Denny,
Well done, an excellent topic as typified by all the responses on the white frog thread.
So Rich has the Heinz Brenner piece? I remember seeing it on Ron Diestlehorst's site many moons ago & initially was skeptical because in those days I was always skeptical of any bayonet purporting to be associated with the SS. This one, however seems to have much more going for it. Especially in that it's not overembellished with swazs & runes all over.
I think the next time I saw it was in Wayne Techet's book where it had a multi-page writeup. Overall the quality just seems to be there in the etch. Not double etched but triple etched which is always a nice thing to see. I've been told there are some bogus triple etched pieces out there but this one looks to be very well done. And thanks to Wayne, we know the vine & leaf motif was done by Holler for Horster & WKC so there is consistency & an tangible connection between the manufacturer of the bayonet & the maker of the etch template.
Another nice thing about this piece is the fact it has some research potential. A gift from a proud father to his son, a special sentiment indeed. Thanks for sharing.
A beautiful assemblage of truly rare bayonets.
Denny,
Thank you very much for putting the pictures of the SS Bayonets up for me.
Richard K
John and Forum Members,
Look at the portapee on John's bayonet and then look at the portapees on my 2 RZM Bayonets. Which portapee is considered the SS VT and which is considered the Waffen SS Portapee?
Richard K
John,
You have a very rare SS Bayonet. I have watched it over the years and then lost track of it.
Richard K
Billy,
Thank you for your kind remarks and interest in the SS Triple Etch. Do you and or any of our forum members have any questions on the SS RZM and or triple etch. I know that there are a few Forum members that have Some SS RZM Bayonets. Please show them.
Richard K
Grumpy,
I am glad that you liked the RZM SS Bayonets and the SS triple etch. I have two more SS etched bayonets in my collection. Any questions on the RZMs or the triple etch that I can answer for you?
Richard K
Thanks, but the photos speak volumes. I am fortunate to own a single RZM example with portepee and frog. It has been the only example I have seen for sale during my collecting days and I am very happy to have it! Would like to find an etched example, but most who own them are well aware of their value. Maybe some day at a flea market, antique mall, etc. Wishful thinking!
Forum Members,
I would like to cover the following topics on SS Bayonets:
1. SS KS 84/98 Bayonets.
2. Do SS marked bayonets exist or are they all fakes and reproductions.
3. Bayonet Models used by the SS. German & Foreign captured.
4. SS markings used on guns, bayonets & equipment.
5. Exert from Mike Welser's Bayonet Book.
6. Comparison of a SS VT Bayonet to a SS TV Bayonet to a Waffen SS Bayonet.
7. SS Police Bayonets.
8. SS Portapees.
9. SS Marked Frogs.
10. SS Rigs: SS Marked & Numbered: Belt, Bayonet, Pouches, Canteen & Bread Bag.
11. Unmarked SS bayonets & equipment.
12. 2 SS Bayonets with: consecutive numbers, phosphate finish, dated 1945, & capture papers.
We can also add to this list of topics. Please let me know what you want to discuss and add to the list. I shall also have photos (from Mr. Noss from whom I have purchased the rights) showing SS men with bayonets. They are informative and interesting to the collector.
Please give me your thoughts on the topics.
Richard Kuchta
I have no doubt about the RZM marked short dress bayonets? Anyone seen a long one so marked? Wish I knew more about the issue type equipment and bayonets, but some authentic SS markings do seem to appear on such. Etched SS dress bayonets are extremely rare and were undoubtedly special ordered. Is there a period maker catalog that illustrates them. Never seen or heard of such. Probably more than a few fakes of these around, but there do seem to be "legitimate" examples, based on workmanship and other factors.
I bought a SS double sided engraved bayonet on a hotel buy in Texas, some 12 years ago. Maker was "WKC".Wish i still had it.My question is why do we not see more SS engraved bayonets, there were plenty of SS men, you always see the Army engraved pieces.
Thanks
Bob
I just noticed the Brenner ss bayonet on the discussion. That is the same bayonet that I bought and sold to Ron Distelhorst. I been collecting for 42 years, and have done hotel buys forever and that is the only one I have ever seen.
thanks
Bob
Denny,
Is the pistol grip area marked with a Death head? Thanks for showing your SS rifle. The same property marks used on the rifles will be found on some of the SS bayonets. Have several bayonets marked with Runes over a TK.
Richard K
I bought a SS double sided engraved bayonet on a hotel buy in Texas, some 12 years ago. Maker was "WKC".Wish i still had it.My question is why do we not see more SS engraved bayonets, there were plenty of SS men, you always see the Army engraved pieces.
Thanks
Bob
Bob,
I have to agree with you. Why are there not more original SS etched bayonets out there? I have a few more;however, for every one original SS etched bayonet I have seen at least 25 fake/reproduction ones. Somewhere an opinion was expressed that because the SS was always on the move that they did not get the opportunity to order the KS Bayonets. I think that it has more to do with attrition. Early SS units were completely wiped out and then refitted with new recruits and then bled dry again. My opinion also goes for the scaricity of the early SS TV equipment / bayonets. Extremelyrare items.
Richard K
Bob,
You were very lucky and had very good taste acquiring the SS triple etch. Ron gave me a story on how the GI acquired the SS Triple Etch Bayonet. Some story and alot of luck. Thanks for your input Bob.
Richard K
Thanks, but the photos speak volumes. I am fortunate to own a single RZM example with portepee and frog. It has been the only example I have seen for sale during my collecting days and I am very happy to have it! Would like to find an etched example, but most who own them are well aware of their value. Maybe some day at a flea market, antique mall, etc. Wishful thinking!
Grumpy,
Did you post a picture of youe RZM bayonet awhile ago? I thought that I had seen it. It is said that the SS RZM bayonets were used before the SS daggers became available. The SS RZM bayonets have a tendency to loose their nickel chrome plating. I have seen several others and they all seem to have this in common. Perhaps bad castings & or bad plating. However, you just do not see them out in the collector's field. There should be many more.
Richard K
Forum Members,
Give me your opinions on the two different styles of SS portapees. Which is considered SS VT and which would be Waffen SS?
Richard K
There was a Heer army dagger posted a while back with a blade dedication to a " Heinz Brenner".
Denny,
Is the pistol grip area marked with a Death head? Thanks for showing your SS rifle. The same property marks used on the rifles will be found on some of the SS bayonets. Have several bayonets marked with Runes over a TK.
Richard K
Richard, The third picture shows the pistol grip with a nearly worn smooth DH.
It is said that the SS RZM bayonets were used before the SS daggers became available. Richard K
Could you please expand upon your statement about using the RZM bayonets before the SS dagger became available? Didn't the '33 SS dagger become available before the Reichs Zeug Meisterei was formed in 1934?
Richard, I have not posted photos of my RZM bayonet here. As to the portepees, I don't have the answer. My guess is the metallic portepees are earlier, being of the same materials as the silver examples with runes on the stems, often called "officer" portepees, even though they are sometimes seen on NCO weapons. Those appeared around 1935-36. The VT and W-SS portepees may have been the same, maybe not. I think not, since there are few seen, given the size of the W-SS. I have always thought it odd that no known official W-SS bayonet portepee was issued. They may have been the controversial metallic type with black thread, seen in at least two types. If that is the case, very few, if any, were issued. Many believe they are postwar, plain and simple. I, too, have noticed there seem to be few RZM bayonets and have wondered why there aren't more. Perhaps the dagger quickly replaced it, leading to few RZM bayonets being manufactured. The RZM stamp indicates the manufacture date is likely 1935, just before the daggers came out. Also, the standard dress bayonets, short and long, must have come out somewhere during this time, perhaps eliminating the need for RZM markings. I agree the hilts on the early bayonets age and wear poorly. They often show "bubbling," peeling, "wear-through," etc. It's too bad the materials aren't better, so many would be better preserved. The early history of Third Reich edged weapons and their accouterments seems somewhat convoluted. It appears there was a struggle within the party to get organized and to standardize things for a time in the early and mid-1930's. Edged weapons, uniforms, insignia, etc., were all subject to change during that time and even later.
The daggers were produced prior to the RZM becoming operational, and Denny is correct that it was formed in 1934. Early in 1935 the: “Dienstdolche der SA und SS, Fahrtenmesser für die Hitler-Jugend und das Deutsche Jungvolk,” by name and a number of other specified (NSDAP) items were under the legal protection of multiple decrees. There was no mention of dress bayonets, and the Waffen-SS itself did not come into existence until years later. FP
Fred, your correct about the RZM. But the LAH was around before the Waffen-SS and there is pictorial evidence in RPT books and elsewhere of them wearing the KS98. I have some in my files and will post one tomorrow.
Joe, I’m looking forward to the pictures, but I think that we may be looking at the same thing, but from different angles. I have no argument with the fact that the KS98 is seen in period photos, or that other types of bayonets are seen as well. Or that the LAH was eventually transformed into a combat unit, and was an integral part of the Waffen-SS.
What I was trying to get at being that the Waffen-SS itself as a distinct entity did not exist until well after 1935. Fred
Combat units of SS used in early days the older Wehrmacht equipment, so GEW.98 or Kar.98a with SG98/05 and SG84/98 WW1 era bayonets, the commerzial reworks of rifles doesnt mean the stamps on rifles should be same as on bayonets automaticly. The dress KS98 were used too, there is photografic material enough.best regards,Andy
Denny,
My statement about the RZM SS Bayonets comes from the collector's community with no actual documentation bases. Early photos show SS men wearing KS bayonets. Mr Noss provided some excellent photos to us many years back of an SS TV man being married and wearing a KS bayonet with "SS NCO Sword Portapee". My opinion is that "if the TV man had a dagger he would be wearing it on his wedding day." My opinion. Also, what was early production like for SS daggers. Where the daggers readily available. Since the SS got all old left over equipment, did this same situation also push them to the back of the bus for dagger prodsuction?
I have a great picture that will be appropriate to post today if I can get it to Denny. Look at who is wearing a KS Bayonet and portapee.
From Richard:
"Who is the SS General wearing the bayonet and portapee"?
Forum Members,
Do you recognise the famous SS General wearing a KS Bayonet and portapee? Perhaps his SS Men follow suit wearing a KS Bayonet instead of a dress dagger??
Richard K
Denny,
Thank you for posting the picture.
Richard K
There must be always given a date with a similar picture, i assume from info about SS uniforms is a 1932-36 period, note the small eagle on the cap, the general is here as a Regiment commander of LAH.best regards,Andy
Hello
Sepp Dietrich ?
Regards
Alain
Yes, already is more possible to focus the picture to 1934-35 period as there are probably sleeve cufftitles same as he had higher officer rank post 1935.On Wikipedia there is a visitation of LAH by AH and he wore sabre instead of bayonet.
I could be wrong w/o clearer pictures,but to me that doesn't look like a bayonet, more like a sword.
Alain & Andy you are both right. It is an early picture of Sepp Dietrich wearing a bayonet & portapee. As you can see he is surrounded by officers wearing daggers. There are many pictures of Sepp out there wearing bayonets.
Richard K
Mikee,
The picture is of Sepp Dietrich wearing a bayonet. There are similiar pictures of him with his famous sword.
Richard K
All I'm saying is, he probably is but the picture isn't clear enough for "me" to see the difference. Your word is good enough for me.I'm half blind anyway
. Thank you.
Not entirely uncommon with some high profile individuals, Sepp Dietrich I think had a reputation for doing what he wanted to do. With (if I remember the incident correctly) his being given on at least one occasion either a direct order to comply with established protocols as regards dress sidearms. Or his failure to comply which prompted his being censured.
But what the period photos of dress bayonets in use do not show are the blade markings. And given the lack of sharpness in detail of most, I don’t know how you could tell if it was a preexisting Imperial era dress bayonet, versus a Third Reich era manufactured blade? FP
I stand corrected on when the daggers came out. Of course, the daggers came out a couple of years prior to 1935. I should have said that instead of what I did say. It's odd that the bayonets carried RZM markings a good while prior to their appearing on daggers. I have seen at least one photo of an SS man wearing a short dress bayonet with the "NCO" portepee with runes on the stem. Wittmann seems to think those portepees were for the SD. Perhaps the RZM bayonets have some connection there? The RZM bayonet I have came with such a portepee, also dated 1935.
FP,
Thank you for the input. The only hard fact that the picture shows is that Sepp Dietrich was wearing a bayonet and portapee. From the picture, it can not be accurately determined what period of bayonet.
FP,
Any opinions on why there are not more RZM SS Bayonets in the hands of collectors?
richard K
Grumpy,
I obtained the rights from Mr. Noss on a particular SS photo showing 3 Deutchland SS Men wearing the particular "SS NCO Sword Knot on their 98/05 Bayonets." I do not remember the date on the photo but it predates any use on SS swords. This was provided to Whittman by me. Would you members like to see this picture?
Richard K
Denny,
The TK found on the pistol grip of SS marked rifles is extremely typical of the size and geometry of the TK found on the SS Marked Bayonet Frogs & Rifle Slings. Thanks for sharing your SS rifle with us.
Richard Kuchta
I would greatly enjoy seeing the photo of the three SS men.
"The TK found on the pistol grip of SS marked rifles is extremely typical of the size and geometry of the TK found on the SS Marked Bayonet Frogs & Rifle Slings."
yes but only for short period of reworking of older equipment which was the gew98 converted to K98k configuration. So the pieces are converted probably in early 1933-38 period.
For SS knots is probably the best book George Wheeler History of german bayonet 1918-45.
Grumpy,
I shall look for my photos from Mr Noss. I haven't seen them in years myself.
Richard K
"The TK found on the pistol grip of SS marked rifles is extremely typical of the size and geometry of the TK found on the SS Marked Bayonet Frogs & Rifle Slings."
yes but only for short period of reworking of older equipment which was the gew98 converted to K98k configuration. So the pieces are converted probably in early 1933-38 period.
For SS knots is probably the best book George Wheeler History of german bayonet 1918-45.
Andy,
I do not know how long they were reworking the Czech Rifles and or why?
George Wheeler has a great section in his book on the SS Portapees. There are a few more SS portapees out there that George doesn't show.
Richard K
Here is a nice shot of the KS98 bayonets with the LAH. Looks like the knots might be leather strap rather than a cloth bayonet knot?
Interesting the bayonets are the long (em) style. To my knowledge, the SS RZM ones only came in the shorter version.
Joe,
What a great picture of the LAH Band wearing the Black Belt & Bayonet Frog. I have a picture of the LAH Band wearing the White Belt & White Bayonet Frog but carrying the 98/05 Model Bayonet. Your picture would be earlier than mine with the White Belt Rig. Joe thanks for sharing. Almost forgot, Joe can you make out the type of portapee being worn on the bayonets. Could it possibly be the "SS NCO SWORD PORTAPEE"?
Richard K
I would greatly enjoy seeing the photo of the three SS men.
Grumpy,
I found the picture of the 4 SS Men with no trousers but wearing their combat Belt with Black Frog, 98/05 Bayonet and "SS NCO Sword Portapee" attached to the frog. Hopefully Denny can put it up tomorrow for me.
Richard K
The photo here we assume is a LAH Band photo, so probably not for obvious soldiers of LAH typical as music band has a special position, its not a combat unit. I believe the color schema of knot is typical for LAH. The dating is probably similar to early 30ies as they wore M16 helmets.There are cufftitles on sleeve so probably 1934-36 are the period. Maybe a see wrong but soldiers wore a long blade version and the chief in front a short blade, which was for NCOs and officers.
The czechoslovak rifles were reworked post 1941 probably so other period and other marking should be there.best regards,Andy
Andy,
Perhaps the LAH Band was not a combat unit but its director was charged with war crimes for personally killing several Poles so as to gain recognition for being rough & tough.
Richard Kuchta
Denny,
I have about 4 SS Pictures to be put up showing bayonets. I shall send them shortly. Thank you for your help.
Richard K
Grumpy,
I found the picture of the 4 SS Men with no trousers but wearing their combat Belt with Black Frog, 98/05 Bayonet and "SS NCO Sword Portapee" attached to the frog. Hopefully Denny can put it up tomorrow for me.
Richard K
Richard,
If it’s the same picture that I remember, was this from back in ........ was it 2003? With the four SS men not LAH, but from the SS-Standarde Deutschland?
Regards, FP
Grumpy,
I found the picture of the 4 SS Men with no trousers but wearing their combat Belt with Black Frog, 98/05 Bayonet and "SS NCO Sword Portapee" attached to the frog. Hopefully Denny can put it up tomorrow for me.
Richard K
Richard,
If it’s the same picture that I remember, was this from back in ........ was it 2003? With the four SS men not LAH, but from the SS-Standarde Deutschland?
Regards, FP
FP,
The picture you mention is one in the same. It has been since about 2003 since I have seen it. Your right, there are 4 SS Men from Deutschland with no pants. Just big 98/05 bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Denny,
Thank you very much for putting the pictures up for us.
Richard K
Forum,
Does it not seem strange that the SS Officers and men would be wearing daggers in these particular situations if they had them. The SS officers are wearing KS 98 Bayonets with Officer's Portapees.
Can anyone put a timeline reference on thes pictures to help us?
Richard K
Forum,
Included in the pictures just put up by Denny is a picture of an SS Weapon's Work Camp. Note the type of rifles being refurbished.
Richard K
Hello
SS with Vz.
Klinge
Very interesting photo, especially the MP35 held by the guy with the binocs. But these are TK are perhaps from one of the occupation TK Btls. occupying towns in Czechoslovakia. Perhaps this is a pre-war photo?
Super photos. Thanks, guys. Interesting to see the "officer" portepee with runes worn with bayonets.
Very interesting photo, especially the MP35 held by the guy with the binocs. But these are TK are perhaps from one of the occupation TK Btls. occupying towns in Czechoslovakia. Perhaps this is a pre-war photo?
I don't know the date of this photo, but there are wartime photos showing the bright hilted Vz. 24 bayonets in use in the field. And my thanks to Klinge for posting it as one I don't remember seeing before.
FP
Forum,
Included in the pictures just put up by Denny is a picture of an SS Weapon's Work Camp. Note the type of rifles being refurbished.
Richard K
Richard, On the printed page version of the photo that I have (which seems to be a little larger) the rifles appear to be 98K's. Having a bright metal firing pin disassembly disc in the buttstock. FP
All of the bayonets and rifles Vz.24 in the picture are unreworked in the picture,so probably pre 1942 date. The helmet maybe could help on this, when they have a M40 helmets? best regards,Andy
Klinge,
Thank you for posting the picture of the TK with the VZ Rifles & Bayonets. It is one of the best that I have seen.
Richard K
FP,
In regards to the bayonets in the picture posted by Klinge, I agree that bayonets in the white were used during the war period. I know that I have some SS VZ-24 bayonets that are so dated.
Richard K
In regards to the picture of the 4 SS Men with 98/05 Bayonets and SS portapees on their frogs, this is the earliest picture in my files showing the so called "SS NCO SWORD PORTAPEE". As you can see, the Portapee is being worn on a combat 98/05 bayonet. I do not think that the SS Men shown are NCOs. What is your opinion?
Richard K
Forum Members,
Can someone give an opinion on the 2 different styles of SS portapees shown on the KS 98 Bayonets. John Z & Richard K. Which portapee is considered SS VT and which would be Waffen SS.
Richard K
Denny:
Now that is one heck of an Eickhorn!
John
Denny,
Thanks for posting the pictures for me. Great!!
Richard K
John,
This SS Artillery Bayonet comes from a very old collection.
Richard K
Can anyone determine the model of bayonets being carried by the LAH Band. I have 2 complete SS White Rigs. One rig carries the Reworked, SS marked 98/05 Bayonet.
Richard K
Klinge is possible determine the date of the soldiers with vz.24 rifles? Any backside stamp?
To SS knots on pictures:
-first LAH band , hard to visible details of knots, period 1934-36
-4 SS soldier of 1.Kraftfahrer company, Rgt Deutschland, i assume period middle of 30ies maybe later, the knot looks like with circle runes on stem
-soldier of Der Fuehrer has post 1936 cap, different knot without circle on stem
-soldier of Oberbayern has probably same period or earlier, the knot is with circle runes stem
-soldier of Oberbayern with M16 helmet, combat SG84/98 bayonet and same knot
-3 SS NCOs of Rgt Deutschland, early period pre 1936, small caps, similar knot with different colours but with runes in circle on stem
For me is important to know which period is it, the uniform of various parts of SS changed about 3 or 4x in time, so is important the dating. Evidently is the using of knots of small dimension, not sword knot marked on stem with circle runes markings.
