M1914 Navy Luger...

[Pete Ebbink]

...now on GunBroker :

http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/Vie...?Item=24702930

Noticed the word "refinished" or "restored" does not appear in the write-up...$ 4,200.00 seems awfully high...



<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/restored_navy_2.jpg.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/restored_navy_2.jpg.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>



Regards,

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

[Russ]

And only a 30% restocking fee if it is not rite. <img border="0" alt="[crying]" title="" src="graemlins/crying.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[crying]" title="" src="graemlins/crying.gif" />

[Pete Ebbink]

Hey Russ,

Yes...sales are final...but you do get the manufacturer's warranty...can't go wrong with that... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Wonder if the folks at DWM are aware of this... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

I posted as several LF members, in the past, have asked for help being able to know what a restored piece looks like.

To the credit of the person that did a nice job on this Navy restoration...he did not try to "add back" some "authentic" holster wear...by rubbing areas down with leather polishing rags...

If this Navy were priced, say $ 1500 - 1800 or so; I would be the first to buy this one...it is a nice restoration work, IMHO...

Regards,

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

[Malcolm P.]

30% restocking fee on a $4200 gun that has to be refinished or restored! Lets face it, chances it is mint untouched since 1916 are virtually nil. Wonder if he knows this is fraud and maybe criminal to boot! Almost tempted to buy and file the suit to get it for free plus damages!

[Navy]

A very nice restoration that is worth about $1500.

Tom A.

[Pete Ebbink]

Hi Malcolm,

The listing seller does not state "Original, mint"...rather they just state "Mint"...

Many sellers sell on a policy called "careful omission"...aka "If you do not ask the right question(s), we do not need to disclose everything"...

If only becomes fraud if you ask the right questions and the replies (hopefully you get them in writing) are lies.

p.s. Wonder what sized rear toggle flange pin this 1917 Navy has...???

Regards,

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

[Malcolm P.]

Just an additional note, I am an attorney. Given that it is priced as an original mint condition Navy and not as a restored piece, knowingly selling one with such a misrepresentation can be considered fraud. Throw in use of wire (e.g. the Internet) and mail fraud (payment and shipping) on top of that...and you are looking at potentially very serious felony charges.

I know I am probably preaching to the choir, but since all of us on occasion do sell guns, we should all remember that being honest is a requirement of the law and not just desireable ethical behavior as collector or seller. Carrying out a $3000 fraud over the Internet is more than a bit different from an almost anonymous cash transaction at a gun show. It is a growing problem, with increasing prosecution, not to mention lawsuits. Ask Ebay how many of their fraudulent vendors are being prosecuted or sued. If you choose to engage in "a policy called 'careful omission'" you may end up in jail with permanent loss of firearm ownership rights. In other words, a bit of "puffing" - an optimistic statement of condition - to get an extra couple of hundred on the deal is one thing, but lying and misrepresentation for $3000 is quite another. One is clear fraud; the other is not. If the issue is pressed, the seller of this Luger may be in serious trouble. I can virtually assure you that any judge and jury will not be impressed by a claim of "he never asked." If the seller had it restored, he darn well better disclose or price it accordingly.

[Pete Ebbink]

Hi Malcolm,

You make very sound and valid points.

Maybe, if you will not mind, I will send a polite e-mail to the seller on GunBroker...inviting them to log onto the Luger Forum and to read this discussion. They can then decide if they might want to add some more description to the auction add.

At least for the current members on the Luger Forum that have had a chance to read this discussion thread, they can decide if they want to over-pay for the restored piece. I certainly would not.

Regards,

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

[Tony S.]

I think that I actually saw this piece in PA a couple of years ago at a gun show. The gun that I saw then looked just like this one and had the same year on it. It took a while, but after a very close inspection and the discrepancies between the looks of the bore and condition of the gun, it was determine to be a restored job (since I am not an expert, a good friend of mine with over 40 years of experience showed me the discrepancies). The owner indicated that it was not a restoration job, but a well kept gun. I may say that the restoration job is excellent! The owner did not allowed just anyone to handle the gun and when allowed, gloves had to be on.
Malcolm, How do you pursue someone engaged in mail fraud? It is my understanding that it is a very difficult and perhaps costly matter, am I right? I had a similar situation happening to me last year, I went to two attorneys and they declined the job. It was not the money, but the principal behind the act that got me furious about these creeps. They are con artist, people without decency and/or dignity polluting our society. WOW! I guess that I still pretty upset about it! Anyway...

