Posting these pictures for richard.

2

3

4

5

6

7

John,

Thanks for putting the pictures up for me. They got a little intermixed but we can sort them out. One group of pictures is from my collection showing an SS 98/05 Frog numbered to the scabbard. I can not see the number on the frog but perhaps John can put up another view of the frog showing the stamped number at the bottom.

As for the Bayonet with the SS Runes on the grip, is it real? This bayonet resides in another collection. The portapee looks good to me. What do you think about the whole rig?

Richard Kuchta

Richard

You have a A.G. Schmidt & Shon Trade Mark, the pictures are to dark for what ever is on the grip. When ever I see something on a grip, red flags go up. The bayonet is on the rough side. I don't know anything about portapees.

TKissinger

TKissinger,

The pictures came out ok on my home computer but they are very dark on my work computer.
One thing that can't be seen are the rivets in the grips. They look coroded due to lack of finish on them. Were the rivets plated by this maker or are these indications that the grips were removed?
I must say that the runes in the grips are very well done. Definitely some good workmanship here. However, are the runes original or is this a post war fantasy bayonet?

Richard Kuchta

Richard, I’m afraid that I have to agree with Terry. From what little I can actually see clearly of the Sigrunen they look to be non-factory additions. If it was an approved pattern I think we would see a lot more of them. And factory installed Sigrunen would have been a lot cheaper and easier to do than making and hand fitting a custom hand made set of Runes - all of which argues against it being a period modification. FP

FROGPRINCE,

Your observations are always appreciated. I like Terry am always apprehensive when I see items attached to the grips, especially SS Bayonets.

I have never seen just runes attached to the grips before. Has anyone seen this style of SS Runes on a bayonet grip before?

Richard Kuchta

FROGPRINCE,

Did you receive these pictures at home? I sent them to you but I do not know if you had received them.

I wanted to discuss the 98/05 SS numbered frog but the pictures on the forum are too dark and the required picture is not showing the bottom of the frog where the number is stamped.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

I did not comment because I really cannot see much detail. However, I agree with Terry and FP that the runes do not look "of the period" to me either. This is a seldom seen maker and it is too bad if someone screwed up a nice bayonet to add these runes.

George

Richard, I just took a look and have the messages but am on my way out. I’ll try to get to them this evening. Regards. FP

I agree with George, it's a real shame to see a Carl Schmidt & Sohn AG messed up. It is a hard to find maker.

Richard requested that I put together and post for him some images of a 98/05 bayonet scabbard and frog that he has with matching numbers. The pictures were a little dark and I have lightened them as much as I was able to for discussion purposes - with him making any comments that he wants to share.

When I put the images together my immediate observation was that the frog appeared to be hand stamped using what looks like individual die stamps. And with the scabbard (from what I can see) it appears to me like it was numbered using what I am assuming was a rotary hand engraver although I can’t see the bottom of the characters well enough to be 100% sure. FP

The frog.

Reference the dress bayo - I agree with those who believe that a very nice bayo has likely been screwed up by the addition of runes. The troddel looks OK from what I can see but is irrelevant in terms of evidence of the legitimacy of the rest of the package.

Reference the 98/05. I do not like the style of the characters used and would be very concerned that the numbers etched in the scabbard appear fresh. Any etching or stamping which has left metal exposed for 60 years should appear browned or otherwise discolored from such exposure. Overall, I would be very concerned with the subject 98/05 scabbard, frog and therefore whatever bayo is in it.

Scott B

SCOTT,

The numbers that appear on the scabbard are engraved as are all numbers that are on 98/05 SS marked bayonets.

This set of numbers are still bright as are some of the others that I have. However, others have toned and others have been re-blued after numbering.

As per your comment on the style of characters used, what do you base your opinion on? How many other 98/05 SS BAYONETS with numbered scabbards have you observed?

Richard Kuchta

FROGPRINCE,

In regard to the numbers on the SS 98/05 Bayonet Scabbard they are definitely done on a pantagraph and or some other type of engraving machine. The letters are much to precise as to be done by hand engraving. However, the engraving cutter could have been much sharper which in turn would have reduced some of the chatter on the character geometry.
In the past I have referred to the SS marking their 98/05 bayonets in similar fashion to the Navy. Both are engraved and marked on the crossguard and scabbard.

As for numbers on the Frog, this is the only 98/05 SS frog marked as such that I have ever seen. This frog is also stamped with the SS property mark that I have requested not to be shown.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

I stand by my comments.

I would not be encouraged by the fact that engraved numbers you have observed in this series all look the same. Certainly numbered SS daggers show variation in characters, placement and application. SS marked rifles also show variation in number characters and application. Why shouldnt the subject SS combat bayonets? Aside from those observations, the primary issue is the fresh appearance of metal condition exposed by engraving after 60 years. Any examination of legitimate unit marked bayos, regardless of branch, be it engraved or stamped characters, which expose metal through blue, must show evidence of 60 years exposure. The only exceptions being if the item came from a time capsule or if metal was exposed more recently. I am not aware of any other explanations - are you?

As you know Richard, my collecting focus for the past 20+ years is SS marked rifles. I am quite conversant on legitimate and fake deathsheads, other SS markings and SS arms production. Of course there is much more to a legitimate SS marked rifle than SS markings. In any case, my collection has been vetted by the best and could never be confused with Jensen garbage. In previous postings you have indicated that the same deathsheads and SS marks used on rifles were also used on SS bayos. I think we can agree that if such markings were ever period applied, this is a logical conclusion. However, I am concerned about some of the deathsheads you have posted in a previous thread.

I remain very skeptical about SS combat bayos and those I have seen recently at shows and posted online in forums. The secret millionaire collection not withstanding, I am particularly concerned about the volume that have suddenly surfaced over the past few years.

Scott

Richard, I don’t know your reasoning behind the statement that the engraving was “definitely” done on a pantograph or some other kind of engraving machine. Or why that would be an issue. But since its been brought up I am going to post some pictures to try and explain my thinking from what I see in the images. Pantographs, engraving machines (or whatever) if nothing else should produce fairly consistent engraving which is more or less repeatable from one character to another. That IMO does not seem to be the case here with the characters not evenly applied having variations in depth, angles, and not being linear.

The first image shows the first two numbers with the upper portions in the photograph seemingly much deeper than the lower portion. The “7” to the right by contrast appears to be much shallower and fairly consistent in depth. If all three had the same depth at the top you possibly could argue that the fixture was tilted. However, that does not appear to be the case here as demonstrated by the “7”.

