Original or Not? Advice?

[blazzin1]

Hey Guys, First post here. Thought I would try to get some advice from ya'll. My Dad just recently gave me the set-up you see below as a gift when I retired from the AF. No, it's not the overly popular family heirloom used by my great-grandpappy, just some lucky finds my Dad has pieced together over the years. I know the pistol is not like some of the "show-pieces" you see on here, with 98% finish, and look totally immaculate. But it is special to me because my Dad gave it to me, and as far as I can tell it is all original (please correct me if I'm wrong!!!). I've done a little research on it, and here's what I've discovered so far....S/N is 540XX, it was manufactured in late 1913, and has the "WGP" (Warren G. Penfield) inspector marking. It has the "H" (Frank Hosmer) stamps on the rear of the slide above the firing pin hole, and on the receiver just above the disconnector hole. The barrel has the correct "PH" marks, and all the parts and pieces look to be original. The finish looks to be about 50-60%'ish in most areas. But here's what I can't figure out:
1. What are the "R" and the "little square box" stamp on the reciever? Also there's another little square box forward of the mag-well on the reciever.
2. I cannot make out what the stamp is on the inside of the slide behind the disconnector recess, looks sorta like maybe a "3" or maybe "8" or maybe even a "B"??? Also, looks like a really small "arrow" stamp right next to it pointing to the cut-out for the firing pin stop???
3. What are the "5" and "J" marks on the barrel? The "5" is in front of the pin lug mount, and the "J" is stamped on the side of the lug.
4. Some "Bubba" decided to engrave what looks like a TX driver's license number or something into the front grip area on the frame!!! That is the only real defect I can see on this gun. I know better than to refinish this gun, but I sure would like to remove this engraving somehow!!! The finish in this particular area is probably only about 10% remaining, almost all gone. I can't afford the likes of the "restoration experts", but would like your opinions of either "remove the engraving" or "leave it alone", and also any advice on how to remove the engraving if that is your recommendation.

Please let me know if you see anything flaky to this gun that I missed, I am a "newbie"!!! And don't worry, I don't store it in that holster. Oh yeah, any guesses on value would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance for your guidance and advice.

http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010770.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010721.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010774.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010723.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010730.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010751.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010749.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010750.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010742.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010753.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010758.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010756.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010757.jpg

[blazzin1]

http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010733.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010754.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010755.jpg
http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/P1010724.jpg

[Scott Gahimer]

Looks like a very nice retirement gift. Congratulations. All the markings you ask about are simply production/inspection marks used by the factory during manufacturing.

I think you are a lot better off leaving the engraving alone on the front strap. There is no way to remove it without showing it was removed. There is also no way to refinish that specific are that won't be obvious to anyone knowledgeable to sees the pistol.

[smokey]

blazzin, in this time of "privacy and political correctness" it may be hard but, if you know someone in law enforcement that could track down the name of the person whose drivers license # that is,or was,it could prove interesting.....or not.A long shot but who knows? It is a beautiful pistol. Regards, Nick

[blazzin1]

Thanks for the comments guys. Yeah, we are working on tracking down that number. You're right, it might turn out interesting. So Scott, if you don't see anything questionable so far, can I assume everything is original as I thought?!?!? Anybody else got any comments....good or bad?? Thanks for looking....

Keith

[bgiven]

FYI your serial number was shipped to Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, IL in a shipment of 1000 on Nov. 6, 1913.

You may not be able to blame Bubba for the DL number on the front strap. In the '70s it was common in some areas of the country that LEOs went door to door with electric pencils marking citizens firearms with their DL numbers. I know a buddy in St. Louis told me the local LEOs offered a free electric pencil for anyone who complied with their request.

[blazzin1]

bgiven,
Thanks for the info!!! Where do you guys get this stuff?!?!? So, so far, I guess the consensus is just to leave the engraving. I sure wish I could get rid of it. But I definitely do not want to do anything to lessen the collectable value of it.

[Duane Hansen]

The electro pencil marks do take away from the value but nothing compared to the hit you would take if you refinished the whole gun. Best to leave it alone.

[mayagrafix]

I guess the consensus is just to leave the engraving. I sure wish I could get rid of it. But I definitely do not want to do anything to lessen the collectible value of it.
Depends on who the number belongs to. If the person in question has military history, and this number proves to be the link between the two, it could turn into the most valuable part of the whole pistola.

When info is found scrawled inside the grips for instance, it is much valued by collectors. A pistol with a photograph of the previous owner in uniform alongside it adds to its value, just as any documentation that can link the piece to a previous owner serving in uniform.

I would go with leaving the number ID on your piece.