[Edward Tinker]

Malcome well said.

I thought the "mint" wording was off too, but hadn't thought of it as you are. On e-bay, some of these guys use words to the effect of, I think it is original", It is very mint looking....

Words mean a lot, and if you rep it as it isn't, then you're a dummybutt and wrong.

Ed

[Big Norm]

Aside from the grips, which look a little too perfect to me, what gives everybody the impression that this is a restoration? I have seen some pretty darn good guns in some collections.

The 30% restocking fee was a total turn off for me too along with the buyer being responsible for the S&H. The guy can really make a lot of money just selling the gun and then accepting the return.

The guy really gives very little information about this Luger. He acts like he is doing everyone a favor selling it.
Big Norm

[Malcolm P.]

I am a newbie and may be speaking out of turn, but what strikes me is that this is a gun issued out in 1916 in the middle of a war that is not going particularily good. It should have seen some action in some capacity at some point. I don't see any holster wear or other signs of rust or wear on the gun. Even an otherwise mint condition Luger that is a "warhorse" should, in my opinion, show some holster wear or other signs of use. If it were a 1917, I would think OK, issued but never really used. A 1916, on the other hand, should have some signs of use. From what I have seen, even a mint condition "warhorse" Luger shows SOME holster wear.

To me, it is just too "minty." If we were talking military Colt Armys (wether SAA or 1911), it is too perfect, in my view, to have actually been a military issued gun. Given the state of the Imperial Navy and the war in 1916 and the most likely history of the gun since, I find it hard to accept that the gun is not refinished. I have one bought that is a partial restoration that is not in that good of shape, and I simply find it difficult to believe that this one is in that good of shape. Couple all that with a 30% restocking fee, well...if the seller were that confident in the providence of the gun, why have a 30% restocking fee?

All this may be unfair to the seller and the gun may be 100% legitimate. However, he has brought suspicion upon himself. As noted, he makes it sound like he is doing you favor to sell it and if you are not happy with it, pony up over $1000 just to look at it. If that does not indicate that the gun has problems, I am not sure what else can.

I guess when all is said and done, if you are selling something online like a Navy Luger in that good of shape, $4200 is likely a bargain. Offer it with a 3-day inspection and don't play games with a restocking fee. If you are not doing that, then any potential buyer is entitled to ask the all important question of "what gives?" In other words, stand by what you are offering if it is that good and don't play games.

[the gunman]

Thank you Malcolm P for some great information on this matter

[Pete Ebbink]

Hi Norm,

Here is what I saw...granted the photos do not allow much detailed looks...

1. No wear patterns at all.

2. The depth of the "1916" looked a little shallow on the chamber (i.e. as in...having been sanded down during a rework).

3. Straw looks like it was just done last week. Too new looking and too uniform in color. No trigger finger wear pattern showing on the right side of the trigger.

4. Straw is lacking what you guys called a couple of years back its coating of "sperm whale" oil or varnish...

5. The gun shows not the slightest evidence of rust or patina/oxidation under the blueing.

6. Color of the blueing looks a bit too grey and not typical DWM rust blue.

7. Gun looks way, way too clean...as if it was soaked in an solvent, ultra-sonic cleaning bath.

8. Grips screws look like they were done, last week as well.

9. Cannot tell for sure from the photos...but the size of the '1916' number fonts on the left side of the receiver appear to be the same size as on the left side of the front sight base...as I understand they should be of differing sizes...

Here are the things I would ask the seller to send me detailed, close-up photo of :

1. Shot showing the size of the rear toggle pin/flange.

2. Shot showing the stampings on the underside of the barrel to see if any "halos" are present.

3. Close-up shot of the C/M proofs and the "1916" stampings on the left side of the receiver.

4. Close up shot of the C/M proofs on the left side of the barrel, near the shoulder, and on the underside of the barrel, if present there too.

5. Close-up shot, top view, of the Navy rear sight pulled back...to show if the metal around the "200" number is "in the white" or not.

6. Close up of the serial number and C/M stamped on the bottom of the magazine...since the ad says the magazine matches the gun.

