Trust your instincts: Bad gun

Navy · 10-20-2003, 03:33 PM

All,

Got back to Huntsgaritaville last evening after a mixed weekend visiting old and sick parents and brand new grandson...figger one balances out the other.

In any event, awaiting in my palacial rent-a-lair was a big USPS box all sealed with tape and Certified Mail stamps all over it.

Opened it as I mixed a martini and was *really* impressed by first sight of the holster. A very primo C Weiss Braunschweig 1939 dated piece with the right markings and the right smell.

Pulled the gun out and it looked really nice at first glance.

Got my illuminated magnifying glass and began my typical exam. About 15 miliseconds into it, I noted that the piece, a 1938 S/42, had an eagle N proof on the left side of the receiver and breechblock.

I know that the KM glommed onto handguns when and where ever they could but there was something I didn't like about this one.

Didn't have III Reich Lugers with me (That won't happen again!) so I called on some knowledgable very senior collectors for advice.

Two emails and voila, the mystery she was solved as Inspector Cleuseau would say.

The Eagle N proof didn't go into use until Jan 16, 1940, some 2 years after this piece was made. Sooo, unless the gun was sent back to Mauser for referb in 1940 and then found its way into KM weapons supply channels, which would be more coinky-dinky than I believe possible, it is a fake.

It was returned via Express Mail at noon today.

The SN is 1849 lower case L suffix (Yes, I know they are all lower case but l looks like the number one) and the property number is N2894.

I have no doubt it will surface again, perhaps with the correct proofs.

Be careful, its a jungle out there kiddies. With Loogies, you are predator or prey it appears. I know which one of those I want to be.

Tom A.

John Sabato · 10-20-2003, 04:09 PM

Thanks for the debrief Tom... Too bad you didn't capture it on "digital film" with your new camera!

Navy · 10-20-2003, 04:46 PM

I have some pix

of this fake; will use as upload "wind dummy" later.
<img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" />
Tom A

Big Norm · 10-20-2003, 10:48 PM

TomA,
is this the same 1938 S/42 you pictured in the discussion section?
Big Norm

Navy · 10-20-2003, 11:23 PM

Norm and all,

NO, absolutely no, this is NOT the gun I have (with assistance) posted pics...
I stand behind the pictured piece 100%; the newbie went back to the seller today express mail.

If you had read the lengthy and tortued e-mails between John D and I, you would know that I was trying, against all hope of success, to post pix of this bad gun. But, alas, the techno-demons have once again kicked my butt.

As we used to encourage the "indige" to say in SE Asia, I offer to the Forum Gods my own "Chu Hoi"; I surrender. White Flag. I promise not to NEVER try and send a picture again. Its about as easy and painless as getting rid of a tattoo and an ex at the same time.

I have had surgery that wasn't as involved or painful.

Tom A

drbuster · 10-21-2003, 12:21 AM

Dear Tom A. If the proofs were proper and not E/N's, were there any other obvious clues that this piece was bogus? On page 108 of Still's Third Reich Lugers, the serial number 1849i doesn't fit into the expected sequence of known examples with the property mark N2894. Is that another glaring clue or are there exceptions to the sequencing noted with confirmed original WW2 Navies?

Navy · 10-21-2003, 08:48 AM

Herb,

As I mentioned in post, I didn't have III Reich Lugers with me (I am about 700 miles from home and have been since 3 August) so I couldn't consult it. Also, based on increasing data turned up doing research for a forthcoming book, there appears to be ZERO correlation between serial number ranges and property numbers in the Imperial, Weimar and III Reich navies. It is maddening and counter intuitive but it seems to be the case. It is almost like guns were purchased from Mauser inventory and orders were filled on a random serial number basis and shipped to Kiel or Williamshaven where they were property numbered as they were issued, again, on what appears to be an almost random basis.

Quite obviously, this CANNOT have been what occurred, but it is what the spread of property numbers and serial numbers suggest. So clearly, there must have been some step in the issue process that has not been documented to eplain this.

I wrote a lengthy piece on this on the forum some time back and it was published in AUTOMAG.