The piece on dress bayonet is of war period as white is replaced by grey color. best regards,Andy
Andy,
Thank you for the input for the time lines for the SS portapees and SS Men pictured. You have a very good knowledge of the SS uniforms and the time periods.
Richard K
Hi Andy
Unfortunately, nothing written on the back of this photo !
Regards
Alain
All of the bayonets and rifles Vz.24 in the picture are unreworked in the picture,so probably pre 1942 date. The helmet maybe could help on this, when they have a M40 helmets? best regards,Andy
Andy,
A lot of what I have in photos is not immediately accessible (or catalogued). But I can confirm your projected date for the rifles and especially the Vz. 24 bayonets that are not reworked. Having a good photo of Waffen-SS combat soldiers, who are obviously in the field. That is roughly datable from at least mid 1941, to the end of the year (or later). I also remember seeing a fairly good picture of a bayonet knot, but can’t for the moment find it or some others of the Vz. 24.
In the interim if we’re just mostly looking at pictures. This is what you see most of the time in Waffen-SS pictures. The SG 84/98 (98K).
Regards to All, FP
Forum Members,
I would like to cover the following topics on SS Bayonets:
3. Bayonet Models used by the SS. German & Foreign captured.
Please give me your thoughts on the topics.
Richard Kuchta
Jumping ahead to number three. The image to the right is one of my favorites in showing that soldiers tend to use whatever is available. Being a couple of the images of the Selbstladegewehr 259 (r) (aka the Russian Model 1940 Tokarev rifle) in the service of the SS. I also have one (that is one of the ones that I'm having a problem locating) with the bayonet itself mounted on a belt.
"And believe it or not. There is or was one with German markings, that is probably still in a collection somewhere." I really should have elaborated on the preceding statement with the following information to avoid any misunderstanding: It was an original matching Model 1940 Tokarev rifle that was being offered for sale. As I recall at 3 or 4 times the price of a standard rifle in that condition. The extra premium in price was due to the rifle being sold as a:
“German Ordnance marked gun that was used to help develop Germany's own self loading rifles”.
And it had Waffenamts stamped in strategic locations to '
prove' the story. I did not purchase it. Nor did anyone that I knew. And the rifle has since disappeared, and I have not seen or heard of it since I first saw it. So I’m assuming that somebody still has it in his collection. A few years after I saw it, I found out the source of the Waffenamts. They were original period stamps that had been borrowed from a collector, who had no idea that the friend he loaned them to
"just study them", was going to do anything other than just closely look them. But the individual that he had thought was a friend - instead used the stamps to make some fakes (altered originals) that were specifically targeted for the
'TR collectors market'. Because Third Reich era gun collectors would pay
a lot more money for the gun than a Russian arms collector would.
Regards to All, FP
 copy.jpg "Selbstladegewehr 259 (r) copy.jpg")
Thanks FP for sharing of interesting photos, the left is probably a Feldgendarmerie so it could be a photo of captured material,in the second photo is interesting that i assume minimum 1941 period because the SVT40 rifle, there are two obsolete Gew.98 rifles.The pistols holster could be belgian FN? best regards,Andy
Hello
Another SS photo with a K98 bayonet.
There is a famous photo of a Feldgendarm with a Tokarev 1940 and bayonet on a website. If I can find it, I will post it.
Regards from Paris
Alain
Hello
I found this interesting photo on a website.
Alain
Klinge,
Great photos. Keep them comming.
Richard K
Forum Members,
From the first topic on SS Bayonets we can conclude the following:
1. SS KS 84/98 Bayonets exist in the forms of etched and plated blades. Examples shown include: triple etch, double etch, single etch, and 2 SS RZM plated blades.
2. The SS Portapees with the salt & pepper balls are the early SS VT models.
3. The SS Portapee with the cord on the ball is considered the Waffen SS Ball.
4. The SS Portapees with the White Strap and black lines are considered "Peace Time" Portapees.
5. SS KS Bayonets exist but one must be extremely careful due to all of the known fakes and reproductions that exist.
Richard K
Forum Members,
Let us now list the models and types of combat bayonets that were used by the SS. This includes foreign captured bayonets that were used as is or were reworked into different styles. I think Andy and FP may have a good start on this. I shall add bayonets from my collection as we go on.
Richard K
Forum,
I spoke to Mike the othe night and he allowed me to use the pages related to the SS Bayonets. If you do not have Mike's book on bayonets, you should get it. It contains alot of good data.
Mike was ahead of the wave about 25 years ago when he published his book containing SS Bayonets. I shall only discuss two of the SS Bayonets one of which is in my collection now (SS 84/98 Horster) and the SS Marked 98/05. The Horster is a very unique SS marked bayonet. Please look at the pictures closely and send me some questions and some observations.
Richard K
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures for us.
Richard K
Prior to 1941 are SS partly independent from obtaining material from Wehrmacht, so a 1938 proofed Hoerster shouldnt go to SS. The doubble WaA253 clearly speak for army acceptance. The ball finial should be too WaA253 proofed, its a armorer replacement piece, where should be no serials. As You could see the runes were stamped by single stamp which is very suspisious, i personally dont like this.The DH is stamped on leather and pommel. The SS2 stamp should by stamped above the DH as seen on reworked rifles.
The Intertwinned runes as there was a special discussion on other forum (FP and Joe)about Cultural markings should be nothing to do on SG84/98 because it was quality or design mark and SG84/98 is a older not SS design to compare with SS degen or other SS items. When stamped on bayonet so not in places as typical for acceptance. I believe all the cultural stamped bayonets are fakes. The WKC or Alcoso that delivered to SS or Police should be blank, without any markings.best regards,Andy
Andy,
Your opinions of the Horster Bayonet are your opinions not fact only your opinions.
The history of this bayonet goes back to the 1970s when it was brought into the Great Western gun Show along with another bayonet by a young man. The Bayonet was shown to BCN member Fred Marut who looked it over very well. The bayonet was purchased by Fred Maruy's friend who kept it for awhile and then sold it to another BCN member from whom I purchased it.
You say that you don't like the SS markings, based on what? I have several other bayonets marked the same way and with the addition of serial numbers. One of which came from a BCN member in Ohio with a very old rifle collection. As for the TK being stamped. Hello!! The TKs were stamped as well as engraved. The 1938 dated Horster is indeed unique. This bayonet is what one would expect an officer purchased bayonet to be. As for the SS markings not being correct for a bayonet, I ask you again how many SS bayonets have you seen and handled? The TK is a double stamp which often happens.
If this particular bayonet was faked, what was the reason? To increase the value?? When this bayonet was initially purchased, by the friend of Fred Marut it was procurred at the going price of an ordinary bayonet.??!! How many other bayonets have you ever seen like this? Would the faker only make one????
As for dated and manufacturer's marked SS bayonets they exist. They are in collections and I am very glad to own several.
Andy I respect your opinions but they are just that. Opinions!
If the SS marked the majority of their rifles and equipment, why would they not mark their bayonets? The bayonets are marked with the same type of stamps and or engraving used on rifles.
Richard K
Andy,
As I posted, I would only discuss the Horester Bayonet and the 98/05 bayonet in Mike's book at this time. Remember,this book was first published in 1985. We have learned quite a bit about SS bayonets in the last 25 years. I have never seen an original SS marked bayonet with the SS design stamp in any collection.
Richard K
Gentleman: I’ve got a very busy day ahead, and I’m on my way out, so this will be brief. Richard (correctly) mentioned “copy cats” making duplicates of what they see in books. I’m not saying this here, but offering that comment as a general observation only, because with the level of detail in the pictures I’ve seen so far I can’t exactly say what is going on.
What I can say is that Mike stated that the piece he was describing had a blank (quote: “unmarked”) scabbard. Whereas this one has a maker’s name. And the Sigrunes do look like they might have been done separately (?).
As for the “Boxed SS” markings, what there seemed to be agreement on was that was it was not a personal “hallmark”. That it had been called in a period German Police publication a “Culture” mark with Joe Wotka posting some very interesting information. Also being described somewhat differently elsewhere. And that sometimes you see it, and sometimes you don’t on both SS an Police swords. Which is all I have time for at the moment and I have to leave.............. FP
Certainly You shouldnt trust me without any facts, but i have a good experience about the SG84/98 bayonets, so i have a evidence of a similar Hoerster marked with Wffm, which is for Waffenmeister also for a repair, this is a 1938 piece marked correctly WaA253. These pieces are very hard to find as each larger army unit became a only small number of not serialed bayonets for repair.
I everytime goes from facts of SS timeline, this is very important, the prewar period is very problematic and the arms were obtained not through Army connection, so it should be not marked with WaA stamps. Thats the reason why are the Gew.98 reworks stamped with commerzially fireproofs not with army proof and WaA.Since the late 1939 early 1940 as the SS units grew to larger units from regiments to Divisions it was used primary the captured material, and commerzial basis by obtaining equipment woulnt enough so Army WaA proofed items were used. The SS was a elite unit and could be not accept similar 25 variations of DH stamp.When You believe this You could understand german manner. There exist SSZZA proofs that are real for the later period for buying commerzial items, but normally it was on same way obtained by Army. The WaA system was equiped with 25000 inspectors through the Germany and other countries.
I saw fysically about 3 real DH piece and have evidence of more but this is not important. The SS grew to end of war to near 1 Million army so when every rifle used by SS would be stamped so it must be every 7th rifle K98k in today market with this stamps.And this is not. Why? because they used army proofed rifles in majority.
The Mike Welser is great man, unfortunally many of the information there is obsolete. the best sample are the S code bayonet markings.
When You confirm its a rework of TKV in war then its real scenario, other way is for me a faked piece.
Andy,
Again you state your opinion but it is not based on facts. I am sitting at my computer with two different bayonets. One is marked 43 fnj SS ZZ A4, the other is marked COF 43 SS ZZ A2. I suppose you think that they do not exist either.
In addition I just pulled a CLEMN&JUNG dated 1939 with matching scabbard. Both scabbard and bayonet are SS marked TK, RUNES with accountability #1534. This came from the Marino Collection in Gettsyburgh, PA.
Richard K
We should see it but i am sceptical, because of the codes, the letter codes were assigned from Army, by Alcoso commerzial is other situation. When 43fnj and cof 43 are marked with WaA519 on pommels its going through the army WaA system, so it could go to SS, but it should be not stamped this way, only by rework. Without seing it is hard to tell anything.
You should look to Gunboard forum, there is Scott B. as really experts on DH marked rifles.
I believe here should be return to beginn, and ask why are the rework rifles stamped with DH, what means this stamp, its property, issue, unit linked or proof stamp? There exist many KZ rifles with one rune, and no DH why? In the new book of Mike Steves and Bruce Karem " Kriegsmodell K98k" there is other interesting information about certainly production of KZL.
The stamping of bayonets are not important or typical, and that why they are in focus of fakers. As mentioned earlier the real SS bayonets are blankos. Without any markings.There is confirmed to sample that WKC produced bayonets for SS, same as Alcoso,P.Weyersberg delivered to Police with proper acceptance. As there are typical production markings, we could say that the production run side by side with army orders, so WKC commerzial for SS and in same year for Army under cvl code.best regards,Andy
Andy,
Your statement that the SS was an Elite Unit and could not accept 25 different Death Head styles. Based on what??
Take the 98/05 SS Bayonets that are mostly engraved. You will hardly find 2 alike. These were done in weapons work camps with slave labor. There are minor differences in the size and geometry of the TK, Runes, & Numbers. Elite SS Unit didn't have Elite Slave Labor! Maybe you can show us something from an SS Quality Control Document that can verify your statement.
Metal stamps wore out & or broke. You get a size variation when a stamp is worn & dull.
Richard K
Andy,
You are so wrong in your statement that SS Bayonets are not important and that is why they are faked. There are more fake SS rifles out there because they have always brought a premium price. If you ever collected SS rifles, you would know about the fakes and you would also know the work of particular fakers.I collected SS rifles early on and switched to SS bayonets because I realised that they were much more scarce. You were lucky to get one SS bayonet for every 10 rifles you collected. The last I knew Scott B had one SS Bayonet.
Richard K
Andy,
Again you state your opinion but it is not based on facts. I am sitting at my computer with two different bayonets. One is marked 43 fnj SS ZZ A4, the other is marked COF 43 SS ZZ A2. I suppose you think that they do not exist either.
In addition I just pulled a CLEMN&JUNG dated 1939 with matching scabbard. Both scabbard and bayonet are SS marked TK, RUNES with accountability #1534. This came from the Marino Collection in Gettsyburgh, PA.
Richard K
When I left to take care of some business there was one bayonet under discussion. I came back, and now it’s four. With one of them a 1939 Clemen u. Jung. Which is sort of interesting because the commercial bayonets are fairly scarce. Although from the description, I’m not sure if that is what has been brought forward as an example for the discussion. FP
FP,
The 1939 CLEMEN & JUNG SS Bayonet was brought up due to the fact that Bayonets as such with SS Markings were fake as per Andy. Andy's Opinion.
I do not know if you know Fred Marut or not. He is a very knowledgable bayonet collector, BCN Member and gentleman. The point that I was making with Andy that when the SS Horster Bayonet was purchased in the 1970s at the Great Western Show by Fred's friend from a young man, there was no premium paid price for the bayonet. Why fake something and sell it for the same price as a standard combat bayonet. Makes absolutely no sense. Have you ever seen this type of SS marked bayonet out there? Usually a person faking an item will make more than one.I do have several other similiar marked bayonets one of which came from a BCN Member in Ohio.
The Forums on GDC are set up to provide a learning process. However, when something is not understood and is looked at subjectively the learning process stops. Opinions should be listed as opinions not stated as facts.
I also mentioned the 43 dated SS ZZ A2 and SS ZZ A4 Bayonets. I think that they are the only survivors. I have never seen another in any of the SS Rifle and weapon's collections. Truly Waffen SS Bayonets that need to be researched.
I have chosen to share information and pictures from my SS Bayonet collection with you. Some of the items in my collection are extremely rare and have been buried in advanced collections longer than most of us have been collecting.What do I get out of sharing information and pictures with our members? I get the Satisfaction of knowing that I am promoting and contributing to the knowledge of our segment of the WW11 German Dagger Collecting field, "Bayonets". Isn't this what GDC is all about. I am not a dealer. I am a historian and researcher. I have never sold one SS Bayonet. Collector's from all over the world have offered and sold SS Bayonets to me. John Jacobi has found numerous SS Bayonets for me. My major objective is to do a factual book on the Bayonets of the SS. This project is long overdue. For those of you who do not believe that legitimate SS bayonets exist, you do not have to bother yourself participating in this thread. Expressing an opinion is acceptable. Expressing an opinion as a fact without documentation tends to hinder the learning process.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Fred is in fact a very knowledgeable collector, and I actually know who the original purchaser was. What I’m not sure of is if this is actually the very same exact bayonet that he acquired at Great Western. Because Mike Welser is also knowledgeable, and he knows what an unmarked scabbard looks like.
As for Clemen U. Jung, I know what both the early commercial and military models look like. And the 1943 vintage bayonets by Coppel and Eickhorn, and their “mid war” commercial cousins. (Besides some of the DH markings, and some of the SS ZZA types as well.)
So at this moment in time I’m not 100 % convinced that this is the same exact Hörster bayonet. And with the other three I’m left trying to make some guesses. That said, I do like looking at new items and exchanging information. And do try to present my point of view based on the best in information that I have at hand. Or learn in the process, which is something that might also happen depending on the circumstances.
Best Regards, FP
Here was mentioned some people who brought bayonets to Your collection, it would be nice to hear John J. or Fred M. they info about the bayonets, certainly Richard is Your good will to make a book about Your SS bayonet collection, as here a forum is and You asked for other collectors opinion, "or i am mistake on this"so certainly i have right to offer my opinion.
To Your mentioned SS piece: Hoerster 1938 was made for army as there is WaA253, thats a fact, so when the DH is real it must be realised by rework, so when You have a evidence of reworking of the piece, like other stamp on grips, on tang or on blade finish like new blueing, thats no problem to believe its a SS TKV piece. As the DH is stamped, because i dont believe that the rotary engraved DH are real. But i dont like the different stamp where the SS2 is by side and stamped independetly.
As You are member of BCN when i am correct, You could ask the old collectors for confirmation.
Scott B is one of the best experts on DH on rifles, he has when i am correct more as 50 DH stamped rifles and will prepare book about it.There was a large discussion on Gunboard. He dont talk about bayonets. But the DH i assume are same stamps or in same works stamped as the rifles??
I tell You a story about week ago from Prague show, i am a number freek so i make me a dbase about Vz.24 bayonets, previous show on spring 2010 i examined a nice export scabbard for south america with a standard Vz.24 export to Romania, i observed the piece and make me notes about the stamps and serial numbers. Now in autumn i went to the dealer and asked for the piece, the piece was on table but the pommel was marked with stamped LW ZA6 proof. The price was highed about only 10% but it was declared as a LW marked capture piece. so this is the real situation on this job, the fakers are still working.best regards,Andy
Here was mentioned some people who brought bayonets to Your collection, it would be nice to hear John J. or Fred M. they info about the bayonets, certainly Richard is Your good will to make a book about Your SS bayonet collection, as here a forum is and You asked for other collectors opinion, "or i am mistake on this"so certainly i have right to offer my opinion.
To Your mentioned SS piece: Hoerster 1938 was made for army as there is WaA253, thats a fact, so when the DH is real it must be realised by rework, so when You have a evidence of reworking of the piece, like other stamp on grips, on tang or on blade finish like new blueing, thats no problem to believe its a SS TKV piece. As the DH is stamped, because i dont believe that the rotary engraved DH are real. But i dont like the different stamp where the SS2 is by side and stamped independetly.
As You are member of BCN when i am correct, You could ask the old collectors for confirmation.
Scott B is one of the best experts on DH on rifles, he has when i am correct more as 50 DH stamped rifles and will prepare book about it.There was a large discussion on Gunboard. He dont talk about bayonets. But the DH i assume are same stamps or in same works stamped as the rifles??
I tell You a story about week ago from Prague show, i am a number freek so i make me a dbase about Vz.24 bayonets, previous show on spring 2010 i examined a nice export scabbard for south america with a standard Vz.24 export to Romania, i observed the piece and make me notes about the stamps and serial numbers. Now in autumn i went to the dealer and asked for the piece, the piece was on table but the pommel was marked with stamped LW ZA6 proof. The price was highed about only 10% but it was declared as a LW marked capture piece. so this is the real situation on this job, the fakers are still working.best regards,Andy
FP & Andy,
One thing that must be determined on the Horster and Clemen & Jung was when the SS Marks were applied to the bayonets. Were these bayonets salvaged from the field and reissued by the SS?
A similar marked bayonet from the John Milton Collection is on a 27 dated WuK. Tiny runes are to the right side of rhe TK with accountability #191.
As I was going through my bayonets yesterday, I came across the fifth SS Police bayonet. It ia a EAGLE B by P. WEYERSBERG, serial #8192 with SS Marking. Joe & FP do you want to see it?
I would still like to list all of the types and models of Bayonets used by the SS.
Richard Kuchta
Richard:
I, for one, would like to see any examples that you or anyone else may have that are SS marked or SS related.
This is a great thread and I wish it would go on and on. We are all learning a lot.
John
Gentlemen,
Came across yet another SS Police marked bayonet by S 244 36 dated. Police star is between the 2 WA on the end of the pommel.Serial number on the bayonet is # 9938. The 8 is partially removed by the blood groove.
Richard K
It would be interesting to see the variation on S/244 bayonet, this sunburst or asterisk marking was observed and is not linked with police. There exist more samples of Mundlos production.Not only year 1936.best regards,Andy
It would be interesting to see the variation on S/244 bayonet, this sunburst or asterisk marking was observed and is not linked with police. There exist more samples of Mundlos production.Not only year 1936.best regards,Andy
Andy,
What is the asterisk on the S/244 linked to if not the Police.
Richard K
Richard,
Fred is in fact a very knowledgeable collector, and I actually know who the original purchaser was. What I’m not sure of is if this is actually the very same exact bayonet that he acquired at Great Western. Because Mike Welser is also knowledgeable, and he knows what an unmarked scabbard looks like.
