|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,094 Likes: 99
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,094 Likes: 99 |
The trademark is too far away from the crossguard. Whatever else it may be, the blade is a reproduction.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,077
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,077 |
I'm afraid this is a mishmash of bad and questionable parts. The blade is a reproduction SA (not SS) Rohm blade. The grip appears to have originally an SA example, with an SS insert (looks like a reproduction) that has replaced the SA insignia. The SS M36 scabbard may be original. It's difficult to tell from the photos shown. The center band appears to be higher on the scabbard than usually seen, but it could be a "field upgrade," where the chain assembly was added to an M33 scabbard, as opposed to a factory-assembled example. Sorry the news isn't better, but that's the reality of it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 5 |
Thanks so much - very useful information. The Blade did look a little minty based on the condition of the handle and scabbard. The cross guard pieces also look poorly cast and are not marked. So it looks like a nice scabbard and mucked-with handle.
|
|
|
Forums42
Topics31,668
Posts329,045
Members7,519
|
Most Online5,900 Dec 19th, 2019
|
|
8 members (Don Scowen, maybarker, ed773, Documentalist, atis, Evgeniy, Vern, Honestmike),
771
guests, and
50
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|