The second image shows that the tops and bottoms are not even, with the bottom of the “4’ stopping short. And the “7” dropping down below the other two. Why is that?

The third image is an attempt to show first the vertical axis of the numbers with especially the “7” at a slant from the “9” and “4” which are slightly divergent from each other. To the right the “9” and “4” exhibit similar angles but slightly different paths with the engraving at an angle downward to complete the character. And the red arrow showing at the top of the “4” where the cutter ran a little wild creating a scallop while negotiating the turn.

What am I missing that proves that a pantograph (or equivalent) was used to engrave the scabbard? And why does that make a difference??? Most Respectfully, FP

Frogprice,

Excellent observations!

FROGPRINCE,

The engraving of the numbers is still much straighter than that which could be achieved by engraving offhand. Depending on how number templates are located on the pattern table determines straightness of the characters when the engraving is done. I have many other similar bayonets that one must study and evaluate so as to clearly understand the quality of the engraving of the numbers on the scabbard and the markings on the crossguards before making judgements.

As for some brightness being visible on the numbers you must also look at the brightness of the blade. The blade of the bayonet is in super condition hardly any tarnish. When I removed the frog from this bayonet about 3 years ago it was extremely tight.I do not recall any grease or oil residue being present; however,there was the typical dirt and leather particles.

FROGPRINCE MY SS BAYONET COLLECTION WILL ALWAYS BE AVAILABLE FOR YOUR REVIEW AT ANY TIME THAT YOU CAN MAKE IT TO PENNSYLVANIA.

Richard K

Hi SCOTT,

Thanks for your comments.

I have also been collecting SS Rifles and Bayonets for over 35 years and can understand your feelings about bad rifles and bayonets being out there in the market. Some time ago I gave up collecting SS rifles and pursued collecting SS Bayonets full time because they are more rare and scarace than the rifles. In addition the bayonets are less screwed around with than are the SS rifles. I am sure that you have seen quite a few bad SS items in your collecting career. Such dealers as M.H. have been known to have sold bad pieces. I myself have bought some from him which he later bought back.
As for SS bayonets, other than those pieces that you have seen at the shows. How many complete matched rigs have you actually seen? My bayonets have come from vetrans, fellow collectors, BCN Members, EBAY,and some from the mystery millionaire.

Richard K

Richard, Please forgive me, but with all due respect I believe that you may be underestimating what a craftsman can do using his hands and not a machine. I think that even a cursory examination of hand engraved guns, swords, and a number of other items stretching back literally centuries will show that by using their hands plus a few simple tools German (and other) craftsman could engrave scrolls, animals, coats of arms, numbers etc. etc. far surpassing the skill level demonstrated with this bayonet. Straight lines, curves, complex shapes - whatever was required.

While it’s a subjective evaluation on my part: The engraved numbers on the scabbard posted, as compared to your average engraved property marking on a Third Reich German Kriegsmarine bayonet, is IMO relatively awkward/amateurish by comparison. I am not saying that the KM bayonets are perfect. But the engraved inscriptions are more complex and from my perspective better executed.

It also I think might be of interest to know the quality of the work that machine assisted engraving can produce. In 1934 a Mr. Fred Knapp of the Gorton Machine (Tool) Corporation successfully engraved the Lord’s Prayer inside a circle on a small metal plate roughly equivalent to the head of a pin. The circle being .005” (0.12700 millimeter) in diameter. Admittedly that was an unusual one time effort. But it does illustrate what can be achieved with a machine under the control of a skilled operator.

I do appreciate your very generous offer to share your collection with me. I have not been there in a long time, and if I do get back to Pennsylvania I’m certain that a look at a 35 year old plus specialized collection like yours would be the highlight of the trip. Best Regards, FP

FROGPRINCE,

My offer to view my collection is always open to you. I appreciate your comments, knowledge, and professionalism. If you like gorgets I also have some of the best.

Richard K

Richard,

Please forgive the delay in my response but I attended 3 different shows this weekend.

I respectfully disagree with your comment that SS marked “bayonets are less screwed with than are SS rifles.” I have not seen an SS bayo yet that favorably compares to a legitimate SS marked rifle. The fact of the matter is, that anyone with access to a pantagraph machine, a good custom tool and die maker (for SS marking dies and number dies), bluing tanks and standard Imperial or Wiemar reissued 84/98IIIs, 98/05s, frogs and period Polish and Czech bayos and frogs can make SS marked bayos and frogs all day long. The only sophistication would come from properly ageing the finished product. Not enough people have seen legitimate SS deathshead markings to positively ID good from bad. Effectively executing this same exercise with SS G/K98s requires much more knowledge and sophistication. You just cant slap a deathshead and engrave or stamp a couple numbers on any 98 or 98 components to make it SS. As previously stated, legitimate SS marked rifles have many more data points, which must verify to positively determine originality.

It has taken me almost 25 years to build a collection of 40+ matching and correct SS G/K98 variations. I have also collected data on several hundred more, which I have personally examined during this time. Its interesting to note that the mismatch rate of a major component (bolt,action,stock) on legitimate SS marked rifles is about 50%. I am very uncomfortable with the quantity of “matching” SS marked bayos, which have been showing up. Aside from not liking many of the SS specific markings, my general observation is that they are appearing matching at a disproportionate rate to standard, matching, unit marked (of any other branch) 84/98III, 98/05 or SS marked rifles. My point is, that while all the others show up mismatched at a fairly consistent high rate - SS bayos don’t seem to. For whatever reason and against the odds, SS bayos seem to be showing up with matching control numbers and markings. Am I the only person who recognizes this?

I am also concerned that people like Joe Pankowski, Wittman and Johnson had never seen SS bayonets until recently. I believe this speaks to the fact that SS bayonets are a relatively new phenomena which is rather difficult to explain. People make the arguments that previously such dealers/collectors could not be bothered with combat bayonets or may have "missed the SS markings." I have followed up with all three and these arguments have proven to be inaccurate. Believe me, they all knew what SS bayo troddels were years ago, recognized that engraved SS dress bayos existed, were desirable/valuable and all admitted to me that they would have jumped all over any SS combat bayo they would have encountered or heard about. SS combat bayos and their SS specific markings are not exactly subtle. The "missed the SS markings" argument is absurd.

