LugerForum Discussion Forums my profile | register | faq | search
upload photo | donate | calendar

Go Back   LugerForum Discussion Forums > Luger Discussion Forums > Lugerforum Archive

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 02-10-2001, 11:59 AM   #1
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default New collector pitfalls

Hi Folks!


I took a look at the classified sections and was a bit unsettled by all the requests for parts with specific numbers. I think we may need some background here.


The numbering of parts, and especially small parts, was a necessity rather than a luxury. Firearms like the Luger and C96 "Broomhandle" predate fully interchangeable parts. There was a lot of hand fitting that went on in final assembly, and a part from one completed firearm might not work in another firearm.


Collectors, who value originality and are willing to pay a premium for a firearm with all original parts, were quick to notice this. That's the origin of the collectors' question, "Is it matching?" asked before making an offer on any firearm he is thinking of buying. The answer to the question will dictate the price he is willing to pay.


Forgers, who are interested in making a quick buck with minimum effort, were quick to notice that serial numbers repeated. They found it was relatively easy to take two mismatched firearms of the same make and model that happened to have the same last two or three digits in otherwise different serial numbers, and make up a firearm that appeared to be matched. This turned two relatively cheap firearms into one relatively cheap firearm and one very expensive faked firearm.


New collectors, who don't yet understand that in collector circles the term "matching" is verbal short hand for "it has all original parts", also noticed that serial numbers repeat. As they don't understand the situation, they think they can make their mismatched shooter grade pieces into collector grade pieces by swapping parts until all the numbers "match." For the most part new collectors don't do this for profit - they do it to have a â??matchingâ? piece.


Alas, what they produce is not a matching piece, but a faked firearm :-(


Worse yet, they create a booby trap for other collectors. The firearm they have unknowingly faked eventually leaves their hands - by estate sale at their deaths if not before. It takes an advanced collector to pick up on what was done, and to recognize the firearm is a fake. Newbies, and less advanced collectors, are taken in and cheated out of hard earned CollectorBucks.


All of this is why parts swapping is viewed with disfavor by collectors. By the time a newbie shows an advanced collector his prized and very expensive fake and finds out he has been taken no one knows or cares how it came to be faked.


I strongly recommend anyone considering parts swapping abandon the idea. Swapping parts does not (except in very, very rare cases) produce a matching firearm - it only produces a fake. It can also produce a firearm that either doesnâ??t work at all or is very dangerous to shoot.


I hope this helps understand the situation, and that I've not given offense.


Best regards,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 01:25 PM   #2
John D.
Administrator
& Site Owner
LugerForum
Patron
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: A Little NE of Somewhere...
Posts: 2,646
Thanks: 436
Thanked 502 Times in 125 Posts
Default I understand your points - but...

Hi Kyrie,


The points you make are very well stated - but I think they would need to be put into pespective. Yes, you are right - folks that re-stamp or purposely put in "non-original" parts with the intent to re-sell them as "original" are commiting fraud. And yes, these folks victimize new and more experienced collectors alike. Unfortunately - it happens to the best of us sometimes (ask me about a sideframe HK commercial someday - I fell victim as well when I was a beginning collector).


However - I do not agree that the folks who post in the Classifieds looking for specific numbered parts are doing anything wrong at all. In fact - one of the pieces I have has no toggle pin (Axel pin) - and you bet - I'd like to find a matching number if I can find one at all. My intent is not to "turn this over" as a "matching Luger" - but rather, have a piece in my collection that I can come as close to "original" as possible. Will I sell that 1918 DWM someday? Maybe - but at the sametime, I wouldn't represent it as "all original" - maybe since I've been a victim of that previously, I'm overly sensitive to that (see above) - but I'd like to believe that I'm not alone in that sentiment within this Board.


Therefore - while I appreciate your post - frankly, this is an "individualist hobby" - and to cast a pallor over anyone who looks for specific numbers for our own personal use/satisfaction - predetermines that anyone who would look for those parts with matching numbers is a "crook"... Frankly, that's just not true, IMNSHO...



John D. is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 03:18 PM   #3
BILL
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 826
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: I understand your points - but...

