Can someone kindly explain what constitutes "mint" when it comes to blades, or at least direct me towards a resource with this info? And how about grips?

It is not possible to reach a concensus on the definition of "mint", but for what it is worth here is mine for daggers: the same as it appeared the first second it was completed by its maker. Therefore, given the 70 plus years of aging, drying, bumps, scratches, humidity, heat, cold and so on and so forth, there can be no such thing as a mint dagger. Best condition is near mint in my opinion. I even struggle with "mint minus" although that may be splitting hairs. Bottom line is there can't be such a thing unless it just rolled off the assembly line. I would even argue that the first runner marks from the first time a blade was sheathed took it out of the mint catagory.

If there is no reference standard that the collecting community agrees on, then the very term "mint" is of very little use, IMO.

The reason I asked the question was because I've seen for sale at some dealer sites unissued daggers with what I would consider "mint" blades. Common sense to me implies that "mint" means pretty much perfect. This concurs with Skyline Drive's idea of mint.
I've also seen many daggers touted as being "mint" or NM and the blades have everything from a fair amount of greying to smudges/corrosion and the likes. I guess the thing to do is trust the photos and not the description.

doc, you have posed a very controversial question! The answers are as varied as the people you ask. Some say there are no mint blades simply because after the final polish, the dagger was assembled then shoved into a scabbard which started the inevitable "runner marks". Some say that the blades that have survived till today with the least amount of runner marks are mint. So, basically, it depends on who you ask and who's definition makes the most sense to you! To each his own! For your consideration I have attached a pic of an unissued, tagged and bagged RZM S/A dagger which I believe to be as close as you will ever get to mint! Regards, Leipzig
Seems we were all typing at the same time!

I'am with Skyline on this one,as far as I'm concerned "mint" only applies to Uncirculated coins,nats
http://www.stan-the-man.tk/

Rarely and extremely rarely in the case of SA/SS daggers you will find one with no runner marks, if there are no other considerations then that will be about as 'mint' as you can hope for.
Best blades by far to bring to a mint state are the plated ones as you can polish away minor exclusions without removing any crossgraining.

In general I would agree with Skyline that the very first runner marks inflicted will take a blade out of mint status.

I seem to remember an old topic from years ago when the top lads here did not even consider runner marks as a detraction simply because of their inevitibility.

Nolan

There are truly very few blades surviving that might be considered to be indisputably in mint condition but they do exist. Is there such a thing as a flawless dagger? Quite simply NO!
I am very critical in my observations & very fussy about what I am willing to retain in my small collection & therfore place small faith in the descriptions of all but a few.

Condition is a very subjective matter. For example if you compare something described by Wittmann as near mint to items similarly described by Paul Hogle or Chip Gambino you will see that they are light years apart in their appraisals. Paul as most of us know is very objective in his descriptions & Chip (a rare coin dealer) is very conservative. Everyone has to make their own judgement. Near mint to me represents something that is as good as one might reasonably expect it to be after light period use & the passing of 70+ years ie, a small blemish or a dot or two that don`t jump out at you. Anything else is less than objective & for me most good collectable daggers will fall in to my assessment of the Exc++ range. Without very good pictures I have to know from whom I am buying.

I think Landser has just given you the key. You need to look at the use of these descriptive terms by all the major dealers. As always language needs to be understood in context... in this case the context of each dealers sales lingo. For original period daggers mint can probably never mean mint as in a mint, uncirculated coin.

On one end of the scale you have Gottlieb�s "mega mint" category and at the other perhaps Wittmann�s simply "mint" or near mint. Just take time to look at all their catalogued pieces and how they use these terms. Theres a tongue in cheek thread at WAF on this topic "The language of selling" which concludes these dealers are all in the same category of the aggressive car salesman.

By the way, in my experience of having bought several pieces from each, both these gentlemen are trustworthy. Im not looking for "mint" pieces but I have to say I have been thoroughly satisfied with everything I have bought from Wittmann.

Yes, I see what you mean Gustavo. Without bringing up any dealer names as I do not wish to disparage them in any way, let me share two experiences I had. Being a new collector I relied on the forums for advice and was greatful for many who offered advise. I chose to make my first purchase from a reputable dealer one who has been mentioned in previous posts under this thread. I now know I paid a premium for doing this, but it was the right place to start. I also know now that the description I relied on was less than accurate, IMO. Not so much what was said, but perhaps more what was not said that should have been (again, IMO). And some of it revolves around the liberal use of the word "mint". I won't go so far as to say dishonest as that would be unfair, but the aggressive used car salesman comment you made rings true. Now that I know more I am hesitant to make additional purchases from this dealer based on my experiences with the descriptions. That being said, my hesitancy can easily be overcome by just looking more closely at the photos, or asking for better photos and understanding this dealers idea of mint or NM.

On the other hand, a second dealer who has also been mentioned was a real pleasure to work with. Descriptions were dead on and did not lead me down the primrose path. I won't hesitate at all to continue purchasing from Paul Hogle at Lakeside Trader.

So as I said before what I've learned here should have been obvious to me in the first place: trust the photos first, description second and place little trust in the term "mint" unless you know what the heck that dealer means by that.