As for Clemen U. Jung, I know what both the early commercial and military models look like. And the 1943 vintage bayonets by Coppel and Eickhorn, and their “mid war” commercial cousins. (Besides some of the DH markings, and some of the SS ZZA types as well.)
FP,
On the SS ZZ Bayonets that you observed:
1. Where were the markings located?
2. Were the markings both the same size for the SS ZZ A2 & A4?
3. What type of finish did the baynets and scabbards have?
Richard K
So at this moment in time I’m not 100 % convinced that this is the same exact Hörster bayonet. And with the other three I’m left trying to make some guesses. That said, I do like looking at new items and exchanging information. And do try to present my point of view based on the best in information that I have at hand. Or learn in the process, which is something that might also happen depending on the circumstances.
Best Regards, FP
I like to see the markings on pommel,mainly the WaA stamps with t this flower stamp or asterisk is stamped on various samples of Mundlos production, the origin police piece must be without WaA stamps and the star or sunburts marking are everytime with a letter of police inspector. What for serial letter is under the number? Picture would be very helpfull. best regards,Andy
I like to see the markings on pommel,mainly the WaA stamps with t this flower stamp or asterisk is stamped on various samples of Mundlos production, the origin police piece must be without WaA stamps and the star or sunburts marking are everytime with a letter of police inspector. What for serial letter is under the number? Picture would be very helpfull. best regards,Andy
Andy,
The SS S 244 36 has a WA 219.
Richard K
The SS S/244.36 piece, is there any other SS stamps on the piece, certainly a picture would be helpfull, same as there are only WaA219 stamps or other WaA numbers too. the picture of pommel would be helpfull.Same as the letter under serial would be interesting or is there nothing? To samples of flower/sunburts marking, we have in dbase piece 3 of 1935 year, 2 pieces in 1936, 2 pieces in 1938, 1 piece in 1939, 1 pcs in 1941 and other reported in 1943, Majority of them have one WaA243 stamp. By majority of collectors is the flower stamp mentioned as rejection part stamp.best regards,Andy
The SS S/244.36 piece, is there any other SS stamps on the piece, certainly a picture would be helpfull, same as there are only WaA219 stamps or other WaA numbers too. the picture of pommel would be helpfull.Same as the letter under serial would be interesting or is there nothing? To samples of flower/sunburts marking, we have in dbase piece 3 of 1935 year, 2 pieces in 1936, 2 pieces in 1938, 1 piece in 1939, 1 pcs in 1941 and other reported in 1943, Majority of them have one WaA243 stamp. By majority of collectors is the flower stamp mentioned as rejection part stamp.best regards,Andy
Andy,
The scabbard is unnumbered but has th WA 219 on the ball. The letter under the serial number is mostly ground away where the edge is ground back to.
The grips are brown plastic. The asterik is 8 point.
The SS marking is the same as on the P.WEYERSBERG SS POLICE as well as being in the same place. SS Marking is the RUNES over the TK.
In my opinion, the S 244 36 SS Bayonet is police. It has an unmarked scabbard as well as all of the other markings in similiar places as other police bayonets. Why would the bayonet be labeled as a reject? Makes no sense.
Richard K
Richard.
For the Clemen U. Jung without actually seeing it. What we are discussing is really, really, hard (if not impossible) to make a judgment. Original, reworked, salvaged? Who knows?
I also obviously can’t speak for Joe. But I would like to see the P. Weyersberg Police, and I would imagine that he would like to see it also.
And for the S/244 code likewise I'm not sure what you have there either. There is a Police sunburst marking. And a different type as well on some bayonets that is still a topic under discussion. With one theory being that it may be some kind of “Stern” marking. IE: A non “milspec” item, that was suitable for use, but did not conform to period standards. Which is it on your bayonet? Without looking at the bayonet, who knows?
Best Regards, FP
Richard.
For the Clemen U. Jung without actually seeing it. What we are discussing is really, really, hard (if not impossible) to make a judgment. Original, reworked, salvaged? Who knows?
I also obviously can’t speak for Joe. But I would like to see the P. Weyersberg Police, and I would imagine that he would like to see it also.
And for the S/244 code likewise I'm not sure what you have there either. There is a Police sunburst marking. And a different type as well on some bayonets that is still a topic under discussion. With one theory being that it may be some kind of “Stern” marking. IE: A non “milspec” item, that was suitable for use, but did not conform to period standards. Which is it on your bayonet? Who knows?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
The S 244 36 whatever it is was marked and used by the SS. Did this 1936 bayonet start off with the brown plastic grips? I thought the plastic grips came later.
Richard K
Richard,
Plastic grips would not be original. Are they internally marked, and if so what are the markings?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Never took the grips off of the SS S 244 36. I have never found any SS marks on the inside of plastic grips. It is my opinion that the SS did not swap out the grips on the 84/98 bayonets unless there was damage. The replacement grips would then be Camp manufactured wood grips.
Richard K
FP,
Did you say that you have some information on the SS ZZ A2 & A4 marked bayonets. Can you share?
Richard K
Richard,
I've seen literally hundreds (if not more) of German reworked Vz.24 bayonets all with recycled wooden grips. Never one with what looked like a brand new set. Likewise, I've seen a greater number of SG 84/98 (98K) period German recycled bayonets. Wood and plastic. Some might be in better condition than others. But on bayonets so far, all recycled. The singular exception being a couple of sets of brand new late plastic grips by themselves, from a small group of "war booty" items taken from a factory.
It takes a certain amount of specialized machinery (and procedures - plus) to carve the grips out of a block of wood in any kind of economically viable quantity. Can you post a few pictures of what a new camp made replacement grip might look like?
PS: That picture you posted of the KZ workshop was circa 1943/44.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Did you say that you have some information on the SS ZZ A2 & A4 marked bayonets. Can you share?
Richard K
Richard,
Only on the rifles, and nothing beyond what is generally known or believed to be true. That said, some of the history is a fairly interesting topic IMO.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
The SS ZZ A2 & A4 bayonets will be a topic for discussion later. However I must say that these SS marked bayonets are eye catchers. SS markngs are the best of them all.
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
Have you ever seen the picture in George Wheeler's Book (Seitengeeehr) on page 213. "Unidentified SS Nederland Bayonet".
Want to see one?
Richard K
The S/244 36 with removed letter block is a rework, same as plastic grips could be not a normal configuration on the piece, so the flower marking has nothing to do with it.The piece started as army piece ,because proofed with WaA. The SS marking we dont know what looks as You have not added the P.Weyersberg piece. There could be only one possibility that army rejected the piece in war period and SS used it.best regards,Andy
Andy,
Your opinion sounds like a possible solution. However it doesn't explain why it is matched up with a blank scabbard with WA 219 on the ball. The bayonet is serial numbered.
Richard K
Possible answer is the flower marking, as many collectors believe the piece was not accepted into service or were reworked probably by Mundlos, that would be a explanation why is there a WaA219 on ball finial, anyway without seeing the details of pommel WaA area and details of bard area is hard say any opinions. Same as the grips should be dissambled and inspected for marking. The flower stamp should be on crossguard too.
Andy,
I just took the grips off of the S 244 36. There was nothing on the grips except the mold #. The tang was perfectly clean of any marks. There was no * on the cross guard.
Richard K
The grips when dark colored should be marked with code of maker, when red colored so G marked and mold numbers. There are two WaA219 with flower stamp between?
The grips are marked G with mold cavity: #16 & #31.
Richard K
So the grips are post 1942 period.The piece a rework, as removed letter and probably reblued. But without pictures is hard to confirm its same period as the SS stamp there was applied.
Andy,
You will see some pictures of the bayonet but not today. My technician did not come in today.
The blood groove runs way into the ricasso and almost completely removes the 8 in the serial #. The blade edge relief has removed the majority of the letter. Bluing on the blade is 98%.
Richard K
The formulation of the late plastic grips was known by the Germans as a Type 41, with a January 1943 standardization/implementation date. Without seeing the grips (and preferably the whole bayonet) it’s impossible to say just what time period it might have been reworked. Because the formulation itself did change as the war progressed. Regards to All, FP
FP,
Can you put up your pictures of known reproduction etched bayonets. Those that are etched on the blade and pommel.
Richard K
Richard,
Are you talking about dress bayonets, or the combat type of bayonets?
Regards, FP
I brought 4 SS bayonets to take pictures of and post. I have to wait till tomorrow to post the items.
However, any members out there have any information on the SS Polish wz. 29 bayonet? This is a very rare bayonet in it's SS rework form.
Richard K
Hi Richard
My fake SS etched K98 bayonet.
Regards
Alain
FP,
If you have both that would be great to post.
Richard K
Klinge,
Thank you for posting the SS bayonet. It is very beneficial for the collector to see both the original SS bayonets and the reproductions.
Richard K
Hi Richard
Unfortunately I own only this one.....!!!
Regards
Alain
Thanks again Klinge.
Richard K
Yes a normal etch made by Bayoking in England in late 70ies, exist about 25 SS divisions etches, unfortunally some new etches that are with real SS mottos of KS98 dress bayonets were found lately.
Andy and Forum Members,
Do you have any pictures of these reproduction bayonets to post?
Richard K
Richard,do you have any period documentation whatsoever regarding SS procedures regarding bayonets? Anything concerning either the Allegemeine SS, VT/WSS or TV and their requirements? Andy and Fred, do you have anything or ever seen anything? Do any of the catalogs in collections specify SS bayonets for purchase?
http://www.old-smithy.info/bayonets/fake%20etching/fakes.htmHere is a link that we wrote with Erik and some other members of BCN some years ago.
To Joes question - i saw nothing about the accepting of bayonets into SS service, i believe one german member who is experts too(and member here) and looked in to war archives have found nothing too.
Joe,
I know that I have read several articles specifically stating that officers were required to purchase their own equipment. I do not remember the article specifically stating a bayonet.
The majority of the SS VT bayonets in my collection have accountability numbers on them. Several do not. Those that do not are in much better condition than those with accountability numbers.
I need to check my SS TV bayonets to see how the accountability numbers are.
Richard K
Richard,do you have any period documentation whatsoever regarding SS procedures regarding bayonets? Anything concerning either the Allegemeine SS, VT/WSS or TV and their requirements? Andy and Fred, do you have anything or ever seen anything? Do any of the catalogs in collections specify SS bayonets for purchase?
Joe, I’m looking into a couple of things right now, but it’s more tangential than a directive like a manual or a TL. And quite frankly, until we see some more of the items mentioned, some things might make better sense if we actually knew what it is that we are discussing. FP
Joe,
Can you be more specific in regards as to what you are looking for?
Are you looking for directives pertaining to maintaining a bayonet (sharpening, etc)?
Richard K
FP,
Do you have any SS Reproduction Bayonets to post? We would like to see them.
Richard K
Joe,
I know that I have read several articles specifically stating that officers were required to purchase their own equipment. I do not remember the article specifically stating a bayonet.
The majority of the SS VT bayonets in my collection have accountability numbers on them. Several do not. Those that do not are in much better condition than those with accountability numbers.
I need to check my SS TV bayonets to see how the accountability numbers are.
Richard K
Richard,
Speaking generally, from memory, officers were given an allowance to purchase uniform items and that would (or could) include pistols. And while private purchase bayonets as sidearms in the trenches for officers in WW I might have not been uncommon. And while there are a few pictures in circulation showing otherwise, bayonets generally were for enlisted men. And senior NCO's (who were enlisted) were given government property swords if the occasion warranted, not bayonets. Note: Here I'm referring to parades, ceremonies etc. not combat. And in combat officers would have pistols as sidearms, (or maybe sub machine guns or something with more firepower if it was close combat).
PS: And what exactly do you mean by accountability numbers?
Best Regards, FP
The accountability number is the number added by the SS to the bayonet. If the bayonet has been given a number, the scabbard will almost always have the same number added.
I have 2 bayonets with the same serial numbers. For example an 84/98 bayonet has the same number as that on a 98/05.
Richard K
FP,
Do you have any SS Reproduction Bayonets to post? We would like to see them.
Richard K
Richard,
My files are currently not as well organized as I would like. So it may take a little while to gather the information and put something together.
FP
FP,
I know you will have some great stuff. We need to be able to make some comparisons.
We haven't even scratched the surface yet on SS bayonets.
Richard K
The accountability number is the number added by the SS to the bayonet. If the bayonet has been given a number, the scabbard will almost always have the same number added.
I have 2 bayonets with the same serial numbers. For example an 84/98 bayonet has the same number as that on a 98/05.
Richard K
Richard,
Do you mean like the added numbers pictured below?
FP,
I know you will have some great stuff. We need to be able to make some comparisons.
We haven't even scratched the surface yet on SS bayonets.
Richard K
And no offense, but my dilemma here is that I really can’t do comparisons without permission to post some side by side images.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
From the pictures that I hope to send tomorrow, you will see the accountability numbers that I have described to you.
The accountability numbers are also found on SS marked pistols.
If my tech comes in tomorrow, we will have pictures of SS bayonets to look at.
Richard Kuchta
FP and Forum Members,
I received an E-mail from Fred Marut today in regards to the SS Horster Bayonet. I e-mailed him back and asked if I could post it so that all of the members interested in SS Bayonets could read the interesting history of the SS Horster Bayonet. Fred is extremely knowledgeable on Bayonets and is a very advanced collector. Ihope to hear from him shortly.
Richard K
Richard, I asked you and the others if you had in your archive or viewed source material (documentation in the form of manuals, national archive prints or original communications from the 1930s/1940s) that deal with the issue of bayonets used by the Allegemeine SS, VT/WSS or TV. I am curious if any documentation has been discovered to associate with the pictorial documentation we see in this thread. I have seen an inventory from 1935 from an Allegemein supervisory unit listing weapons and equipment in unit possession.
Did the articles you read about bayonet procurement for officers provide any documentary sources for their statements, or was it pure theory? I ask these question as I have always tried to find source answers for questions of police issue weapons and equipment. I have found documented reports showing the increase in police bayonet production in the first year of the war, that I mentioned in my police sidearm article I wrote long ago for Johnson's Vol IV. And their are of course the numerous police weapon manuals dealing with bayonets. I was interested if anyone has pursued a similar course in the SS field.
I personally dont believe Officer of SS would wore a combat bayonet, when so a dress piece, that should be not stamped anyway. FP is right that pistols and several other equipment could be obtained privately. Combat bayonets are always part of a rifle.best regards,Andy
Andy,
SS Officers wore bayonets and carried rifles so as not to attract attention to themselves by enemy snipers. There is a picture in George Wheeler's Bayonet Book of an Officer wearing a bayonet and carrying.
Richard K
FP & Andy,
What documentation do you have that states Officers were not required to purchase their own sidearms?
Richard K
Joe,
I have no official documentation concerning SS Police bayonets. In fact I know of no official documentation that has been found to date that pertains to SS VT Bayonets, SS TV Bayonets, and Waffen SS Baynets. If there was such information available it would have made years of research much more easy and productive.
I have been able to accumulate an SS Bayonet Population of over 120 Bayonets. I have been able to group and compare. I have been able to break out the SS VT Bayonets from the SS TV Bayonets as well as the Waffen SS Bayonets. In addition there is also the SS Foreign Bayonets and Standard SS Dress Bayonets. I have broke down the major groups into sub-groups. You can see similiar charasterics in these groupings of SS Bayonets. However; there is still alot to go to understand the coding. I have cracked the major part of the coding for the SS TV Bayonets. For this the combat belts, pouches, bread bags and canteens were all required. This analysis was predicated upon evaluating a complete known rig.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
Can you provide us with the SS markings that are used on the VZ rifle. The types of markings, the number of, and where located. This will be helpful as we go on.
Richard K
FP & Andy,
What documentation do you have that states Officers were not required to purchase their own sidearms?
Richard K
Richard, I think you mean the reverse? Fred, while it is generally thought by collectors/historians and supported by documented clothing regulations, that officers of the armed forces and police were required to purchase their own equipment and given a stipend for this purpose, officers of the Sicherheitspolizei were provided weapons out of a central armory. This is of course documented by the partial records of the RSHA arsenal located in the National Archives. I attach one of the record cards from this central file of a senior officer that was provided equipment: a P08 and binoculars.
Other such cards are located in the National Archives under the Records of the RFSS and Chef d. Deutschen Polizei. They have also been reproduced for the benefit of collectors. I provided some of these records concerning mostly NCOs and ordinary ranks in postings last Spring in the Firearms section of this forum.
So for this instance, we have the documented instance of officers procuring weapons from a central state source, in this case the RSHA Armory in Rauscha, rather than relying on private procurement. But we have no documentation to extend this procedure to the VT/WSS or TV. But we do know that Allegemeine SS units did maintain their own mini-arsenals.
FP & Andy,
What documentation do you have that states Officers were not required to purchase their own sidearms?
Richard K
Richard, I think you mean the reverse? Fred, while it is generally thought by collectors/historians and supported by documented clothing regulations, that officers of the armed forces and police were required to purchase their own equipment and given a stipend for this purpose, officers of the Sicherheitspolizei were provided weapons out of a central armory. This is of course documented by the partial records of the RSHA arsenal located in the National Archives. I attach one of the record cards from this central file of a senior officer that was provided equipment: a P08 and binoculars.
Other such cards are located in the National Archives under the Records of the RFSS and Chef d. Deutschen Polizei. They have also been reproduced for the benefit of collectors. I provided some of these records concerning mostly NCOs and ordinary ranks in postings last Spring in the Firearms section of this forum.
So for this instance, we have the documented instance of officers procuring weapons from a central state source, in this case the RSHA Armory in Rauscha, rather than relying on private procurement. But we have no documentation to extend this procedure to the VT/WSS or TV. But we do know that Allegemeine SS units did maintain their own mini-arsenals.
Joe,
Thank you for the documentation. This will be of help when determining if Officer purchased material had accountability numbers.
Joe , my statement about the officers having to purchase their own equipment was the way that I wanted it. It is a known fact about the directive that you posted for us. I just wanted to know if someone had something contrary.
Thanks again Joe,
Richard K
"Joe,
Thank you for the documentation. This will be of help when determining if Officer purchased material had accountability numbers."
Rich, in this instance the officers did not purchase weapons or equipment. The requisitioned equipment was sent to the officers and receipts were signed as well as the individual inventory cards documented. Their were no accountability numbers assigned to the material. A very few number of these weapons are in collections and the only markings on them are serial numbers applied according to RSHA requirements.
Hello
I have a postcard showing SS with a K98 bayonet.
Regards
Klinge
Denny,
I have a group of pictures ready to come through. Please post them for us.
Richard K
Klinge, your photo is from a post card series about police service in the EAST. A close-up of this photo is of a member of one of the RSHA details in Poland in the time after the surrender. Notice the SD Raute (diamond) on his sleeve. These men would have received their equipment from the RSHA arsenal.
There are manuals as Reibert about equipment of army units same as about tactics in battle and various situation, the picture that is in Wheeler same as here are from combat that means situation that is special. Officer normally couldnt got rifles and combat bayonets, as it was normally in major of armies. In combat for various reasons is real using of rifles and bayonets by officers.
Same as there are directive about using of own material, should be noted in soldbuch or other papers, the commerzial pistols should be used larger as 6.35mm calibre, there was mentioned some type of pistols.
To Vz.24 rifles, when used by army and SS prior to 1942 was not reworked in anyway probably post 1942 there was clear directives by changing the configuration mainly of bayonets. I assume as post 1942 by SS were same directives as for Army,LW and KM there is no mention of adding of any accountability numbers or property numbers.
Klinge,
This is my favorite SD picture showing a 98/05 being carried.
Richard K
COMPARISON OF THE HORSTER SS MARKS TO THE WuK SS MARKS
Andy,
Thanks for the information.
The SS Officer was carrying a rifle and a combat belt with bayonet. The SS knew that Russin snipers looked for soldiers carrying pistols and binoculars. Just like carrying a target on your back.
The SS did add property marks to some of their VZ rifles. Those are the ones that I wanted to bring up.
Richard K
Letter from Fred Marut to Richard.
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 10:54 AM
To: richkuch43@aol.com
Subject: Re: HORSTER SS MARKED BAYONET
Dear Richard:
Good to hear from you. I was finally able to see a photo of the EuF Horster commercial bayonet you got from Ralph Allen and posted on the internet. I used to have a log-on for the GDC.Com site (which is no longer valid). My attempts to re-register have never been responded to by the administrator with a confirmation and/or temp password either. A friend whom is registered shared the photo of the marking with me.