Since we all have different perspectives(thankfully), there is no way everyone will agree to an individual's tenets' regarding the dos and donts of Luger collecting. It is quite unique. Having read both Kyrie and John D.'s posts I would have to say I understand both positions. I can clearly understand the historical aspect of the 'story' that a pistol carries with it through time and how it can be altered by exchanging parts or modification of numbers and proofs. Some would carry this to extremes, though. We have had the discussion regarding the search for matching magazines. Kyrie makes a good point in that an honest collector, who wants the serialized parts to match, someday becomes the unwitting participant in a tacit forgery. Early on, I, like many of us, learned the hard way about matching parts. It has not made me cynical or paranoid about the issue, but it has heightened my awareness. A Luger could conceivably go through several generations before anyone would know that a part was not an original matched part, maybe never. Two soldiers in a WWI trench could have traded magazines to get a lucky (to them) number and in modern times two collectors, not having that some lucky number, use a data base to find those numbers, and trade back. Yes, history is altered but no one gets hurt. The critical point is the intention of the individual. The person who knowingly sits back and says nothing as the inexperienced Luger collector buys a reworked Luger as an original is the problem. Having given it considerable thought, both the seller and the buyer share the responsibility to the collecting community. Know what you are selling, be as honest as you can be and know what you are buying and who you are dealing with. There will always be crooks and there will always be fools with money. Use your best judgement and know that most Lugers have been taken apart and put back together many times. It is interesting to think of how the hobby would have evolved if the parts were not serialized and proofs were all identical or if they all came 'sealed' from the factory. I guess condition and configuration and quantity of manufacture would be the only criteria. Again, there are a lot of facets to the hobby and like the vampire, once bitten it stays with you.



BILL is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 03:25 PM   #4
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default Re: I understand your points - but...

Hi John,


Thank you for your kind post


But (and I intend no offense!) I think you may have missed my points.


Point #1 is originality cannot be restored by swapping parts.


Purely as an example, letâ??s take the Luger for which you are seeking a toggle pin numbered â??18â?. You say (and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity) that you are doing this to â??have a piece in my collection that I can come as close to "original" as possible.â? Your Luger is as close to original as itâ??s ever going to be right now.


There is only one toggle pin that could restore your Luger to its original condition - its original toggle pin. Any other toggle pin, regardless of how or whether it is numbered, will not restore your Lugerâ??s originality. Using a toggle pin from another Luger that happened to have the same last two serial number digits as your Luger will not make you Luger any more original than using a toggle pin that has a completely different number. Your Lugerâ??s originality is gone beyond recovery.


Point #2 is a fake is a fake regardless of why it was made up.


Continuing with the examp above, if you should succeed in finding a toggle pin numbered â??18â? and install it in your Luger what you will have is a Luger intentionally made to look like something it is not. In short - you will have made a fake. Please note Iâ??m not casting aspersions on you or your character. Iâ??m just describing the result of an action without regard to the actionâ??s motivation.


And yes, I clearly understand your comment that should you ever sell it you would be forthcoming that it is a fake. But can you guarantee all future owners be as honest or as knowledgeable as yourself? If not you will have created a booby trap for all future collectors. Moreover, you may not sell it during your lifetime. But at your demise it will be sold, and very likely sold as all original.


With respect, I think you need to look beyond your no doubt honest intent at the consequences of your actions, no matter how innocent your intent may be. What you intend to do will result in the same thing the intentional forgers are doing - the creation of a faked Luger. And that Luger that will rob future Luger collectors regardless of how innocently it was produced.


Best regards,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 04:03 PM   #5
John D.
Administrator
& Site Owner
LugerForum
Patron
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: A Little NE of Somewhere...
Posts: 2,646
Thanks: 436
Thanked 502 Times in 125 Posts
Default Kyrie - Very well said, and I respect..

your position (as well as the way you are presenting it) And debates like this are both informative and healthy - and I appreciate a Forum such as this to openly discuss these same issues...


BUT (you just knew I was going to say something - heh, heh, heh...) your comment of "Your Luger is as close to original as itâ??s ever going to be right now" - is correct, but my position is that why shouldn't I, or others - strive to make it "closer" to original with the addition of a numbered part - if one would be available? In other words - yes, neither are "original to manufacture" - severely impacting, in my view - "collect-ability" and "value".. Notwithstanding, and in my view - I think it comes down to "intent" of what the present owner intends to do with that pistol?


