1916-1917 Navy Receiver Proofs

Luke · 07-10-2002, 12:38 PM

It is my understanding that the Navy proofs (Crown and Crown/M) were added to the left front of the receiver BEFORE the receiver was blued.

I have been told that after the receiver was manufactured, the proofs were added, and only then was the receiver buffed, polished, and blued.

This should mean that an authentic 1916-17 Navy will have proofs on the left receiver which have none of the "halo" effect found on serial numbers. Correct?

Can anyone verify this?

Thanks,
Luke

John Sabato · 07-10-2002, 01:43 PM

I think you are right Luke, but I am sure that Tom or Derek will give us the real answer soon...

Here is a photo (linked from the Swiss Lugers forum) that shows no Halo... but I believe this pistol is a re-work and has probably been refinished...maybe even by a swiss arsenal.

Ron Wood · 07-10-2002, 05:26 PM

Luke, Earlier on the forum, the subject of "halo" came up and I posted the following:

"The "halo" is a combination of the density of the metal and its effect on the bluing and the raised portion is also subject to more wear thus causing the lighter halo. However, some parts of some Lugers were finish sanded after stamping and before they were blued. A good example of this is the early Navy pieces. The receivers were sanded after stamping the proofs, but the barrels were proof stamped after bluing. Therefore the barrels will have the halo but the receivers will not."

Luke · 07-11-2002, 07:30 AM

Thanks Ron & John.

As always, I am grateful for the advice of some of the more helpful, experienced collectors on the Forum.

Regards,
Luke

Johnny Peppers · 07-11-2002, 05:19 PM

Luke,
I am having problems uploading a scan, but John S. is trying to help me on the problem.
If the scan posts, this is a 1917 dated Navy with the acceptance marks stamped after the finish was applied. They show the "halo" effect, and the raised metal around the stamps can be felt. It puzzled me why the acceptance marks would be applied before the pistol was ready for final acceptance. On US military arms the final acceptance mark is the last thing applied to the weapon before it is shipped out.

(post edited by John S. to display the graphic)

Johnny Peppers · 07-11-2002, 08:08 PM

Thanks for the help John. By the way, the sideplate was removed to get the frame and receiver closer to the scanner bed.

Pete Ebbink · 07-11-2002, 09:12 PM

Hey Guys,

I am really confused now.

I assume both Navy lugers are "real"...so why would DWM have two different steps of manufacturing ? One with stamps before rust bluing and one after rust bluing ?

Was one of those SNAFU days, I asked about in another thread posting, occuring here with these Navies ?

Johnny Peppers · 07-11-2002, 09:38 PM

Pete,
The whereabouts of the Luger I pictured has been known since right after WWII. It was brought back to El Dorado, Arkansas, where I lived up until the time I retired, by a Colonel Barton and was bought from his estate by a local physician. He was then sold along with the rest of the physician's collection in a divorce auction some 15 or so years ago, with me being the lucky purchaser.
Just my opinion, but the Swiss Navy appears to be a Swiss rework of an Imperial Navy pistol. I feel certain that it would have been refinished during the rebuild.

Pete Ebbink · 07-16-2002, 02:30 AM

Hello Johnny,

Forgive me for being a little slow on the uptake...

From the starter post by Luke, he is asking if all authentic Navies should not have the "halo" effect.

The 1917 Navy scan/photo you posted has the halo effect with means it was stamped after rust bluing...isn't this "not typical" for DWM ?

A Forum member has sent me in the past two weeks photos of his newly acquired 1916 (or 1917 Navy) that I recall does not show the halo effect and is reported by the Member's Navy "experts" as authentic.

I am really confused. Should DWM Navies have the halo effect or not ?

Pardon me for being a bit "dense"...

Pete

Garfield · 07-16-2002, 03:51 AM

Hello:

IMHO and from my observations, the proof stamps on the left side of the receiver of an authentic Imperial Navy luger should not exhibit the "halo" effect that one finds when stamps have been applied after the firearm has been blued.