First, you ought to talk to the guy whom got bayonet from the kid that turned up with it @ the Great Western Show, and purchased it for $20.00. He is Don Miller. His phone# is xxx xxx xxxx. As I recall, he got the bayonet on a Saturday after I had left the show. When he later described the piece to me, IMHO it had all the aspects of what I might expect to see on a limited contract of commercial S84/98s ordered by the SS. Same holds true (and you & I have discussed this in the past) about the WKC commercials having the totenkopf w/ "lazy S" surcharge on the crossguard. He told me it had a totenkopf-SS-2 marking under the curve of the pommel and no serial numbers. I believe it was also devoid of WaAs.
I was given the first opportunity to purchase the bayonet. Don initially was not interested in selling it. However, he needed the money he hoped to get for it more, so it was offered to me for $800.00. Rare as it might be, I considered it an extreme amount for any S84/98 at the time (late 1980s or early 1990s), so had to pass. Before I was able to visit him and actually see the bayonet, it was sold to Ralph Allen, where it stayed until acquired by you.
I have known Don for 35 years & have no doubt it was purchased as he described to me. He was most gleeful when recounting the story to me (as would any of us be after making such an unexpected buy at a show).
I think it took Don about a week until he decided to part with the piece. I waited seven years until he let go the nicest WuK I have encountered, before he opted to part with it. In any event, having now seen the marking, knowing the story of how it was acquired, etc. I feel confident this example is legitimate. I cannot forsee some kid walking into the show with such a piece & selling it for $20.00, fake or real. I also doubt my long time friend would have offered it to me either, had the bayonet been otherwise. I think that covers everything I know on the Horster piece...
Best Regards,
Fred
Firstly the Fred mentioned this"When he later described the piece to me, IMHO it had all the aspects of what I might expect to see on a limited contract of commercial S84/98s ordered by the SS. Same holds true (and you & I have discussed this in the past) about the WKC commercials having the totenkopf w/ "lazy S" surcharge on the crossguard. He told me it had a totenkopf-SS-2 marking under the curve of the pommel and no serial numbers. I believe it was also devoid of WaAs." so when i look to the piece You pictured there is WaA, so its not a commerzial contract, when the DH was there added i dont know but certainly not in 1938 as this piece initially went not to SS but to army because of WaA proof system.
The piece of WW1 of Haenckel dont have any sign of reworking, its a unreworked piece, the SG84/98 were reworked in majority of samples in period 1930-34.So i assume the DH and the numbers are engraved, which is for me problematic.
And about the pictures, without exact dating and situation there could be not made any resumes about wearing of bayonets by officers, the first mentioned Wheeler picture of is described as follows " Waffen SS major with rifle and bayonet.This Totenkopf Division officer is near the front line with the W-SS General Theodor Eicke,the officer is armed with a Mauser rifle and is carrying a S84/98 with officer bayonet knot.As officer is armed normally purchased their own uniforms and eqipment,this bayonet could very well be a commerzial product without military inspection markings."
Firstly the picture was done in west and with high possibility France or Belgium in 1940. As the officer was a combat unit leader i assume he got from depot a rifle with bayonet, certainly the info provided by Wheeler is wrong that the rifles and bayonets were buyed privately, and the reason why is the piece unmarked is that early SS obtained equipment commerzialy not through army WaA system, so the piece is probably a early WKC commerzial with wood grip.
The russian snipers have nothing to do with this, as they were efective later in war, then the cuff titles on uniform were hidden not only the weapons were changed.
The SD picture should be too dated but it could be one of the Police units, that were not involved in front battle but were used as Einsatz kommandos behind the lines.
Andy,
Why is the engraved SS TK & ACCOUNTABILITY NUMBER a problem for you?
Richard K
CAPTURE PAPERS FOR SS BAYONET SS 467
Richard
Perhaps you might explain what the marking on the M1914 Mauser pocket model signifies? TK SS-81?
And the death head on the holster? How do you determine authenticity of these stamps when they can be found on such items as this post WWII flare pistol holster?
Joe,
The TK /Runes/Accountability Number on the pistol signifies property of the SS with the SS accountability number. This a point that I was trying to make earlier. Eventhough there serial numbers from the manufacturer, the SS added there own property stamp and number. For an example, I showed the pistol along with 2 bayonets. One bayonet had serial numbers and the other did not. The SS added there property stamp and number. This type of property control is seen quite readily through the SS VT period. Much less in the Waffen SS.
As for the TK on the leather being original, I have over 80 SS frogs with different style TKs. I have over 15 TK marked Combat Belts, TK marked Rifle slings,over 20 TK marked ammo pouches, as well as several Luger holsters and 1 flashlight carrier. I have a very in depth number from which I can make comparisons.
Joe,the holster that you posted, is that from a Reichs Revolver? If so, that style of pistol was suppose to be among the first sidearms used in the KZs. Ihave seen several such guns and holsters in collections. The extremely large skull is appropriate for the gun if it is a Reichs Revolver. The style of skull and size is correct but I would have to make a direct comparisson with my own items.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
I asked you why you have a problem with engraved TKs and accountability numbers? I knew you would and that is why I posted this specific bayonet. If you were looking at all of the picture posts, you should have come across the capture papers. Bayonet #467 is listed on the Capture Papers dated 1945. The American soldiers back then did not know that Bayonet #467 was an SS Bayonet.
Andy, SS Property "Stamps" were either stamped and or engraved. You may not feel good about engraved SS Property Stamps and numbers but the SS did alot of it this way. The majority of my SSVT 98/05 bayonets are done in this manner. Capture papers for SS Bayonets are almost non existent. I know of no others outside of my collection.
Andy,
You made a statement before about the SS Elite wouldn't stand for a lot of variations of TKs etc. Well the SS Elite was not so elite: They used whatever bayonets and weapons that they could get their hands on. Look at the reworked GEW rifles: X out numbers, poor metal finish, etc. but they shot.
Richard K
Joe,
Did you have a chance to look at the SS Police Eagle B ?
Any thoughts on the S 244 36 Asterik. Could this also be a Police bayonet?
Richard K
In regards to the S 244 36 SS Bayonet, when do you think that the serial number & letter were affected? Before or after the grinding process?
in my opinion, they would apply the serial number after all of the secondaries were completed.
Richard K
Joe,
The TK /Runes/Accountability Number on the pistol signifies property of the SS with the SS accountability number. This a point that I was trying to make earlier. Eventhough there serial numbers from the manufacturer, the SS added there own property stamp and number. ...........Joe,the holster that you posted, is that from a Reichs Revolver? If so, that style of pistol was suppose to be among the first sidearms used in the KZs............. The style of skull and size is correct but I would have to make a direct comparisson with my own items.Richard Kuchta
Richard, I am not sure to which part of the SS you are referring with your first statement. It is obvious from the discovery of tens of dozens of RSHA inventory weapon inventory cards that at least that significant section of the SS that included the Gestapo, Kripo and SD,did not utilize an "SS accountability number". The only number of reference for their property control was the manufacturer's serial number that was required on both parts of the pistol (frame and slide) and magazines. That is fact.
The holster is a post-war flare pistol holster manufactured after 1945 to which a TK marking has been applied.
I saw your E/B marked bayonets. I believe that weapons bearing this acceptance stamp are bought and paid for by the Ordnungspolizei using funds provided in the annual budget of the Ministry of the Interior remain the property of the Ordnungspolizei and would not be disposed of without removal of that inspection/property mark. There were strict procedures for handling weapons when the owner was temporarily assigned to another administration from the original home base or when he was transfered. The weapons stayed on the books of the dispersing home base. It could go temporarily with one to another unit, but if the transfer was premanent, the weapon had to be returned to home base. That is fact. So I don't know how you can explain the existence of SS-TK markings (whatever they may signify)on the property of the Ordnungspolizei. I do not believe a simple asterisk would indicate any acceptance mark. The aserisk/subburst K or L was used by the Prussian police up through 1935/36 when it was replaced the the national police insignias based on the eagle and letter.
Richard,
There is a lot to look at, and some of it requires a little more work to try and make an analysis. But for the 1936 S/244 “Stern”, “Asterisk” or “Flower” (or however you want to describe it) with the late grips, I think I mentioned a non-milspec manufactured bayonet that was still usable. And here we have a bayonet with a very small ricasso that can still function as a weapon. But most likely failed whatever gauging process they used to accept items for the Army. That said, I think that I have at least one early bayonet with a shorter than average ricasso, and I will have to look at it to see how (or if) it affected the marking process.
And with the disclaimer that I’m not a “paper/document” guy. There is the Waffen-SS Soldbuch. With some of the ones that I’ve seen it might show an “S” coded, serial numbered bayonet. Maybe a maker marked one without any number. Or maybe just a serial number that had to be from an Army/Wehrmacht contract. And in the firearm portion, a 98K, or possibly a G33/40, or maybe a pistol with serial numbers. With possibly some weapons being lined out, and new ones added. But like I said I’m not a specialist in that area, and more work is needed, but that is some of what I have seen.
Regards, FP
Richard,
With this photo I'm fairly sure that the one to the left is the Weyersberg Police. But the one to the right is the Clemen u. Jung with two "SS" markings? Or is it some other bayonet?
Regards, FP
Firstly Richard thanks for adding of the pictures, so we probably could made some estimates or spend here our opinions.
I will firstly attach the comments to the WaA pieces,
1.WuK 27, proofed correctly by army WaA61,when a asterisk mark so its a reject piece, there should be no SS stamp. When then by rework, on the piece are no sign of this. But the DH is stamped, so it could be real. I personally dont like this type of stamp.
2.S/244.36 piece is a normal Wehrmacht contract, the blade is ok, the grips were changed, why i dont know, You mentioned a G stamp so prior 1943 is this not real. The series letter is probably misstamped should be a or g letter, in h range is reported the 8 pointstar, This asterisk is typical for reject parts, that goesnot through control in first time, the SS DH stamp is engraved, prior 1941 should be no way that SS got this piece.
3.Clemen Jung a other normal Wehrmacht contract, serialed in d range, we have other 10 samples in this range, normal piece not rework in anyway, The DH is a joke , the SS and number looks engraved, in 1939 no way as property of SS, as no rework so it is problematic
4.P.Weyersberg 8192 police, really bad as this is a really SS police bayonet, that was damaged by adding of DH, maybe Joe could more add, but SS Police i believe has nothing to do with TKV or KZL guards, i assume it was destined for SchPO or other police units, as You could see its a commerzial contract!!! no any WaA!!!, the early numbers are reported in 1940, the numbers goes to 10000 minimum. The DH is engraved, and should be not there as its already a SS police piece.
5.Mauser M14 pistol, its the pre 1934 design, i am not experts on pistols, but believe this is a late 20ies production for commerzial market, has nothing with SS, it was buyed privately, so no reason stamp there any SS numbers, the markings is engraved.You should ask on axis or Gunboard pistol forum for details about the serial number dating. The DH on frog could be real, but i am not expert on this.
6. The certificate dont speak about any details of 467 marked bayonet, You have there a SS stamped piece, or any other details? no i believe when i bring here a piece with 467 number it could be ok.2 german daggers - what is this SA,SS, army ,LW no specialization.So no way to link it after 60 or 70 years to a collection.
best regards,Andy
There are some question that should be answered:
Why they used similar DH on piece as WW1 Haenckel, that should be reworked in early 30ies and a Clemen Jung 39 that was 100% a army contract? You spoke about 25 variation of DH but here are minimum of 5-6 years difference with similar proofs. I believe because they came from one source.
The most problematic piece for me is the Police SS bayonet, as there have nothing to do the DH stamp, as it was already a SS property. Same as S/244.36 which has post 1943 grips have similar stamp as the earlier ones??
The using of various materials didnt means that germans or SS have not a certain directives how to accept equipment into service or property. This is certainly not here the point, more problematic is that You compare a early prewar , with early war and late war period, thats the problem, dating of the stamping, same as SS was increased and changed in short period.
I have a rule, when a problematic piece came from a certain source, so the complete source is problematic. For this i have only one resume. I dont like these DH stamps. So You should compare each piece where it came from. Anyway it is a interesting discussion.
best regards,Andy
Andy,
Your statement regarding the capture paper not relating to the SS 467 bayonet is so incorrect. You definitely are not familiar with capture papers. Gosh, the capture paper did not describe what type of medals or identify the daggers. These souvenirs had no importance or value to soldiers. They just wanted souvenirs from the War to send home.
No for me is no incorrect, when the paper change the owner and the dagger are saled to other, You will never know what for dagger were brought back by the GIs. So its like it mentioned FP in previous paper statement, in Soldbuch and other oficial papers, there is unfullended information, because in the papers are only numbers to sample soldier have a rifle with 8145 number, the letter of series were not added, as when the producer made 5 production strings from letter a-e, in the bunch are 5 rifles of serial number 8145, which rifle have the soldier?? Thats the problem by similar certificate papers. So when a german bayonet 467, it could be SG98/05 with 467 numbering, same as Carl Eickhorn 39 with 467b or 44asw, 467aa. There is too minor detailed info, so it could be not linked. Only by owning the piece with paper from war in one collection for 70 years and totally confirmed that the piece were never changed. best regards,Andy
PS You could look to list of RSHA presented by Joe W. Rauff got there in 1942 a P08 pistol, with serial number 9514 or so, it was Mauser production or byf production, or it was a older Luger? where is letter of series? is this a commerzial contract? You could not use similar info as is it not enough info to determine a certain pistol.
Andy,
The Capture Papers listing Bayonet #467 perfectly describe the SS Bayonet that was sent home by the GI. Just because you don,t want it to be doesn't change the validity of the Capture Paper for identifying the SS Bayonet #467.
Andy, how many Capture Papers do you have in your collection? Any Capture Papers to go with SS Rifles, Bayonets, Equipment? Please Post we would like to see them.
Richard K
Joe,
I have no hard documentation on the SS Property Stamp & accountability numbers found on SS Bayonets and some weapons. You are the expert on Police items and I can only show you the Police Bayonets with the SS Property Marks. Have you ever seen a bayonet such as I posted before? I do not have the answers as to why such Police Marked Bayonets with SS Property Stamps exist. I invite you to see my collection and evaluate first hand what I have shown you so far. I am sure that I have the largest collection of SS Bayonets eventhough it numbers slightly over 100. There should theoretically be thousands of SS Bayonets out there but there are not.
I keep going back to the SS Property Stamping the majority of their rifles. I know that the numbers on the bayonets are not linked to the serial numbers on the rifles.
As for the Early Death Head Stamp on your Holster, I was not familiar with that holster per say. That is why I asked if it was a Reichs Revolver. I have a friend in Albany, NY who has a very large, advanced SS Weapons Collection and he has 2. The reichs revolvers were supposedly used in the early days of the KZ Camps. I do know that his holsters had the typical early , large TK Stamps. I shall try to post some pictures om my Early Death Head Stamps.
Richard K
Forum & Andy,
The Clemen & Jung SS Bayonet came from the Marino Collection in Gettysburgh, PA.
The TK & Serial number were definitely engraved. To call this a joke reflects upon the person's knowledge of the subject matter at hand. This bayonet was not reworked. It was no doubt salvaged from the battlefield. But when? The Property Stamp and Number could have been done by the field armorer. Those marks were put in a very specific place which in most cases a person making reproductions / fakes would not even concern themselves about.
Let us go back to Fred Marut's Letter. Back in the Time when the SS Horster Bayonet was purchased for $20.00 what would have been the incentive to add SS marks and sell it for the price of an average going bayonet? The Marino Bayonet dates back to the late 60s early 70s.
richard K
Forum Members,
I heard from John Jacobi last night and he would like to participate in the Bayonet Discussion; however he can not get into the GDC. Is there someone who can possibly help him.
Richard K
FORUM,
Comparison of the Milton SS WuK 27 having the TK RUNES as to the SS HORSTER having the TK RUNES 2. There is signifiance with the Runes with no number as compared to the Runes with the 2.
How were early SS VT Standartes denoted?
How were early SS TV Standartes denoted?
Richard K
I have copies of some certificates from other members,same i have friends with SS papers and soldbuchs, same as You could look to the book Kriegsmodell from B.Karem and M.Steves and chapter 10, named Capture papers and ship home boxes, very interesting reading, there is a many certificates as US personnel didnt understand the specification of german equipment, they would not bring exact info, so there are similar desctiption:
1 german rifle, 1 german knife with scabbard, by edged weapons no details, max a number, the best described are short firearms, one certificate is for Pistol M,sn 942xxx which is probably HSc from the serial number. But from this is no possible identified a bayonet nr.467 was SS.
Do You could confirm that the collection of Your certificate was same from 1945 to 2000? have You got the 2 unknown daggers and some german medals with this bayonet?
For me not exact info for identifing a weapon.
Back to Clemen&Jung 39, as mentioned earlier the piece was a army contract. Thats the point. Is no reworked how could get it a SS KZ Guard repair fieldwork? When it was stamped there the DH and SS-1534? In war? the DH is similar to a SG84/98 WW1 of Haenckel, You believe on Haenckel it was stamped 1943? Here was very interesting what mentioned FP n his answer , have the Clemen twice DH? one on crossguard and other on pommel?
There should be exact timelines for using some of the DH stamps, i believe that exist real pieces, i assume that You have some , but i believe that You already got some problematic pieces too. best regards,Andy
PS to the Marino collection, i dont know about but the earliest SS fakes occured already 5 to 10 years after war, same as there is confirmed production of dagger postwar for US GIs as bringbacks, similar items are not real collectibles as it were not produced in III Reich period.
To Fred, i dont believe collectors could remember so exactly one thing that happened in 1970 so 40 years ago, and say yes there was a DH on pommel, Fred mentioned the piece but didnt mentione the DH, it was described later by the owner, so the piece was buyed for 20 USD and what was the price later 800USD because of one DH on pommel? Sorry thats the reason why they make fakes. Make a profit.
Andy,
I still do not agree with you on the Capture Paper for SS Bayonet #467. This is the last that I shall address the point but I also have a Capture Paper that just states Rifle. They did not need to get into elaborate descriptions of war souvenirs being sent home.
I also have Capture Papers with the recorded serial & property numbers along with the send home box containing the 2 bayonets: 1 SS 98/05 Bayonet, 1 84/98 Bayonet in a SS marked frog, as well as a SS belt & Buckle. Nothing on the Capture Paper says anything at all about the items being SS.
You are not making any kind of sense concerning Capture Papers having detailed descriptions of War Souvenirs.
Richard K
I hope that other members talk not only my self, as my english is terrible, when possible Richard could You answer the question of FP? are there two DH stamped on the Clemen 39 piece? Thanks.
FP,
In regards to the two bayonets with Runes over TK they are: Paul Weyersberg and the Asterisk marked bayonet.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to the Clemen & Jung SS Bayonet you are correct in stating that it is marked as an early SS VT. I have several WKC bayonets marked as such and I believe some late SS TV bayonets.
I did not say that the Clemen & Jung was marked by a KZ guard. I stated that the item in my opinion was a battlefield pick up that was claimed by the SS and so marked in the field by the armorer who would have the company records.
Richard K
Forum,
I have sent some new pictures to Denny to post for us. The pictures are of the SS Flashlight & Carrier as well as one of my Luger Holsters. Early TK on holster is hard to see but the one on the carrier is perfect. You can see some differences between the TK on the Carrier as to Joe W Pistol Holster. Look closely.
Richard K
FP,
On the Clemen & Jung there is an engraved TK, RUNES & Number on the rear crossguard as well as on the bayonet scabbard. I think that I may have a SS 98/05 done similiarly.
Richard K
Forum,
Andy brought up a good point about having a time line for the different SS Stamps. That would be good as well as helpful.
I just want to start it off with a small discussion on the Death Head / Lazy S Stamp used by the SS. We have not talked about it up to this point. However, the TK/Lazy S is found on the earliest SS Marked Bayonets (1933) to late in the 1940s. However, the stamp location and position moved all around. Stamp was used also by the SS TV.
Richard K
Forum & Andy,
The Clemen & Jung SS Bayonet came from the Marino Collection in Gettysburgh, PA.