I think your point is well taken when you said "But can you guarantee all future owners be as honest or as knowledgeable as yourself.." Unfortunately - no. All I can do - is maintain records of what I change. For example, all my collection is logged per BATF requirements - but in addition - a sheet is maintained for each Luger with a description, condition purchased, and what parts I have replaced (I have only two "non-matching"/"incomplete" Lugers right - so these records are easy to maintain). To your point more specifically - it's a broader issue whether I do these changes and record the same - or whether another individual does it to commit fraud. No - I cannot guarantee that in the future owners will be as honest - and I would be a fool to think so - however, I think all who are advocates of this hobby do keep records similar to mine. What the next owner chooses to do with those documents are would be their decision - just as they are faced with decisions on their current Lugers - and whether to interchange parts or not. Therefore, again - I do not see the harm if I do it for personal reasons - and try to protect within my best ability, to maintain accurate records of those same changes...


At the root of all this, I think your comment of "the creation of a faked Luger. And that Luger that will rob future Luger collectors regardless of how innocently it was produced..." - unfortunately - is exactly on target, and point well taken. There is no concrete answer - either practically nor fundementally - and personally, it is an esoteric debate. In other words - for each one of us whose does this for our own personal reasons, be encumbered with a responsibility that extends beyond our own control of that weapon? I'm not sure how? For example - if we change non-original parts for a closer serialized version - are we responsible to be sure future owners are as honest? If so - how/what should each of us do who practice this, short of defacing that "non original" serialized version or the weapon itself? If yes, we should do that - then we are decreasing our own personal "value" in that weapon. If not - we open up that same weapon to be tendered as "original" by others less scrupulous...


Hmmm - this is an interesting debate - as I know we both respect and understand each other's position...


My Best to you always Kyrie!!



John D. is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 04:25 PM   #6
Marvin
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Upstate S.C.
Posts: 1,132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: New collector pitfalls

Kyrie,


First, Welcome back to the Forum, I for one have really missed you. I have read your posting, the replys from others, and I agree with your comments on "faking" Lugers. I like mine to be matching and this is what I normally buy. I hope I never get one that has been made up or faked and this is why I try to read and learn as much as possible.


With the import marked, dip blued Lugers coming into the US the past several years, they make a great storehouse of parts to be used in swapping. I do have a couple of import marked Lugers and one has been been completely restored to original condition. I don't feel that this restoration was harming the pistol since it had already been "dinked" with by the Russians or whoever. The value may have increased slightly since I bought it at a good price and then the added cost for restoration was reasonable. It had all matching numbers which appear to be correct for the pistol. The pistol is absolutly beautiful, but anyone in their right mind would have to know it was restored; I have never seen a wartime Luger in perfect condition; they all had some slight blue wear somewhere. I have a Double Date Import, dip blued, being restored currently to original condition. I feel that this type work does not violate the faking of a pistol since it will have a mark on the pistol indicating a rework. What are your thoughts on reworking the import, dip blues back to original? Your thoughts are much appreciated.


Marvin



Marvin is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 07:01 PM   #7
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default John - Very well said, and I respect..

Hi John!


Sorry about the subject, I just couldnâ??t resist


First let me thank you for your understanding and kind replies. Unfortunately this is one of those subjects that can raise strong feelings that make discussions deteriorate into acrimony, even though neither party wants that to happen.


Alas, I think you may still be missing one point - quite possibly because Iâ??m not being as clear as I should [wry smile]. Your comment, â??...my position is that why shouldn't I, or others - strive to make it "closer" to original with the addition of a numbered part...â? perhaps illustrates this.


With originality itâ??s never a matter of degree - a Luger is either all original or it is not. At the risk of choosing an overly dramatic example, consider the differences between the living and the dead. The living are required to pay taxes and are made to suffer if they do not. The dead are not subject to taxation (leaving aside any estate the dead may leave behind). If one falls gravely ill he is not a â??little deadâ? and his tax bill is not reduced according to how â??closeâ? he is to dead.


