Navy?

Conny · 01-22-2007, 11:05 PM

Gentlemen, I read most of the posts and cannot find reference to this luger. Is this a real Navy? I looked up the numbers on the data base and it displays.....Commercial Navy??...9mm

Would love a REAL Navy. Not interested in being some guys girlfriend in prison for using a stock with a fake.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/classifie...976645914.aspx

Thanks for your time.

Navy · 01-23-2007, 05:24 PM

Excellent advice Mr Tac

Tom A

MFC · 01-24-2007, 11:57 PM

Conny,
You can barely make out the C/M proof on the barrel. The crown (floats) above the M and is off center. I'm not the expert here but have learned on this forum
that it's a fake stamp.
Mike C.

Chuckc · 01-25-2007, 08:47 AM

Not an expert here, but the front sight looks to be too low. Obvious rebarrel? Originally he had two of these for sale. Interesting that one guy would wind up with two (rare?) navies.

Pete Ebbink · 01-25-2007, 04:02 PM

Very good eye, Chuck !!!

Pete Ebbink · 01-25-2007, 04:04 PM

Very good eye, Chuck !!!

Looks like the C/M on the barrel underside has its crown "hovering" pretty high over the M...

Big Norm · 01-26-2007, 03:05 PM

Conny,
I won't comment on this particular navy because the pictures are so crummy. But I doubt seriously that any commercial navy Luger would have military/naval proof marks (crown M) on it. I went through my books regarding 1908 navies and my "Imperial Lugers" 1st edition book by Jan Stills did not mention a commercial 1908 navy. "Lugers at Random" by Charles Kenyon does mention it on page 118-9.

My book "The Luger Book" by John Walter does the best job of talking about the variation 1908 commercial navy on page 211. Mr. Walter has this to say about it:

"Navy Pistolen 1904 are invariably identified by their navy crown/crown M/crownM proofmarks and military cyclical-serial numbers, but 'navy commercial' could also be obtained. Most of these are 9mm New Model Parabellums with grip safeties, crown/crown U proofmarks on the receiver-side and crown B/crown U/ crown G marks on the barrels. Their numbers include 255064, 35682-38412, 43916, 51310-51357, 54099, 62151, 64302-64400 and 67943 (with gaps in the sequences), plus an additional handful of short-frame navy commercials in the 56747-58634 group without grip safeties. Though all survivors chamber the 9mm Parabellum, 58539 was sold by Stoeger in 7.65mm prior to 1917. In addition to the prewar examples that can justifiably claim to be genuine navy commercial Parabelliums, some post-1920 guns were made from cannibalized parts."

Unfortunately, Mr. Walter did not differientiate between the 1904, 1906, 1908 or model 1914 variations in this or any of the other books that he published on the subject. But he did mention navies without grip safeties which, I presume, would encompass the 1908 and Model 1914's. On a personal basis, I regard the 1908 version commercial navies in the 51000 serial range as legit. I have seen commercial navy Lugers with both the long and the short frame variation in that serial range. This was a transitional period on frames and maybe the factory just used up some spare parts that they had on hand. Much like they did on the 1917 artillery Luger front and rear sight adjustment pins in that transitional period.

Also, unfortunately, I put in a long day yesterday and today looks like it going to be another. I am sure that more has been written on commercial navies, but I am too tired to do the necessary digging. I hope that this helps.
Big Norm

Navy · 01-27-2007, 02:10 PM

The piece is bad.

Tom A

Big Norm · 01-28-2007, 01:18 AM

Per TomA, Takfoley and now me...yep.
Big Norm

thegundude · 01-28-2007, 11:03 AM

I sent him an email regarding this peice. I wonder if he's aware of it being fake or not.

Big Norm · 02-01-2007, 12:29 AM

The seller may or may not know. The next question is: "Does he care?" He has a large audience on the internet. Many do not even know about this, or Jan Stills websites. Many sellers depend on the unwary. Heck, even some of the experienced buyers get caught every so often. Who is to say that a one-of-a-kind isn't really a true one-of-a-kind or that certain Kreighoff isn't real or made by some guy in Kansas City? We can't always have a TomA, Ron Woods or JohnD around to ask. All you can do is read the books, study, watch the appropriate websites and give it your best shot. Thumbs up or thumbs down.
Big Norm

Big Norm · 02-01-2007, 12:44 AM

Steve,
I would just like to add that all the books that I have on Lugers are pot marked with little messages on the inside. Its sometimes surprising how many errors and omissions have been pointed out to me and others over the years that I have been on this forum. Sometimes the amount of information can be overwelming and new information keeps coming out. Don't be afraid to ask questions. The only dumb question is the one that you don't ask.
Big Norm

Steinar · 02-01-2007, 04:48 AM

..are you sure it's not just a small feather, that it actually comes from one of Donald Ducks adventures?

btw tac, seems like we are holding the fort while the others sleep "there are currently two registred users on the forum".
..might have something to do with the "The time now is 04:20 AM"

01-22-2007, 11:05 PM	#1
Conny User Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Culpeper, Va. Posts: 279 Thanks: 0 Thanked 26 Times in 13 Posts	Navy? Gentlemen, I read most of the posts and cannot find reference to this luger. Is this a real Navy? I looked up the numbers on the data base and it displays.....Commercial Navy??...9mm Would love a REAL Navy. Not interested in being some guys girlfriend in prison for using a stock with a fake. http://www.gunsamerica.com/classifie...976645914.aspx Thanks for your time. __________________ Rangers Lead the Way, Duane Leiker

01-24-2007, 11:57 PM	#3
MFC User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Louisiana Posts: 1,237 Thanks: 183 Thanked 281 Times in 162 Posts	Conny, You can barely make out the C/M proof on the barrel. The crown (floats) above the M and is off center. I'm not the expert here but have learned on this forum that it's a fake stamp. Mike C. __________________ Mike C.

