[kiwigrizz]

Hi there I have included several pictures 1 showing the reciever with a ruler to show that the reciever has been ground back and 1917 stamped on it I have also done the same picture with my 06 navy showing the reciever as flat you will also be able to see where the reciever comes of the round that the reciever has been ground as the high point on the side is rounded just above the MM marks also the MM with crown does not look right as my 06 Navy has the crown going down inside the v in the Ms the other thing is the sideplate has been linished posibly to remove the number and has quite a big step in it. I bought this Navy and was given that the gun was 98% the condition is definetly not 98% and I think the gun has been made up from a 1920 has anybody any ideas


Download Attachment: navy pics 007.jpg
147.63 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 008.jpg
147.19 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 011.jpg
149.37 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 012.jpg
147.98 KBDownload Attachment: navy pics 003.jpg
135.99 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 004.jpg
148.11 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 005.jpg
147.71 KB

Download Attachment: navy pics 006.jpg
154.21 KB

 

[kiwigrizz]

Hi there again i some how stuffed up above as some of the pictures got mixed up before the writing hope those that read this can understand i also forgot to say about the extractor it has been refinished and is about 1 sixtenth of an inch below the outside of the bolt the picture shows this possibly to remove the number. I have learnt my leson and would never buy sight unseen again. I bought this navy and 2 GNR's and was unable to return them as the dealer here said that the dealer in the states had put it across him and would not send them back
cheers

 

[Jan C Still]

Evan
Check the size of the 1917 Navy main toggle pin flange against that of a standard P08. The Navy flange should be larger.
Also look over the two posts below.

IMPERIAL NAVY PROOFS AND SN. Jan C Still http://luger.gunboards.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=421

Authenticating Model 1914 Navy's Dan Clemons http://luger.gunboards.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=438

Please let us know what you think.
Thanks
Jan

 

[kiwigrizz]

Hi there Jan,
Im sorry although I have about 40 lugers I dont know a lot about them and unsure what you are talking about. I have a vernier and can measure parts but im unsure what to look for can you explain more fully
thanks
evan

 

[kiwigrizz]

Hi there again Jan,
Ok I think I have worked out what you want I read the other sight that you posted and understand that what you want is the rear pin size that is the pin below the rear sight mine is the same size as a standard dwm 4 inch luger it fits perfectly from gun to gun I gather this is the dead giveaway that it is fake
thanks
evan

 

[Guest]

Evan,
Attached are photos of a Navy toggle pin and a standard toggle pin. The flange diameter of the Navy is .355 where the standard is .3115. The difference in diameter is very evident once they are compared.

Download Attachment: Pin-1.jpg
100.35KB

Download Attachment: Pin-2.jpg
69.3KB

 

[kiwigrizz]

Thankyou John for the pictures mine is the smaller size on my vernier it is .3110 so it is definitely a fake I thought so with all the other problems listed above. One would think that the dealer in America that sent it over would have known this he seems to have the biggest name in the industry and runs a website listing lugers for sale. I certainly would never trust him or buy anything from him again.
thanks
evan

 

[Luke]

Quote: "I bought this navy and 2 GNR's and was unable to return them as the dealer here said that the dealer in the states had put it across him and would not send them back."

Evan,

Did your local dealer identify his source in the US? One has to wonder if all of the discussion of fake Navy Lugers here and on the other Luger forum has caused the Luger mechanics to start exporting.

Luke

 

[Pete E.]

Luke,

From Kiwi's earlier posting on his GNR's :

" but the dealer in the states who sent them over here calls himself Mr Luger and has a web site also lives in Peoria A.Z. I have emailed him but he fudges around and gave me no info on the firearms "

 

[Luke]

Oh !

 

[keoki7]

He ought to be prosecuted.

 

[Ron Smith]

Evan, Try this~http://www.ag.state.az.us/consumer/

http://www.usdoj.gov/

Good Luck, Ron

 

[huggiebear]

This very sad state of affairs, I am afraid , is only the very minuscule tip of the iceberg!!! For an example, if one had the opportunity to personally inspect the selection of lugers in the last RI Auction, one would have thrown up his hands and walked away in disgust. The vast majority were either boosted, refinished or outright fakes. This is the results of 30 years plus of closet collectors of not doing their homework and instead trusting in the reputation of noted "Luger" experts. It is beginning to recycle as these closet collectors are now starting to release some of these "treasures" and will , once again, be bought and reburied deep until they too are brought to the surfaces , yet again. And the cycle will run never ending !! REMEMBER FOLKS, THIS HAS BEEN CONDUCTED OVER A PERIOD OF 30 PLUS YEARS OF FAKERY !!!!

 

[huggiebear]

Incidentally, this deficiency of using a smaller non-naval toggle head pin diameter has been brought to the attention of the mechanic who first originated these "beauties" and is now using or even correcting past errors on returned specimens so that this noted deficiency is now addressed which the collector should no longer be using this sole criterion as a guide to assert one way or another whether one has the real thing !!!

 

[Luke]

The axle flange diameter issue is old news.

It is, in fact, surprising that any of those Lugers are still in circulation. One would have suspected that all of them would have been returned and brought up to specification by now. Anyone who bought one of these fakes . . . and who reads . . . would have probably returned it to the seller by now; and it would have found its way back to the mechanic.

As the Luger mechanics improve their skills and knowledge almost no one will be able to identify their "work" within a few years. Sad, indeed.

 

[kiwigrizz]

Hi there again folks,
Sorry I was unable to thank you all before for all your help but I went away on Friday to a Cowboy shoot and when I got back on Sunday night my modem had blown up so I now have it fixed and back on the air. I was wondering about one more thing the strike on the barrell and frame for alignment is this done with one tool when the barrel is fitted and if the marks are not aligned and not the same depth and width does this show that a replacement barrell has been fitted. Thanks guys and will look forward to your replys
evan

 

[Pete E.]

Hi Evan,

Member Dwight Gruber has done extensive study on what are called "witness marks". See the following discussion thread (some of the photos in this posting were lost during server problems in the past...) :

http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=110&SearchTerms=witness,marks

p.s. Sorry to hear about your bad experiences here in the USA...this is tragic news. Please spread the word to your fellow collectors in NZ...

 

[Dwight Gruber]

quote:Originally posted by kiwigrizz

I was wondering about one more thing the strike on the barrell and frame for alignment is this done with one tool when the barrel is fitted and if the marks are not aligned and not the same depth and width does this show that a replacement barrell has been fitted.

Evan,

The "Witness Mark" question as you describe is not without some controversy. Ideally it should be a single-stroke by a single instrument, in perfect alignment. No conclusion can be drawn about a barrel's originality if it is not, on the basis of the witness mark alone.

--Dwight

 

[Pete E.]

Just recent heard from Evan that he won his court case and the appeals case in New Zealand against the NZ broker...

Evan got taken on this M1914 Navy and two force-matched, consecutively numbered GNR's...

Good guys sometimes do prevail...!!!

 

[Dwight Gruber]

Pete,

If you are still in contact with Evan, see if you can find out if the U.S. suppliers are listed by name in the court documents.

--Dwight