This example may be a little silly, but Iâ??m trying to point out there is no continuum of â??originalâ?. Either it is, or it ainâ??t


Regarding intent, I understand and appreciate your position. However (and you also knew this was coming [friendly smile]) we are responsible for more than just out intentions - we are responsible for the foreseeable results of our actions. As an illustration of this let me share with you a real life incident.


One of the fellows I used to shoot with was a State Trooper. On one occasion, while driving to the range, I noticed he was visibly upset. When I asked why he shared a case he had worked. It seems a fellow (former NASCAR type) had his infant daughter fall ill suddenly. He and his wife piled into his almost hand built â??Vette and sped off to the hospital. He drove fast and hard, and the three of them eventually arrived at the hospital - in the back of an ambulance.


On the way he broadsided a Mustang. His speed, at impact, was estimated well in excess of 100 miles per hour. The â??Vette just disintegrated at impact and the roll cage (with he and his wife) ended up almost a mile from the point of impact. His daughter was thrown free and by some miracle suffered only minor injuries. It took several days to identify the remains of the four people who had been in the Mustang.


The State Trooper I was with was the one who handled the accident scene. He had charged the driver of the â??Vette with four counts of involuntary manslaughter (he was later convicted and served a number of years). The State Trooper (and later the jury) found the man knew the potential consequences of his actions included death or injury to bystanders and acted anyway. That he was concerned about his daughter was in his favor, and was why he was not charged with four counts of vehicular homicide.


Anyway, I hope this points out that intent is not everything, and we are also responsible for the foreseeable results of our actions. In the context of our discussion we can reasonably foresee that should this or any Luger be made to look like it matches, it will at some point be sold as matching - regardless of any record keeping we may do.


So the question is, alas, a moral and ethical one that extends past our intent. We have to ask ourselves what kind of a legacy we want to leave behind for future collectors.


Anyway, I apologize for being so long winded on this subject and thank you for your time and patience.


Very best,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 07:03 PM   #8
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default Re: New collector pitfalls

Hi Marvin!


Itâ??s good to be back, but Iâ??ve never been far away. I just havenâ??t had much to report on the Luger front, other than the 1923 Finn in the Collectorsâ?? Corner (big, sloppy, smile!).


Restorations arenâ??t usually a problem, as very few restorations are perfect (most arenâ??t even very well done). They are easily spotted for what they are. Not the least reason for this is just what you point out - a well done restoration looks too good to be true. I (and most all the collectors I know) donâ??t have a problem with restorations.


Speaking specifically of the recent imports, these are impossible to completely restore due to the importation marks. These markings cannot be legally removed as they are a part of the identifying marks of the firearm. Anyone who removes these is subject to some serious Federal charges. Other than that rather large hurdle, I see no more problem restoring these than in restoring any other Luger.


On a related subject these newly imported pistols are going to be a blessing mixed with a curse for Luger collectors. A good friend of mine (and an advanced collector) was recently approached by a well respected gunsmith with a request to help use these pistols to fake rare Lugers. To say he declined would be putting it mildly. But be alert for a sudden influx of rare and uncommon Lugers on the market - they arenâ??t going to be what they have been made to look like :-(


This was not exactly unexpected - the only thing I find surprising is it took so long (sigh...).


On a happier note, Iâ??ve been corresponding with a fellow who just inherited a Luger that had been in his family for many decades. After a bit of back and forth to get a description of the pistolâ??s characteristics, it appears he has very nice 1900 American Eagle variation. With all our recent talk about fakes I just thought it would be nice let folks know very nice examples of uncommon variations do come to light very now and again


Very best,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 07:30 PM   #9
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default Re: I understand your points - but...

Hi Bill!


I'm not ignoring you and you have raised some excellent points, but most of these are also discussed in the discussion between John and myself.


One point you raise that is not covered, and I think is very worthy of note, is contained in this, "...It is interesting to think of how the hobby would have evolved if the parts were not serialized...".


US military arms fall into this category, and the response of collectors of US arms is interesting. As there are no small parts numbered the issue of swapping numbered parts doesn't come up. Also, just about *all* US military M1's (Garands and carbines) have been rebuilt many times (unlike most Lugers).


