Printable View
If you are ever in Quebec City, make sure you take a tour of the citadel, the fort in the old city. In the museum sitting there with a few other pistols is NAA #78. It turned out to be a nice surprise for me! I didn't expect to see a 1911 there, much less a rarity like that. (Oh and the other stuff in there, along with the changing of the guards is pretty neat too!).
I have only seen one North American Arms 1911 in all my years of collecting, it was at the Colt Show in Reno, Nevada last year. They are definately a Rare Bird.
I was at the Citadel doing military training in '96 and had occasion to look through the museum. The Van Doo soldiers that were with me had no idea what they had there. They had been postecd there for years and had a prize like that sitting dead center (as I remember) in the cabinet. From the description in blue book of gun values, it was in better than the 98% condition the book showed. It had been made not more than a mile away and had not travelled anywhere. When gramps died, thank goodness the executor of the will said "let's give this to the army museum" and it's there for all to see. I have pics as well. What a beauty!
Yes, I think most people don't have any idea, they just say, 'oh it's some old .45 pistol....'. This was the second one of these that I have actually seen up close.
I posted this on another forum, but it's appropriate for this thread. Here is the (in)famous NAA 1911 at the Citadel. I took this picture last year.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../naa1911-1.jpg
How much more value does one have over a Singer?
I don't think that they bring as much as the Singer does, as it was never accepted and used by our military.
While the North American's are more scarce than Singers, as Duane states, a Singer typically will bring almost twice the money than a similar condition North American will. The only reason I can think of is also as Duane states... the North Americans were never accepted or used by the U.S. military. Therefore, it can easily be argued that these exceedingly rare pieces are not even military pistols.
koldt... thanks for posting that picture! That pistol is in far better condition than I expected.
I would be curious to know then, because the blue book of gun values lists the NAA at $27,500 for 98%. And that's four years old! The Singers are listed in WW2 and that would be apples and oranges. Yes they're scarce but less than 100 NAA were made. They were on contract but the war ended before delivery. Singer lists 500 copies made on one serial range. $24,000 U.S. per. What have you guys seen in sales on Singers? I haven't seen any NAA for sale.
OK, I'll ask. Why is it infamous?Quote:
Originally Posted by koldt
North American Arms did have a contract to build the 1911 pistol during WWI, but none were completed before the war ended. Just like the other WWI contractors that did not deliver any pistols, the contract was cancelled with the end of the war. The specimens seen today were made up following WWI.
As to prices, a year of so back a British proofed Singer in really nice condition but with an incorrect magazine sold at auction for $80,500 including the buyer's premium. A lesser condition Singer with an incorrect magazine and barrel sold for somewhere in the $60/70,000 range.
The NAA that I saw in Reno was for sale for $18,000. It had very little finish left. As far as Singer 1911A1 pistols go, I believe a very nice one sold last year in the $70,000 to $80,000 range if my memory serves me. It is impossible to compare apples to apples here, but my money is still on the Singers as far as disireability goes. This is only my opinion though.
My question remains, has anyone seen a NAA for sale and if so how long has it been since that?? How much$$$
Logic would have the prices of NAA's higher then Singer's because of the scarcity of the pieces. But the market for these pieces has been a very different story.
Bottom line is the values of these rare pieces depend on what people are willing to pay for them. The recent Singer sales I know of have all been well north of $50,000 - with exceptional pieces pushing $85k to $90k. NAA's that I know have sold recently have sold quietly through private hands and were significantly less money... in the $20k +/- with a 90% for a little more than $30k. So, more people desire the Singer than NAA for whatever reason.
So if a rough NAA sold for $18,000, then what would a nice one go for? There aren't enough around to be sure. Has anyone seen a good one sell?? If so, how much$$$? What year was that?
I kind of messed up my posts guys, sorry bout that!!
Most North Americans are not in very good condition... at least not the ones I have seen either in person or in print. The one at (I believe) the Citadel in Quebec is the nicest one I have seen... with original finish. The finish on these pistols tended to flake off much like a Black Army looses it's finish. If you look at the picture posted of that pistol in Quebec, you can see some of the flaking at the muzzle end of the slide. Typically, this flaking is all over. I guess this is a long winded way of saying that there are not many very nice examples left. I know one sold at Rock Island Acution (last year, I think) for $32k... it was in 90% or so condition. There have been refinished examples, but I never did check to see how much they brought.
I believe the primary reason Singers have always sold at higher prices than the NAA pistols is because Singers are military pistols, and the NAA, while contracted to be a military pistol...isn't. As Johnny notes, they were completed post-WWI and sold commercially.
Technically the NAA is therefore not an M1911, as M1911 is a military pistol that was accepted by the U.S. Gov't.
Even some Singers that were not accepted by the government have sold for healthy amounts of money in the last few years. I don't believe they are worth what some people paid for them because they, too, are technically not a military pistol, but their values are probably carried by the values of the military Singers.