The TK & Serial number were definitely engraved. To call this a joke reflects upon the person's knowledge of the subject matter at hand. This bayonet was not reworked. It was no doubt salvaged from the battlefield. But when? The Property Stamp and Number could have been done by the field armorer. Those marks were put in a very specific place which in most cases a person making reproductions / fakes would not even concern themselves about .......... The Marino Bayonet dates back to the late 60s early 70s.
richard K
Andy,
.......... I did not say that the Clemen & Jung was marked by a KZ guard. I stated that the item in my opinion was a battlefield pick up that was claimed by the SS and so marked in the field by the armorer who would have the company records.
Richard K
Richard,
First, my thanks for the clarification of the bayonets in the picture I reposted. As regards engraved markings in general. What kind of equipment would the SS armorers have needed to do the engraving in the field?
Regards, FP
FP,
I am only expressing a technical opinion because I am not aware of the tools that the armorer actually had to use. I would assume that he would have access to a portable generator that would be capable of running a small lathe & milling machine. The armorer would also have available a drill and grinding device. If the power was available, he could use an electric pencil and or hand engraving device.
Richard K
Richard, are these lazy S TK's associated with the P08s found with Lazy S/TK chamber markings? That has always been the term for these controversial P08s that are believed to be from WWI German assault troops.
Joe,
The Lazy S Death Head Luger has the same SS Marking as the bayonets and rifles. I have 2 of the Lugers and can post some pictures of them along with a Lazy S Marked bayonet.
There are also 2 other variant styles of Luger Markings used by the SS.
For a long time, the fakers have not got things right on faking a Lazy S Death Head Luger. Extremely easy to spot the bad ones. The fakers also make the same mistake on making bogus SS rifles.
Richard K
Joe,
You can see some differences comparing my Early TK on the Flashlight Holder to the Pistol Holster that you posted. The TKs on the luger holsters seem always to be a little distorted. This can possibly be from leather shrinkage and dryness.
Richard K
Denny,
Thanks for posting the pictures.
Richard K
FP,
I am only expressing a technical opinion because I am not aware of the tools that the armorer actually had to use. I would assume that he would have access to a portable generator that would be capable of running a small lathe & milling machine. The armorer would also have available a drill and grinding device. If the power was available, he could use an electric pencil and or hand engraving device.
Richard K
Richard,
Thank you for the reply. If I can respectfully disagree for a moment, what you seem to be suggesting would I think be at a much higher echelon for a number of reasons.
Regards, FP
BCNers and those following this post..super information thanks to all that post! Anytime SS information is posted it can become an emotional event. I personally could care less for anything SS marked but that is just me. I have seen many bayonets over the years during my surfing on the internet in the late night hours and if they had an SS stamp on it... real or fake (i never knew nor cared) i sent this lead to richard kuchta. This is what the BCN is about helping other collectors. Continue with the dialog! I was off line due to my own ignorance when the site changed but I am back thanks to Vern! Terry K appreciate your work too!!!...greetings to all! My bayonet education started with FLM, FP and Mike Welser...but be advised these guys to include Anthony Carter (RIP) learned from Jack Schrader who is still with us!!! nuff said, jcj
Nice to have here John back. To Clemen&Jung piece it looks like correct finish not refurbisher or reworked so is not a repair, only small wearing spures there.The grips were probably reworked from the details on screws counter parts. I dont know how SS would became this bayonet, and why they would stamp there a property number with this form of DH in later of war? Thats why i mentioned my doubts.
To FP info about the engraving, i believe the engraving in field is very problematic, same as time costing, every Fieldrepair work certainly have a set of digits stamp as it was in army need to restamp serials by repairing pieces, is no way for me engraving 1534 crossguards so? With dies were easy to make any reserialing, same as i believe the DH should be too stamped. By engraving each skull is a originall. That could be realised only by small numbers.best regards,Andy
John,
It is good to have you back home again. Thanks again for all of those good SS Bayonets leads that worked out.
Richard K
First, it’s very nice to have John back on the forum!!
And while a lot of folks have mentored, done research, and made a number of substantial contributions to the collecting of bayonets. It was John who put together the forum. And got it up and running for which I am
very appreciative. I’m also taking a moment here to remember the late Anthony Carter. Who was a true gentlemen. A friend to us all, and is greatly missed.
Andy has zeroed in on one of the core problems with the concept of “field” engraving. Let’s say a set of stamps in an armorers kit might have weighed one or two pounds at the outside limit. Versus at a minimum: a suitable period engraving tool, a generator, and fuel. And if you add in some very heavy machine tools. That were not made to be moved around, and might need to be re-calibrated. I think you can see where the concept might be starting to have some problems, without even looking into anything else.
I have some things to get ready for, and I hope that everyone has a very pleasant day. FP
Andy & Forum,
Thank you for your opinions on the Clemen & Jung. However; I went into my showcase and pulled out the SS ZZ A2 & A4 which are both WA and maker marked. The SS ZZ A2 & A4 stamp are perfect & beautiful to look at. Why would the SS mark these 2 bayonets during the latter years of the war? It comes down to the fact that we do not know why the SS did property mark their bayonets. But they did and these pieces exist today as proof. In this thread it is hoped that we can come up with some technical answers & solutions instead of just throwing stones at a target each time I post a bayonet picture.
I just pulled out several other bayonets for comparison.
1. 1938 Elite Diamant, SN8677, WA 218, with SS Property Stamp Lazy S over TK.
2. ACS With Scales Logo, SN 9124 on the Rear Crossguard, SS Property Stamp, and Marked: 9th SS TK Standarte (NORD then Thule), Police Star on Spine with letter L. Frog is also 9th TK Marked. This bayonet came from Norway along with several other SS pieces.
We need to focus on obtaining explanations and opinions on why the bayonets are SS Property Stamped and why some have accountablity numbers and why WA issued bayonets with late dates are SS Property Stamped / engraved.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone,
Richard K
Richard, I surely appreciate your dedication to your collecting hobby. And I appreciate the opportunity to view your varied collection. But perhaps it just comes down to whether other collectors accept your premise regarding these SS marked bayonets and other items. "It comes down to the fact that we do not know why the SS did property mark their bayonets. But they did and these pieces exist today as proof."
You have stated your premise is valid and we need to provide proof or explanation for it. Some of us would like to see the evidence before we accept the premise.
FP,
You asked for an opinion on the hand engraving on the Clemen & Jung. I gave you an opinion based on technical experience based upon my time designing for Hart Rifles in Nespoceck, PA. This was my opinion, predicated upon gun fabrication and maintenance.
Your statement along with Andy's are only your opinions unless you have some hard facts / documents to back up what an SS armorer had to work with. The fact is the Clemen & Jung has engraved SS Markings. Are they pretty? Absolutely not. This bayonet was procurred by Mr. Marino (who had a tremendous SS collection)35 to 40 years ago. If you were a collector back then, I would almost guarantee that you did not see reproduction SS Combat Bayonets. There was no incentitive. Please see Fred Marut's letter again. The West Coast has always been ahead of the wave for Collecting WW11 German items and you didn't see fake SS Combat bayonets 35 to 40 years ago out there. As a fact, how many of you members have ever seen bayonets with the same exact markings and placements of them as I have posted? Please let me know?
Let us focus on obtainng answers to a multitude of new things that I have brought forward to the bayonet collecting society.
Richard K
Joe,
What type of evidence are you talking about Joe? The property marks on the bayonets and rifles and some pistols are the same. Are you saying that that all of the SS rifles out there marked similiary are not correct because the markings can not be explained??
Are you saying that bayonets listed on capture bayonets are not legitimate?
Joe, I have the coding determined for the SS VT. I didn't find a chapter in a book that described what or how a TV item should be marked. It was detemined by obtaining a large enough population of bayonets and items that would be used along with them. It was then a matter of grouping and comparing SS marks.
Joe, as I offered before, my collection can be viewed and evaluated. Have you seen all of these same exact markings in the same locations as what has been shown?
Richard K
Offcourse there are still problems by engraving, because FP and I already spoked on BCN old discussion about various stamping problems and technical disposition of field armorers, so same as You could read comments on Gunboard from Scott B. and and SS bogus rifles, the majority of faked rifles are engraved as the dremmel tool was easy to obtain in 20 or 30 years ago.
The majority of original SS rifles, to sample the Russian captures that were on
Richard, I surely appreciate your dedication to your collecting hobby. And I appreciate the opportunity to view your varied collection. But perhaps it just comes down to whether other collectors accept your premise regarding these SS marked bayonets and other items. "It comes down to the fact that we do not know why the SS did property mark their bayonets. But they did and these pieces exist today as proof."
You have stated your premise is valid and we need to provide proof or explanation for it. Some of us would like to see the evidence before we accept the premise.
Richard,
Years ago on the original BCN. There was a tremendous discussion that went on back and forth for years about what were called by collectors the “breadbag” frogs. And the bayonets that they were often seen with.
And it took
a lot, and I mean
a lot, of discussion before some tentative conclusions were reached. Said frogs never seen in the UK (other than a few acquired from the U.S.), and in Europe only a few seen from France.
Likewise, you have stated that you have a significant amount of bayonets and frogs that are virtually unknown to a lot of the collecting world. So if the past is any guide, you should probably expect a lot of discussion.
But as Joe said, it’s going to take an examination of the items to see if we can see some kind of pattern that can be determined. Which is what helped us (the collectors) with the “breadbags”. And right now it’s an open topic with a lot of questions to be asked, and looked into and answered in turn as was the case earlier.
Best Regards, FP
PS to Andy: I have a matching original finish partially Waffenamted police (that has a noticeable manufacturing defect that does not affect its functionality) with no other external markings than a German Police Eagle on the spine.
Andy,
The SS 98/05 bayonets have had accountability numbers assed to them. I have only 1 98/05 bayonet that has only a stamped property mark. There werte no serial numbers on the 98/05 bayonets. The TV & VT WW1 84/98 bayonets had accountability numbers added to them because of no serial numbers. Early TV & VT WKC bayonets had accountability numbers added to them because there were none.
As for the SS VZ bayonets, the majority were given new numbers. The VZ bayonets already had serial numbers.
There was a reason the SS gave accountability numbers to the bayonets. I myself do not have the documentation nor the block numbers and or ranges. If I did I would not be asking for the information However, I know that the numbers were repeated.
As for the engraving of the SS property stamp and accountability numbers on bayonets to be called a fake "based upon some rifle parts and or rifles that were electric penciled by a faker/crook" is absurd. That is like calling all SS daggers fakes because there are a lot of bad ones out there!
I guess all of the Navy 84/98 bayonets that have the Navy accountability number & W engraved on them would be bad also?!
To Your previous listing:
1. 1938 Elite Diamant, SN8677, WA 218, with SS Property Stamp Lazy S over TK. -its a problematic piece because of WaA, could You provide the series letter and what the lazy S looks like?
2. ACS With Scales Logo, SN 9124 on the Rear Crossguard, SS Property Stamp, and Marked: 9th SS TK Standarte (NORD then Thule), Police Star on Spine with letter L. Frog is also 9th TK Marked. This bayonet came from Norway along with several other SS pieces. - unfortunally dont believe the already SS police piece correctly marked should have other SS unit property stamp, are the stamping engraved or stamped, any pictures avialable?
To SSZZA2,3,4 i assume from the name its a depot or the main depot marking that should be probably as accepting there? "ZeugAmt" were found on rifle barells mainly ,there exist some of clearly fakes on market already and the markings are stamped i will here bring more data tomorow. It could be only on commerzial production found not on WaA accepted army production.
To FP Your piece could be declared as blanko, which was a part of export contract probably and were used late as police. but its more a exception as a rule. I compared my dbase and police contracts of war were strictly done on commerzial marked bayonets.
FP,
Do not get me wrong, I love the discussion on SS bayonets. There are not that many collectors out there who are familiar with them and with whom I can discuss such items.
As I stated before, the major SS weapons collectors are the most knowledgeable of the SS bayonets. My friend and long time SS collector in Arizona passed away several years ago. He was in his early 80s. I inherited many key pieces from him including 2 SS TV KZ marked bayonets.
Keep the questions comming?
Richard K
As You mentioned the navy pieces You are right the N marked ones are engraved, but engraved through a pantograph mashine, which have exact rules because there are models of sign and digits, so the digits are same high, form and font on various bayonets and scabbards there was a discussion about it on old BCN.
1. 1938 Elite Diamant, SN8677, WA 218, with SS Property Stamp Lazy S over TK. -its a problematic piece because of WaA, could You provide the series letter and what the lazy S looks like?
2. ACS With Scales Logo, SN 9124 on the Rear Crossguard, SS Property Stamp, and Marked: 9th SS TK Standarte (NORD then Thule), Police Star on Spine with letter L. Frog is also 9th TK Marked. This bayonet came from Norway along with several other SS pieces. - unfortunally dont believe the already SS police piece correctly marked should have other SS unit property stamp, are the stamping engraved or stamped, any pictures avialable?
To SSZZA2,3,4 i assume from the name its a depot or the main depot marking that should be probably as accepting there? "ZeugAmt" were found on rifle barells mainly ,there exist some of clearly fakes on market already and the markings are stamped i will here bring more data tomorow. It could be only on commerzial production found not on WaA accepted army production.
To FP Your piece could be declared as blanko, which was a part of export contract probably and were used late as police. but its more a exception as a rule. I compared my dbase and police contracts of war were strictly done on commerzial marked bayonets.
The SS TV 9 is all stamped. Your question does not make sense concerning what type of SS mark should be on it. Please explain more clearly as to what you are looking for.
Again you need to substantiate your statement that SS ZZ A2 & A4 stamps were not put on SS bayonets with WA. I would like to see this documentation. I know where these bayonets have been for the last 30 years. Have you ever heard of another or seen another SS ZZ A2 & A4 bayonet? Do you know the size of the stamp? Do you know where the stamps are located? You are prejudging something that you have never seen and have no knowledge of.
Concerning the 1938 SS Elite Diamant with WA and Lazy S over TK was mentioned so as to show that this is a possible reclaimed battlefield bayonet.It has the standard Lazy S over TK that was used on rifles and lugers.
Richard K
[/quote]
Andy,
You find the same type of pantograph engraving on the early SS TV & VT Bayonets.
It is extremely difficult to metal stamp a scabbard without causing defformation. A support mandrel & fixture of some sort would have to be used.
Richard Kuchta
Joe,
In George Wheeler's book on page 160. The third bayonet down has a serial number over a "6". What does the 6 mean?
Richard K
There is problem because the too many variations of the DH exist on Your material, as pantograghed there must be same model of DH and same font and size of digits, on Your samples are various digits and the size of DH are different. Same as the font of some digits are not real, as they are postwar, when You compare with digits of war material.So i dont like any stamping on bayonets as 9 TK marked? Other way the ACS was already serialed and proofed to police.
The marking with units was forbiden in Armyand other branches too already in 1936/7 period, the only real stamps are on frogs, on material was enough the serial number.
To Your Mauser M14 pistol i already asked on the pistol forum, like mentioned before the pistol was made in 1919/20 period on the serial range, so it was buyed privately long before Hitler formed his Schutzstaffeln. I dont believe that someone would add any property numbers on his own pistol. Same as the font of digit 1 is no possible so engraved in early 30ies.
About SSZZA marking i dont know where there are marked, but on some commerzial marked rifles were stamped on barells. There exist some fakes, as You already mentioned a normal WaA production You have it on, so i have doubts. cof43 and the other piece are already avialable for SS from Army contracts, only be rework it would be real. As we dont see any picture i couldnt say more on this. Here is a fake stamp obtained in east europe.
About the reclaimed bayonets, thats Your explanation as more "bayonets like Clemen39, Elite 38,S/244.36 and others was found in batlefield and refurbished by SS and then marked", i dont believe in this scenario,because the two You already offered pictures are not reworked anyway.Only the S/244 have replaced grips. By reworking should be the grips marked innerly with tang, as You known already from other bayonets. Other way the DH lazy S was realised on rifles that are not WaA proofed only commerzially marked!! I would like to see the marking on the Elite piece.
and lastly "As for the SS VZ bayonets, the majority were given new numbers. The VZ bayonets already had serial numbers." where should be the serial numbers on Vz.24 bayonets? I dont know about serialing of czechoslovak bayonets.
Andy,
Thank you for posting the fake SS ZZ A2.
As i have stated previously, I have never seen the TK property stamp located on the ricasso and that also goes for the SS ZZ A2 & A4.
The SS ZZ A2 stamp on my bayonet is different from what you show. The fake stamp is good and if you do nt have an original to compare to you could be easily fooled.
Thank you again Andy. This picture of a reproduction bayonet will help collectors from being cheated. Good work!!!!
Richard K
Andy,
I can post some pictures of the Elite Diament. I have the Plant shutdown for the Holiday but If I can get someone to take pictures, I will or else you have to wait till I get back to work. The Lazy S is metal stamped as best as I can tell from under a magnifying glass.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to the engraving of the SS Property stamp and accountability numbers on the SS 98/05 Bayonets and early WW1 SSVT bayonets, there are differences in sizes due to the operator going too deep with the tool, not going deep enough, and or dull that will push the meyal instead of cutting it.
What I just mentioned, pertains to the size of the geometry. The geometry is consistent.
Andy, there are definitely different styles of SS Property skulls. You can see this quite readily on the SS rifles. There has to be some significance to the different style of skulls. Please see Angolia's Cloth Insignia of the SS: pages 189 to 195. Some of these Collar Tab TKs show up on property marks.
Richard K
Andy,
I never mentioned a 9 TK on the bayonet itself. You are mistaken. The designations for the SS TV are very simple to locate and understand once you understand their coding. The SS TV Standarte marks are very consistent except for a few of the Standarts who chose different locations.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
Thank you for your opinion on my SS Pistol. I do not agree with your opinion because I have seen too many SS Pistols done this same way. The most beautiful done are the series of captured Czech Pistols. They are reworked, nitro proofed,Property stamped / engraved, polished, and high blued.They come in a TK marked holster. They readily exist and are highly sought after by SS Weapons Collectors. In addition they are very expensive.
Also, the Death Runes is also a variant property mark for SS Lugers. I have never seen an accountability # on a luger. The majority of the original SS Lugers will be either Nitro proofed or E/N proofed.
Also, my SS Pistol was purchased by me in 1963 along with the SS Belt & Buckle that it came with for $45.00 from Mr John Laidacker from Shickshinny, PA. He ran an antique / pawn shop. His father was the noted Laidacker of the Kentucky Rifle Collection and publications.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
The series letter on the SS Elite Diamant is b.
Richard K
Thanks for details of Elite piece, You are kindly to post the pictures when You are back in work, isnt hurry.
As You mentioned the Commerzial proofed Lugers, so should be same on bayonets, SS obtained bayonets prior 1941 through commerzial buying, its confirmed in various books.I believe there is enough archive materials about.
So the pieces that are prewar and WaA proofed have no link with SS, there could be only reworked in war, but this was done in army repair works not by SS armorers. After 1941/2 was material for W-SS obtained through Army so not need to reproof. Only other branches of SS Algemeine , Police and maybe TKV used the commerzial sales further.
"2. ACS With Scales Logo, SN 9124 on the Rear Crossguard, SS Property Stamp, and Marked: 9th SS TK Standarte (NORD then Thule), Police Star on Spine with letter L. " -i dont know about the not marking of 9TK but here is Your description so i assume the 9TK is on the crossguard
Andy,
I also collect SS Helmets and would like to make a point about the SS RZM helmet. The majority of the SS RZM helmets contain an inkstamp on the inner pillow of the liner. The one that I just pulled reads 1/SS2 over 1935. Property Stamp for SS GERMANIA.
I pulled my 1st Pattern SS/VT Helmet and it has a property stamp of 111/SS1 for SS Deutshland.
I just looked at my SS Ammo Pouches and they are all SS Property Stamped. SS VT; SS TV; Waffen SS.
All of my 15 SS Combat Belts are SS Property Stamped. SS VT; SS TV; Waffen SS.
If they property stamped all of the above items, why would they not property stamp Bayonets & Frogs????
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
The Elite Dianmant is not TV marked on the Crossguard. The TV mark on the Bayonet does not contain a TK.
Richard K
Andy,
I have 2 SS Lugers here on my desk. It is my opinion that the SS VT & TV Lugers were reworked in the SS Weapons' Work Camp. When necessary barrels were replaced, feed springs in the clips and the sear. The guns were proofed and in most cases I do not think that they were even blued. It is quite common to have a Death Head Luger with mismatched parts. Condemed Lugers were probably parted out. I have seen several lugers where hardly any parts matched.