Within this context US collectors strive for "correct" rifles, where "correct" means all the parts were supplied by the same manufacturer. Parts swapping to accomplish this seems to be tolerated, if not praised. Pity the US collector - he had no way to judge originality. So he is stuck with "correct", and the understanding this doesn't mean "original". Truly original M1's are so rare that any piece represented as all original is instantly suspect!


Even in this more tolerant atmosphere, there are problems. Heaven help the fellow who presents a rifle as "all correct" if it has even one incorrect part! They too have their own version of fakery and fraud. Luger collectors worry about people swapping parts and renumbering parts. US collectors worry about the people churning out exact duplicates (right down to the cartouches!) of M1 stocks!


Anyway - it's interesting to see how different, and in some way show similar, the conditions are when collectors don't have serialized parts. Circumstances require US collectors to have lower standards, but they have similar goals and problems. We truly are all in this together


Very best,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 08:37 PM   #10
Marvin
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Upstate S.C.
Posts: 1,132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: New collector pitfalls

Kyrie,


Thanks for the response and I hope you will be a more regular poster on the Forum. Regardless of different opinions, I feel we are all adults here and will not take any offense to these differences. Differences are where the truth will come to light. Sometimes we need to have a little "jolt" and it is good!


Glad you are back and I look forward to more discussions and opinions.


marvin



Marvin is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 09:24 PM   #11
bill munis
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: New collector pitfalls

Hi all,

I just finished reading all the posts on this subject and I have a different opinion about it. I see absolutely nothing wrong with replaceing a #31 holdopen with the correct #21 holdopen on a Mauser byf. The #31 is not the original holdopen for the gun, and who knows who or why it was replaced. If I can find the correct original #21 holdopen and make the gun all matching, I feel I have done nothing wrong, and certainly have not forged or faked this gun, in my opinion. Who is to say that this original #21 holdopen is not the original that went to my gun? I do have a problem with forging and counterfieting though, and I feel there is a lot of difference between trying to restore my byf 41 back to an all matching peice by finding an original holdopen and replacing it, than by making one or re-stamping one. A reproduction or re-stamped one is a fake and a counterfiet in my opinion, but an original holdopen just makes the gun correct. A lot of this is the intent of the person swapping the parts. If the intent is to restore the gun back to an all matching piece with an matching part that is of the correct manufacture and time frame, I see nothing wrong with this. If his intent is to deliberately fool someone with the wrong manufacture or time frame, then that is fraud and counterfieting in my opinion.


One example would be any 1940 code 42 or any 41/42 with black plastic grips. Are these real? Experts say now that no black plastic grips were issued until June of 1941, which makes it about the T block. So, are all earlier guns fakes with black plastic grips? Does a replacement part make this a fake? What about black plastic magazines? They are in a lot of guns that were originally issued with numbered magazines, so does this make the gun a fake or a counterfiet, a fraud?


I feel that the point about refinishing guns is much more important and should be more concerning to collectors, than replacing mismatched parts. There are some excellent refinished guns out there now, that are almost non-detectable as to being so close to the original finish in both color and wear, that even the most advanced collectors are being fooled at times. Without a high powered mag and a strong light, you aren't able to see the blemishes and who runs around gun shows with this equipment? Sure, anyone can tell the 100% finished stuff, but these fakers or refinishers aren't all dumb, and they do put some wear back on them.



 
Unread 02-10-2001, 09:30 PM   #12
Johnny Peppers
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calion, Arkansas
Posts: 1,042
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default US Military Collectors

Kyrie,

Your statement that US military collectors have no way to judge originality is simply without merit. This is a very broad statement to conclude that no collector of US military small arms has the expertise to judge the originality or any US weapon. Just as you can tell that a dip blued recent import is not correct, I can tell whether a 1911A1 "Transition Model" made in 1924 is original or not.

