[Douglas_Jr]

Hi folks,

This link was posted in another forum.

http://members18.clubphoto.com/ed779902/1950020/guest.phtml

Just as an exercise for my knowledge, I´d like to know what you guys think about this Navy... I´d start with the Navy marks on the receiver - very sitant from each other... Am I correct?

Douglas.

 

[Dwight Gruber]

I don't think the distance apart of the Navy proofs is a useful criterion. The photo of the proofs is inadequate to reveal pertinent details.

Indeed, in general, the photos are just too poor--too small--to allow confident analysis. The gun just screams to be examined in person. The only thing which is blatently apparent is the lack of a date stamp on the left frame rail.

--Dwight

 

[garfield]

The pictures are not much help. As Dwight stated, 1917 should be stamped on the left frame rail. Also the take down lever and the sideplate should be numbered in the commercial manner rather than military. As large as the pictures are of the C/M acceptance marks, they do not show any real detail. The C/Ms do not look "right", IMO, however, not certain that "distance" between the two is a valid criteria for criticism. Don't know what we have stamped on the underside of the barrel, can't really see it; Brit stuff? I would not buy it.

 

[Douglas_Jr]

Folks,

As I said, I just brought this discussion here to learn a little more about Navy Lugers... in fact the distance between the C/M caught my attention but it semms that it doens´t mean much.

I know that this kind of late Navy are widely faked and I thought it it would be a good exercise to check this one. I also forgot to say that I do not intend to harm the seller in any way, even because I do not know him.

Here is the additional info that the guy put in the advertise:
WWI 1917 DWM NAVY LUGER FOR SALE...matching numbers and correct...Magazine I believe is correct type, but may be Portugeuse...British proofs under barrel. Price asked is 2,250.00.

Douglas.

 

[Pete E.]

Hi Douglas,

The "missing" 1917 date on the left-side receiver rail is odd and possibly a red-flag. Did you ask the seller the size of the rear toggle pin flange ? It should have the large flange size.

Regarding spacing of the C/M stamps...

I captured a few jepgs off this forum as well as off the Internet and even the Simpson LTD web site. There seems to be quite a variance in the distance of placement amongst the stampings...suggesting the three stamps were hand-held and not held in a stamping jig of some short :

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 1.jpg
34.64 KB


Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 3.jpg
19.69 KB

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 4.jpg
29.1 KB

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 5.jpg
22.53 KB

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 6.jpg
8.93 KB

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 7.jpg
56.74 KB

Download Attachment: Navy Stamps 8.jpg
71.77 KB

This last photo is of your seller's Navy :

Download Attachment: Navy Stamp 9.jpg
51.39 KB