GH,
Garfield

Johnny Peppers · 07-16-2002, 10:39 AM

Pete,
As stated previously, I think it is quite evident that the Navy in the first set of pictures has been refinished after manufacture. The 1917 dated Luger I posted has not been refinished. It exhibits the oxidations under the finish even though it is in the 97% original finish range. It has the typical rust on the grip frame under the grips with the matching staining on the grips. If it would further our knowledge of Lugers, I will be glad to bring this Navy to the October Tulsa show for any and all to examine.
I will be glad to send scans of any or all parts to anyone that will drop me their e-mail address. There may be a way to attach pictures to the forum e-mail, but it is much easier to scan directly to e-mail.

Dwight Gruber · 07-16-2002, 11:19 AM

A little laate into this thread, but--

John S, the pic you posted up-thread, it looks like a long-frame, and there is no date stamped on the frame rail. What year Navy is this?

--Dwight

John Sabato · 07-16-2002, 05:00 PM

That is a photo of the Swiss Navy mystery gun posted by another member (Jim Elson) a few weeks ago... It has the Swiss sunburst cross over the chamber, but it was slightly canted to one side. There was no consensus on it's true origin but in my own very humble personal opinion, I believe it was a private rework of a German Navy Luger...

Here is the link to the other thread that contains a photo of the crest:

Swiss Navy Thread-Click Here!

Just my $0.02

Pete Ebbink · 07-16-2002, 05:37 PM

Hello again, Johnny,

I hope you did not take offense to this luger beginner asking you, twice, about the 1917 Navy luger that you posted.

I was not implying that your gun was not right. If that is how my post came across, I sincerely apologize to you !!!

I was trying to understand if the issue of the Navy stamps on the left side (halo effect or not) would be a 100% "black & white" issue with these DWM models.

It appears that some 1917 Navies may have left DWM with some variations in the manfuacturing process and steps. So here is a real Navy luger with the documented halo effect.

My wife always tries to remind me to be flexible and open to new ideas. She has convinced me, over 23 years, to not be so "black & white" and to accept those gray areas of life as we experience them.

Thank you for taking your time to explain the attributes of your gun to this luger novice...

Regards,

Pete

<img src="graemlins/xyxwave.gif" border="0" alt="[bigbye]" />

Navy · 07-16-2002, 06:11 PM

Folks,

With the possible exception of some barrel proofs,(I think I may have seen 4-5) there should not be haloed metal on any navy proof or acceptance marks. There SHOULD be halos around any "extra" markings, such as unit marking or property/rack numbers.

Tom A.

John Sabato · 07-16-2002, 06:45 PM

No offense taken Pete... I did the best I could to clear up your question...

BTW, Johnny is my Dad...(or maybe Johnny Peppers [img]biggrin.gif[/img] )

Please call me John.

Pete Ebbink · 07-16-2002, 07:11 PM

Hello John Sabato,

My last posting was a reply to Johnny Pepper's last reply to me...some other postings got in between these...

I know you might be sensitive,...many members of my family still call me "Petey"...just makes me boil... [img]eek.gif[/img]

Luke · 07-16-2002, 07:16 PM

To: ALL

Is there a reference document somewhere which addresses this question?

Does this apply only to Navy Lugers, or were proofs added BEFORE polishing and bluing on all Luger receivers?

Thanks,
Luke

Edward Tinker · 07-16-2002, 07:19 PM

Good question Luke, so much of what we know is from others, and is "probably" 100% true, but it would be nice to see it in writing.

{in writing we always believe it so much more than hearing from others, I guess it is felt it has been researched more [img]wink.gif[/img] }.

Johnny Peppers · 07-16-2002, 08:57 PM

Pete,
No offense taken. In the 15 or so years that I have owned the pistol it has been looked at by collectors more knowledgeable and who have been collecting and studying Lugers longer than I. There has never been any doubt that it is absolutely correct. This was my reason for making the pistol available to anyone that wanted to examine it, or sending scans of the pistol to anyone that would like to see any part of the pistol. No matter what should be or should not be, the markings on this Navy were stamped after the pistol was blued. Maybe it would be a learning experience for all. Very few things in collecting Lugers are absolutes.