Either way, a nice original NAA is a desirable piece. They're just not desired by as many collectors as are the Singers...and apparently not as desirable, based on the prices paid.
In the last 15 years, the Singers have appreciated at a much faster rate than the NAA pistols. In the mid-1990s a nice Singer was about $20K. A really nice NAA (if you could find one) brought about $12-15K. Today Singers are 3-1/2 times the price of the '90s. The NAA has perhaps appreciated to the $20-30K range for a really nice one. Those not really nice don't seem to apprecaite much at all...unlike a Singer. Even ratty Singers have appreciated to beyond what a nice NAA normally brings.
It is all about supply and demand...with an emphasis on demand.
Ok , think of this. You have one of these two pistols in mint condition. Your best friend comes into the other one , also in mint condition , and asks you if you'll trade straight across. You jump at the chance.
What did you end up with? Chris
Me? A Singer.
The above scenario is one you can't loose! ... having a North American is not bad for "second place"!
Part of the situation is, what is the nationality of those who are driving up the 1911 prices? Americans. This not making a bash on anyone.
Americans are the main collectors willing to pay top dollar for premium/collectible 1911s. A non-US gun will not receive the same kind of price, no matter how rare, as a US manufactured gun, by a US collector.
There, I said it.
And then there is the case of the .45 Luger built by DWM and sent to Springfield Armory for testing when Ordnance was trying to adopt an automatic handgun. It has been roughly valued in the $1 million range.
I would love to look over one of those first hand!! I've heard about the American Eagle Lugers but we don't get many of them up here.
While this is an American Eagle Luger, it is no where close to being a .45 Luger. This is a 1900 American Eagle with the "dish toggles" that were changed to the flat checkered toggle knobs in 1903. The American Eagle chamber marking was added to the Lugers shipped to the U.S. up through the 1906 models.
The .45 Lugers were larger in virtually all dimensions that the standard Luger, and were essentially hand built. No one knows how many .45 Lugers were built as they were not serial numbered, but so far only three are known. Two were sent to Springfield for testing, of which one is still known, and another .45 thought to possibly be the back-up pistol to the two sent to Springfield is in the Norton Gallery in Shreveport, Louisiana.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2wpi1kz-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2rykqid-1.jpg
Hmmm... just how many non-US made M1911 pistols were used by the US military? Unfortunately, we can not count the 105 that were manufactured by North American Arms because they were not accepted by the US Military - largely because of the end of WWI. So, if someone is collecting 1911's with (or without) US Military history, well, just how many foreign guns will they have?Quote:
Originally Posted by koldt
Personally, I love thinking of the NAA's as military pistols, but for the reason stated above (and in many prior posts) I am not 100% correct in that belief. It is simply another variation of a phenominal pistol that was at least intended for US Military use. They are so rare, that there are only about 40 known to exist in collections and museums. Most collectors will never see one in person unless they find a museum that has one on display.
Beautiful Luger Johnny, may I guess that it's yours? Is it 30 Luger or what? Note all parts show special attention to finish. No rough marks here!
That is one I have had a while, and is .30 Luger. The early pistols had a lot of attention to detail. They were rust blued, and after blueing the inside surfaces were polished back to white where some of the blueing solution may have run down inside. As you probably know, the .30 Luger, or 7.65mm as it was known to the Germans, was a bottleneck cartridge which was necked up in 1902 to make the 9mm Luger cartridge. Usually the straight cartridge is necked down into another cartridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2d13f52-1.jpg
This is a very strange and hard to explain Luger. It is a Mauser built Luger on a 1942 dated receiver, and is .30 caliber. The pistol is a commercial pistol produced when Germany was trying to turn out military firearms, and from the dated receiver had to be mid to late war. The barrel is a left over from a Swiss contract from the 1930's, and if you look carefully the barrel is marked Kal 7.65. Instead of being stamped, the caliber marking is acid etched. The small parts are strawed in the manner of the early rust blued pistols, and even though the pistol was tank blued, the inside surfaces were polished back to white.
A special thanks to the moderators for indulging me in showing a few Luger pictures.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2dan8ee-1.jpg
Thanks to the moderators too. A beautiful gun is a beautiful gun.
It's not hard to see why the Luger was dropped in favour of the P-38. Too
much intricate machining and hand fitting. Old world craftsmanship at it's best. I wasn't aware Lugers were even turned out in .30 cal. during the war years.
Thanks for the photos.
In the mid 1930's the Mauser factory set aside the w and v letter suffix blocks for mostly commercial and contract pistols. Most of the police Lugers are in these serial number ranges, as well as some small contracts. One contract was for Sweden in 1940 which was in .30 caliber with the Kal 7,65 marked barrel which was 4 inch instead of the normal 4 3/4 inch .30 caliber barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike webb
The pistol shown above is in the w letter suffix block.
Looking at post 27 reminds me of a Mauser military pistol we had in the Army collection in the school in New Brunswick. It was in the white inside and I had no idea how that would have happened. It was a broomhandle with matching serial # stock. Just about perfect too.
