Very Bad News

[Dwight Gruber]

I just compared the pictures against the toggle on my own Navy (which I am reasonably certain is authentic) and I recognize some noteworthy detail differences. I would not have known them if I had not something with which to compare.

It is obvoiusly time to start examining a lot of Navy toggles.

--Dwight

[wterrell]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Hi Pete,
Your photo gallery is a very terrible idea </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">

I agree with Pete.

[John Sabato]

I agree with Pete and Wes... documenting the problems (if any) with these new toggles in a Member Gallery Album is no different that talking about them and showing photographs here... Sure it might have to make the "boosters" have to work harder to fool people, but they will work to do that anyway...

Exposing them is the way to go. I say show these toggles for what they are: Reproductions...

How many of you remember this quote:

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing..."

I say document the flaws and make them work for their ill-gotten gains...

Let's stand for something.

Here is my



again!

[MauserLugers]

In my opinion, the only way you are going to have a photo gallery displaying these fakes is to buy about 20 of the faked navy Lugers and then photo display what is different and wrong about them.

As far as these toggles go that are being offered for sale at this time, I think you could look at many different original toggles and find slightly different cuts, grinds, and polish marks, so unless there is a very distinct flaw I'm not sure that just a photo of these toggles will really tell one anything. I looked at 3 of my Navy Lugers and compared them to the toggles for sale and I didn't notice anything really significant. My 3 Navy toggles are all slightly different as to the cuts, grinds and polish marks. They are not exactly the same in my opinion.

I think the only way you are going to get anything worthwhile is to buy the fake navy and then photo how it was assembled. Each will be slightly different as to fit and what is needed to assemble it. That is the flaw that was in the older fakes. Not only are there things to look for on the toggle assembly, but the barrel and proofs also. So, to do this right I think you have to examine the whole Luger and the toggle alone does not tell us much worthwhile. -- Bill

[Edward Tinker]

Bill is right in this respect. I sat down with a friend, spread out about seven Lugers of the same year and it was amazing how they still looked just slightly different from each other upon close examination. He asked me, which ones are reblues or messed with.

Answer, none of them!

Very educational and eye opening, a couple were in better shape than others, one had seen hard usage, and they just had a slightly different look to several of them.

Ed

[G.T.]

I Think Bill has the correct answer... on their own, these new navy sights are a replacement part, although they are new, they are not, as of yet, fake... I think you have to take the whole unit (gun) into context to determine what is, or what is not, correct....up till the point that I saw the pictures, I was skeptical... but, someone has put a real effort into reproducing these parts... and I am pretty impressed by the detail of these units.... Although, as pictured, I believe I could tell the difference... If someone dolls it up a bit, it's going to be tough.... It will be interested to see how many of these sights hit the market... I for one, would like to have one... and I think they are quite well made.... Do your homework Guys, and you won't have to stay after school!! till...later...GT

BTW, A fella who can make that sight... can, with out a doubt... make the whole pistol! Think about that for awhile!

[Big Norm]

It seems like this issue has come up before. I was real mad when I made my post then and I still am. I got many Emails on the subject both pro and con. The last time I brought up this subject there was tremendous hostility among forum members and I got my share of it via Emails. I feel vindicated but definately not happy. I am not gloating. I am sad.

Has anyone noticed the counterfeit proof marks on repro artillery stocks on the internet? There is a stock attaching iron for sale on Ebay that, I THINK, was previously posted with the repro wood part attached that had a counterfeit proof mark. I THINK that I remember the serial number in the iron, but I am not sure. But this is not the first time that I have noticed it.

Hasn't anybody noticed repro artillery holsters where the salespeople said they would put any date you wanted on it? I haven't seen a artillery repro rear sight yet, but I am sure that they are out there. The same goes for the adjustible front sight for an artillery.

People got mad at me when I mentioned that I had heard rumors about a guy in Cincinatti and another in Florida who had all the dies to create counterfeit Kreighoffs. They also got mad at me when I mentioned the big name dealers who would rub a refinished Luger with a leather belt to give that "holster wear" look. Are we going to quit buying Weimar Era Lugers? These Lugers are notorious for cannibalizing parts from other Lugers.