[blazzin1]

mayagrafix,
Definitely a good perspective on the engraving. I'll have to be a little more assertive on trying to figure out who it belonged to.
Anyway, here's another nice picture my Dad took of the same pistol before he gave it to me. Love this one....

http://i698.photobucket.com/albums/vv348/blazzin1/IMG_1302.jpg

[NyteOwl]

Attached to JAG?

[bgiven]

I personaly don't think that even if the TX DL number was linked to any GI, for any reason, it is a post war addition that subtracts from the overall condition, and originality of the M1911.

[mayagrafix]

You have a point in that the (after mil use) addition of the TX DL number may not add any importance to the piece. However the fact is that it is there, and me thinks every cloud has a silver lining :)

[bgiven]

However the fact is that it is there, and me thinks every cloud has a silver lining :)

That's right, the fact is that it is there, which is a post war addition, that subtracts from the overall condition, and originality.... period. I'm sorry, but think, or wish, what you want..... there is no silver lining.

[jwenum]

Al in all,an excellant looking pistol..Cherish it.

[Scott Gahimer]

The only silver lining I see in regards to the engraving is that is it on a worn front strap...and not on one of the more prominent views of the pistol. It is a detractor, but it would hav been worse if engraved elsewhere on the pistol. Not only would it have been there, but you would have had to look at every time you viewed that side of the pistol.

Even so, it is still a nice piece and a great and thoughtful gift from your dad. I'd keep it just like it is and not alter it. Nothing will make it anymore original than it is right now...especially messing the pistol up by trying to remove the marking.

[bgiven]

I agree, it is a very nice representitive of an early M1911, and the best part IS the family connection. Keep it exactly as it is now, cherish it, for what it is, and it's history. Please don't store it in the holster, and don't worry about the front strap, as there really isn't anything you can do about it now.

[blazzin1]

Thanks for all the kind comments guys. To be honest, I expected some criticism from a few because of the imperfect finish and "bubba-fied" front strap. But, nice to see that ya'll are accepting of a new guy with a not-so-perfect pistol. Because my Dad gave it to me, I will keep it and cherish it forever. I don't plan on ever shooting it, I have a Springfield GI for that. I guess I'll just leave the engraving as is, and see if I can track down whoever that number belonged to. Thanks for all the advice.

[Hawkmoon]

If the driver's license number did not belong to my ancestor, and if I had no plans to sell the pistol, given that the engraving has already significantly reduced the real, monetary value of the piece -- personally, I would remove the engraving and do my best to blend some refinishing on the front strap in with the finish of the rest of the pistol.

I suppose that's contrary to some collectors' credo, but I would be bothered by the engraving every single time I handled the pistol. Life's too short to tolerate that.

[Varangian]

That's right, the fact is that it is there, which is a post war addition, that subtracts from the overall condition, and originality.... period. I'm sorry, but think, or wish, what you want..... there is no silver lining.

Depends on who's looking.

Not everyone is looking at collecting from a "perfection" standpoint. Some like weapons that have been used, and appreciate them, not as fancy pretties on a shelf that can be touched only with white gloves, but as survivors of history with lives of their own.

Rarely can you get that with an all-original 99% finish example. It's been nowhere and done nothing.

Even the great John S. du Mont abandoned collecting on mere appearance:

Condition, the criteria of the big money boys, now goes out the window. And who wants to collect an example that spent its life in a bureau drawer, or in an ordnance depot and was never issued? Not a true historian. The more used, probably the more history, whether carried by a cavalryman, a cowboy or a desperado. Many parts were field replaced, finishes were altered or worn off - grips were changed, barrels shot out or cut off, sights replaced.

To me, these worn guns breathe history. Some change for the chap who once collected only condition! And it is reasonable to believe that "Billy the Kid," like Custer, owned dozens of guns and who knows what the serial number was or where they got them? Your worn old single action that the "condition" boys wouldn't look at not only doesn't cost big bucks, but may well have thrown lead in a desperate situation that would make your hair stand on end. Or maybe a deputy owned your gun and brought his quarry in to justice and the rope - or as the old cow poke said when the trap was sprung: "poor old Joe, he was jerked to Jesus." What can be said of the Colt single action revolver can be said of guns of most any war, right up to and including World War II. So what are you waiting for? And speaking of condition, I dearly love those old "dug" relics and have some in my collection. Rusted so solid they are inoperable and many are found partially loaded. What stories they could tell - a few shots fired before their assailant dropped them in their tracks. Think about it. That's great history!