Last summer I personally examined and did data sheets on four SS marked rifles, which were obtained from the secret millionaire collection. All examples were fraudulent and in fact rather crude attempts of fraudulent SS rifles. A single example of fraud would discredit the complete fantasy story. Four personally examined specimens plus details and pictures of two others from the secret millionaire collection all of which are fraudulent seal the fate of this story and this source. It is evidence that fraud items from a single source have traveled to more than one buyer. It should be no surprise that fakes have spread. It should also be no surprise that the value of SS marked bayos drives other entrepeneurs to manufacture specimens with varying degrees of sophistication. Most importantly Richard, if items from this fraudulent source have been utilized as a baseline for originality the data and results are now quite flawed.

Finally, MH showed me several items of yours years ago. The only ones I currently own are my old SSR which you owned for a short time and a very basic bnz43-sszza4. All else was initially or shortly therafter rejected. Although a good friend, MH is one of several knowledgable collectors I know and trust. He has certainly made mistakes as we all have. However, collectively the sum of my group is as good as it gets.

I am very open to the potential existance of SS marked bayos. It would enhance my own collection and interest. However, based on the picures and hands on evidence I cant support their case. Its hard to believe that I am the only one unwilling to drink the Koolaide on this subject.

Scott B

SCOTT,

I am very concerned about the great number of SS rifles that have been showing up over the years. Everything you said about the tools and craft to fake SS bayonets goes the same for rifles. The only thing different is that there is very little information out there on SS marked bayonets. You make broad statements about SS bayonets, however you have no expertise on the subject matter, you state that you don't feel good about them. Your opinions are based upon feelings and not facts. Take some pointers from Frogprince and be more objective. You make statements such as that it is easy to fake SS bayonets. Please share some data with us. What markings does an LAH 98/05 Bayonet have on it???? What markings does an LAH 84/98 have on it???? What markings are there on the SS VZ-24 Bayonet Grips???? How is an SS Police bayonet marked????
Scott, if the Army, Airforce, Navy, and Police marked their rifles and bayonets are you saying that the SS did not???????
You have one reblued, Lazy S Deathead Bayonet without original scabbard and frog in your collection that I passed on. You need a much larger population of SS bayonets to study and research before you make the statements that you do. I guess if it is not in your collection and you haven't seen it then the item doesn't exist?????

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

In a previous discussion dated November 2003 in a thread titled 'Do You Own a SS Combat Bayo?' you stated the following regarding SS proofmarks:

FROGPRINCE,

"I have been using the term proofmark to identify the many types of Death Heads and accompanying geometry that is found with them. The same proofmarks are used on both rifles and bayonets. This is where the area starts getting gray: In the collectors circle, it is believed that each different style of Death Head has a significance as to date, rework house / KI, unit, etc.. The numbers and letters and or Runes that accompany the Death Heads also have a significance. To date the only person that I know that has been able to decipher the marks to some extent is Scott Buggin, a vetran collector and a vast source of knowledge on SS Rifles."

Two points:

1. You comment that "The same proofmarks are used on both rifles and bayonets." I agree with this comment. It is exactly for this reason that I have found all of the SS marked bayos I have examined on line or in person to be highly suspicious. Not only their geometry, as you say, but also detail, markings, and method of application is inconsistent with what is found on legit SS marked rifles.

2. Although you have mis-spelled my last name the person you identify in this post as "a vetran collector and a vast source of knowledge on SS Rifles" is me.

Your words not mine. How do you reconcile these previous comments with your current position on markings and my expertise? Is this the cost of disagreement on the subject? You cant have it both ways my friend.

The "secret millionaire" story and source has also been exposed and completely discredited. Perhaps you need to tell the story about this collection/source. It would also be worthwhile to show pictures of the two unaltered Gew98s from this source with original Imp. configuration including lange rear site, Imp. proofs, Regimental markings and no sign of rework, which have had deathsheads and commercial proofing subsequently added for no legitimate reasons. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Imperial/Wiemar and Nazi period reworks will quickly identify these inconsistencies. These same people will tell you that it is absurd to believe that an SS bayo isnt much easier and less complex to fake than an SS G/K98 variation. Pictures of early SS/T and other SS personnel with unaltered Gew98 rifles, and bayos - 84/98, 98/05s, Polish and Czech is not evidence that these items had to be SS marked.

It is every collectors duty to be a good steward to the hobby. This often involves debate and disagreement about originality. That is what I am doing. There is no evidence in SS rifles that specific unit markings were applied in a configuration consistent with standard regimental markings or Police markings. In any event, Wehrmacht unit marking of weapons was stopped by order well before the outbreak of war. Still, I believe that it is possible that the SS marked bayos. However, I have not seen evidence in the many I have looked at in recent years support they do.

Scott B

Inasmuch as I heard my name mentioned I do have a couple of observations: In the early years what eventually became the Waffen SS engaged in a “scavenger hunt” (for lack of a better way to express it) to supply themselves with arms acquiring by them from multiple different sources because the German Army did not want to supply them. I remember reading an account where there was at least one discussion of wanting to raid a German Army artillery park when some field artillery guns were desired. So who knows what else went on if that was considered a viable option??

As with most German arms there can be some minor legitimate exceptions here and there. But speaking generally more or less by the time the combat arm of the SS became the Waffen SS as a branch of the Wehrmacht its arms came from the same sources as rest of the Wehrmacht.

In other words they had the Waffenamts that were applied under the supervision of the German Army’s Heereswaffenamt and would be indistinguishable from arms procured for the German Army, Navy or Air Force. Timing is critical here and there is overlap, but fairly early on the German Navy quit marking its rifles, bayonets, and frogs. The Luftwaffe was not consistent with marking its rifles, never marked its bayonets, and quit marking its frogs. And German Police 84/98 combat bayonets did not have Waffenamts being procured independently of the Army - and like the Luftwaffe they also early on quit having made their own unique frogs for the 84/98. The main points here being that early SS bayonets like Police bayonets will not or should not have Waffenamts, and that later Waffen SS bayonets will look like regular German Army bayonets.

From the photographic record once the LAH was reconfigured early pictures show them carrying the 84/98 as do pictures of the SS-VT. And other somewhat later pictures show SS troops in training and in the field with the original bright hilted/muzzle ring equipped versions of the VZ24 bayonet, using Czech machine guns, and there is one often published photograph of an SS soldier carrying a captured Polish wz.29 bayonet. All of the aforementioned being either very or relatively early photographs. As always, if anyone has period photographs showing the Waffen SS (or its predecessors) carrying something else the sharing of that information would be very much appreciated. FP

Gentlemen,

I stayed out of the earlier lengthy discussion on SS bayonets and I have stayed out of this one until now. I do want to state that I very much appreciate the civil tone of this discussion and I want to commend everyone involved because debate in this manner is the way we all learn.