As far as "glaring" tip offs, none noted on this particular gun. As III Reich KM pieces were marked with a pantograph starting in 1935 IIRC, detecting a bad mark by the average collector is difficult at best if not impossible. I have some "special things" I look for in KM markings, which I will not go into in a public venue.

Jim Cate, the famous collector/author postulates that 75% of all KM marked guns are bogus. This, combined with the hefty price some of these bring strongly suggest that this is not an area to attempt while still using training wheels.

Tom A.

drbuster · 10-21-2003, 09:19 AM

Tom. A., sounds to me, if Jim Cate is correct, that his is an area of luger collecting that should be "quicksand" even if you are at the racing bike level, or even the Harley level!

Navy · 10-21-2003, 10:37 AM

Herb,

The difficulty is what makes it sooo rewarding.
Tom A

Pete Ebbink · 10-21-2003, 12:01 PM

Hello Tom A.,

Please check your Private Message feature...

Regards,

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

Pete Ebbink · 10-21-2003, 12:02 PM

Hello Tom A.,

Please check your Private Message feature...

Regards,

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

Doubs · 10-21-2003, 12:40 PM

Tom, this is only "thinking out loud" but if 75% of the U-Boat fleet was destroyed and lie at the bottom of the oceans, it seems to me that a large number of Navy Lugers would be there with them. That may help explain the holes in the serial number ranges. Again, just a thought.

Pete Ebbink · 10-21-2003, 11:06 PM

With Tom's permission, I just posted a copy of Tom's article dealing with Navy serial numbers versus property numbers in our Member's Gallery.

If you continue to left click on each page, the page will "expand" for easy reading for some of our tired, older eyes.

This great article was recently submitted by Tom in the September 2003 edition of NAPCA's AutoMag newsletter.

Since a few LF members are not NAPCA members, Tom was kind enough to allow me to post it here for others to learn from and enjoy...

Thank you, Tom !

Regards,

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

Navy · 10-23-2003, 09:25 PM

Pete,

My pleasure, sir.

Tom A

10-20-2003, 03:33 PM	#1
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Trust your instincts: Bad gun All, Got back to Huntsgaritaville last evening after a mixed weekend visiting old and sick parents and brand new grandson...figger one balances out the other. In any event, awaiting in my palacial rent-a-lair was a big USPS box all sealed with tape and Certified Mail stamps all over it. Opened it as I mixed a martini and was really impressed by first sight of the holster. A very primo C Weiss Braunschweig 1939 dated piece with the right markings and the right smell. Pulled the gun out and it looked really nice at first glance. Got my illuminated magnifying glass and began my typical exam. About 15 miliseconds into it, I noted that the piece, a 1938 S/42, had an eagle N proof on the left side of the receiver and breechblock. I know that the KM glommed onto handguns when and where ever they could but there was something I didn't like about this one. Didn't have III Reich Lugers with me (That won't happen again!) so I called on some knowledgable very senior collectors for advice. Two emails and voila, the mystery she was solved as Inspector Cleuseau would say. The Eagle N proof didn't go into use until Jan 16, 1940, some 2 years after this piece was made. Sooo, unless the gun was sent back to Mauser for referb in 1940 and then found its way into KM weapons supply channels, which would be more coinky-dinky than I believe possible, it is a fake. It was returned via Express Mail at noon today. The SN is 1849 lower case L suffix (Yes, I know they are all lower case but l looks like the number one) and the property number is N2894. I have no doubt it will surface again, perhaps with the correct proofs. Be careful, its a jungle out there kiddies. With Loogies, you are predator or prey it appears. I know which one of those I want to be. Tom A.