I have found as supply gets thinner "mint" also gets fatter."Mint" from 20yrs. ago is not the same "mint" as today.I think it's in the eyes of the holder.

I think also that blades have to be 'in hand' to make a grading. Photo's can be both sympathtic and unsympathetic.

Nolan

We've been through this before, but here goes- please add your own memories-MINT, MINTY, STONE COLD MINT, DROP DEAD MINT, NEAR MINT, ALMOST MINT, MINT MINUS, MINT PLUS, PERFECT MINT, TRUE MINT, ABOUT MINT, UNTOUCHED MINT and the list goes on. Mike

All my daggers are graded paleomint.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McAlvanah:
We've been through this before, but here goes- please add your own memories-MINT, MINTY, STONE COLD MINT, DROP DEAD MINT, NEAR MINT, ALMOST MINT, MINT MINUS, MINT PLUS, PERFECT MINT, TRUE MINT, ABOUT MINT, UNTOUCHED MINT and the list goes on. Mike

Mike, you have forgotten about NEAR MINT +, NEAR MINT ++.

Actually, be your own judge and do not rely on the seller's opinion, I never do anyway, as I'm always 99% dissapointed with the seller's own appraisal on condition.

Some dealers though are willingly dishonest with their grading...............unless they were totally blind.

-It's a shame, no matter what the collectible is nowdays everybody expects it to be in mint condition ! The public has become unrealistic.

I forgot Pat-there are an almost infinite number of permutations-Dont forget NATURAL MINT-Mike

I think you are quite right Ed, many peoples expectations are high & as I have said before they can`t all be perfect. I actually like the look of a worn piece regardless of whether it is a medal or dagger or whatever. The oh so perfect are quite sterile IMO & I actually got rid of an unissued Navy dagger & kept a worn one in preference. Worn but not abused is how I think they look best but that is just one opinion among many. I just get tired of seeing stuff that is really not much better than poor being extolled by certain people as very good & better.

We are not stupid or blind.

BTW Pat, when Gustavo was talking about high pressure care salesmen I don`t think he meant you LOL!

Just kidding Amigo!

Here's my definition of "mint" "

How about MUSEUM GRADE?

And, Pat, don't worry, I think of you as a low pressure salesman

John

Despite its appearance, this dagger is definitely NEAR MINT

and the famous ebay description of an SA-" Except for some corrosion and sharpening on the blade, some small cracks on the handle and some dents on the scabbard, this dagger is mint." Mike

Mike that ebay dagger ,is that the same one Ray Charles sold to Stevie Wonder ??

quote:

Despite its appearance, this dagger is definitely NEAR MINT

But seriously, is there really no way to establish an "expert" recognized definition of the term "mint" and for that matter nm, nm+, nm-, etc.? Couldnt some of the heavy weights in the community come together for such a purpose?

If it can be done with coins why not daggers. I can't believe it can be that hard to establish a reasonable grading scale, but I recognize my ignorance in making this statement.

"I'm glad that your opinion on the subject is in no way biased by any knowledge of it whatsoever"

Not mint, just some runner marks

I remember a couple of yrs.ago Craig G. and some others tried to establish a rating guide.Don't think it ever worked out as different dealers will argue there mint to a grade mint.

Craig's system was very well thought out but never caught on although it was capable of a more detailed description. Probably, because it still came back to the judgment of the person assigning the rating .... just like the system in common use now.

Both present the same challenges:

- Sellers maximize the rating and that is true of any collectible or any used item. Buyers should expect that and make their own decisions.

- A dagger is a complex item. An early SS dagger knife has 7 pieces and the scabbard has 10 visible pieces. Collectors put emphasis on different components. One may be a blade man so a beautiful blade overshadows a ding on the grip. Etc,etc.

- There is little differentiation between the effects of wear and those of age. A late war dagger may show no wear but have suffered from the deterioration of zing parts or peeling on cheaply plated parts or cracking.

My approach is to use ratings as a indicator only. I make up my mind with the item in my hand. If I am looking at pictures, I only buy if there is a "no questions asked" return policy where I can send the item back as long as I pay postage and insurance both ways.

In my mind here is how I rate daggers:

1. A real gem. few signs of wear or age. I will buy it even if I already have that maker.

2. Great dagger. Small signs of wear and age. I will certainly buy it if I do not have one and might buy it as a duplicate if I already have one.

3. Run of the mill decent dagger showing wear and age. I'd only buy it if it was hard to find and I did not have one.

4. Below average dagger showing age wear and problems. Maybe mixed parts. I've never bought one of these.

5. Lab Rat. Beat up, broken or missing parts. Good only for experiments. I had three of these purchased long ago to experiment on. I gave one without a scabbard to Paul Horton's son and have the other two.

The only exception would be design variations, prototypes, or similar things. There, you hold your breath and punt

Dave

Plenty of "mint" daggers about, but most have
been tuned up and messed about with.
Regards
John Rosser

Strange how you add one little letter to a word and then your off the hook for any accuracy IE: MINT (Y)

Hey ya Dr. Mike!
I always liked "drippy mint"


Bret Van Sant