There are many good points and counter points in this discussion and I would like to add my humble voice to simply say that in over 40 years I have never held in my hand a bayonet that I thought had legitimate SS "proof" markings. Never say never, but I am afraid I am on the side of the skeptics. When I wrote my "Seitengewehr" book in 1999, I debated with myself how to discuss markings. I knew that with good photos and a logical discussion, decent fakes would surely follow. I chose to go ahead and photograph and discuss markings as I believe that knowledge is power.

Most SS marked bayonets can be determined as fake by studying them closely and understanding what the markings are supposed to mean. The ubiquitous WaffenAmt (WaA) is actually an inspection and acceptance marking (Wehrmachtabnahmenstempel) and signifies the bayonet meets military inspection requirements. There is no need to further inspect the bayonet so dual markings of this type are not proper 99% of the time, IMHO. There is no good evidence that I have seen that the SS had a program that inspected/accepted bayonets, so even commercial bayonets with SS "proofs" (in the manner of military WaA markings) are not proper 99% of the time, IMHO.

Reworks and property markings are another matter. Reworks do show a variety of odd markings such as the SU and Ku markings. Reworks should be reworked however to even qualify for such a marking. I think I will leave out any specific details as many people watch this board and I am not going to make fakes any better than they are currently.

Property markings are another issue that is now much better understood than in the past and that is where I believe SS markings are possible. This is however, a slippery slope and is not for the timid. I think each such bayonet has to be examined and must stand or fall on its merits and red flags.

Just my thoughts on this interesting subject.

George

SCOTT,

I do have a Polish bayonet that has SS markings as well as a reworked scabbard to go with it. I told you that SS Bayonets are more rare than SS rifles and depending upon the type and condition bring more money than a SS Rifle.

I do have a great collection of pictures, thanks to Mr. Noss and other GDC members, showing SS men carrying many types different types of bayonets. Of course you can not see any markings, but on the other hand you can not see any markings on the rifles carried by SS men, yet we do know that alot of the rifles were marked.

You seem to be hung up on this secret millionaire who had or still has a larger SS Rifle collection than you. There are other collectors who have larger collections than you do. Get over it.

At one time you wanted to give me a chapter in your book to cover SS Bayonets. I told you that I was not interested because I plan on doing something myself after the research is completed. You need to research your own subject matter more before you do a book.

Please bring something to the Forum Table that is informative and interesting to all of the members. This is the Bayonet Forum.

Richard Kuchta

GEORGE,

Thank you for the response. I respect your opinions and knowledge on the subject matter of bayonets and SS Bayonets. I would appreciate your help at some time in the future to analyse and critique the SS bayonets that I have obtained over the last 35 years.

I would like to do a publication similiar to what you have done devoted to only SS Bayonets. I have read your book through numerous times as to where it is considerably worn.

As you stated, faked SS bayonets can be readily identified. I have held back considerable data so as not to give the makers of reproductions a heads up on something that is very important to me. I can only tell you that when you see a large population of these bayonets things start to fall into place. However, there are still alot of areas that need answers such as when the cut off period was from SS/TV & SS/VT to Waffen SS. You can see a distinctive change in the markings. The SS VZ-24s are the best indicators of time because they have been dated.

Thanks George,

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

It appears from responses that others believe that this is an interesting and informative thread. I do not believe that my comments have been off point.

You failed to address my questions relative to the two points you had previously made in the 'Do You Own a SS Combat Bayo?'discussion. The first point is, if in fact "The same proofmarks are used on both rifles and bayonets" then specific knowledge of SS markings on rifles equates to knowledge of SS markings on bayos. Correct? The second point is, "To date the only person that I know that has been able to decipher the marks to some extent is Scott Buggin, a vetran collector and a vast source of knowledge on SS Rifles." You are speaking of me correct? These points are rather central to you argument. Has your position changed and if so why?

Reference offering you a chapter on SS bayos. Anyone who knows me or has followed any discussions I have had in on-line forums or BCN over the years will tell you that I have always been suspicious of SS bayos. There is no evidence to the contrary. Having said this, I would never offer you or anyone else to do a chapter on SS bayos in my book on SS rifles. Unless I am sold on their legitimacy I would never risk degrading my reference and name.

The fact that pictures exist showing the SS carrying G/K98s and various bayos is not proof that the weapon/s in the picture were marked. Legitimate SS marked G/K98s do exist and this is not in question. However, the existance of SS marked G/K98 is not evidence that SS marked bayos do exist. There are lots of pieces of SS used equipment large and small which I believe were not marked.

To suggest that I am jealous of the 'secret millionaire' SS collection is equally absurd for many of the same reasons. I am not a jealous person and no one could produce evidence to the contrary. As with most things in life, there has always been plenty of things and opportunity to go around. Like most collectors, having the money to buy all that I want has been more the issue. Secondly, as with my distrust of SS marked bayos, I have always distrusted the "secret millionaire collection" story. Once I had hands on of some specimens and was able to determine they were fraudulent, I knew I was correct about this distrust. It should go without saying that it would be illogical to envy a collection that is fraudulent. My only inclination has been to expose the fraud.

In terms of value - SS G/K98 vs. SS marked bayo. Very subjective. My goal has never been to drive the value of SS rifles up. The bottom line is authenticity. If guaranteed authentic, I dont know anyone who wouldnt pay more for an SS marked rifle than an SS marked bayo.

I have spent over 20 years focused on research of SS marked G/K98s. I am constantly pursuing this research task but agree it is incomplete. However, as with all such subjects I dont believe that absolute completion is possible. I am moving forward with my book regardless. It wont be perfect but it will represent all that I have learned to date.

I suggest you pay very close attention to ORPO's comments. They are spot on. As of a couple years ago, others like Joe Pankowski, who have made their life collecting/dealing blades, will say the same thing. Not a smoking gun but still very troubling.

In conclusion Richard, I am concerned that our disagreement on this subject has become personal on your side. I believe in debate as a source of flushing out the truth. I would never compromise my reputation by calling what I believe to be a good item bad, or a bad item good. Reputation like authenticity is everything.

Scott B

Richard,

You previously stated "Such dealers as M.H. have been known to have sold bad pieces. I myself have bought some from him which he later bought back." Are you saying that MH knowingly sold bad items? Is this what you mean to say? Be more specific - which items?