07-10-2002, 12:38 PM	#1
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 18 Times in 6 Posts	1916-1917 Navy Receiver Proofs It is my understanding that the Navy proofs (Crown and Crown/M) were added to the left front of the receiver BEFORE the receiver was blued. I have been told that after the receiver was manufactured, the proofs were added, and only then was the receiver buffed, polished, and blued. This should mean that an authentic 1916-17 Navy will have proofs on the left receiver which have none of the "halo" effect found on serial numbers. Correct? Can anyone verify this? Thanks, Luke __________________ "Peace, if possible; truth, at any cost." . . . Martin Luther

07-10-2002, 01:43 PM	#2
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,150 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	I think you are right Luke, but I am sure that Tom or Derek will give us the real answer soon... Here is a photo (linked from the Swiss Lugers forum) that shows no Halo... but I believe this pistol is a re-work and has probably been refinished...maybe even by a swiss arsenal. __________________ 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..."*

07-10-2002, 05:26 PM	#3
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: 6,986 Thanks: 1,065 Thanked 5,088 Times in 1,674 Posts	Luke, Earlier on the forum, the subject of "halo" came up and I posted the following: "The "halo" is a combination of the density of the metal and its effect on the bluing and the raised portion is also subject to more wear thus causing the lighter halo. However, some parts of some Lugers were finish sanded after stamping and before they were blued. A good example of this is the early Navy pieces. The receivers were sanded after stamping the proofs, but the barrels were proof stamped after bluing. Therefore the barrels will have the halo but the receivers will not." __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

07-11-2002, 07:30 AM	#4
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 18 Times in 6 Posts	Thanks Ron & John. As always, I am grateful for the advice of some of the more helpful, experienced collectors on the Forum. Regards, Luke __________________ "Peace, if possible; truth, at any cost." . . . Martin Luther

07-16-2002, 05:00 PM	#13
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,150 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	That is a photo of the Swiss Navy mystery gun posted by another member (Jim Elson) a few weeks ago... It has the Swiss sunburst cross over the chamber, but it was slightly canted to one side. There was no consensus on it's true origin but in my own very humble personal opinion, I believe it was a private rework of a German Navy Luger... Here is the link to the other thread that contains a photo of the crest: Swiss Navy Thread-Click Here! Just my $0.02 __________________ 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..."*

07-11-2002, 05:19 PM	#5
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Luke, I am having problems uploading a scan, but John S. is trying to help me on the problem. If the scan posts, this is a 1917 dated Navy with the acceptance marks stamped after the finish was applied. They show the "halo" effect, and the raised metal around the stamps can be felt. It puzzled me why the acceptance marks would be applied before the pistol was ready for final acceptance. On US military arms the final acceptance mark is the last thing applied to the weapon before it is shipped out. (post edited by John S. to display the graphic)

07-11-2002, 08:08 PM	#6
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Thanks for the help John. By the way, the sideplate was removed to get the frame and receiver closer to the scanner bed.

07-11-2002, 09:12 PM	#7
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hey Guys, I am really confused now. I assume both Navy lugers are "real"...so why would DWM have two different steps of manufacturing ? One with stamps before rust bluing and one after rust bluing ? Was one of those SNAFU days, I asked about in another thread posting, occuring here with these Navies ?

07-11-2002, 09:38 PM	#8
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, The whereabouts of the Luger I pictured has been known since right after WWII. It was brought back to El Dorado, Arkansas, where I lived up until the time I retired, by a Colonel Barton and was bought from his estate by a local physician. He was then sold along with the rest of the physician's collection in a divorce auction some 15 or so years ago, with me being the lucky purchaser. Just my opinion, but the Swiss Navy appears to be a Swiss rework of an Imperial Navy pistol. I feel certain that it would have been refinished during the rebuild.