This discussion also brings up a good point on a Luger that had several posts a day or so back. This is the LP08 rig that is described as all matching, and I have no reason to doubt the owners description. One thing that is apparent is that the holster is missing the carrying strap as most are. Would a reproduction strap immediately condemn this rig to the ranks of a "fake". The shoulder strap not only performed the function of enabling the soldier equipped with the LP08 to carry it, but also performed the function of holding the shoulder stock and holster together. Why should the owner or some subsequent owner not have the right to replace the strap in order to prevent damage to the other original leather parts? It must be left off because it might fool someone someday, or someone finds it offensive to replace anything?



Johnny Peppers is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 09:38 PM   #13
John D.
Administrator
& Site Owner
LugerForum
Patron
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: A Little NE of Somewhere...
Posts: 2,646
Thanks: 436
Thanked 502 Times in 125 Posts
Default Hi Again, Kyrie..:)

I thought I would change the subject line


Based on yours and others replies, this is an interesting discussion - to say the least. Further, and on reflection - the points you are making are both excellent and compelling... That being said, let me ask you a few questions, if you don't mind..


- If folks do change out parts for "matching" serial numbers but non-original parts - I'm getting the impression that you would suggest that they return the "non-matching" numbered parts if they go to sell it in the future? To that point - I'd absolutely agree. That way we/they/whomever would not contribute to falsification of that Lugers identity in the future. Your analogy above is very well taken (the traffic accident and the responsibility of the driver) as contributing to a greater "wrong" perpetrated on unsuspecting bystanders.


- If a part doesn't exist on a Luger - are you also suggesting that we acquire a part that is intentionally "mismarked"? I'm not sure where I stand on this one - so I'd invite your thoughts and comments.


Kyrie - this is a tremendously interesting discussion - and I am guessing there are on this Board who are reading these thoughts - whether they choose to interact or just watch on the sidelines. It is an issue which is at the core of collecting - and frankly, I think many are considering the ramifications within context of their own collecting experiences. I know I am - and I appreciate the ability to discuss these without resolving to flaming or dissolving the dialogue into acrimonious accusations.


My Best To You Always, Kyrie !


John D.



John D. is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 10:19 PM   #14
BILL
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 826
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default 'matching'vs.'original'

Great discussion! One thing we should be able to agree upon as collectors/historians/shooters/Luger lovers is the difference, and it is significant, between all matching serial numbers and 100% original. Maybe someday that will be the terminology with which we will have to judge a pistol's value when considering adding it to our collections. A pistol that is 100% original has never had a swapped out part, never had a replaced spring, never had any touch up bluing or been restrawed. It speaks for itself. That still leaves us with undetectable changes of which we have no knowledge, unfortunately.

Just one short story..years ago, a close friend of mine was fortunate enough to acquire an original cartridge counter but unfortunately it had a mismatched sideplate. In his travels to other states he would display his beautiful pistol. At an out of state show an elderly local was browsing and made the comment that he thought he had a Luger that had the cartridge counting feature. My friend discounted the fellow's story but later that afternoon he returned with it wrapped in a cloth. It was as he described but to both of their amazement it had the sideplate that matched my friend's. There was a friendly exchange and one pistol left that show with all matching numbers. The belief was that the US arsenal had disassembled them after test- firing them and, since we don't number our arms in any particular fashion, not payed any attention to reassembly. All original or just all matching?



BILL is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 10:40 PM   #15
Dok
RIP
 
Dok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bermuda (Eat Your Heart Out)
Posts: 1,626
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default I for one, am reading the thread...

and see both sides of the issue. I think Kyrie's point of view speaks clearly on behalf of the collecting part of our hobby, and any possibility of corruption of a weapon howsoever caused should be avoided at all costs.


I am a shooter, and I doubt if I will ever own a truly valuable Luger, because my primary desire is to shoot. Yet the appeal to have all my numbers match, is there, whether that is some subconscious charade (me fooling myself into believing I have a Luger that is better than it is) I'm not sure, but certainly if I could easily swap my mismatched numbered parts the temptation would be great. (I hasten to point out the temptation wasn't THAT great - to pay $75 more for all matching at purchase)


At the end of the day, I think that this debate has no clear answer, and each of us has our own point of view, a point of view which is correct perhaps for each of us based on our own circumstances. As I've said before to discuss these issues inj the forum is important, as they cause us to reflect (when perhaps we would not) on an alternative point of view, and at least understand a little a view other than our own.