I am very concerned that you have cast such aspersions on MH. Professionally, I have known MH since the late '70s and consider the quality of his goods, knowledge and character beyond reproach. I have NEVER heard any negative comments from others on such issues. Your primary source should be so lucky.

Please dont misunderstand - less than 5% of the total guns in my collection, (including 4 of 40+ SS marked rifles) have come directly from MH. I know these items to be legitimate so such comments have no impact on my collection/investment.

Personally, I consider MH to be a very good friend. I suggest that any further discussion on MH be conducted directly with me or MH and not on a forum. You have my email address. Please feel free to contact me for MHs.

I just bought a RP marked bayonet, with a serial slightly higher than that recorded in th ebooks and a finsih that looks decidely late war compared to one other example i ahve examined. Since the RP became an SS unit late in the war, woudl it be safe to assume that the bayonet was carried over into SS use, and could therefore be assumed to be SS?

All of the SS, marked blades i have (3 now) are all fakes of one form or another, and were bought as such. I should love to see what a real one looks like, so am looking forward to the book that has been mentioned - i jsut hope it will include examples of many of the fakes

Recently I also picked up an RP marked commercial bayo attached to a Gewehr fur DRP 1934 dated DRP marked rifle. I havent yet compared it to the information in Georges' excellent reference. just another small research project. they are piling up.

Deutsche Reichspost marked rifles and bayonets are rare enough by themselves. But to acquire a rifle/bayonet grouping would be a very desirable acquisition not often seen.

As I mentioned earlier period photographs show Leibstandarte (LAH) troops with the 98K style bayonets, and there are others post 1938 with SS troops using unmodified Czech rifles and unblued full muzzle ringed bayonets. This weekend I found again some notations regarding the negotiation between Himmler and the OKW as regards arms and equipment for the SS. Of particular interest were statements that with the notable exception of Leibstandarte (LAH) the balance of SS combat troops were equipped primarily with captured ex-Czech weapons that generated a secret “Bericht über die tschechischen Waffen beim Kampfeinsatz,” 5.8. 1940, (Geheim) , RFSS/T-175, 104/2626129ff” regarding their use.

Anyone have additional comments or insight on this - which apparently was directly from from the Reichsführer-SS himself? FP

FROGPRINCE,

I just got back from a business trip to Saudi Arabia and I am catching up on E-mails. The information that you just posted about Czech weapons being used by the SS is very interesting.
I have quite a few SS marked VZ-24 bayonets:some with rings, some without, and even bayonets with WA.

Richard K

Frogprince,

I was very fortunate indeed to find the rifle/bayo combination. However, the bayo numbers do not match the last 4 digits of the rifle. Not certain they should.

The use of captured Czech and Polish equipment by the SS has been documented in several references. It is also evidenced from period photos. However, evidence of ownership does not necessarily equate to the SS marking such equipment with deathsheads. The fact that muzzle rings, in some cases, were left intact speaks to the urgent need for such equipment. Such urgent need argues against rework and/or marking which would serve no functional purpose and would otherwise delay issue.

It is clear that throughout its history LAH received priority for weapons and equipment allocations. I have never seen a period photo of pre-war LAH personnel with other than German produced 98 variations.

SCOTT,

If the SS was in such a hurry to get weapons, and in this case bayonets, why did they rework them at all. All of my SS VZ-24 bayonets have the grips reworked, some of the bayonets are reblued, some have the muzzle rings cut off and others do not. In addition there are SS property markings on all of the bayonets that I have. All of the bayonets are dated by the SS rework houses.

Richard Kuchta

Scott, The rifle/bayonet numbers not being matched would not particularly bother me as I don’t know if that particularly was an issue for the Germans on the nonmilitary side, and it certainly was not one for the military itself. It should however I think have the style DRP marking and grips commensurate with the time the rifle was made.

I agree that urgency was a very significant consideration. From the photographs of the captured bayonets I earlier made reference to they show no evidence of any alterations, and appear to be as originally manufactured. I think simple logic itself tells you that if they had to use captured weapons at all instead of German arms they were having significant problems - as confirmed by German sources of the problems the SS encountered in supplying itself.

Richard, Glad you are back safely. As regards the VZ24 bayonets (just like any other bayonet) without seeing them as a group there is IMHO not an unquestionable basis for making either an independent or collective evaluation as to their provenance. Either for a best or worst case scenario.

And having said that: Waffenamted examples obviously indicate prior involvement of the Heereswaffenamt and timing. Which do bring some other issues into play. The (more or less cosmetically) reworked VZ24 bayonets as a group themselves can be very “iffy” as some were done after the war and others not necessarily by the Germans. And timing and the very large variations in the way the conversions were done is also a factor. There are some additional issues as well not the least of which is the seeming lack of pictures of SS troops carrying the later versions of the VZ24. So assuming for the purpose of discussion all is good - would the conversions have been for the SS itself or under contract for the Army/Wehrmacht?

But like anything else sight unseen it’s still a guessing game because there are also some Czech bayonets out there that should never have had any possible connection to the SS. Regards to All, FP

I would be very interested to see the czechoslovakian Vz.24 bayonets with ss marking, i dont believe that in both plants of Zbrojovka Brno were produced bayonets so marked, only possibility is a rework in SS field armory and adding of similar marking to these pieces. The new blueing and reworking of grips must be detailed examined. I collect 20 years here in this area, but never see so marked piece. I assume that in 1939/40 period the majority of rifles were used as it was, later when enough rifles were avialable, i tippe before Soviet campaign, they started upgrading to german standards. best regards,Andy
PS.Richard, it would be great see the details of Your SS Vz.24 bayonets on BCN online page or , You could it send it to FP or my email for comparation Blazicek@infostat.sk

FP,
Agreed. In some ways I would be more concerned if the the RP bayo did match.

You also make some great observations on the VZ bayos. There is absolutely no legitimate reason I can conceive of for the existance of period reworked/refurbished SS marked bayos with retention of the muzzle ring. IMO-refurbishing the rest of the assembly and retaining the muzzle ring is inconsistent with all logic and standards involved in SS arms reworks of the period. I would also be very concerned with typical WaA's appearing on SS marked bayos.

AndyB,
You make excellent points as well. That a 20 year CZ bayo collector from CZ has never seen an SS marked bayo sounds like a huge red flag to me. It is difficult to accept that all the SS marked CZ bayos are here in the US.

SCOTT,

Your opinions on VZ-24 SS bayonets are appreciated. As usual, they are opinions based only on your feelings and not facts. I guess VZ-24 SS marked rifles do not exist either. How about Czech field glasses that have SS property marks on them, do they exist?

