Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
About 10 years ago I bought an Imperial Navy Luger from SARCO. I thoroughly examined it and then sent it back with a letter of explanation. SARCO immediately refunded my money, including the cost of shipping. It's been a long time but I'll try to give as much detail as I can. The pictures I took at the time will help show what I'm describing.

The pistol was not "all matching". The locking bolt was a mismatch. The frame was an Erfurt judging from the C/Letter on the trigger guard and it had been renumbered to the top part. Oddly, the Erfurt sideplate was correctly numbered and didn't appear to be renumbered or altered. The unit marking is for a Fortress Machine Gun Detatchment which could have been a Navy costal fortress but may not have been too. The frame was not marked "1917" on the left side. That was proper for an Erfurt frame but not for a Navy.

The top part seems to have genuine Navy acceptance stamps (the crowns aren't floating) but the barrel serial number isn't stamped evenly although the font is the same as the frame serial number. The bore was perfect and the rear sight seemed original.

The finish on the entire pistol seemed to be original rust blue and the stamps showed halo although the pictures don't show halo in all views. The grease on the inside of the pistol was very old and set up.

My conclusion was that the gun was not an attempt to fool anyone when it was made. I feel that it was a post-WW1 rework using an Imperial Navy top and Erfurt frame. The serial numbers were matched at the time of the rework. Surely someone intent on passing the pistol as a genuine Imperial Navy would have done a better job of it.... wouldn't they?

What do the board members think, based on my description and the pictures? I've often wondered if I should have kept it but $1,800 is a lot of money for a rework..... even a Navy rework!

Download Attachment: NavyLuger.jpg
50.79KB

Download Attachment: NavyTop.jpg
218.51KB

Download Attachment: NavyFrame.jpg
52.15KB

Download Attachment: NavyFrameProofs.jpg
56.74KB

Download Attachment: NavyBblSerNo.jpg
51.5KB

Download Attachment: NavyFrtSight.jpg
38.16KB

Download Attachment: NavyUnitMks.jpg
67.91KB
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,549 Posts
Doubs, the only opinion I have is that it was smart as all get-out to take pictures and keep the information.

Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,298 Posts
Agreed that this is a bogus piece. Its interesting, though--the C/M acceptance marks look like proper stamps but they display "halo" which means they were stamped through the blue which is not proper.

-Dwight
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Dwight
I agree with you. "I feel that it was a post-WW1 rework using an Imperial Navy top and Erfurt frame." However the price is much too high for such a rework.

Thr F.M.G.A.9.22. signifies a Fortress Machine Gun Abt. Of the 13 reported 8 are 1911 to 1913 Erfurts. The marking is not reported on Navy Lugers.

Jan
 
G

·
Boy, the gunsmith had a heavy hand with the stamps. All are very deep.

1. The Proofs look to be correct.
2. The mark between the barrel and receiver looks original.
3. The date looks to be missing from just above the take-down. Not good!
4. Blue has been added to the gun at some point in time. Not good!
5. The numbers on the take-down are located in an incorrect place as is the number on the side-plate. What were they thinking?

A look under in and around the toggle would reveal even more. Based on what I see, this is not an authentic model 1914 Navy.

Good call!

Dan
 
G

·
Boy, the gunsmith had a heavy hand with the stamps. All are very deep.

1. The Proofs look to be correct.
2. The mark between the barrel and receiver looks original.
3. The date looks to be missing from just above the take-down. Not good!
4. Blue has been added to the gun at some point in time. Not good!
5. The numbers on the take-down are located in an incorrect place as is the number on the side-plate. What were they thinking?

A look under in and around the toggle would reveal even more. Based on what I see, this is not an authentic model 1914 Navy.

Good call!

Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Dan
The date missing on the frame and the the serial numbers located as on an Army P08 are not so inconsistent with the fact that the frame and the side-plate are some Erfurt P08 ones!
They never tried making a quality fake,but only mounted toghether some parts they had in storage.Now it could be a collecting piece(if it was a good one),but originally it was a shooting gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Dan
The date missing on the frame and the the serial numbers located as on an Army P08 are not so inconsistent with the fact that the frame and the side-plate are some Erfurt P08 ones!
They never tried making a quality fake,but only mounted toghether some parts they had in storage.Now it could be a collecting piece(if it was a good one),but originally it was a shooting gun.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top