Under the microscope

Ray · 03-31-2001, 12:11 AM

Gentlemen

I guess to begin with, thanks to Marvin and DM on the strawing question.So here it is, guys. While the Luger collecting business is great stuff and already costing lots of money,( three toys in March), issues are beginning to arise. As a Professor of Medicine and Medicinal Chemistry(clearly not a liberal)I have a natural compunction to look closer than most folks. My habit, developed from collecting shotguns and M1 Garands, is to look closely at the scrolling(shotguns) or the lettering(Garands) to assess whether the weapon has been redone.Under a stero microscope my last two luger purchases presented with some interesting images. These guns, a 1937 S/42 and a 1939 42 both had all matching numbers and appeared in great shape.Under the scope all of the numbers were sharp at the edges. However in both cases the proof marks (the interesting designs on the right side of the receiver) seemed somehat rounded although the markings on the barrel were much sharper. On a Garand the soft edges would suggest a refinish. In the cae of the Luger I do not understand the other sharp markings coupled with the soft edge stamps unless it was simply a dull stamp. Well, you guys are the Luger forensic experts; what is the answer/ Is it possible I am just looking too closely?

03-31-2001, 03:12 AM

Ray,

What you see in regards to those acceptance stamps is pretty-much standard. They are often seen as weak or partial because they were struck after the heat-treatment, and before any final polishing (if any) of the upper receiver. These receivers, by Mauser, tend to run fairly hard.

Marvin · 03-31-2001, 09:46 AM

Ray,

Joe is correct that the insoection stamps are "hit" after the receiver is hardened and this results in the stamps being worn faster than the date and code stamps. In addition, the date and code stamps are much larger than the inspection stamps and again, they wear at a much faster rate. Another thing about the inspection stamps is how "hard" the inspector hits the stamp. I have a couple of Lugers where the stamp was hit so hard, it is difficult to tell what the stamp is. Other times, the stamps are hit so light, they are almost not there. The light hit and the heavy hit sometimes gives the appearance of being buffed.

This is a good observation which you made on the stamps and and the question is good. When a reblue job is done on a Luger, there are usually other tell-tale signs to look for in addition to the stamps, but when a good job is done, it is sometimes difficult to tell. If you have ever seen any of the Rust Blue jobs that Ted does, you must know exactly what to look for as the job is so good.

Keep us informed with other observation you make under the microscope, it is interesting.

marvin

03-31-2001, 12:11 AM	#1
Ray Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Oregon Posts: 126 Thanks: 2 Thanked 37 Times in 16 Posts	Under the microscope Gentlemen I guess to begin with, thanks to Marvin and DM on the strawing question.So here it is, guys. While the Luger collecting business is great stuff and already costing lots of money,( three toys in March), issues are beginning to arise. As a Professor of Medicine and Medicinal Chemistry(clearly not a liberal)I have a natural compunction to look closer than most folks. My habit, developed from collecting shotguns and M1 Garands, is to look closely at the scrolling(shotguns) or the lettering(Garands) to assess whether the weapon has been redone.Under a stero microscope my last two luger purchases presented with some interesting images. These guns, a 1937 S/42 and a 1939 42 both had all matching numbers and appeared in great shape.Under the scope all of the numbers were sharp at the edges. However in both cases the proof marks (the interesting designs on the right side of the receiver) seemed somehat rounded although the markings on the barrel were much sharper. On a Garand the soft edges would suggest a refinish. In the cae of the Luger I do not understand the other sharp markings coupled with the soft edge stamps unless it was simply a dull stamp. Well, you guys are the Luger forensic experts; what is the answer/ Is it possible I am just looking too closely?

03-31-2001, 03:12 AM	#2
Joe DeLong Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Under the microscope Ray, What you see in regards to those acceptance stamps is pretty-much standard. They are often seen as weak or partial because they were struck after the heat-treatment, and before any final polishing (if any) of the upper receiver. These receivers, by Mauser, tend to run fairly hard.

03-31-2001, 09:46 AM	#3
Marvin User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Upstate S.C. Posts: 1,132 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Under the microscope Ray, Joe is correct that the insoection stamps are "hit" after the receiver is hardened and this results in the stamps being worn faster than the date and code stamps. In addition, the date and code stamps are much larger than the inspection stamps and again, they wear at a much faster rate. Another thing about the inspection stamps is how "hard" the inspector hits the stamp. I have a couple of Lugers where the stamp was hit so hard, it is difficult to tell what the stamp is. Other times, the stamps are hit so light, they are almost not there. The light hit and the heavy hit sometimes gives the appearance of being buffed. This is a good observation which you made on the stamps and and the question is good. When a reblue job is done on a Luger, there are usually other tell-tale signs to look for in addition to the stamps, but when a good job is done, it is sometimes difficult to tell. If you have ever seen any of the Rust Blue jobs that Ted does, you must know exactly what to look for as the job is so good. Keep us informed with other observation you make under the microscope, it is interesting. marvin