07-16-2002, 02:30 AM	#9
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello Johnny, Forgive me for being a little slow on the uptake... From the starter post by Luke, he is asking if all authentic Navies should not have the "halo" effect. The 1917 Navy scan/photo you posted has the halo effect with means it was stamped after rust bluing...isn't this "not typical" for DWM ? A Forum member has sent me in the past two weeks photos of his newly acquired 1916 (or 1917 Navy) that I recall does not show the halo effect and is reported by the Member's Navy "experts" as authentic. I am really confused. Should DWM Navies have the halo effect or not ? Pardon me for being a bit "dense"... Pete

07-16-2002, 03:51 AM	#10
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Hello: IMHO and from my observations, the proof stamps on the left side of the receiver of an authentic Imperial Navy luger should not exhibit the "halo" effect that one finds when stamps have been applied after the firearm has been blued. GH, Garfield

07-16-2002, 10:39 AM	#11
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, As stated previously, I think it is quite evident that the Navy in the first set of pictures has been refinished after manufacture. The 1917 dated Luger I posted has not been refinished. It exhibits the oxidations under the finish even though it is in the 97% original finish range. It has the typical rust on the grip frame under the grips with the matching staining on the grips. If it would further our knowledge of Lugers, I will be glad to bring this Navy to the October Tulsa show for any and all to examine. I will be glad to send scans of any or all parts to anyone that will drop me their e-mail address. There may be a way to attach pictures to the forum e-mail, but it is much easier to scan directly to e-mail.

07-16-2002, 11:19 AM	#12
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,889 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,281 Times in 423 Posts	A little laate into this thread, but-- John S, the pic you posted up-thread, it looks like a long-frame, and there is no date stamped on the frame rail. What year Navy is this? --Dwight

07-16-2002, 05:37 PM	#14
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello again, Johnny, I hope you did not take offense to this luger beginner asking you, twice, about the 1917 Navy luger that you posted. I was not implying that your gun was not right. If that is how my post came across, I sincerely apologize to you !!! I was trying to understand if the issue of the Navy stamps on the left side (halo effect or not) would be a 100% "black & white" issue with these DWM models. It appears that some 1917 Navies may have left DWM with some variations in the manfuacturing process and steps. So here is a real Navy luger with the documented halo effect. My wife always tries to remind me to be flexible and open to new ideas. She has convinced me, over 23 years, to not be so "black & white" and to accept those gray areas of life as we experience them. Thank you for taking your time to explain the attributes of your gun to this luger novice... Regards, Pete <img src="graemlins/xyxwave.gif" border="0" alt="[bigbye]" />

07-16-2002, 06:11 PM	#15
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Folks, With the possible exception of some barrel proofs,(I think I may have seen 4-5) there should not be haloed metal on any navy proof or acceptance marks. There SHOULD be halos around any "extra" markings, such as unit marking or property/rack numbers. Tom A.

07-16-2002, 06:45 PM	#16
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,150 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	No offense taken Pete... I did the best I could to clear up your question... BTW, Johnny is my Dad...(or maybe Johnny Peppers [img]biggrin.gif[/img] ) Please call me John. __________________ 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..."*

07-16-2002, 07:11 PM	#17
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello John Sabato, My last posting was a reply to Johnny Pepper's last reply to me...some other postings got in between these... I know you might be sensitive,...many members of my family still call me "Petey"...just makes me boil... [img]eek.gif[/img]

07-16-2002, 07:16 PM	#18
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 18 Times in 6 Posts	To: ALL Is there a reference document somewhere which addresses this question? Does this apply only to Navy Lugers, or were proofs added BEFORE polishing and bluing on all Luger receivers? Thanks, Luke __________________ "Peace, if possible; truth, at any cost." . . . Martin Luther

07-16-2002, 07:19 PM	#19
Edward Tinker Super Moderator Eternal Lifer LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: North of Spokane, WA Posts: 15,909 Thanks: 1,986 Thanked 4,500 Times in 2,076 Posts	Good question Luke, so much of what we know is from others, and is "probably" 100% true, but it would be nice to see it in writing. {in writing we always believe it so much more than hearing from others, I guess it is felt it has been researched more [img]wink.gif[/img] }. __________________ 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

07-16-2002, 08:57 PM	#20
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, No offense taken. In the 15 or so years that I have owned the pistol it has been looked at by collectors more knowledgeable and who have been collecting and studying Lugers longer than I. There has never been any doubt that it is absolutely correct. This was my reason for making the pistol available to anyone that wanted to examine it, or sending scans of the pistol to anyone that would like to see any part of the pistol. No matter what should be or should not be, the markings on this Navy were stamped after the pistol was blued. Maybe it would be a learning experience for all. Very few things in collecting Lugers are absolutes.