I can not wait to share the pictures of these SS bayonets with all of the BCN members. Later this year I plan to start getting the documentation together for a publication.

Just because an item has not bee seen does not mean that it does not exist. Kelly Hicks new book on SS Helmets is a fine example of extremely rare SS Helmets being shown for the first time. When I was collecting SS Helmets over 30 years ago, some of those now shown SS helmets were not even known to exist. The same goes for the variations of SS Decals.

Like rare SS Helmets, SS Bayonets go for high prices. A complete matching bayonet & scabbard with SS frog will trade for more than a chained SS Dagger. There are thousands of chained SS Daggers but only a few surviving SS Bayonets.If you have money, you can buy a Chained SS Dagger or SS Rifle any time you want. You can not say that about SS Bayonets.
How many real etched, SS KS/98 Bayonets exist? Only about 3 that I know of and the major one is in my collection. The SS Bayonet I am refering to is the one that was in Techt's book on engraved bayonets.

Scott, I am not the only person collecting SS bayonets. These bayonets reside in alot of advanced collections. There are BCN members that have them in their collections also.

SCOTT

In regards to your posting concerning your knowledge and expertise about SS rifles, I did state that you do have a vast knowledge of SS Rifles and their markings. An example is the runes 01, runes 2, etc. I have several bayonets marked with runes 2. As far as I can tell, it looks like the same stamp that was used on the rifles to mark runes 2. You are the only person that I know of that has deciphered these particular SS markings. When you support your statements with facts, you show your expertise.
However, when you make a lot of the statements that you do concerning or alluding to that SS Bayonets that are marked bring up a red flag and you do not feel good about them is your opinion and not based upon any facts by you. I respect your opinion and everyone is entitled to their opinion. However in collecting, the items speak for themselves, facts are facts, you have never seen any of my SS bayonets.

You mention that my main source of SS bayonets is the mystery millionaire. You also mention that anything that comes from this source should be treated with suspicion and be questioned. However, when MH is alluded to, that does not set well with you. I shall not mention MH again in any of my postings because it does not belong in the forum because it does not contribute to the transfer of knowledge in our collecting field.
As to where my collection came from,it came from all over the US. I never bought an SS Bayonet in Europe, but I did talk to former SS men while on business trips in Europe. Talk to a former SS man and see what he has to say about SS/TV & SS/VT equipment being property marked.
I have bought 7 SS Bayonets from the Secret Millionaire. I would buy more except that he will not separate the remaining bayonets from the rifles.
This forum is to promote our collecting hobby and exchange information. As I said before, everyone is entitled to their own opinion on any of the posted subjects. The SS Bayonets speak for themselves.

Richard Kuchta

The DRP bayonets were consecutively numbered into at least the 12 thousand block (Andy I’m sure has the latest information) and show mid-war finishing standards. A rifle/bayonet matching serial number combination would have personally caused me to look at them both very, very, closely myself.

I have one or two period German rework specification sheets showing what was acceptable with conversions for captured bayonets. But most, most, unfortunately they are not for the ones under discussion. To be reworked - especially to the level of some of them - they had to be either be taken away from troops in the field or pulled from storage. And if taken away from troops in the field the troops were almost certainly given 98K bayonets as replacements.

As regards the bayonets that still have their muzzle rings intact (and some other reworks which are really a multifaceted topic unto themselves) the seeming contradictions with some of the modified Vz.24 bayonets has puzzled me for years. Circa 1941 the CZ factory at Bystrica introduced the first of the OEM Czech bayonets that were blued and made without muzzle rings. So it makes sense that if they were going to refurbish bayonets - that all of them would have had the muzzle rings cut off/removed.

However, that is not always the case. And I have seen a fair number of blued/refurbished Vz.24 bayonets with the muzzle rings still completely intact. * Note: An intact muzzle ring on a CZ/Romanian bayonet for example does make sense - Romanians using a very interesting conglomeration of bayonets from various sources and some have been passed off as German conversions. Some ex-Romanian bayonets were originally German, so they all have to be looked at very closely, and I am not saying that having a muzzle ring intact necessarily makes a Vz.24 bayonet ex-Romanian. As I also have Waffenamted CZ/German bayonets with muzzle rings fully intact using the original phosphate/bright finish of the Czech originals. So the presence of Waffenamts might or might not be a problem with reworked CZ bayonets depending on who did the refurbishing/conversion.

One of the other things that puzzled me in the population of reworked bayonets were the Waffenamted 1942 dated CZ bayonets some of which were of fairly late manufacture in 1942. They very obviously were made w/o muzzle rings. So why were 1942 dated bayonets w/o muzzle rings refurbished/converted? The reason being because the Germans quit systematically refurbishing their 98K bayonets in 1941. So why did they rework the CZ bayonets (especially the late 1942 examples) well into 1942 and possibly later? There are a couple of other factors involved as well, which is why I like to look at the bayonets very closely, and am sometimes reluctant to make snap judgments without a close inspection first.

There is no question that various elements of the SS were issued captured Czech weapons. That is supported by both photographs and period documents. Or that some SS military type items had RZM markings. Or other types of markings. Or that a very large number of “SS” items in collections old and new are fakes. Rifles, pistols, bayonets, swords, daggers, helmets, field gear, fantasy items, other misc. items, whatever.

I completely agree that “we ain't seen them all yet” as I am still finding and seeing things that others have found that are or were unknown. Finding something new is one of the joys of collecting. But there is a dark side as well. Because altering an original item or creating one can be so profitable - fake SS items go back at least 40 years or more with books on fakes being published as early as the 1960’s.

While fakes were not uncommon in early books on German militaria, I am sorry to say that fakes and bad information have gotten into many other books including some of the latest ones. Some of the information is misstated and probably based on ignorance. Other information is simply flat wrong with fakes or altered items being presented as original period items often based on the owner’s opinion or what he was told with no basis in fact. For example BBOTW has some very good information in it. But it also has some obvious fakes and misinformation as well, as do other books on Third Reich militaria.

Sorry for the length, but the discussion has touched on a number of issues. FP


(Below: A circa 1941 Bystrica manufactured example w/o muzzle ring.)

A circa 1940 Bystrica manufactured example with muzzle ring.

My mistake. The first bayonet is actually a 1942 dated example from Brno. Except for the markings, the bayonets from Bystrica and Brno are basically identical in outward appearance, FP

FROGPRINCE

Extremely interesting and informative post. As always.

