Notifications
Clear all

LG54 (sporter version of Hakim)


Garvin
(@garvin)
Curator in Chief Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 5599
Topic starter  

LG54 (sporter version of Hakim) 

Spotted on eGun.de.







Quote
Garvin
(@garvin)
Curator in Chief Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 5599
Topic starter  

LG54 (sporter version of Hakim) 

Spotted on eGun.de. The seller has set a minimum on his auction of 1,300 euros.

 






 


ReplyQuote
Garvin
(@garvin)
Curator in Chief Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 5599
Topic starter  

LG54 (sporter version of Hakim) 

This is the very rare civilian version of the Hakim, of which only a small number were made around 1954. It had a strong resemblance to the Falke models 80 and 90, which were launched in early 1952, so may have been a copy. Some parts of the Anschutz, such as the cocking linkage, was of markedly inferior construction compared to the Falkes. The rearsight, although substantial, was also quite crude by comparison, using pressings where the Falke parts were machined from solid steel.

a3c733bf87782ab1fc710aa31c185a94.jpg c31738c1f626dc1d6ebf4a273cd9c74c.jpg 4518a17e381301496f8500311815e01e.jpg 77cb76d7ba8a308b782b54b5bdaead38.jpg 844a9de518dc4c6430891f0732247cc4.jpg 055e6566479792fe5d68fe105d72c937.jpg 5a9c5ac6421a7ec7057e41bd5fdb3626.jpg 34c19fc23d6b1e1aac9b2688686b63e7.jpg 5830777dfd7e3f6278632a1289e47892.jpg 9825142655345b5d89982f23e5896927.jpg f80aedd849c050d0b41a2b5d3473d176.jpg 897920749d92142efba1a9a53072620d.jpg a91474c6a02fc34d09bb14f4de54c49d.jpg 3bf095a52de6a2ca892511515dc6d60f.jpg 5ad1a370ba5dda8bd2db53f2bb0e0565.jpg a8c7619593323d232efd1365008e6596.jpg 373e232d0f26f4cd927a13133587b9b9.jpg c925a87d713861b1be0faff828062351.jpg 4d7a13e362d36b3d70ec299aacc7629a.jpg 754a077f6e75a4dc96840d64c7c94618.jpg 63e0f4040d73a2cedd22be094fd22e7b.jpg 5659deef245b4353ef2102d583135291.jpg


ReplyQuote
Garvin
(@garvin)
Curator in Chief Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 5599
Topic starter  

LG54 (sporter version of Hakim) 

With thanks to Eberhard for the heads up.

 

















ReplyQuote