db=G...ID=47867&-find Pete, When you ge there, please check for several specific things: The barrel, to make sure that all the appropriate markings are there, and that it has a witness mark; The chamber, to see if it has a chamber ring; The area on the front of the frame under the serial number where the letter sufix is usually located; The rear sight numbers, to see if they are aligned; The recoil lug, to see if it is serial numbered; The size of the rear toggle flange; The underside of the rear toggle piece, to see if it is machined properly and if it has the proper letter stamp. If you can, compare the left frame rail contour to a known authentic 1908 Navy and to an Alphabet DWM. --Dwight

10-02-2006, 12:14 AM	#44
Jan C Still User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Box 240188, Douglas, Alaska, 99824 Posts: 463 Thanks: 0 Thanked 52 Times in 32 Posts	Re 1917 Navy Luger controversal/fake Based on all the information supplied by the experts on this Forum (not to include tacfoley), this Luger appears to have started as an Imperial military Luger. Sometime in its recent history a start was made toward making it into a fake Navy Luger. A new 6 inch barrel was added, 1917 dates were added to the left sight block and left frame, a new reproduction Navy rear sight was added, and fake Navy proofs and acceptance stamps were added to the left receiver. However, the original military proofs were never removed from the right receiver. Hence, this Luger has both Imperial Army stamps on the right receiver and modern (fake) Navy stamps on its left receiver. What is interesting about this Luger is that it has a recent provenance. Is the current owner willing to supply information on the source of the original donor Imperial Army Luger, who added the new 6 inch barrel, the new reproduction Navy rear sight, and (most important) who added the fake Navy proofs, acceptance stamps, and the 1917 dates. The addition of a new barrel and rear sight to an Imperial military Luger to make a shooter is understandable. However, the addition of fake Navy proofs and 1917 dates is a different matter. Jan

10-02-2006, 01:14 AM	#45
Jan C Still User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Box 240188, Douglas, Alaska, 99824 Posts: 463 Thanks: 0 Thanked 52 Times in 32 Posts	tacfoley You are not includes as an expert! Please read above. Jan