Then I have seen SS Lugers that were late war issue "not junked WW1 guns" that were in excellent + condition. These guns are extremely rare and have a premium value.
Richard K
I am not expert on firearms so i couldnt give any opinions on this area, same as i am not experts on uniform details, but leather is much easier to stamp as metall, same as many of the leather items were not stamped with die only ink stamped. I believe too that there exist some of the SS stamped frogs. I have only offered my opinion on bayonets, mainly to SG84/98 and Vz.24 because i collect these items for 25 years. best regards,Andy
Andy,
Do you know what the "6" stands for on the ricasso, under the serial number of the police bayonet in Wheeler's book on page 160. It is the third bayonet from the top?
Richard K
I know what You mean, the bayonet is police and commerzial contract the additional 6 stamp could be stamped in work, same as by unit or postwar.Hard to explain is a exception more.
Richard (and Andy),
I’ve looked at the pictures for the Paul Weyersberg. With a “6” on the crossguard, and another “6” underneath the “6915” serial number on the other side of a muzzle ring marked commercial Police bayonet. Just offhand, I don’t know why it would have those two markings like that. But I can say that Weyersberg in particular, in that general time frame did some unusual things. Commercial Police bayonets (no WaA) marked in the military fashion with dates. Military bayonets with “quotes” and underlining. And of course the “Tr serial number” marked bayonets. So (to me) I’m not sure that it has any special significance, and I'm also not sure just when it was applied.
I also looked over the comments this morning, and can offer the observation that the various Navy marked items are reasonably consistent. Whereas I can’t say the same (IMO) for the bayonet markings that were posted. And the proof of the matter might be in bayonets we haven’t seen yet. But I’m leaning towards Andy’s view.
And for the SS ZZA bayonets we haven’t seen them yet, so I think that the “jury has to be out” until we have something more to work with.
As for when the Waffen SS actually started receiving arms from the Army/Wehrmacht, I looked into it a while back. And don’t remember the particulars. But my immediate recollection is that the SS started receiving arms in the period after the fall of France, but before Operation Barbarossa.
And here is the picture I remembered of the bayonet knot.
Regards to All, FP
And another showing SS troops in combat in Karelia. Which roughly dates the picture, and shows unmodified Czech Vz. 24’s in the field. FP
Thanks FP nice picture, i believe the wounded soldier has the Vz.24 too.
Thank you Andy, and here is another one of the Vz. 24 that has not been modified. With the caption citing troops from the Polizei Divison. FP
FP,
After seeing Andy's fake SS ZZ A2 - 84/98, I can only send pictures to individuals who will not post them. The fake is too close. Why give the faker needed corrections.
What do you mean that you are leaning toward Andy's thinking on engraving. Please explain. I have over 30 98/05 SS bayonets and one with capture papers #29. I also have the box that this item was sent home in.
Mike Welser was the first to publish the SS 98/05 bayonet in his book. The geometry is the same for 90 % of these marked bayonets.
Why haven't you commented on the bayonet with capture papers?
Having any luck finding more reproduction bayonets for us to look at. We need the kind of stuff Andy put up.
Those were excellent pictures of SS men with VZ-24 rifles & bayonets.
We need to look at an actual VZ-24 rifle and look at the SS proprty marks on it. Can anyone help out?
I am having trouble getting into the GDC site from home. I had to go through my work computer.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the Police Bayonet with the 6 below the serial number on the ricasso, this is very similiar to a SS VZ-24 that I just sent you recently. That VZ-24 was a SS TV.
Richard K
dy,
Why is the cutting edge on the top for a VZ-24 Bayonet?
Richard K
Richard,
Right now I only have a few minutes to respond. But in reverse order, the Austrian Model 1895 had a reversed blade, and so did the Czech made copies when it became independent after WW I. As did the Model 98/22, Vz. 23, Vz. 24 and Vz. 33. But there are exceptions and some export models did not.
And you are going to have to refresh my memory, as I don’t know which Vz. 24 you are making a reference to, as a comparison with the Police 98K (SG 84/98) in George’s book.
As for the one I’ve seen posted here with the capture papers it did not give me instant ‘heartburn’. But with all of the topics that get started going in different directions, I haven’t really sat down and looked at it closely. And without something to look at as a point of reference for some of these other topics, it can at times be distracting.
As for reproductions/fakes/altered items, I do have some material. But really haven’t had the time to do much with it (see above - no offense intended, just a small joke
).
And for the engraving, which as Andy mentioned earlier, has been a topic at other times and places. Right now I just don’t have the time to go into specifics.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I agree with you. We are going in a lot of different directions and it is extremely hard to focus on all of the information that has been posted.
Capture Papers are very important to me when it comes to authentication of an item, soldier liberating the item, time, location. Capture papers for SS items are almost non existent. Posting them here did not raise any excitement. SS Weapons's Collectors would give almost anything to have them.
Richard K
Hello, nice pictures that could be dated with the location and probably by the SS uniform too.
To Richard FP already answered the reason of using of upper edge,firstly as a design that was used by Austrian and czechoslovak got a lot of them after 1918 and other reason is by uning it by fight with upper attack with rifle to a cavalry man, that should be bring more efectivity as a normal position bayonet edge.
When You have a time and interest You could send the SSZZA for opinion to FP or my address, and its remain confidentialy.
The serialing on Vz.24 You probably mean is not from beginn there it means a german rework, as mentioned before the piece in Wheeler book is no rework same as some of Your Vz.24 bayos too. There should be no serialing there normally. Thats why i asked You about serialing of czechoslovak bayonets, they were not serialed only in 1924 first production year.
Like mentioned before capture papers are problematic because of not detailed describing, i already posted the reasons, when there is a detailed marking description thats the other point, but fake a certificate is a easiest way,more easy as make a SS bayonet fake DH stamp.
Andy,
I shall send pictures of the SS ZZ A2 Bayonet when I get back to work.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to Capture Papers are you saying that even if they are original that they prove nothing?
The chances of a 3 digit serial number on a bayonet matching existing numbers on a Capture Paper is quite phenominal.
Richard K
FORUM MEMBERS,
I pulled a Waffen SS Bayonet this morning to look at. Here iscription:
1. 41 dated
2. ddl Maker
3. Brown plastic Grips
4. Serial #8510
5. Letter: b
6.Matching Scabbard
7. WA 883
Frog is stamped with Manufacturer Name: Wilhelm Ellers & City over 1941 date.
8. Frog is also SS Property stamped and 1941 dated. So this bayonet can not be a battfield pickup or a rework.It is a supply contract item.
9. The Bayonet is also SS Property marked with a metal stamp. Same type found on rifles. On this bayonet you have to tell me what the SS Property Stamp Looks Like and where it is located.
Richard K
10. Bayonet is in excellent + condition.
Andy,
I stand corrected as per VZ-24 Bayonets being serial numbered. I only looked at a few and they were numbered on the end of he pommel. Majority not Czech serial numbered.
Richard K
Forum Members,
I pulled out from my collection a SS VT 84/98 Bayonet. Here is the description:
1. S/174G
2. Serial #9734
3. Letter: e
4. Early WA 88
5. Matching Scabbard
6. Frog has shrunk onto scabbard
7. Frog is SS Property Marked
8. Bayonet is SS property Marked. Tell me what type of property mark and where it is located.
9. Tell me about the Accountability #.
Richard K
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS 98/05, what is the earliest SS date stamp on the Frog and where is it located?
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
In regards to the early SS 98/05 Bayonets,what is unique about the frogs?
Richard K
Forum Members,
In regards to the early 98/05 Bayonets, what is the color of the frog?
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS 98/05 Bayonets, what is the highest serial number that has been recorded for a SS VT Bayonet?
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS VT 98/05 Bayonet, what is the style of Property Mark referred to?
Richard K
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS VT 98/05 Bayonet, the property mark is identical to the mark used on what SS Rifle accessory?
Richard K
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS 98/05 Bayonet, what does the term double stamp refer to?
Here are other problematic pieces as mentioned before the SS property stamp should be not stamped on WaA proofed bayonets as they were army contracts.
-41ddl is a normal contract, serialed and proofed by WaA, i dont know what is there stamped as its not a rework it should be nothing there, no SS or DH
-S/174G, in e range should have a wood grips, as there is a early army proof its same as previous, frog has any stamps? maker or dating? Its a 1935 production, so no way that it went to SS early prewar period. As they used commerzial contracts.
-Vz.24 marked on pommel are not serialed but this are unit marks, has nothing to do with serial numbers, this was the reason why i answered some years ago that this number couldnt be a assembly number of the grips.
-i believe You should make home a dbase of Your SS items, to firstly have a source where it came from, from what a collector or country, exact described before it could be lost the info, because these are important information
- other point it should be exact observed for variation of DH stamps, and SS numbers, why are there stamped or engraved on crossguard and why on pommels, because SS worked in exact timelines
-to the 9. "The Bayonet is also SS Property marked with a metal stamp. Same type found on rifles." thats the point that we could not have a same opinion,You know about rifles with DH, but they are in majority a short time period reworks and You believe that the stamp were used on bayonets post 1934(WuK) to late war COF43, all the time of the 3R. This is the problem. I believe there dont exist rifles post 1939 so marked. You should go to Gunboard forum, as there are experts on rifles. And compare the stamps with rifles picture there.Because the rifles are the key to bayonets. Bayonets were used primarily with rifles. to sample the KZL rifles K98k made by bnz or other firms by labor workers and in reality property of SS, were only single rune stamped on reciever and have no DH or SS in circle or any acountability numbers. So it looks like the most stamps DH and SS are already on bayonets?
Here a nice commerzial WKC late war piece found on attic, with small rust on pommel, the finish under frog was gone as there too long on the scabbard. These is a real NS party organisation contract, with high possibility a SS piece. The frog is stamped with J.de Valk/Adam 1942. So probably added older frog on a new bayonet on last months of war. The serial number on blade was probably removed.No any WaA there.
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS VT 98/05 Bayonet, what is the lowest accountability number documented?
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to your statement about the 41 ddl, what documentation do you have to back up your opinion? Show me something please?
Andy,
Saying that the bayonet that you posted is a possible SS bayonet is stretching it some.
This is like looking at a SS M-42 single decal helmet and comparing it to a M-42 with no decals. We all know that the SS wore M-42 helmets with no decals but your bayonet with out property marking is just a unmarked bayonet.
Andy,
The S174G has wood grips. Does the WA number check out?
You are again making opinions that are not backed up by fact / documentation.
Do you know when the SS put their property stamp on the bayonet?
Here are other problematic pieces as mentioned before the SS property stamp should be not stamped on WaA proofed bayonets as they were army contracts.
-41ddl is a normal contract, serialed and proofed by WaA, i dont know what is there stamped as its not a rework it should be nothing there, no SS or DH
-S/174G, in e range should have a wood grips, as there is a early army proof its same as previous, frog has any stamps? maker or dating? Its a 1935 production, so no way that it went to SS early prewar period. As they used commerzial contracts.
-Vz.24 marked on pommel are not serialed but this are unit marks, has nothing to do with serial numbers, this was the reason why i answered some years ago that this number couldnt be a assembly number of the grips.
-i believe You should make home a dbase of Your SS items, to firstly have a source where it came from, from what a collector or country, exact described before it could be lost the info, because these are important information
- other point it should be exact observed for variation of DH stamps, and SS numbers, why are there stamped or engraved on crossguard and why on pommels, because SS worked in exact timelines
-to the 9. "The Bayonet is also SS Property marked with a metal stamp. Same type found on rifles." thats the point that we could not have a same opinion,You know about rifles with DH, but they are in majority a short time period reworks and You believe that the stamp were used on bayonets post 1934(WuK) to late war COF43, all the time of the 3R. This is the problem. I believe there dont exist rifles post 1939 so marked. You should go to Gunboard forum, as there are experts on rifles. And compare the stamps with rifles picture there.Because the rifles are the key to bayonets. Bayonets were used primarily with rifles. to sample the KZL rifles K98k made by bnz or other firms by labor workers and in reality property of SS, were only single rune stamped on reciever and have no DH or SS in circle or any acountability numbers. So it looks like the most stamps DH and SS are already on bayonets?
I agree 100% with you on creating a data base with all of the details on each bayonet. Believe it or not I started one quite awhile ago and need to do a good updating. I have also recorded documentation from all of my fellow SS weapons collectors. Serial numbers, Accountabiliy numbers, KZ Accountability, etc.
Richard K
Thats the reason why i mentioned a possible SS contract, other point is that we have already a original papers found by one documents collector that a member SS HJ division in later 1944 wore a WKC blanko bayonet.
To 41ddl, i already mentione that was SS equiped with commerzial material to this time and since 1940/41 there are captured material firstly and normal Army material used, as WaA was accepted by SS as equal proof and useable by SS units, about this exist books about SS. I personally have here only one and its a slovak translate of Christopher Ailsby book about non german SS units, named "Hitlers Renegates", they mentioned a totally independence (material and technical) of Army as a Party organisation in early pre war years. To sample the Totenkopf division had a swear realised in Prague in late 1940 and was to 2/3 equiped with czechoslovak material. Is from the book !Prague under the Hakenkreuz!.
Other point is we have a dbase of 14000 98k bayonet samples, no to this time real bayonet was found with WaA together confirmed with SS stamps.
And lastly Do You have a documents about that Your SS marked 41ddl or other WaA marked pieces are real? You dont pictured the marking on the piece, but already talk about it as unreworked.So for me no way that a SS stamps should be on a unreworked WaA proofed army piece.
Andy,
In your database of over 14,000 bayonets how many of them are SS? How many SS TV? How many SS VT? How many are Waffen SS Bayonets?
Richard K
Andy,
I just took out my SS 84/98 that was used by the 'Frw Legion Nederland". The description is as follows:
1. ASW Maker
2. 43 dated
3. Serial #2223
4. Letter n
5. Matching Scabbard
6. Portapee has a Orange and Silver Ball; White Stem, Silver Strap. In SS Tie.
7.Frog dated 1943
8. Frog Maker Marked: KVZ
9. Bayonet in Excellent ++ condition
10. Bayonet contains the Nederland SS Insignia in Silver
11. WA 519
There has been no rework other than adding the Nederland SS Insignia.
Horster bayonet was issued to "Frw Legion Nederland".
Extremely rare bayonet. Only 1 known. Purchased from SS Collector in Europe along with Tunic & Belt.
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
I have provided numerous SS Marked Bayonets with WAs. Because of the dating of some of these bayonets they would have to be battfield salvaged bayonets that were given SS Property Markings.
Other SS Bayonets with WAs and dating would have to be direct contract supply.
Richard K
Andy,
You state that the SS used commercial contracts for bayonets early on. Could you please provide the documentation to substantiate that statement.
It is known that the SS Weapons Work Camps assembled rifles, pistols & bayonets. The Camps assembled bayonets mainly from rejected blades. They also refurbished WW1 leftover/surplus bayonets & leather accessories. It is also said that WKC was a Jewish owned company whose owners ended up in the camps and their factories were taken over & run by the SS. I have more SS bayonets with WKC markings than any other type.
Richard K
Thats the reason why i mentioned a possible SS contract, other point is that we have already a original papers found by one documents collector that a member SS HJ division in later 1944 wore a WKC blanko bayonet.
To 41ddl, i already mentione that was SS equiped with commerzial material to this time and since 1940/41 there are captured material firstly and normal Army material used, as WaA was accepted by SS as equal proof and useable by SS units, about this exist books about SS. I personally have here only one and its a slovak translate of Christopher Ailsby book about non german SS units, named "Hitlers Renegates", they mentioned a totally independence (material and technical) of Army as a Party organisation in early pre war years. To sample the Totenkopf division had a swear realised in Prague in late 1940 and was to 2/3 equiped with czechoslovak material. Is from the book !Prague under the Hakenkreuz!.
Other point is we have a dbase of 14000 98k bayonet samples, no to this time real bayonet was found with WaA together confirmed with SS stamps.
And lastly Do You have a documents about that Your SS marked 41ddl or other WaA marked pieces are real? You dont pictured the marking on the piece, but already talk about it as unreworked.So for me no way that a SS stamps should be on a unreworked WaA proofed army piece.
Andy,
From your experience with SS Bayonets, what type of property mark should be on the 41ddl and where should it be.
Richard K
Andy,
Did you find WA 88 for the S/174G SS Bayonet?
Richard K
Richard,
It has to be early morning in Europe, so I think that it will be tomorrow at the earliest before Andy could possibly get back to you. “88” I believe is seen on some Solingen made bayonets from that period. And Andy would be the one that I would go to myself for confirmation.
You’ve mentioned a number of bayonets that use different ways to indicate SS ownership in your postings. With some of the bayonets that I’ve owned or seen, I know from personal experience that it’s not always easy to tell a refinished one from an original. But with only a verbal description, quite frankly I don’t know what you have. Because sometimes what looks like an original from a distance. Turns out to be a rework when seen closer up.
Best Regards, FP
"In your database of over 14,000 bayonets how many of them are SS? How many SS TV? How many SS VT? How many are Waffen SS Bayonets?"
there is not a real bayonet confirmed that have SS property stamp and WaA on same bayonet, i unfortunally dont know what is the difference between SS TV and SS VT or W SS, Could You explain it? But in dbase are about 100 faked SS markings, thats the point.Of them about 80 are etched on blade or have added insignia on pommel or grip.
You provided some of SS marked bayonets and WaA marked, but for me are this engraved DH problematic, it would be nice to see the mentioned stamped DH with lazy S on the Elite Diamant 38 bayonet.
To Your asking for documents, i already give You one book for looking, but as enough books are already on market about the early SS You should look in them. There is enough material.
-"It is also said that WKC was a Jewish owned company whose owners ended up in the camps and their factories were taken over & run by the SS." here You are total wrong, there was other Jewish owned company and the firm was here already mentioned, You should look to Your material. WKC was the only firm that used the sutterlin font which was by SS preffered, so WKC was probably a very tight with SS in cooperation.
-"There has been no rework other than adding the Nederland SS Insignia."
to 43 asw, this is a normal WaA contract piece, that could be certainly used by a SS units,i assume it should have a wood grips, when it was added the insignia i dont know, by soldier were this normally forbidden, but i known about more WKC blankos that have added DH in to grips, so it could be done by soldier but it could be added postwar by Gi? As You not posted any other info or picture is no possible say for me more.
-To E/88 is observed in 1935 it should be probably under grips have earlier E/77 as there was a switch period, exist a possibilty that there is a E/68 but the stamp was not so clear that it could be missreaded, without any pictures from You is not anything more to say.
-41 ddl with WaA shouldnt have any SS stamp when not reworked in anyway, but i believe too by rework it was not property stamped.We have in dbase 120 bayonets listed in 41ddl no one has any SS marking.All have WaA883.
Please dont add full my answer by responding because these thread would be really long. thanks,best regards,Andy
Andy,
Thank you for sharing the information on your 14,000 bayonet database that does not contain any original SS Bayonets.
I have asked simple and very basic questions about SS bayonets in general and more specific basic questions about 98/05 bayonets. The questions that I asked could be readily addressed by a non advanced collector of SS bayonets. You ask for pictures and data, then you critique my collection, and tell me you have problems with what you have been shown and told. You tell me things are not correct such, as SS property marks on WA bayonets. You are critiquing SS bayonets and do not know the difference between a SS/VT; SS/TV; and Waffen SS Bayonet. Can you see my point! I have a problem with your expertise on SS marked bayonets. You ask me what kind of property marking is on a particular bayonet and then you tell me you have a problem with it. I have asked you what type of property marking should be on a particular bayonet and located where and you can not tell me. I like sharing my collection with the forum and making them more knowledgeable from my focused years of collecting but Andy I sometimes have a problem providing information to you in a one way direction.Your statements to me come across in a very direct and opinionated manner. "It is the SS Elite, they would never stand for so many variations." Andy, do you think that I need your blessing on my collection? I do not think so. Some of my collector friends have sent me E-mails concerning the thread and have pointed out that you come across with a predetermined opinions not based on SS Bayonet Expertise. The current procedure of show me your SS Bayonets and I will tell you if they are original or not is not taking this thread in the direction that it needs to go in. I appreciate and respect your opinions but we need to answer alot of questions that exist. We have not even scratched the surface of SS Bayonets and collecting. I have gleemed some of the best SS bayonets from the major collections in the US and Europe and it is now time to obtain the documentation and facts that go with thes bayonets.