Richard Kuchta

Hello FP, great thanks for attaching of the super nice items, You was direct in plant for this 2 pieces?,haha. I could never find here so nice pieces. Unfortunally they dont exist good sources from the war period, from both plants of Zbrojovka. But i believe that in Povazska Bystrica were switched from ring to without barrel ring crosspiece in period of 1941. best regards,Andy

Excellent comments and insight on CZ bayos! One of the issues which clouds the rework aspect of CZ bayos is determining if items were reworked wartime, postwar or both.

Richard,

It appears that you interpret all of my comments on this subject as opinions while all of your comments are interpreted as facts. Rather inconguous don't you think?

Lets clarify things. Unless we were present to see an item produced and marked there can be no smoking gun in terms of evidence. Therefore, everything we think and say relative to an items authenticity is based upon opinion. These opinions are based upon what we have learned through years of study and collecting the sum of which produces a preponderance of evidence. We must rely upon our experience but must temper opinions with an understanding that not every variation has likely been discovered. Too my knowledge, no period documentation has been found which describes SS marking standards or rework standards. Regardless, if such docs were discovered and authenticated, it would not be evidence that a specific item was period SS marked or reworked. As with many other collectibles of the period, such documentation may only serve as the basis for creating more accurate fakes.

You previously commented to the effect that the deathsheads found on SS marked rifles are the same as those found on SS marked bayonets. If this is accurate then knowledge of the deathshead markings on rifles translates to knowledge of the deathshead markings found on bayos. My comments on the negative aspects of SS bayonets, which I have examined in person or viewed on-line, is based primarily (though not exclusively) upon my dislike of their deathshead markings. The fact is that these markings have IMO not compared favorably to deathsheads found on legitimate SS marked rifles.

You make frequent statements that are focused on the value of SS bayonets vs. other SS collectibles. Strictly opinion. However, these comments suggest that one of the purposes of your collecting and research on this subject is to drive prices. Is this correct? Except to illustrate a motive for fraud - there is no educational purpose in discussing value.

I agree - the MH subject does not belong on the forum. However, the "secret millionaire" collection is extremely relevant to this subject for three reasons. The first reason is because, as the story goes, this collection was allegedly ALL obtained from veterans who had liberated a concentration camp/camps. If this story is accurate, this collection represents an excellent primary source of data on SS weapons with provenance. The second reason is because of the vast quantities of approx. 100 SS marked weapons, which allegedly reside or have resided in this collection. This is significant because it would represent the single largest collection of SS weapons with provenance. The third reason is because I have personally inspected rifles from this collection and consider all of them very poor frauds. I have detailed data and some pictures of other rifles obtained from this collection. I consider these rifles fraudulent too. Suffice it to say, if my evaluation is completely or even partially correct the complete "secret millionaire" story and the credibility of all items in the subject collection folds like a house of cards. Are you suggesting that my evaluations of the subject rifles are 100% incorrect? If so, please provide evidence to support your position. If not, how would you reconcile even one fraud in this all vet obtained SS weapons collection? Moreover, how would fraud identified in this collection impact the authenticity of the "7" SS marked bayos you have obtained from this source? How is this collection and its associated issues not relevant? Please explain.

Scott

SCOTT,

You say that my statements on SS bayonets are based on opinions? Wrong!!!!!! My statements are based on actual bayonets. I keep asking you what SS bayonets have you seen and analysed and please provide a description of them.

In regards to your statement that the secret millionaire got all of his collection from concentration camps is absurd. Where do you get this stuff from?

Your statement that my motive for research on SS bayonets is to drive the prices up and illustrates a motive for fraud is as unprofessional and biased as are all of your remarks. This forum is to exchange information and promote the collecting hobby. You have brought nothing to this forum table concerning SS bayonets but your negative feelings and opinions.
What don't you understand about an SS Bayonet being as valuable as an SS Dagger???? Do you understand the laws of supply & demand????
Enough said.

Richard Kuchta

hello members, i hope that the interesting discussion here goes not to a splutter, i would be happy when Richard K. could provide to secured area a one detailed Vz.24 piece marked with SS marking, i am BCN member from 1999, and many members knows me that i am involved in research about slovak produced bajonets. Could You send pictures to FP or to me? It would be great to look to it, or You will made a small book about it? Thanks Andy from Slovakia

Put me down for a book as well

Andy,

I shall get some pictures of the SS VZ-24 bayonets and send them to Frogprince who will hopefully be able to process them and send them on to you.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,
I will be happy to process and send to Andy any pictures that you send me whenever the opportunity arises.
FP

FROGPRINCE,

I shall contact my friend this weekend and see if she can make time available to take the pictures.

Thanks for your help.

Richard Kuchta

FROGPRINCE & ANDY

We took pictures of 9 different SS VZ-24 bayonets today and sent them on to you FROGPRINCE. Please look everything over and send a copy to ANDY. Please get back in touch with me on my home E-mail.

Richard Kuchta

Thanks Richard very much for Your cooperation, i will send You comments ,when i get the pictures. Thanks for Your help,best regards,Andy

Richard,
I have the images, but have to go back and make sure they downloaded properly in case I missed something. I’m not much of a photographer myself and extend my compliments to whomever took the images being much better than I usually take.

Before sending the information to Andy I would like to group the images a little differently by chronology. And lighten up a couple of them where they might be a little dark (lighting and distance are my own biggest problems with digital photography).

I will contact you and may want some additional information especially as regards the dates of some. I may already have the information, but did not see it in my quick examination as I downloaded some of the images. With some Czech bayonets it’s stamped on the bottom side of the handle between the grip plates instead of being on the blade. Pictures are always preferable - but I am pretty familiar with CZ bayonets so a description of what is there (if anything) should suffice without having to take additional images.

Also, I really do appreciate the extra effort you have made, and am sure that Andy will as well.
Best Regards, FP

Richard,

Let me repeat – “Unless we were present to see an item produced and marked there can be no smoking gun in terms of evidence. Therefore, everything we think and say relative to an items authenticity is based upon opinion.” As I made clear by using the word “we” this comment applies equally to your knowledge of SS bayos and my knowledge of SS rifles. That an object exists is not, in and of itself, evidence that the subject item is authentic.