Are we mad at Mike Krause of Krausewerke 1906 .45 cal fame who wanted to reproduce the exact replicas of that Luger until he found out that he would be involved in trademark infringement by putting DWM on the toggle?

Are we going to punish the quality artists who do excellent work only restoring a Luger to its original finish with no alterations? I am not jumping on Ted Green (Thor) for his refinishing work. From pictures that I have seen, he does good work. I have only phyically seen one Luger that he has done but I did not see the "before" on that particular gun so it would wrong for me to make a broad generalization. I have had four lugers out of the some 40 that I own, restored by another restorer. None of these guns where otherwise altered. All of these guns were 50% or less blue with zero straw. When I put these guns on the table, people ask me if they have been restored. I reply,'If you have to ask then ...'.

OK, I have laid my sins on the table. I consider myself a collector and I think that I have a good collection of quality original as well as refinished Lugers. But where do we draw the line on cottage industry Lugers? Surely, those of us that have big investments in Lugers would hate to see the market value of our prizes destroyed by counterfeits. But this is a fine forum with its 1400 or so members, many whom we all respect as experts in our hobby. We are going to have to draw up some sort of scale, bylaws or something which constitutes the difference between a valuable collector luger, an inexpensive shooter and junk. If we can not tell the difference between a counterfeit navy rear sight and an original. If we can not tell the difference between a quality restoration, a lovingly cared for for years treasure and a piece of junk produced by a poverty stricken counterfeit tool and die person who doesn't want to get honest work, then our hobby is doomed.
Big Norm <img border="0" alt="[soapbox]" title="" src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" />

[John Sabato]

Norm, & everyone else...

I doubt there will be any viable solution to the perpetration of evil on this hobby until the second coming of Christ... There will be no technical solution that will totally preclude skulldugery by those who practice it. All we can do is keep well informed and take as much precaution as the Luger "bug" allows when we work to possess all the Lugers that we want.

I hope that all who have vented their frustration and anxiety over this subject feel better for having done so.

BTW, I had not heard anything about a copyright infringement problem for Mike Krause using the DMW logo... I can't imagine that the copyright for a logo for a company that hasn't been in business for over 75 years could be a problem ??? Any facts about this situation that can be verified?

[policeluger]

I have one original Navy rear sight for a project gun I have long lost interest it. I got it years ago from Mr. Mertz, at a LA great western show. I would offer it up to be used as a test piece in a comparison test, IF I could be assured it would be returned in a timely manor.

[John Sabato]

policeluger and all concerned parties to this issue.

It would not be necessary to send your genuine Navy toggle/sight to anyone for a preliminary comparison...

I would suggest that you have the most capable friend with a quality digital camera take 6 in-focus closeup photographs with appropriate lighting to highlight the details of your Navy toggle/sight in exactly the same orientation as the sample photographs that were included in the auction link above...

send the photos to me in Hi-resolution and I will place them in a Member Gallery Album I will create for this explicit purpose.

I have requested permission to use the auction photographs on this website... I will post whatever reply I receive from the originator of the auction ad.

This same proposition may be taken up by anyone who currently owns a Navy rear sight/toggle who can have the appropriate photographs taken...

Please do your best to create photos that resemble the auction photos so that a proper "apples to apples" comparison of features and appearance can be made by all observers.

Photos should be zipped up and sent as attachments to the official Lugerforum email address: lugerforum@yahoo.com

Ladies and Gentlemen... I await your submissions.

[Big Norm]

John.
unfortunately, as well as sadly, I have to agree with you 100%. If these navy rear sights are really exact then there isn't anything that we can do to prevent it. The best and possibly the only thing that we can do is read this and other forums and study the best available books. I read once that Tom Knox quit looking at Lugers because there are too many fakes. That saddened me too.