So what is the better approach? If you like mechanical variations, imaginative design and (if a rarity) great value, then by all means go for condition and the "bureau drawer" gun. On the other hand, if you appreciate history and understand that the gun had to be used to make history, then you still have a wide collecting field covering many generations and at a pretty reasonable cost. And despite the lower cost, appreciation of value is still in the cards, for one day collectors may suddenly realize what they have been missing.

http://www.gunandswordcollector.com/Templates/articles/6_full_circle.html

I like the pistol, and would like it even more if it could be connected to one of the people in its history...

[Scott Gahimer]

Varangian:

Welcome to the forum.

I would disagree with the opinion you quote in your post regarding M1911 and M1911A1 pistols. There are many high condition pistols with documented history and provenance.

Nearly every pistol I have in my collection that has come directly from a veteran or family of a veteran is well above 95% condition. Several other pieces with documented history in the National Archives I have are also high condition pieces.

"It's been nowhere and done nothing" is not an accurate statement regarding many of these pistols.

Each pistol has to be considered on its own merit. Poor condition does not necessarily equate to military service. Just because a pistol is well worn, has parts replaced, is refinished, etc. tells us nothing about its military service.

It has been 64 years since WWII ended. These pistols have been available to the public legally since the late 1950s. It is much more likely excssive wear occured since that time, rather than during the few years many of these pistols were used in military service prior to being liberated by some veteran returning home from service.

Nor do I think it is a fair assessment to characterize those who collect condition and originality as "big money boys". Many who collect the best examples they can find are not big money boys. I know that to be true because I am one of that crowd. I have done without many "other things" in life some enjoy to pursue a hobby I enjoy. Some simply prioritize differently. It has nothing to do with the size of the paycheck.

Ther are plently of pistols that have been thrown under truck seats or have been neglected and abused over the years. Reading anything into their history based on condition is purely speculative.

Original, high condition pieces will always be the most desired collector pieces. Prices are based on supply and demand. If low condition pieces were the standard, values for those pieces would exceed the prices of high condition guns. The wealthy do not drive the market on these pistols. The pistols drive the market. If low condition were "king", it would be reflected in the prices paid.

We know what pistols looked like when they were new and shipped to the military. Pistols that have retained their condition and originality will always be more valuable and desired because wear cannot be documented. There are far too many nice original pistols with documented provenance to believe that poor condition generally equates to any more than abuse and neglect.

I am former military and my standard duty weapon was the M1911/M1911A1 pistol as an Army MP. The military never permitted duty weapons to fall into such states of disrepair as we see today with many pistols. I sometimes hear fellows say how ratty their old .45s were when they served, but that was not my experience, nor the experience of others I know who served.

Weapons maintenance during wartime has always been a priority.

I will continure to collect the best examples I can find, not becuase they're worth more. I will collect them because I believe they best reflect what our troops were issued and what they used and brought home. We did not fight our battles with pistols. They were generally a secondary weapon. They were not drug through the mud behind tanks and trucks. They were typically issued to officers, NCOs and specialized personnel with specific need for a pistol. They were sought after and valued by most who carried them.

[Varangian]

Being on active duty for over 23 years myself, and being for nearly that entire time one of those issued sidearms, I can say that with the exception of newly-issued weapons I have never, ever, seen a duty sidearm in a combat arms unit with more than 80% finish.

My current M9 was handed to me with about 20% of the paint scraped off the frame and slide, and the barrel is devoid of any finish other than the dark spots from cleaned corrosion. It's always gone BANG, though, and shoots to POA at 25 meters, so I'm quite happy with it.

Perhaps your weapons spent more time in racks than in the field, and that explains their wonderful condition. My experience differs, and I am highly suspect of any military sidearm of pristine condition having ever seen much use outside of an arms room.

I'm not saying that corroded mixmasters be considered valuable collectibles. But if an otherwise nice example has a name scratched on it, or a booger to the metal, I don't think it's become worthless as a collectible...as I said in my first post, the suitability as a collectible depends on the motives behind the collection.

Mis dos centavos, YMMV.

[Scott Gahimer]

My service was 30+ years ago. The time frame I refer to is at least 64 years ago. There is a big difference between the wear factors and durability of the M1911/M1911A1 and the Beretta M9. I do not expect to see too many original finish M9 pistols in nearly 65 to 100 yrs since produced.

I do not question your service or your expereince with the pistols you have been issued or seen. I am only pointing out that your experience in the last 23 years is not necessarily typicsl of collecting M1911 and M1911A1 pistols for the last 25 or so years, nor is comparing the service lives of two totally different pistols used years apart in different parts of the world.

How many original M1911 or M1911A1 pistols do you have?

[Varangian]

How many original M1911 or M1911A1 pistols do you have?