Check out the NAA item 1-818, Military Pistols
1-1032 is another interesting offering. An aftermarket receiver and an Ithaca slide for only $1295.
Interesting pics on the NAA. Things that I had no way of knowing without seeing that. The hammer was smooth, other parts looked like they were made without examples to work from. The mag is two tone but no lanyard loop. Inside machining was good but simple. The word limited was smaller than the rest of the roll mark.
Still, I could never afford such guns so I'll have to settle for pics.
The North American hammers never made it as far as the checkering process, and the mainspring housings did not have a lanyard loop.
Ordnance dropped the lanyard loop on the magazines early in 1916, and the last Colt pistols shipped with the LL magazines were in October of 1915.
The North American has definitely been refinished, The blueing is wearing fairly evenly, not flaking. As stated in the ad, the legend does not show correctly... The lettering appears narrower than others. Wish we could see the MSH... it should not have any provision for a loop.
I have seen one North American (photos of it are on CoolGunSite) that has a checkered hammer - not the normal smooth one. (The rest of that pistol is all as expected and original.) It is important to remember that all of these were toolroom prototypes, and other parts may have been used in the assembly (such as a Colt hammer in this case).
The ad is stating that the Limited that tapers off at the end is correct.
Yup - the location, size, and tapering of the "Limited" all appear close to correct, as well as other subtleties of the text... that's not the issue I see with it. All of the lettering of the font itself is very narrow... not as wide as the correct legend. The only way I can think of to make lettering thinner is to make the original wider letters go away, and re-engrave (etch, or ??) the letters. (The ad mentioned that he thought the legend had been "refreshed as they now appear engraved not roll stamped...") I tend to agree.
If they were all toolroom prototypes, anything is possible. Prototypes generally all show variations.
I have to agree on the (problematic) lettering. With the very small sample size that I have actually looked at, there's quite a bit of variation in the lettering. Certain letters are thicker than others for instance. I don't see that same variation here, there's much more consistency in the lettering on this one.
For instance, I think that the words "NORTH" and "QUEBEC" should be much fatter/thicker. That said, a lot of the other letters look right, like the word "Limited". I'm no expert on these, but I would be a bit reluctant on this one (and not just because it's a lot of money!).
As I mentioned, the lettering and finish are the two major problems I see with this piece. That being said, this one could very possibly be the most affordable NAA currently for sale. Any potential buyer should know that it was likely an all correct, original piece, but has been refinished and re-lettered. The ad and price both reflect that. IF this was all original, the price should be about twice the asking price. It is not a bad piece, it is just not original.
I did some photo work and placed one of the pics from the ad along with a close up of the slide markings I took of the NAA pistol at the Citadel.
The ad/unknown pistol picture is the one on top. My picture of the Citadel NAA is on bottom.
Close, but there are some differences.
Pictures are the best I could do with what I had.
http://www3.telus.net/hansonk/NAA1911.1.jpg
Here are the rollmarks from serial number 55....FWIW.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../12/Naa3-1.jpg
Rock Island Auctions Drove Up The Singer Prices!
Hi Oldcanuck,
Does your #55 actually have #56 on the trigger? It doesn't look like it's a 55...
Yup.... 55 on the slide and frame, 56 on the trigger. I guess it was hectic in the toolroom that day !!!!!!!
'oldcanuck'
By any logistical and logical standard of such a sequence of numbers on a rare and worn pistol as yours, I think you are correct.
Actually there really isn't that much wear on the pistol. However the original copper oxide finish, being quite fragile, and it being stored in a holster early on it's life, hasn't helped the finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by cafdfw
FWIW, this is the roll marks on #24... (Sorry about the uneven lighting... I'm working on it!)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5082-1.jpg
Rob,
Whats the number on #24's trigger....??? I appears to start with a 3 ????
Bob
Here is a better picture of the trigger. The first number is definitely a 2. (I did a double-take when I first saw it because I thought it looked like a 3.) It may be silly of me, but I have not detail stripped this one. I have been told and read that it is indeed #24. (I just have not confirmed it.)Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcanuck
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5088-1.jpg
Rob,
Sure nuf.... that first picture is certainly decieving.
Nice example of an 'oldcanuck'....!!!!
BG
Here's another one... This one is #87.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5094-1.jpg
Rob,
You certainly don't need 2 of those. If I were you, I'd trade one off on something American built !!!!!
BG
After I wrote about not detail strippng the pistol, I noticed that the MSH pin was installed backwards. That was all the excuse I needed... Here is a picture of the trigger from #24 out of the gun. All numbers match...
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5098-1.jpg
Who said anything about "NEED"? But, they look so nice together!Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcanuck
#87 is above #24 in both images...
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5102-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_5105-1.jpg
Rob,
Really nice..... Thanks for sharing.
Bob
Not one, but two. Excellent!
Is there a list of serial numbers of the remaining guns?....I saw one last year with a single digit....would like to know how many are estimated to have survived?