Please send me your mailing address and I will send you a copy of my March 1998 issue of 'Guns and Ammo' magazine, page 52-55. This is where I got my information about copywrite infringement of DWM. Please sent it to my real email address since I often forget to read my forum email.
Big Norm

[Edward Tinker]

Policeluger, I would be more than happy to take the pics for you, of course that would require you to ship it to me...

I'd pay shipping back of course, if you want to ship it to me?

Ed

[Navy]

All,
It takes a bit more than a sight to make a Navy.
Again, I will re-state what I have posted here many, many times.
Ya gots to know what you are doing when you play this game, 'cause you are betting a couple of thou or more that you know what you are doing. If you are cavalier, inattentive or fool hearty you will find many, many dealers who are very happy to take your money. Some will even send you Christmas Cards each year.
Buy the books, read and study, go to the shows, and mostly ask questions of the gray beards in this area...then listen to their answers whether you like their content or how they are phrased.
Buy from other collectors and when you are buying from a dealer, ask people on this board about their experiences with said dealer.
There ain't no magic to this, it just takes a long time to develop the "eye" and learn the inspection/examination techniques that are used to distinguish the righteous from the boosted.

FWIW, I will be pleased to assist any forum member in "authenticating" a Navy, subject to my having time available.

Pls contact me off list if interested in my help.

Tom A.

[John Sabato]

Tom A, what is your opinion of the quality of this repro sight based on the photographs?

[Navy]

Hi John,
I am on vacation at Tybee Island using a laptop, so my screen is not that good. Having said that, the quality looks pretty good; I am thinking about buying one to do a detailed exam. If I do so, I will report back.

The simple facts remain. These guns were produced in a different time and had a great deal of hand finishing and polishing. There are bound to be differences between guns made within a few hundred numbers of one another.

Bottom line: Ya' gots to know what you are doing or you put lots of $$ at risk. There are, alas, no short cuts.
Tom A.

[tracyp]

You make the call.

[Navy]

From the left side shot, it appears that there are some obvious differences in the grooves on the outer matrix of the ears; If I had some photoshop software on this lap top, I'd blow it up to see better. Will do that Sunday upon return to home station.
Tom A.

[Vlim]

Hi,

Most obvious clue:
Checkering of sides on original: 4 checkers wide.
Checkering of sides on repro: 6 checkers wide.

[Ron Wood]

Gerben,

You have pointed out the best clue. In general, all the checkering and grooves on the reproduction sight are finer, i.e. more lines per inch. Also the vertical grooves on the sight "ears" are shorter than the original,the trailing profile of the ears has a longer radius and a shorter vertical slant at the rear, plus the original has a larger radius on the edges of the toggle knobs,etc. These features could probably be reworked by a forger, but some vestige of the finer lines would probably remain, particularly on the linear knurling on the "barrel" of the toggle knobs. This knurling is either done mechanically with a device similar to a roll die or forged, so the metal is "upset" at the ends of the lines (sort of like the condition that creates the "halo" on barrel serial numbers). Hand cutting these lines leaves a smooth transition to the un-knurled area.

[John Sabato]

Excellent Photographs and observations! I have been out of touch for the holiday weekend, but you guys have done a fantastic job is reviewing these great photos by tracyp... I encourage others to post quality photos of their own original rear sight toggle so we can examine them for differences from these new sights...

Please identify your Navy model by type and year if you can to assist the forum in knowing more about these fascinating Lugers.

Tracyp...could you identify what model of Navy your toggle is from please?

BTW, the person that is auctioning these sights in Germany has granted permission via direct email to me for the use and posting of his photographs on this website... he had apparently never heard of the Lugerforum and was please that we showed interest in his sights...

Here is his reply:
------------------------------
Hello

you are welcome to publish the pictures yes in the Lugerforum.com

I didn't know this for it this gives "Lugerforum".

Knowing this interestingly. Perhaps you can for me

Letting information come. You also like to become about

We produce this one for novelties for reports.

With best greetings

Sorry,for my inglish

Bernd Bote.

Produkt Manager