I appreciate all of the E-mails that I have received from interested collectors concerning specific bayonets, bayonets in their collection, and leads on SS bayonets for sale. Please do not be afraid to discuss your questions in the thread.
The SS bayonet discussion started with the white frog thread. I am still trying to get some pictures of items while I am at home. I will definitely post my two LAH white rigs: one with a 84/98 bayonet and one with a 98/05 bayonet. I shall also try to post the pictures of the SS property marks found on rifles.
Richard K
Gentlemen,
This will be ultra brief as I have to be somewhere this morning. I have a question about bayonet frogs that is more directed to Richard. How many of the ‘tropical’ types (canvas/webbing) in your collection are SS marked? And what are the other types besides those shown so far?
I hope that everyone has a good day, and I’ll be back this afternoon.
Thanks, FP
Gentlemen,
This will be ultra brief as I have to be somewhere this morning. I have a question about bayonet frogs that is more directed to Richard. How many of the ‘tropical’ types (canvas/webbing) in your collection are SS marked? And what are the other types besides those shown so far?
I hope that everyone has a good day, and I’ll be back this afternoon.
FP,
I do not have any SS Tropical Frogs and I have never seen any in the collections that I have had a chance to view. However; they could very well exist. Why not?
The following are the types of SS frogs in my collection:
1. WW1 98/05 Frog SS Property Marked
2. 98/05 Camp Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
3. 98/05 Period Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
4. 98/05 White Ersatz Leather Frog; Manufacturer's Stamp & Dated 1939; SS Property Marked
5. WW1 84/98 Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked
6. 84/98 Camp Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
7. 84/98 Camp manufactured Frog; Unmarked
8. 84/98 Period Manufactured Frog; MFG STAMP; SS Property Stamp.
9. 84/98 White Frog; Manufactured by A. Fisher 1938; SS Property Marked.
10. Original VZ-24 Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked.
11. VZ-24 Camp Manufactured Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked.
12. KS 84/98 Bayonet Frog; SS RZM Marked
13. KS 84/98 Bayonet Frog; Unmarked
* SS TV Frogs will sometimes have Standarte Markings as well as dates in addition to SS Property Mark
Richard Kuchta
"You are critiquing SS bayonets and do not know the difference between a SS/VT; SS/TV; and Waffen SS Bayonet" sorry i would like the hear the other members, maybe they have the explanation, as i already saw only few real SS bayonets, and they were same marked i believe they were TKV marked.
I dont asnwered the question about SG98/05 because i didnt saw any so i could not say anything to this part of SS bayonets.
Unfortunally the bayonets as VZ.24 or some of the WaA marked i have problem with the SS markings, i offered my opinion, is Your right dont believe me, but i have mentioned some facts that were not accepted but is clear described in books.
You mentione some items but will not bring details. so what is the the reason of the discussion? I didnt started the thread about SS items,but i could offer my opinion as its a open forum, i have nothing against You and respect that You are SS collector, but to sample i have got answers about the Mauser pistol from really experts of the material, they mentioned no real possibilty as it private buyed weapon much earlier made as SS were formed.
best regards,Andy
Andy,
Please understand what I am saying. Some of the bayonets we are talking about have Property Stamps that you have never seen. Some of these stamps are similar to what you have been shown by me but are variants and are stamped in different locations. You continue to state that specific bayonets are not original "your opinion" based on no credible documentation. You are critiquing things that you have never seen and are making value judgements as to originality.
I have pulled a Waffen SS WKC Camp bayonet to talk about next.
Richard K
Rich
I already offered here some fake pictures same as one blanko piece i dont see unfortunally no other responses from other members, only FP and Joe W.,it would be nice to have other members opinion? Maybe only i am so sceptical about the items. But without pictorial evidence is probably hard to make a desicion, You posted here info about 40 SS bayonets but pictured are only few of them. When someone will a really correct discussion about some marking, it must be offered, but when is no possible to offer because the fakers, then what for reason has this thread? It brings only half or uncomplete information.
To Your answer - i already saw in my collecting years thousand of bayonets, so am very sceptical same as it were confirmed SS used bayonets, because W-SS were fighting here in Slovakia, and no one was property marked. I asked You for lazy S picture as i saw a really correct lazy S for confirmation,You could send it private when not add here. Its the one that i could compare. As mentioned before You should ask the sources where You came the mix WaA and SS marked bayonets, from what a area they came?
Andy,
You will get the pictures that you requested.
Richard K
Forum Members,
It has been discussed many times as to what part WKC actually played in the manufacturing and supply of SS bayonets. This particular SS WKC Bayonet I believe to be a camp assembled Waffen SS Bayonet. The description of this bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Marked Blade
2. Rough grind on blade
3. Minimum polish on blade
4. 85% / 90% blue on blade
5. Marks on tang: Large H; Large Ar; #5 on oppsite side of tang.
6. No WAs
7. SS Property Mark: Stamped Runes 2 over TK rotated.
8. Accountability #: 368. Looks pantagraphed engraved.
9. Blanko Scabbard with pantagraped engraved 368.
10. Grips: Wood / Camp Made
11. Grips Marked: 1941 & Runes
Ready for questions!
Richard Kuchta
I dont see the pictures of Your piece, but already have problem with the grips, how You could say its a camp made grips?
secondly Your bayonet was made in 1943/44 period when matching how it could have a 1941 grip?
There is no evidence of assembling bayonets in camps, only of rifles. As stamped by WKC why it should be assembled in camp?
Andy,
What documentation are you referring to when you state that no bayonets were made in the camps?
Andy,
I said that I believed that this was a camp assembled bayonet.
When grips contain the markings such as are in these grips, they are considered camp grips. Either made from scratch or reworked.
Richard K
Andy,
How did you determine the mfg date of the WKC blade?
Richard K
Andy,
Were you able to match up the WA 88 with the S/174G?
Richard K
nr.1 because there is well reported production of rifles but not of bayonets, the main produced rifle of camps K98k modell are already the late Kriegsmodell modell, that in majority werent equiped with bayonet slot, read the book i already mentioned in previous mails, in Germany there was enough bayonet producers
nr.2 i dont know what for marking is for camp rework? the runes and 1941 date?
nr3 as You offered the rough finish and tang marking, there no possible that Your piece was made earlier as 1943
nr.4 i already answered the question, without picture no possible to say, as it could be no 88 but 68, anyway both are reported by WKC.
Anyway when stamped by WKC blanko it went to NS party with or wout the additional SS stamps.And it was made by WKC no in camps.
Andy,
How did you determine the mfg date of the WKC blade?
Richard K
Richard,
Thanks for the information as regards the tropical frogs and the listing. What is a little confusing though, is that you don't seem to make a distinction between the VA and some of the other marks, seeming to treat them equally. And one of the ways I use to date the commercial bayonets is to compare them with dated military production. Side by side, using the date and letter block.
Best Regards, FP
nr.1 because there is well reported production of rifles but not of bayonets, the main produced rifle of camps K98k modell are already the late Kriegsmodell modell, that in majority werent equiped with bayonet slot, read the book i already mentioned in previous mails, in Germany there was enough bayonet producers
nr.2 i dont know what for marking is for camp rework? the runes and 1941 date?
nr3 as You offered the rough finish and tang marking, there no possible that Your piece was made earlier as 1943
nr.4 i already answered the question, without picture no possible to say, as it could be no 88 but 68, anyway both are reported by WKC.
Anyway when stamped by WKC blanko it went to NS party with or wout the additional SS stamps.And it was made by WKC no in camps.
You expressed your opinions and I do not agree with any of them. Bayonets were beng assembled using rejected parts that would not meet the quality specifications of the army.
Grips as I mentioned are quite frequently found on reworked and or assembled bayonets.
I mentioned early on that I have 2 consecutive numbered SS bayonets that are phosphate finished. They are salvaged bayonets that have been scrubbed. The SS property mark was on before the finish was applied. Bayonets have camp grips dated 1945. Bayonets were taken from the Wobbelin (SS Weapons Work Camp) Concentration Camp near Hagenow, Germany in May of 1945 by PFC Walther F. Dunn of the 552nd H.P. Bn B Co.
The serial numbers of these bayonets are:1236 & 1237. He also got a rifle with srial #51342. Rifle was completely refurbished. The bayonets were never issued.
There were work camps in Germany where the SS had the skilled slave labor work on weapons.
Andy you need some new books.
Richard K
Andy,
How did you determine the mfg date of the WKC blade?
Richard K
Richard,
Thanks for the information as regards the tropical frogs and the listing. What is a little confusing though, is that you don't seem to make a distinction between the VA and some of the other marks, seeming to treat them equally. And one of the ways I use to date the commercial bayonets is to compare them with dated military production. Side by side, using the date and letter block.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Please explain your question again. I am getting tired and need to refuel. Will try to explain once I understand better.
Richard K
FP,
Please explain th VA as to the other marks? Still confused.
Richard K
Richard,
I’m sorry if I confused you, it was not a question it was a statement. With different frogs having different characteristics, that seemed to me from the list, to be lumped together as being the same. Also, thanks for the additional information on the two 1945 bayonets. I take it from your description that they applied the dates to the grip exteriors, instead of the usual places like blades and scabbards? And the same for the serial numbers, or are they in the usual locations?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
There is nothing similiar to any of the other SS Bayonets. As we had discussed at different times, time was crucial for fabricating weapons at the end of the war. We now have bayonets and scabbards that have the manufacturers codes as well as the serial numbers and dates removed. Blades look to be unpolished but heavy coating of phospate looks beautiful. On the tang of the 1237 SS bayonet, the old serial number of 9718 remains. On the tang of the 1236 SS bayonet, you find the old serial number 5738 and a large H and 6. The WAs have been scrubbed from the pommel. Inside of the new grips is a new geometry style, full frontal TK; serial # and 45 date. Yes, the bayonet is SS Property Marked.
Why put this much rework into a bayonet in the final days of the war? This question needs to be answered? The quality of workmanship exhibited in these two bayonets is better than anything I have observed prior on SS bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I’m sorry if I confused you, it was not a question it was a statement. With different frogs having different characteristics, that seemed to me from the list, to be lumped together as being the same. Also, thanks for the additional information on the two 1945 bayonets. I take it from your description that they applied the dates to the grip exteriors, instead of the usual places like blades and scabbards? And the same for the serial numbers, or are they in the usual locations?
FP,
The SS Frogs are a study in themselvs. I gave you styles and groupings. But the frogs further break down into sub groups of Property Marks, Locations, dates, & serial numbers, and my favorite SS TV Standarte Property Mark.
Richard K
Best Regards, FP
Richard,
No offense, but now I'm the one who is confused. All of the external markings were removed. But the serial numbers, 1945 dates, and Death's Head markings are all on the interiors of the grips? With new manufacture grips that still show the milling marks from when they were machined. And the bayonet from the outside looks like it's not numbered? You also say that it is a heavy phosphate. Can you identify the type?
With workmanship that is better than anything you have ever seen previously. I don't know why so much work would be put into them either, and I guess it will remain a mystery as to just what you have been looking at.
Best Regards, FP
Fp,
In regards to SS Bayonet Frogs, I left out the sub-category of hilt straps.
Fact:
1. 90% of the SS TV bayonets in my collection have hilt straps.
2. 12% of the SS VT bayonets in my collection have hilt straps.
3. Less than 10% of the Waffen SS Bayonets have hilt straps.
Richard Kuchta
The SS Frogs are a study in themselvs. I gave you styles and groupings. But the frogs further break down into sub groups of Property Marks, Locations, dates, & serial numbers, and my favorite SS TV Standarte Property Mark.
Richard K
Richard,
Just so we have a common basis of understanding. Which of the ones listed below are the "VA" marked frogs?
1. WW1 98/05 Frog SS Property Marked
2. 98/05 Camp Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
3. 98/05 Period Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
4. 98/05 White Ersatz Leather Frog; Manufacturer's Stamp & Dated 1939; SS Property Marked
5. WW1 84/98 Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked
6. 84/98 Camp Manufactured Frog; SS Property Marked
7. 84/98 Camp manufactured Frog; Unmarked
8. 84/98 Period Manufactured Frog; MFG STAMP; SS Property Stamp.
9. 84/98 White Frog; Manufactured by A. Fisher 1938; SS Property Marked.
10. Original VZ-24 Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked.
11. VZ-24 Camp Manufactured Bayonet Frog; SS Property Marked.
12. KS 84/98 Bayonet Frog; SS RZM Marked
13. KS 84/98 Bayonet Frog; Unmarked
* SS TV Frogs will sometimes have Standarte Markings as well as dates in addition to SS Property MarkThanks, FP
Richard,
No offense, but now I'm the one who is confused. All of the external markings were removed. But the serial numbers, 1945 dates, and Death's Head markings are all on the interiors of the grips? With new manufacture grips that still show the milling marks from when they were machined. And the bayonet from the outside looks like it's not numbered? You also say that it is a heavy phosphate. Can you identify the type?
FP,
Let me try to clear up your confusion:
1. My opinion is that these SS Bayonets initially started off as battlefield salvaged bayonets.
2. The orignal serial numbers, manufacturer codes, dates were removed from the bayonet and scabbards. On one scabbard, I can see just a little bit of the manufacturer's code showing when using a magnifying glass.
3. New serial numbers were applied to both the bayonet and scabbard. Very precise metal stamp.
4. SS Property stamp was applied to the bayonet.
5. Internal grips contain 45 date, serial #, & TK.
6. The phospate is very dark, not the light gray.
With workmanship that is better than anything you have ever seen previously. I don't know why so much work would be put into them either, and I guess it will remain a mystery as to just what you have been looking at.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I said that their was also a rifle taken at the same time from the depot. The owner would not part with the rifle at the time and would only sell me the bayonets. However, I was allowed to look the rifle over. It was still covered in protective hardened,grease. Rifle was 41 dated and had perfect blue. I could not see any SS Property Stamps.
Richard K
FP,
In regards to SS Bayonet Frogs, I left out the sub-category of hilt straps.
Fact:
1. 90% of the SS TV bayonets in my collection have hilt straps.
2. 12% of the SS VT bayonets in my collection have hilt straps.
3. Less than 10% of the Waffen SS Bayonets have hilt straps.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I’m not at all questioning what you have in your collection. But based on what I’ve seen in photos and other documentation, that number seems like it might be a little ‘light’ (undercounted) for the tie straps. In that group of Waffen SS frogs are you including the “shorty” frogs (made for the folding shovel)? Or just the standard type?
Also, my thanks for the update on the type of phosphate finish.
Best Regards. FP
WKC would never accept that there is their trademark on a assembled piece, anyway there is no evidence of assembling bayonets in camps, reworking is other possibility. As Your piece is late war, the condition You could compare with my attached piece, the grips should be red colored plastic, certainly the grips could be not 1941 dated by matching piece.
The 45 dated piece are in reality a 43/44 pieces reworked there maybe,as You mentione 2 WaA removed on pommel it must be early 44 maximum, the consecutive numbers could be nice but without seeing is hard to say, what for grips are there? Wood?
I assume as in plastic is hard to give any additional stamps?
The pieces are in reality 45 reworked not produced.Thats all. It would be nice to see the remains of producer marking. best regards.Andy
FP,
In regards to the SS marked frogs, I went over the frogs again this this morning and came up with the same results.
I did not count the KS Frogs because it would be difficult to group them.
I did not count the shorties because I have none.
I did not count the SS Police Bayonet Frogs because the population is too small and could be easily skewed.
However, I do agree with your statement concerning hilt retainers on Waffen SS Frogs. If you look at all of the pictures of Waffen SS Men you see alot of bayonets with hilt straps. My collection does not reflect that fact. I could have excluded SS Carried Bayonets if they did not have the SS Property stamp. I would have never recognised the bayonets as being SS. It stands to reason that at some point in time that the SS was receiving WA / Army bayonets, rifles & equipment.
I have an interesting bayonet that may have some bearing on your point, FP. My bayonet ia a 1940 cul; serial #4602; letter W; WA 883. The scabbard is matching. The bayonet came in a SS Property marked frog. This bayonet is recorded on a capture paper along with a SS Property marked 98/05; Accountability #29 and a SS belt & buckle & medals. If this bayonet was not in a SS marked frog, I would have not even considered it and would have passed it up.This group of items that I have just described were sent home by Pvt. Edward T. Samuelson on 3 Sept, 1945 in a German wooden instrument box which I also have.
Richard K
FP & Forum Members,
Fact:
Early SS/TV & SS VT WW1 reissued Frogs will only be black coated on the front side. The backside will retain the original brown. It is difficult to tell this since the leather is so old now.
Richard K
WKC would never accept that there is their trademark on a assembled piece, anyway there is no evidence of assembling bayonets in camps, reworking is other possibility. As Your piece is late war, the condition You could compare with my attached piece, the grips should be red colored plastic, certainly the grips could be not 1941 dated by matching piece.
The 45 dated piece are in reality a 43/44 pieces reworked there maybe,as You mentione 2 WaA removed on pommel it must be early 44 maximum, the consecutive numbers could be nice but without seeing is hard to say, what for grips are there? Wood?
I assume as in plastic is hard to give any additional stamps?
The pieces are in reality 45 reworked not produced.Thats all. It would be nice to see the remains of producer marking. best regards.Andy
Andy,
You could be right on the actual date of the bayonets before they were reworked. There is no way to tell the date of the material that was reworked into the new SS bayonets.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to camp made and assembled bayonets, I have several very crude examples that could never have got through an actual bayonet manufacturing facility. They would have been tossed into the scrap barrel to hide the hideous workmanship.
Richard K
Andy,
The 45 dated bayonets do have new wooden grips. There is not a scratch on them. The inside of the grips provide great documentation for the SS bayonet.
Richard K
No way that is Your piece 1940 cul, and certainly not a W range.When scribed font letter so Your piece is a 40 cvl,and the series letter is m or n.Without seeing details is probably not more to say.Is a normal Wehrmacht accepted piece. Is have no link to SS only the frog is probably SS piece.best regards,Andy
Andy,
In regards to WKC would never allow having their Manufacturing Logo on a bayonet not put together by them is your opinion. There are so many different circumstances in which this was accomplished.
1. Remanufactured Bayonet (reworked and new parts added where required)
2. Bayonets assembled in a work camp.
Richard K
Forum Members,
In regards to the SS VT 98/05 Bayonet, what is the lowest accountability number documented?
Fact: The lowest recorded SS 98/05 Serial # is #17.
Richard K
Richard K
Sorry but WKC stamped the logo on already finished bayonets so when crude made is made by WKC and no others. By reworking spures is clear that we dont know where it was reworked, maybe in camp, maybe by field armorer or maybe postwar by country that used it, or by faker.
You didnt answered on the 1940 cul details? Or You have problem by deciphering the code cvl and cul? cvl code should be in handwriten font, the cul in block letters. The series letter You reported is too wrong it must me other letter.
Andy,
As per your bayonet question, it is cvl written in hand script. Dated 1940
Richard K
Andy & Forum,
I discussed the 41ddl before; WA 883; serial #8510; Letter b; with matching scabbard.The frog is maker marked and dated 1941. The frog has an SS property stamp and is also dated 1941. Bayonet is SS property stamped Runes2 over TK.
With the dated SS Proprty stamp on the frog, and the SS Property stamp on the bayonet, and the matching scabbard dated 1941, it is my opinion that this bayonet would be an army bayonet (contract) supplied direcly to the SS.
Richard Kuchta
When You have a interest to know the letter of series You should send the picture, but i believe is letter m, as is reported as last in 1940.
The piece 41ddl coulnt go to SS because of the serial numbers, the serial numbers were added as acountability numbers of Army, they proofed it with WaA stamps and after this it was property of Wehrmacht. Thats because army didnt proof it with unit markings, the bayonets go directly to Depots, where were distributed to units later, the serial number with letter was important for invertarisation, same as soldiers got this numbers in their soldbuchs and were responsible for their equipment.
That Your piece have a SS stamp could only mean a rework by a SS fieldrepair unit or camp, or the stamp is a fake.
Andy,
The 41ddl is definitely marked with a lower case b below the serial #.
Since 1941 is possible that Waffen SS got the equipment directly from army storages same as from commerzial contracts too, but the WaA proof was accepted as enough quality for W-SS so they neednt any additional markings. Other point are the TKV or A-SS where the bayonets were obtained continuosly by only commerzial contracts. There could be special serial strings like typical on a police bayonets or others.