10-20-2003, 04:09 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	Thanks for the debrief Tom... Too bad you didn't capture it on "digital film" with your new camera! __________________ 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..."*

10-20-2003, 04:46 PM	#3
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	I have some pix of this fake; will use as upload "wind dummy" later. <img border="0" alt="[cheers]" title="" src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" /> Tom A

10-20-2003, 10:48 PM	#4
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	TomA, is this the same 1938 S/42 you pictured in the discussion section? Big Norm

10-20-2003, 11:23 PM	#5
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Norm and all, NO, absolutely no, this is NOT the gun I have (with assistance) posted pics... I stand behind the pictured piece 100%; the newbie went back to the seller today express mail. If you had read the lengthy and tortued e-mails between John D and I, you would know that I was trying, against all hope of success, to post pix of this bad gun. But, alas, the techno-demons have once again kicked my butt. As we used to encourage the "indige" to say in SE Asia, I offer to the Forum Gods my own "Chu Hoi"; I surrender. White Flag. I promise not to NEVER try and send a picture again. Its about as easy and painless as getting rid of a tattoo and an ex at the same time. I have had surgery that wasn't as involved or painful. Tom A

10-21-2003, 12:21 AM	#6
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Dear Tom A. If the proofs were proper and not E/N's, were there any other obvious clues that this piece was bogus? On page 108 of Still's Third Reich Lugers, the serial number 1849i doesn't fit into the expected sequence of known examples with the property mark N2894. Is that another glaring clue or are there exceptions to the sequencing noted with confirmed original WW2 Navies?

10-21-2003, 08:48 AM	#7
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Herb, As I mentioned in post, I didn't have III Reich Lugers with me (I am about 700 miles from home and have been since 3 August) so I couldn't consult it. Also, based on increasing data turned up doing research for a forthcoming book, there appears to be ZERO correlation between serial number ranges and property numbers in the Imperial, Weimar and III Reich navies. It is maddening and counter intuitive but it seems to be the case. It is almost like guns were purchased from Mauser inventory and orders were filled on a random serial number basis and shipped to Kiel or Williamshaven where they were property numbered as they were issued, again, on what appears to be an almost random basis. Quite obviously, this CANNOT have been what occurred, but it is what the spread of property numbers and serial numbers suggest. So clearly, there must have been some step in the issue process that has not been documented to eplain this. I wrote a lengthy piece on this on the forum some time back and it was published in AUTOMAG. As far as "glaring" tip offs, none noted on this particular gun. As III Reich KM pieces were marked with a pantograph starting in 1935 IIRC, detecting a bad mark by the average collector is difficult at best if not impossible. I have some "special things" I look for in KM markings, which I will not go into in a public venue. Jim Cate, the famous collector/author postulates that 75% of all KM marked guns are bogus. This, combined with the hefty price some of these bring strongly suggest that this is not an area to attempt while still using training wheels. Tom A.

10-21-2003, 09:19 AM	#8
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Tom. A., sounds to me, if Jim Cate is correct, that his is an area of luger collecting that should be "quicksand" even if you are at the racing bike level, or even the Harley level!

10-21-2003, 10:37 AM	#9
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Herb, The difficulty is what makes it sooo rewarding. Tom A

10-21-2003, 12:01 PM	#10
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello Tom A., Please check your Private Message feature... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

10-21-2003, 12:02 PM	#11
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Hello Tom A., Please check your Private Message feature... Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

10-21-2003, 12:40 PM	#12
Doubs User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Byron, Georgia Posts: 1,671 Thanks: 772 Thanked 1,617 Times in 526 Posts	Tom, this is only "thinking out loud" but if 75% of the U-Boat fleet was destroyed and lie at the bottom of the oceans, it seems to me that a large number of Navy Lugers would be there with them. That may help explain the holes in the serial number ranges. Again, just a thought.

10-21-2003, 11:06 PM	#13
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	With Tom's permission, I just posted a copy of Tom's article dealing with Navy serial numbers versus property numbers in our Member's Gallery. If you continue to left click on each page, the page will "expand" for easy reading for some of our tired, older eyes. This great article was recently submitted by Tom in the September 2003 edition of NAPCA's AutoMag newsletter. Since a few LF members are not NAPCA members, Tom was kind enough to allow me to post it here for others to learn from and enjoy... Thank you, Tom ! Regards, Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

10-23-2003, 09:25 PM	#14
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Pete, My pleasure, sir. Tom A