1916-1917 Navy Receiver Proofs - Page 2

Silvano · 07-16-2002, 11:17 PM

Recently I have seen 2 1917 Navies, both are believed to be authentic, and both exhibit halo's.
I always thought that Proofs on Navy receivers were struck prior to blueing, but these 2 Lugers are evidence to the contrary. Since both Lugers are 1917's, and both exhibit rougher workmanship, I thought perhaps that this might be evidence of rushed late war production? If this is the case, can other 1917 owners please identify their production time from the serial# and maybe you can help demonstrate a pattern to this theory. <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Johnny Peppers · 07-17-2002, 01:01 AM

For the record, the serial number of my 1917 dated Navy is 1676ns.

Jerry Harris · 07-17-2002, 01:40 AM

Some impulse (probably unwise) just makes me want to say this for the record. It's hard to understand why any sensible person would stamp a blued surface. Stamping is a locally violent process guaranteed to disrupt the soft, ultra-thin film and invite the corrosion which bluing (even rust bluing) is supposed to inhibit.

Since bluing has no effect on any functional aspect of a gun, I would order MY Luger factory to do all the inspecting, testing and proofing of the barrel/receiver assembly in the white, field strip the gun, polish, blue, reassemble and ship. So there...I feel better now.

Garfield · 07-17-2002, 01:53 AM

Silvano:

IMHO, the two Navies that you saw, based on your describtion, would seem to be two of the many bogus Navies that are floating around.

Good Hunting

Dwight Gruber · 07-17-2002, 03:47 AM

I have no idea of the production date/serial number relationship, but for the record the serial# on my 1917 Navy is 8958, no suffix. It has a large toggle-pin head, no apparent proof halos, and considering the shape its in its unlikely anybody would have faked it.

--Dwight

Edward Tinker · 07-17-2002, 04:37 AM

Yes Dwight, but its a NAVY!

Even tho I'm Army and Army I is, those navies sure attract me! [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

John Sabato · 07-17-2002, 10:59 AM

Silvano,

Please check your Private Messages by visiting your profile (link is at the top of the page)

Edmond , DCB shooting · 07-17-2002, 02:21 PM

Hi, SN with 2 suffix letters? i thought it existed only on some STG 44 in April/ May 45?

[quote]Originally posted by Johnny Peppers:
<strong>For the record, the serial number of my 1917 dated Navy is 1676ns.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Garfield · 07-17-2002, 02:30 PM

Ed:

The "ns" indicates no suffix.

Regards

07-17-2002, 04:37 AM	#26
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	Yes Dwight, but its a NAVY! Even tho I'm Army and Army I is, those navies sure attract me! [img]biggrin.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

07-17-2002, 10:59 AM	#27
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	Silvano, Please check your Private Messages by visiting your profile (link is at the top of the page) __________________ 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..."*

07-17-2002, 02:21 PM	#28
Edmond , DCB shooting User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: FRANCE Posts: 53 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Hi, SN with 2 suffix letters? i thought it existed only on some STG 44 in April/ May 45? [quote]Originally posted by Johnny Peppers: <strong>For the record, the serial number of my 1917 dated Navy is 1676ns.</strong><hr></blockquote> __________________ Shoot'in by DCB

07-16-2002, 11:17 PM	#21
Silvano User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 16 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Recently I have seen 2 1917 Navies, both are believed to be authentic, and both exhibit halo's. I always thought that Proofs on Navy receivers were struck prior to blueing, but these 2 Lugers are evidence to the contrary. Since both Lugers are 1917's, and both exhibit rougher workmanship, I thought perhaps that this might be evidence of rushed late war production? If this is the case, can other 1917 owners please identify their production time from the serial# and maybe you can help demonstrate a pattern to this theory. <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

07-17-2002, 01:01 AM	#22
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	For the record, the serial number of my 1917 dated Navy is 1676ns.

07-17-2002, 01:40 AM	#23
Jerry Harris User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Central Ohio Posts: 64 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Some impulse (probably unwise) just makes me want to say this for the record. It's hard to understand why any sensible person would stamp a blued surface. Stamping is a locally violent process guaranteed to disrupt the soft, ultra-thin film and invite the corrosion which bluing (even rust bluing) is supposed to inhibit. Since bluing has no effect on any functional aspect of a gun, I would order MY Luger factory to do all the inspecting, testing and proofing of the barrel/receiver assembly in the white, field strip the gun, polish, blue, reassemble and ship. So there...I feel better now.

07-17-2002, 01:53 AM	#24
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Silvano: IMHO, the two Navies that you saw, based on your describtion, would seem to be two of the many bogus Navies that are floating around. Good Hunting

07-17-2002, 03:47 AM	#25
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,889 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,281 Times in 423 Posts	I have no idea of the production date/serial number relationship, but for the record the serial# on my 1917 Navy is 8958, no suffix. It has a large toggle-pin head, no apparent proof halos, and considering the shape its in its unlikely anybody would have faked it. --Dwight

07-17-2002, 02:30 PM	#29
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Ed: The "ns" indicates no suffix. Regards