I also stated - “You make frequent statements that are focused on the value of SS bayonets vs. other SS collectibles. Strictly opinion. However, these comments suggest that one of the purposes of your collecting and research on this subject is to drive prices. Is this correct? Except to illustrate a motive for fraud - there is no educational purpose in discussing value.” The first point of this comment is that you are the person who frequently brings up the subject of value. To my knowledge, no one else has except in response to your comments. The second point of my comment is to identify value as subjective. The third point of my comment is to point out that discussion of value serves no educational purpose except to illustrate a motive for fraud.

I can’t imagine how a reasonable person with normal reading and information processing skills could twist my previous comments into your interpretation? They are not complex and are rather simple to understand.

I have data on most every SS marked bayo I have personally examined or have seen online. What are you seeking in terms of data and what is the point of your question? Some of them are yours so I am unlear as to what this will accomplish.

My comments about the KZ provenance of the “secret millionaire” collection came from you directly in several conversations, the collector/victim whose fraudulent SS marked G/K98s I examined last summer, and V the conduit for the garbage. Like most fantasy characters in comic books and movies, the identity of the “secret millionaire” has remained secret to everyone else I know in the hobby. The bottom line is that every SS marked rifle I have examined from the “secret millionaire” collection, in person or through detailed pictures and data, is IMO fraudulent. Therefore, any other item from this collection should be viewed with great skepticism. I guess if you believe the words you previously wrote about my expertise on SS rifles you need to be concerned. Of course this may be a convenient time to retract your comments.

It is interesting to note that you conclude your as always emotional response with another discussion of value. Who cares? Completely irrelevant from an educational standpoint.


Scott

SCOTT,

In regards to the statement that I am driving the prices up on SS bayonets you make no sense. I have only sold 2 SS bayonets since I have been collecting them and I sold them to your associate who I said I would not mention his name. The prices that I pay are set by the people selling the bayonets and they are knowledgeable of their value. Collectors should be aware of the value of bayonets. You paid way over value for the SS bayonet that you bought. It was reblued and did not have the original scabbard or frog. Did you drive the price up???

You are constantly playing with the word fraud. You are very familiar with the term. Does it have anything to do with one of your associates buying a complete armorer's chest of 98K rifle parts? Where did they go?

You statement that something can not be deemed real and or authentic unless you were there to see it made is absurd.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

You are correct - a primary focus of my profession for over 20 years was fruad detection, prevention and investigation. So I know of what I speak when I use the term and have not applied it incorrectly in this case.

Reference your constant need to discuss values - my point is very simple. There is absolutley no educational value in discussing value. It is irrelevant to the education process except if buying or selling.

Reference the SS marked bayo I purchased at SOS last year - I agree the value was a stretch and I have never been particularly thrilled with it. However, afterwards many BCNrs indicated either that it was a steal or they wished they had bought it. As I recall one of those people was our moderator. I never really discussed the item or value after SOS with anyone but you. At that time you made a strong cash offer, which I turned down indicating that it would only be available in trade towards a legitimate SS rifle. Since you didnt own one of those, the point was moot. It appears that you have now found it convenient to forget about these facts. Suffice to say your actions were not those of someone who previously knew of the subject bayo or disagreed with its merits.

Since you have persisted in discussing my friend with accusations and inferences about credibility, I feel it appropriate to involve him. I will forward all discussion links to him so that he can take appropriate action.

Scott

SCOTT,

You say that there is no educational value in knowing the value of a bayonet. I disagree. The collector should know as much about the item that he is collecting and that includes the value. First of all, why would you not want to know the fair value of a bayonet. Is it for the reason that you think that it is OK to way overpay for a bayonet or an item that you want to acquire? Or is it that a collector should not know the value of his item so that he can sell it below the established fair market value? The forum is set up to exchange knowledge and ideas. You are saying that it is irrevalent till you are buying or selling to obtain this knowledge. You are way too late at this point.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

I stand by my comments regarding the discussion of value. If the purpose of a thread is to examine the history, production methods, characteristics, or to determine the authenticity of an item - value is irrelevant. If the purpose of a thread is to discuss purchase/sale, insurance coverage or fraud motives - value is relevant. Why is this point so difficult for you to comprehend?

Suggesting that dishonest motivations are behind my position on discussing value are without merit and evidence. Aside from personal ethical issues, don’t you think it a bit illogical that I would try to manipulate price on a commodity (i.e. SS marked bayos), which I do not believe are authentic?

Your responses continue to embarrass yourself and discredit your position. I suggest we move forward and discuss more substantive things such as deathshead variations, which you have previously posted as authentic and/or any retractions on previous comments you have made.

Scott

Scott

You are entitled to your opinions. I agree it is time to move on.

What are you bringing to the forum to discuss?

Would you members of the forum like me to put up the triple etched HEINZ BRENNER bayonet for review and discussion. This was the bayonet that was in German Etched Dress Bayonets by our Mr. Wayne Techet. Please indicate if you want to see it because I will have to get the photos takn and processed.

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

I have a question to ask before we get into analyzing some deathshead information you previously provided in the thread 'Do You Own a SS Combat Bayonet'. For sake of clarification were any of the pictures provided copied directly from 'BBOTW' or Senich or are you claiming that all were taken from items in your collection?

Scott

SCOTT,

First of all why do you want to know? What are we going to learn about bayonets?

Richard Kuchta

Richard,

You posted or had the subject pictures posted as examples of deathsheads which may appear on SS marked bayos. As such the question directly relates to the subject. Therefore, the source of the photos seems pretty germane.

Are you suggesting that all types of deathsheads, which you consider legitimate should appear on SS marked bayos? How long do you believe the SS marked bayos?

Scott

SCOTT,

Those are some good questions. I have sent Frogprince pictures of 9 VZ-24 bayonets. The SS have dated these bayonets and the dates fall into 3 groups: 1939, 1940, & 1941. I would believe that the last deathead markings would be 1941 for the VZ-24 bayonets. I know that deathead markings on 84/98s stopped much earlier. I would need some help from the experts determining the cut off dates on the 84/98s.

As for the Deathead marks on the bayonets, there are deatheads with geometry that you do not see on the rifles. The 98/05 deatheads are a very early type deathead that can be found on the SS/VT collartabs and on the SS side rail scopes.
Other deatheads are similiar to deatheads found on rifles. Those deatheads that are metal stamped into the bayonets resemble more closely those tat are on the rifles. However, the metal stamped deatheads on the bayonets do not always present the full geometry due to mismatch of the stamp face to the bayonet geometry.
The engraved deatheads & runes on the bayonets vary from those found on rifles. The variance is usually in size: may be larger and or smaller depending where they are located.
Also, I did have numerous guns and scopes in Senich's book.

Richard Kuchta