Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Greetings - I recently got this holster. I thought it was for a Hi Power, but clearly, the magazine holder is not big enough.

What pistol do you think it was made for?

Dimensions are 9" long, 6 1/4" wide. (it's missing its strap)

The magazine holder is 4 3/4" long, approx. 1 1/4" wide, and appox. 7/16" deep

It fits my FN Hi Power somewhat snugly.....if the magazine holder was the right size, I would say it's a tight-fitting HP holster.

any thoughts?
648091
648092
648093
648094
648095
648096
648097
648098
648099
648100
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,842 Posts
could be for a Radom...Bill
 

·
Moderator / Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
10,229 Posts
I think I recently bid on this on eBay...
 

·
Registered
WWII firearms, holsters, insignia, badges, Japanese swords, and other militaria
Joined
·
403 Posts
This is indeed a Radom holster. However, the markings on the back are bogus. The maker "cgn" never made a Radom VIS holster to my knowledge.

The Maker is Otto Stephan, code "gaq". The original markings are just visible inside the flap. It is marked "gaq 4" on the left side of the stud, and "P35(p)" on the right side of the stud.

You can easily spot the "gaq" holsters from other Radom holster makers by the fact that they used double row stitching on the belt loops. All other makers for Radom holsters used a single row of stitches. Also,"gaq" holsters will not have a lift strap.

I've attached photos of another "gaq 4" holster so you can compare.

Matt:cool:
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
with the obvious marks on the inside of the holster flap, why would someone feel the need to add fake makers marks to the rear? while I can see the stupidity to mark up a non marked good gun to try and pass it off as something else, this holster already contained remnants of a good mark. I just don't get it.
 

·
Registered
WWII firearms, holsters, insignia, badges, Japanese swords, and other militaria
Joined
·
403 Posts
with the obvious marks on the inside of the holster flap, why would someone feel the need to add fake makers marks to the rear? while I can see the stupidity to mark up a non marked good gun to try and pass it off as something else, this holster already contained remnants of a good mark. I just don't get it.

I agree with you. However, I don't think the markings are that obvious. I don't believe anyone in this thread noticed them until I mentioned it. (if they did, no one commented on them.) My guess is; whoever added the bogus markings on the back didn't see the markings inside the flap, or didn't know what they were.

Having said that, I have seen this before. It's very sad to see, but it does happen.

Why would they do this? One word- Money. Having sold many holsters over the years I can confirm that holsters with makers markings sell for more than unmarked holsters. Even if both are exactly the same. That's just how it is.

Hope this helps,
Matt:cool:
 

·
Moderator / Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
10,229 Posts
Pretty talented added markings I must say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
Pretty talented added markings I must say.
I was thinking the same thing....its getting scary. As for your followup Matt, Yes I agree adding a mark to something that didn't I could see would be tro try and add legitimacy, but if marks are already there? But as you say the guy may not have seen them. But as Jerry mentioned the person that did add them is VERY talented becuase they look legit. Someone with that kind of talent , I would have thought would have seen the inside flap mark.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top