Dok is offline  
Unread 02-10-2001, 11:18 PM   #16
bill munis
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: 'matching'vs.'original'

If you use authentic, real, correct parts, there is no way that anyone can tell the difference as to whether the gun was originally issued like this, or someone made it as it was once originally issued. That said, does anyone actually know that any gun is actually as issued? Just because you didn't swap a part does not mean that someone before you didn't, and there is no way that you will ever know that.



 
Unread 02-11-2001, 12:22 AM   #17
BILL
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 826
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: I for one, am reading the thread...

You are right Dok, but I sense there are more than two sides to this issue. If we could just step into the time machine and pick up a factory fresh Persian artillery and maybe an unopened case of Abercrombie and Fitch two liners before they got put out on the shelves it might quench the thirst..(for a little while).



BILL is offline  
Unread 02-11-2001, 06:40 AM   #18
Marvin
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Upstate S.C.
Posts: 1,132
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: 'matching'vs.'original'

Well, I have to jump in one more time on this very interesting string. One of the things that really concerns me are the parts "matching" service from a company in Texas. You can call them and they will "find" that matching part you need for a Luger. The parts are expensive, but you will have a matching part. The parts are genuine Luger parts, just reworked to match. This is wrong and I feel this is where a lot of what Kyrie is saying will stem from. The only good thing about this company currently, is that the nubers are not exactly like the originals, but it takes a very knowledgeable person to know this. This is the reason any Luger lover/collector should buy books and read up on the pistols.


Marvin



Marvin is offline  
Unread 02-11-2001, 07:31 AM   #19
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default Re: US Military Collectors

Hi Johnny,


Thank you for your reply


Firstly, when I referred to US arms I was thinking exclusively about M1's and should have said so. I did not and apologize for the confusion my omission obviously caused.


Secondly regarding the holster, I was referring to numbered parts and the term "matching" has meaning only in that context. The individual pieces of leather that make up a holster are not numbered and in this context the terms "matching" or "mismatched" have no meaning. For clarity, I'd suggest using either "all original" to indicate as it came from the factor", or "all correct" to indicate it was repaired by the using authority (arsenal field repair and the like), or "restored" to indicate an attempt was made to bring a damaged holster back to its original configuration by some collector/shooter. Or the phrase "fixed by a Bubba" to indicate it was repaired in a way different from the original design by some shooter just so it could be used. I'd use the word "fake" to describe the holster only if it were presented as all original when it was not.


I hope this helps!


Regards,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
Unread 02-11-2001, 08:17 AM   #20
Kyrie
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 748
Thanks: 0
Thanked 198 Times in 96 Posts
Default Re: New collector pitfalls

Hi Bill,


Absolutely no offense intended, but I think you have missed the point :-(


You say, "If I can find the correct original #21 holdopen and make the gun all matching, I feel I have done nothing wrong, and certainly have not forged or faked this gun, in my opinion." and I quite agree. But this discussion is not concerned with finding the original part, because that cannot be done. Even assuming the original hold open for your Luger still exists (unlikely in and of itself since hold opens were generally removed only if they were broken and a replacement was needed), it would be just one of ten thousand odd hold opens with the same number. There is no way to *recognize* it in the crowd.


While it's always risky to try and read minds, I think you are aware of this. What you are proposing is not searching for the original hold open for your pistol. Rather you are proposing that the first hold open you come across numbered "21" is the original hold open for your pistol. Anyone who knows the approximate number of Lugers made is going to recognize as wishful thinking the assumption that the next numbered "21" hold open you come across is the original part for your pistol :-(


There is nothing wrong with wishful thinking - we all do it. But it becomes a problem when we begin to regard our wishful thoughts as reality. The nut of this issue is the difference between a pistol that *is* all original versus making up a pistol that only *looks* all original.


With all that said, you make some very good points concerning grips that would be fuel for excellent conversation! But I'm going to defer involvement in hose discussions for the moments, as the discussion on numbered parts seems to still be a ways from conclusion. I don't juggle well at all (it's one of my many personal failings [smile]), so I need to keep both eyes on the one subject in front of me


Best regards,


Kyrie





Kyrie is offline  
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2022, Lugerforum.com