Just one. A Springfield Armory M1911, made in 1914 or 1915 depending on the reference source. Springfield Armory's SN list says 1914, Clawson's list says 1915.

http://i26.tinypic.com/riakbn.jpg

[Scott Gahimer]

Thanks for the photo. I'm not sure what SA list you are looking at, but Clawson lists the Ordnance Dept. procurement records for the Springfield Armory pistols on page 392 of his first book.

107524 was procured, according to the Ordnance Dept, on June 5, 1915. The pistol have have been completed a few days before that, but the pistols were procured on a weekly basis.

If you'd like to discuss your pistol further, please post a new thread for it and we'll go from there. The SA pistols are interesting and unique.

There is a certain amount of skepticism many who have not collected have regarding high condition original pistols, and what their role was while in the military's possession.

Condition has little to do with originality and nothing to do with specifically where or how a pistol might have served.

The OP's pistol here was probably much much nicer when liberated from the military. It is a fact that many of these pistols were carried and used after the fact, and many had modifications made to them. The engraving on the front strap is a prime example of that.

However, because that pistol appears to be all intact and still original finish, I don't think any experienced collector would say the pistol is worthless. I'm confident that's not what Bob was meaning with his comment. An all original pistol with an added marking strikes me as a pistol that probably was passed around all that much. The more owners, the more likely parts are swapped out and pistols are refinished.

An added marking like that simply kills the collector value for most collectors. Most will value a pistol with a changed part or parts higher because that can be corrected without permanently altering the pistol. Changing parts does not restore originality on anything. It simply restores a proper appearance. A close inpsection will normally show what parts have been replaced on a pistol.

However, to remove the engraving from the front strap would require metal to be removed, and along with the metal, the original surface preparation and natural patina due to it's age and use. To remove the marking and forfeit the originality of the finish or lack thereof would be a mistake IMO. I don't like the engraving, but I like the pistol much more as it is than I would if altered.

Finding relics on the battlefields in poor or altered condition is different than finding relics in poor or altered condition in gun shops, collections or even with veterans or family members.

I agree, digging up a loaded pistol on the beaches of Normandy would be a treat for any collector because if the pistol had been lost there during WWII, it would be a rare and interesting find today. We would be relatively sure the pistol had remained that way since lost on the beach.

However, once a pistol leaves the battlefield or the military and falls into private hands, it is an entirely different situation. Even pistols that remained in the military and were used extensively (at training facilities?) and were subjected to possibly numerous rebuilds or repairs are not valued or desired nearly as much by most collectors. The pistols that came home with fellows immediately after the wars are generally nice pistols in original configuration.

Officially documented Marine Corps pistols are one example of an exception to the rule. Fewer pistols resulted in higher use and the Marine Corps did not send pistols in the be rebuilt and refinished with Parkerizing. Most of their pistols that show signs of repair simply have a part or parts replaced and remain original finish. A few I seen appeared to be old, period reblues with what are believed to be R.F. Sedgley markings on them. I've seen a few others with S marks that are Parkerized, but they generally appear to be commercial aftermarket refinish jobs.

Even with Marine Corps pistols, most collectors given the choice will select the best condition examples available.

Again, I'm happy the OP has a nice pistol and a priceless gift from his father. The engraving on the front strap takes littlle, if anyhting, away from that. But if the pistol were offered on the market, I suspect the value would somewhat plummet due to the engraving. The pistol is not for sale and I do not suspect it will ever be offered for sale by the OP. IMO, the engraving is a moot point to him...and it should be. Others expressing their opinions has nothing to do with the pistol and its owner. They're just opinions offered for the benefit of others trying to learn.

[Varangian]

I'm not sure what SA list you are looking at, but Clawson lists the Ordnance Dept. procurement records for the Springfield Armory pistols on page 392 of his first book.

http://www.nps.gov/spar/historyculture/upload/US%20M1911%20serial%20number%20ranges.doc

Sorry, took me a while to find it again...

[Scott Gahimer]

There is a lot of outdated/incorrect information in the stuff. I'd really recommend the Clawson 3rd Edition Collector's Guide.

[pjcarby]

Nice pistol Mr. Blazzin. I have to agree with the "leave it alone" crowd. That DL # is part of the history. I seem to like that and find it interesting. For a 1913 model it sure looks good to me.

[blazzin1]

Thanks pjcarby (and all the other folks with the positive comments). With everyone's advice, I have come to the decision to leave it as is. Haven't had a chance to try to research that number yet, but I'm in no hurry the pistol isn't going anywhere for a long while. Thanks again for the comments, anyone want to put any guesses on value (other than sentimental)???