[Brandon M]

Hello all,

I would like to present my 1917 Navy. This is a relatively new acquisition for me, and I'm just now getting around to posting photos. Hopefully our resident Navy experts will tell me I bought a good one.

4575a is all matching with an unnumbered firing pin and grips (which I believe is correct for these?). The magazine has a faint Crown/M but is unnumbered.

Here are the photos:

The floor is open for questions, comments, and criticisms.

-Brandon

 

[Norman R]

Congratulations Brandon, 1917 Navy #4575a looks like a fine gun indeed, and your photos are excellent. All you need now are a Type 2 holster and magazine pouch.
Norm

 

[lugerholsterrepair]

All you need now are a Type 2 holster and magazine pouch. nah..go for the type 1 and a stock. The type 2 was for landlubbers. Not that there's anything wrong with that... but the stock!

Checked my dozen Navy mags but nothing close..

 

[Tim Hawkins]

Beautiful gun. Thank you for the nice presentation!
Tim H.

 

[jeb111]

Brandon that is a beautiful Navy! The Navy Lugers are some of the best looking Lugers built! Congratulations!
Jim

 

[heckinohio]

Another back pat!!!!!! Goes to show that there is still some good stuff out there.

I always wonder why anyone would sell such good items??

PJH

 

[Brandon M]

Thank you all for the compliments. Navies make me nervous, but I used the 1917 Navy Real Vs. Fake thread here authored by Mike Cogswell and felt pretty good about it.

Norm and Jerry, I am always looking for the proper accoutrements to go with my Lugers, the proper Navy leather is no exception. Lately I have spent more money on holsters, manuals, etc. than I have guns.

Jim, I agree. The 6-inch Navies are probably the best looking Lugers ever made.

PJH, would you believe me if I told you I picked this gun up from Cabela's? I believe someone must have walked in and liquidated a loved one's collection as the store had several Lugers.

-Brandon

 

[spripple33]

Brandon,
That's a nice looking Navy! Congrats!
-Jason

 

[Brandon M]

Brandon,
That's a nice looking Navy! Congrats!
-Jason

Thanks Jason! I like it pretty well.

-Brandon

 

[klaus 3338]

Nice Navy but what's about the magazine? I think it belonged to a first issue Navy.

 

[Brandon M]

Nice Navy but what's about the magazine? I think it belonged to a first issue Navy.

Klaus,

I wasn't sure if the magazine was appropriate or not. How can you tell? I am eager to learn.

-Brandon

 

[klaus 3338]

I observed that the 06 mags have concentric rings and the same acceptance mark they have on the receiver (3 lobe crown or pentagon shape on late 06), the 08 variation has the pentagon C/M and most dated 1916 or 1917 has plain knops and pentagon C/M. All Imperial Navy mags have the serial number stamped in large letters like the mags of the DWM first issue military Lugers.

 

[klaus 3338]

Your mag seems to be a early Navy replacement magazine, the first I ever saw.

 

[Mauser96]

Your mag seems to be a early Navy replacement magazine, the first I ever saw.

I think so. Two of mine,
Guy

 

[Norman R]

What Klaus is referring to, I believe, is the early 3 Lobe Crown/M which was replaced by the Pentagon Crown/M at about 1906 Navy 4000a. the 2 photos below illustrate the difference.
Norm

 

[Brandon M]

Well,

Looks like I'm just going to have to find a gun that is appropriate for this magazine! Don't you hate when that happens?!

-Brandon

 

[Norman R]

Not so fast, Brandon, since it's an unnumbered spare it could have been laying in some armorer's tool box for years.
Norm

 

[Brandon M]

You're right, Norm...but I'm still looking!

Guy, glad to see you weighing in on this one! I will email you soon, as I think we are still planning to travel to France in late summer/early fall.

-Brandon

 

[klaus 3338]

Guy and Norm, thanks for showing your Navy mags ans Norm shows the early Navy mag in best conditio, wow that's a beauty.

 

[klaus 3338]

Norm, how looks the crimp of the early mag please.