01-25-2007, 08:47 AM	#4
Chuckc User Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Cave Creek, AZ Posts: 68 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Not an expert here, but the front sight looks to be too low. Obvious rebarrel? Originally he had two of these for sale. Interesting that one guy would wind up with two (rare?) navies. __________________ Art in metal and wood

01-28-2007, 11:03 AM	#10
thegundude User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Western NC Posts: 1,137 Thanks: 3 Thanked 16 Times in 3 Posts	I sent him an email regarding this peice. I wonder if he's aware of it being fake or not. __________________ Keep your knees in the breeze and your iron in the air. ~Steve

02-01-2007, 04:48 AM	#13
Steinar User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 1,538 Thanks: 18 Thanked 36 Times in 21 Posts	..are you sure it's not just a small feather, that it actually comes from one of Donald Ducks adventures? btw tac, seems like we are holding the fort while the others sleep "there are currently two registred users on the forum". ..might have something to do with the "The time now is 04:20 AM" __________________ Previously known as Morgan Kane

01-23-2007, 05:24 PM	#2
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	Excellent advice Mr Tac Tom A

01-25-2007, 04:02 PM	#5
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Very good eye, Chuck !!!

01-25-2007, 04:04 PM	#6
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Very good eye, Chuck !!! Looks like the C/M on the barrel underside has its crown "hovering" pretty high over the M...

01-26-2007, 03:05 PM	#7
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	Conny, I won't comment on this particular navy because the pictures are so crummy. But I doubt seriously that any commercial navy Luger would have military/naval proof marks (crown M) on it. I went through my books regarding 1908 navies and my "Imperial Lugers" 1st edition book by Jan Stills did not mention a commercial 1908 navy. "Lugers at Random" by Charles Kenyon does mention it on page 118-9. My book "The Luger Book" by John Walter does the best job of talking about the variation 1908 commercial navy on page 211. Mr. Walter has this to say about it: "Navy Pistolen 1904 are invariably identified by their navy crown/crown M/crownM proofmarks and military cyclical-serial numbers, but 'navy commercial' could also be obtained. Most of these are 9mm New Model Parabellums with grip safeties, crown/crown U proofmarks on the receiver-side and crown B/crown U/ crown G marks on the barrels. Their numbers include 255064, 35682-38412, 43916, 51310-51357, 54099, 62151, 64302-64400 and 67943 (with gaps in the sequences), plus an additional handful of short-frame navy commercials in the 56747-58634 group without grip safeties. Though all survivors chamber the 9mm Parabellum, 58539 was sold by Stoeger in 7.65mm prior to 1917. In addition to the prewar examples that can justifiably claim to be genuine navy commercial Parabelliums, some post-1920 guns were made from cannibalized parts." Unfortunately, Mr. Walter did not differientiate between the 1904, 1906, 1908 or model 1914 variations in this or any of the other books that he published on the subject. But he did mention navies without grip safeties which, I presume, would encompass the 1908 and Model 1914's. On a personal basis, I regard the 1908 version commercial navies in the 51000 serial range as legit. I have seen commercial navy Lugers with both the long and the short frame variation in that serial range. This was a transitional period on frames and maybe the factory just used up some spare parts that they had on hand. Much like they did on the 1917 artillery Luger front and rear sight adjustment pins in that transitional period. Also, unfortunately, I put in a long day yesterday and today looks like it going to be another. I am sure that more has been written on commercial navies, but I am too tired to do the necessary digging. I hope that this helps. Big Norm

01-27-2007, 02:10 PM	#8
Navy RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Dc 'burbs in Virginia Posts: 2,482 Thanks: 0 Thanked 16 Times in 10 Posts	The piece is bad. Tom A

01-28-2007, 01:18 AM	#9
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	Per TomA, Takfoley and now me...yep. Big Norm

02-01-2007, 12:29 AM	#11
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	The seller may or may not know. The next question is: "Does he care?" He has a large audience on the internet. Many do not even know about this, or Jan Stills websites. Many sellers depend on the unwary. Heck, even some of the experienced buyers get caught every so often. Who is to say that a one-of-a-kind isn't really a true one-of-a-kind or that certain Kreighoff isn't real or made by some guy in Kansas City? We can't always have a TomA, Ron Woods or JohnD around to ask. All you can do is read the books, study, watch the appropriate websites and give it your best shot. Thumbs up or thumbs down. Big Norm

02-01-2007, 12:44 AM	#12
Big Norm RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 1,864 Thanks: 1 Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts	Steve, I would just like to add that all the books that I have on Lugers are pot marked with little messages on the inside. Its sometimes surprising how many errors and omissions have been pointed out to me and others over the years that I have been on this forum. Sometimes the amount of information can be overwelming and new information keeps coming out. Don't be afraid to ask questions. The only dumb question is the one that you don't ask. Big Norm