Regards,

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

[Big Norm]

Pete,
I totally agree with you. After I posted my message, I noticed the shallowness of the date on the chamber. But if the restorer is good enough to do this good a job of the restoration then he would be good enough to know to not blue the white on the adjustible rear sight. All in all, I have to say that given the conditions of the sale, the starting price and that the pictures are inadequate, I would avoid this gun. I wouldn't like the situation even if I had the gun in my hands. Sometimes you just have to walk away. All this also goes for the artillery that this guy also has up for auction.

But I also have to admit that I have recently personally seen some guns that are of this period that look pretty good. Jerry Peters has a 1908 commercial navy and a 1917 artillery that look like they just came out of the box. Doug Smith has a 1902 "Fat Barrel" that he got from RIA that had me drooling for an hour after seeing it. I also have a couple of WW1 and WW2 Lugers that still have the "Sperm Whale" oil or varnish of them. I have a Swiss "Cross-in-Shield that has this finish still on the straw. But when I took the gun out in the day light, I noticed that the straps had some wear on them. Not a lot, but enough to justify more wear on the straws coating.

Malcolm,
don't worry about being a newbie. Your two cents is worth as much here as anybody else's. But in this unique instance, I would like to say that accepting a 1917 but not a 1916 because of the lack of wear deserves a small comment from me. In 1918, there were a number of model 1914's produced. They were produced to complete a 1916 contract and, therefore, they were given a 1916 chamber date. But with this one exception, your logic is good.
Big Norm

[Pete Ebbink]

Hi Norm,

Hope your hunting season is going well !

You are right about some sock-drawer lugers coming out in the day light after many, many years.

I think some guns are showing up in the market after being carefully put away for the past 35-50 years...as the old time collectors are passing on their pieces to the next care-takers. Exciting time to be looking for lugers !

Regards,

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

[Navy]

All,

Good work, Gents. It appears that some of my preaching has taken hold, if I may seem so bold as to claim credit for enlightening anyone on this forum.

This gun is a very nicely done restoration which will fool 98.9% of the public. This is an example , a perfect example, of why one needs to get a 3 day return (without any BS restocking fee) and go through the thing as I have described previously here.

I surmise that following my recommended approach, this piece would be detected as a restoration in about 10 minutes.

Tom A.

[Big Norm]

Tom,
yes, absolutely, your checking on the oxidation of the bluing and having you at my side as I physically examined this gun would be the only way that I would consider buying it. Fortuately, I have a bunch of model 1914's so I am not going to worry about it. Now that 1906 2nd issue thats been on the auction block for a long time may be another story. Nice, but too high priced for me. But it would fill an empty slot for me.

I have two excellent 1917's w/matching mags and I am trying to negotiate a trade of one of them and some boot for a nice "Fat Barrel". But I have failed so far. The guy is a fanatic for very nice 1900's and 1906's (mostly Swiss). But he has an artillery but no navies and that is my negotiating position. God! I hate to give up a nice navy w/matching mag. Maybe he will take a nice 1900 AE with ideal stock and grips with boot instead. Ah, this negotiating can be nerve wrecking...but fun.

Pete,
I gave up on my plan to go grouse hunting this fall. The weather was too rainy and cloudy. Grouse just don't flush good in bad weather and I am not about to sit in my motorhome for 3-4 days waiting for the storms to pass over. But I am beginning to set myself up for rifle deer season. Lets see...scotch, beer, pretzels, my dog...
Big Norm

[gunsndogs]

Hey Pete,

I am a newbie here also and I think you are giving them a bad wrap. You haven't even seen the gun in front of you! Only by these pictures and you automatically have a problem.
Also you didn't read the write up correctly on the guns either! The re-stocking fee and manufactures warranty is for NEW guns only(Not True... the restocking fee is not limited to NEW guns...edited by Admin) It says sales are final for NEW GUNS... (edited by Admin) Because it isn't from the same place I just looked at...(edited by Admin) I actually thought it was exceptionally photographed. Maybe the photographer is to blame because they took photos that were too nice and made the gun look nicer than it really is? (edited by Admin)

I think I will e-mail these folks and give them some support...Heck everybody is a newbie at first before they learn the ropes.

[gunsndogs]

Oh by the way Edward Tinker(posted on 10/24/04) & Pete and some of the others are talking about 2 different Navy Lugers if you haven't caught on yet.

Just thought I would mention it. Yes more than 1 is out on the web by different people...Hmmm imagine that