It is estimated that Wehrmacht ordered in 1934-45 14.5 Million bayonets, all of them are WaA proofed.
Andy & Forum,
Just pulled 2 more SS bayonets from the showcase; both have wooden grips:
The first is marked as follows:
1. Blanko blade.
2. WA 883 on the pommel.
3. Unmarked scabbard
4. SS Property Stamp on Bayonet.
5. No accountability #
SS Bayonet #2 is described as follows:
1. Blanko Blade.
2. No WAs.
3. Unmarked scabbard.
4. SS Property Stamp on bayonet. Different style than SS Bayonet #1 and in a different location.
5. No accountability number.
The blades in both of these bayonets look like WKC Blades.
Please provide your input on who the blade maker could be and where were these bayonets assembled.
Richard K
The piece nr.1 is with high possibility a blanko piece for export to Portugal, it must be examined by marking under grips, normally the crossguard should be serialed. Some of the contract rifles were used by german army, so its possible that Your piece could be one of the remain of these contract. I personally dont believe there should be SS stamps, but without seeing it is nothing more to say.
The nr.2 is with high possibility a NS party organisation piece, could be SS piece, but same to SS property stamp, without seeing it is no more to say. It could be real piece.
The producer of blankos is not identified yet.
Andy,
In regards to the #1 SS Bayonet, this is what I have found:
1. There is no number on the crossguard.
2. There is no serial # in the grips.
3. Both grips are marked WA 218.
4. Flashguard is numbered: #05823.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
In the SS collector community, it is said that WKC & Horster furnished bayonet blanks to the SS.
Do you have any specs & or documentation for the WKC & Horster Blades?
Does anyone have any recommendations as how to imperically compare blanko blades to known blades so as to make a determination of who made them?
Richard K
Joe & Forum,
The other day when I pulled the SS/TV Standarte Thule, Police Bayonet; Police Star L. I really did not know that this was a police marked bayonet. I did not expect to see it on a SS/TV Standarte Thule Bayonet. It resided in the TV Bayonet Section. I did not see the police markings until last week. The markings are extremely small and the bluing hid them well.
Richard Kuchta
Since 1941 is possible that Waffen SS got the equipment directly from army storages same as from commerzial contracts too, but the WaA proof was accepted as enough quality for W-SS so they neednt any additional markings. Other point are the TKV or A-SS where the bayonets were obtained continuosly by only commerzial contracts. There could be special serial strings like typical on a police bayonets or others.
It is estimated that Wehrmacht ordered in 1934-45 14.5 Million bayonets, all of them are WaA proofed.
Andy,
You state that the WA was accepted as enough quality for the SS and that they would need no other markings. I would agree with you as far as quality is concerned. However, what we are talking about mostly is property stamps. Property stamp has nothing to do with quality.
Richard K
...... However, I do agree with your statement concerning hilt retainers on Waffen SS Frogs. If you look at all of the pictures of Waffen SS Men you see a lot of bayonets with hilt straps............ It stands to reason that at some point in time that the SS was receiving WA / Army bayonets, rifles & equipment.....
Richard Kuchta
Since 1941 is possible that Waffen SS got the equipment directly from army storages same as from commerzial contracts too, but the WaA proof was accepted as enough quality for W-SS so they neednt any additional markings.
Over time the longer the war lasted, the proportional increase in tie strap equipped frogs produced accelerated ...... There was correspondence circa 1940 (?) between the head of the Waffen-SS and the OKH, wherein the OKH agreed to supply the W-SS. But as the pictures of unaltered weapons show quite clearly, that this did not happen instantly, and the W-SS continued to use captured weapons until they were re-equipped.
......I have several very crude examples that could never have got through an actual bayonet manufacturing facility. They would have been tossed into the scrap barrel to hide the hideous workmanship.
Richard Kuchta
As Andy mentioned, late WKC bayonets are well known for their very crude finishing. With one of things that seems to be forgotten in this discussion being that (
unwilling) “guest” workers were working in factories. And which would be easier? To relocate some workers? Or to move a whole factory, build infrastructure, acquire tooling etc. etc.? (Which in a postwar photo is seen with some lathes in Dachau. But they don't look like they were ever used, so the installation must have been lacking something.)
The piece nr.1 is with high possibility a blanko piece for export to Portugal ....... Some of the contract rifles were used by german army, so its possible that your piece could be one of the remain of these contract.
Portugal had multiple contracts, and the bayonets fall into the WaA253, WaA883, and WaA519 groups. All of them with no maker, and some are not numbered. When I looked into it years ago, I thought at the time that they might be P. Weyersberg manufactured. But without seeing the bayonet in question it’s just guess, as there is no basis for comparison.
Do you have any specs & or documentation for the WKC & Horster Blades?
Richard Kuchta
I don’t have period specifcations/documentation. But will dated (and undated/commercial) OEM condition bayonets suffice instead?
Regards to All, FP
FP,
Could you get some dimensions using a micrometer and calipers. This could at least give us a stake in the ground so as to compare known blanks to the SS blanks.
Richard K
The piece 41ddl coulnt go to SS because of the serial numbers, the serial numbers were added as acountability numbers of Army, they proofed it with WaA stamps and after this it was property of Wehrmacht. Thats because army didnt proof it with unit markings, the bayonets go directly to Depots, where were distributed to units later, the serial number with letter was important for invertarisation, same as soldiers got this numbers in their soldbuchs and were responsible for their equipment.
That Your piece have a SS stamp could only mean a rework by a SS fieldrepair unit or camp, or the stamp is a fake.
Andy,
I agree that the SS Property stamp would not be put on at the manufacturing factory under the control of the WA. Had to be put on after bayonets were received by SS and or at SS weapons depot or SS Weapon's Work Camp.
Richard K
Forum Members,
The earliest recorded SS stamped date on a 98/05 frog is 1934. The date is located toward the bottom of the frog.
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
Concerning the SS 43asw Nederland Bayonet with WA519 & serial # 2223. Again there is no Stamped SS Property Mark only the addition of the SS Nederland Division added to the front grip. Bayonet has matching scabbard. Frog has a hilt strap, manufacturer's stamp & 1943 date. Also comes with a portapee in orange & silver.
This is another example of a WA Horster Bayonet being supplied directly to the Waffen SS.
FP,
Could you get some dimensions using a micrometer and calipers. This could at least give us a stake in the ground so as to compare known blanks to the SS blanks.
Richard K
Richard,
Why don’t you go first. With some really good comprehensive pictures of all of the blank bayonets that you want to know about. So that we can know that we are discussing the same production series (I have both early and late to accommodate you). And if you put something like a small piece of masking tape where you are measuring. It would let me know exactly the locations that you want measured.
As for the 1943 bayonet with the emblem added to the front grip. Is it pinned, glued, or?
Best Regards, FP
In regards to the #1 SS Bayonet, this is what I have found:
1. There is no number on the crossguard.
2. There is no serial # in the grips.
-there should be by blankos
3. Both grips are marked WA 218.
- so Your piece has grips from a Wehrmacht bayonet, and from Elite Diamant directly, as we known that Diamant ended production in 1941, this is missmatched piece
4. Flashguard is numbered: #05823.
-flash is too from other piece
thats means for me the piece is a rework probably postwar, so the SS stamps are problematic too.
"This is another example of a WA Horster Bayonet being supplied directly to the Waffen SS. 43 asw, with insignia in grip."You should read a manual of Reibert or other german manuals, to soldier was forbidden a make any changes or upgrades on the material that he got, so any emblems added to grips or similar things are with high possibility made postwar by owner or Gis to make it better his bringback. The dress piece KS98 is other story as buyed privately it could be upgraded. So this piece were army piece and could go to W-SS formation certainly, but this emblem proofs nothing. Important like mentioned FP is how is there prepared.
"In the SS collector community, it is said that WKC & Horster furnished bayonet blanks to the SS."
In the bayonet community that is much more larger as the SS coll.community, is no similar information. Because the blanks were by majority of firms obtained by forgerys directly, the producers only mashined the bayonets and completed it. So Hoerster and WKC certainly produced blankos, i believe WKC stamped the mark there, but it was delivered to SS finished bayonets. The assembling in camps is a not real story, but refurbishment or reworking could be realised certainly.
In regards to the #1 SS Bayonet, this is what I have found:
1. There is no number on the crossguard.
2. There is no serial # in the grips.
-there should be by blankos
3. Both grips are marked WA 218.
- so Your piece has grips from a Wehrmacht bayonet, and from Elite Diamant directly, as we known that Diamant ended production in 1941, this is missmatched piece
4. Flashguard is numbered: #05823.
-flash is too from other piece
thats means for me the piece is a rework probably postwar, so the SS stamps are problematic too.
Andy,
I appreciate your opinion but for you to make a judgement call that since the flashguard was numbered that it is a postwar rework and that the SS property staamp is problematic. I do not agree with your opinion. It is again based on no substantiating facts & or documentation. Usable parts were not thrown away, they were used. Without even seeing the SS Bayonet, you can tell it is a postwar rework & a fake. Whow!!!
FP,
In regards to the SS Nederland Bayonet, I have never taken the grips off. Did not want to damage the piece. The SS Nederland device is inlaid into the grip. At some period of time, I will atempt to remove the grips to see how it is retained.
FP,
I shall try to measure some of the blanko SS bayonet blades so that we can perhaps determine the manufacturer.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to your statement concerning that there are regulations governing the use and modification of equipment, I would like to see the SS manual and or documentation for what you are talking about.
1. Saw tooth bayonets were outlawed by the Genieva Convention; however the SS/VT & SS/TV continued to use them.
2. Did you see anything in the SS Bayonet Regulations regarding the Stamping of KL Property marks in the grips?
3. As per the SS Nederland Bayonet, did you consider that it might be a divisional directive, or a batallion directive to have the SS Nederland Insignia inserted into the bayonet grips. The SS Nederland bayonet could also be for the color guard & or Traditions group.
As I said, I had to purchase the tunic, belt, and bayonet. The owner collector would not split the group.
Richard K
"In the SS collector community, it is said that WKC & Horster furnished bayonet blanks to the SS."
In the bayonet community that is much more larger as the SS coll.community, is no similar information. Because the blanks were by majority of firms obtained by forgerys directly, the producers only mashined the bayonets and completed it. So Hoerster and WKC certainly produced blankos, i believe WKC stamped the mark there, but it was delivered to SS finished bayonets. The assembling in camps is a not real story, but refurbishment or reworking could be realised certainly.
Andy
I can agree with the majority of your statement. However; if the work camps were fabricating gun parts and working on guns they could surely do the same to bayonets.
We are close and differing only in the definition of the terms assembly & rework of bayonets in the work camps.
Richard K
Denny,
I am back at work today and have brought in some items to get pictures of. Hope to have items for you to post this afternoon,
Richard K
Thats easy way because we have the information, we have the largest dbase in world same as Arnaud has the largest picturial online collection of the world. Our members already examined the blankos, as You got a offer from FP to commpare the items, i already have 2 pcs of blanko too, early and late production.
Your piece blanko has got a other production flashguard and the grips are from prewar Diamant bayonet, as You known already by reworks were bayonet parts new rennumbered. Anyway to this time are similar blankos without WaA reported with plastic grips not with wood, because of date of assembling.I know about more Portugal contract bayonet already faked wiht DH and SSZZA stamps.
The camp when assembled bayonets couldnt give there WKC stamp as mentioned before. WKC stamp was given to already mashined blank. So when they got blanks from forgery it were unmarked only some special stamps could be found on tang probably.
In regards to your statement concerning that there are regulations governing the use and modification of equipment, I would like to see the SS manual and or documentation for what you are talking about.
Sorry but i will not discuss about this, Do You was in army in reality?, You could change Your uniform or move the bayonet position on belt or add or engraving on M16 bayonet Your girls name? What are You talking about. Do You know anything about german army? There is a basic manual of a soldier in WW2 named Reibert, there is clearly described every change is forbidden, and should be payed by cash or jail, no sharpening or bringing any emblems or similar items. As mentioned in previous SS was a elite group of NS Party, so the strenght and disciplin was even stronger as by army.
1. Saw tooth bayonets were outlawed by the Genieva Convention; however the SS/VT & SS/TV continued to use them.
- all bayonets with sawbacks on SG84/98 postwar are fakes, that is from german collectors that have the information, only sawbacks could be find on items like FW dress piece or DRK hauer
2. Did you see anything in the SS Bayonet Regulations regarding the Stamping of KL Property marks in the grips?
-You wouldnt start this thread when a SS regulation existed
3. As per the SS Nederland Bayonet, did you consider that it might be a divisional directive, or a batallion directive to have the SS Nederland Insignia inserted into the bayonet grips. The SS Nederland bayonet could also be for the color guard & or Traditions group.
- thats collectors would like believe, in true is not real, for adding emblems there were dress uniform and KS98 dress piece bayonet
I already see on german or russian forum each week a new fakes, the SS are already the top runners, so my opinion about one real to nine fakes is already obsolete. Yesterday on a german show added a new collector ask about a sawback piece. The piece is clearly fake sawback, same as the piece is missmatch with missmatched flashguard and unserialed grips. The best thing is the untouched scabbard. The piece was upgraded from a export contract.
"I shall try to measure some of the blanko SS bayonet blades so that we can perhaps determine the manufacturer."
The inspectors of WaA have rules to accept bayonets, so the measurement of blades are not important here, the special stamping on tang of blade on locking nut, or mashinig spures could be help by deciphering, and only by side by side comparison. But anyway its believed that only the largest producers could realised a larger blanko production. So from this, they are candidates - Hoerster, WKC, Eickhorn,Coppel and probably P.Weyersberg.
Andy,
In regards to the SS blanko with the renumbered flashguard,it is your opinion that it is not correct for the SS. Numbered parts may not be correct for the Portugal Contract which I know nothing of. However,the SS acceptance standards may not have been bothered with a numbered functional part that you could not see. Do you have or could you show us a copy of such an SS procurement document?
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
What kind of Russin Sawtooth Fake are you showing us. Is it suppose to be an SS combat bayonet or a commando knife for the Army cook staff? Please elaborate further.
Richard Kuchta
In regards to your statement concerning that there are regulations governing the use and modification of equipment, I would like to see the SS manual and or documentation for what you are talking about.
Sorry but i will not discuss about this, Do You was in army in reality?, You could change Your uniform or move the bayonet position on belt or add or engraving on M16 bayonet Your girls name? What are You talking about. Do You know anything about german army? There is a basic manual of a soldier in WW2 named Reibert, there is clearly described every change is forbidden, and should be payed by cash or jail, no sharpening or bringing any emblems or similar items. As mentioned in previous SS was a elite group of NS Party, so the strenght and disciplin was even stronger as by army.
1. Saw tooth bayonets were outlawed by the Genieva Convention; however the SS/VT & SS/TV continued to use them.
- all bayonets with sawbacks on SG84/98 postwar are fakes, that is from german collectors that have the information, only sawbacks could be find on items like FW dress piece or DRK hauer
Andy, I strongly disagree with your statement in regards to SS Sawtooth bayonets. I have several. I have the 98/05 sawtooth and the WW1 84/98 that has a edge on it that you can shave with. Your substantiation of a couple of guys said that all saw tooth bayonets used by the Germans in WW11 are fakes. I can not speak for the German army, airforce, and navy regarding sawtooth bayonets but I know that my 98/05 Sawtooth Bayonets came out of Dachau. The 98/05 bayonets were stored there in a large quantity. Dachau was a large Work Camp. They made uniforms and equipment in their large shops. Dachau was also a Weapons storage Area fot the SS TV.
2. Did you see anything in the SS Bayonet Regulations regarding the Stamping of KL Property marks in the grips?
-You wouldnt start this thread when a SS regulation existed
Andy, please explain your remark that this thread would not have started if there was SS regulations pertaining to the use & modifications of the bayonet. I assume you have no such documentation from the statement you made. I take it that you have never seen a Sachenhausen KL stamped SS TV bayonet. Guess what? The KL marked bayonets used at Sachenhausen were not German. Do you know what they were?
3. As per the SS Nederland Bayonet, did you consider that it might be a divisional directive, or a batallion directive to have the SS Nederland Insignia inserted into the bayonet grips. The SS Nederland bayonet could also be for the color guard & or Traditions group.
- thats collectors would like believe, in true is not real, for adding emblems there were dress uniform and KS98 dress piece bayonet
Andy, how familiar are you with the SS Nederland. Have you ever seen one of their 84/98 combat bayonets? If so please describe it to us. You are very quick to label bayonets not real when you have no knowledge and or hands on expertise with SS bayonets.
I hope the documentation in your database of 14,000 bayonets is predicated on something more than some collectors said. We work with facts.
Richard Kuchta
Denny,
I am sending the different SS Bayonet Pictures thr to you. You should get the White LAH rigs first.
Thanks,
Richard K
"In regards to the SS blanko with the renumbered flashguard,it is your opinion that it is not correct for the SS. However,the SS acceptance standards may not have been bothered with a numbered functional part that you could not see."
unfortunally You have various opinion on same area, the Vz.24 were inerly overstamped with SS runes and twice serialed as SS property stamp, on other way the blanko should be not stamped or no problem by using of various parts? Some 45 dated pieces are innerly stamped, when the Russian already knoked on door, but early war period piece is missmatched with wehrmacht parts. So certainly doesnt functioned a repair facility. Your piece were not destined for SS because the WaA883 proofs, so it could be only got the marks by reworking.
As You mentioned 1938 Elite Diamant, SN8677, WA 218, with SS Property Stamp Lazy S over TK. Is possible that there were switched the grips, when on Elite are not serialed grips, it could by the previous owners were disassembled and switched with the blanko piece.
"I have the 98/05 sawtooth and the WW1 84/98 that has a edge on it that you can shave" with a sharpening of edges on bayonets were forbiden in War1 same as War2 so when You have razor sharp there is a postwar grind.The sawback bayonets from WW1 exist certainly but i have doubts about their using in army same by SS, the stamps on them that You believe are real, it could be faked too. Without seeing it is no more to say.
And about Nederland bayonet, i must not see it, i know about 25 similar bayonets, that have pinned emblems, the majority of them were upgrades of Gis or veterans thats all, not used there in war. Or You believe that You are the lucky one owner of the Nederland division, and the other 15000 bayonets of the division remained where?
Andy,
As per your opinions and comments about the SS Sawtooth Bayonets, you are again shooting from the hip. Why would you want to see the SS Property stamps and Accountability numbers on them. You yourself said that you know nothing about them. What are you going to do a shoot from the hip critique of the sawtooth bayonets? Perhaps you will consult with the several collectors who said all sawtooth bayonets used during WW11 are bad.
I am presently at home and I have 2 98/05 SS Sawtooth bayonets in front of me. One bayonet has a high blue finish with the SS Property Stamp & Number under the blue. The other Sawtooth is in the white with Accountability #594. Bayonet made by C. Dietrich along with matching scabbard.
Richard Kuchta
"I have the 98/05 sawtooth and the WW1 84/98 that has a edge on it that you can shave" with a sharpening of edges on bayonets were forbiden in War1 same as War2 so when You have razor sharp there is a postwar grind.The sawback bayonets from WW1 exist certainly but i have doubts about their using in army same by SS, the stamps on them that You believe are real, it could be faked too. Without seeing it is no more to say.
And about Nederland bayonet, i must not see it, i know about 25 similar bayonets, that have pinned emblems, the majority of them were upgrades of Gis or veterans thats all, not used there in war. Or You believe that You are the lucky one owner of the Nederland division, and the other 15000 bayonets of the division remained where?
Andy,
Again you are making statements about SS Bayonets that you know nothing about. You know of 25 SS Nederland bayonets with pinned on insigna. What does this insignia look like since you have seen 25 of them? You must now be an expert on phony SS Nederland Bayonets.
You said that you saw 25 fake SS Nederland bayonets with the insignia pinned on. You have annoyed me to the point that I have just taken the grips off of my SS Nederland Bayonet. Guess what? As usual, you are so incorrect. Insignia is not pinned on.
What do you know about GIs enhancing war souvenirs. German bayonets had absolutely no value to a GI at the end of the WW11. Furthermore a GI at this period would have no idea what the shield meant. Here we are 60 years down the road and you sure do not know what it means.
Richard Kuchta
I already see on german or russian forum each week a new fakes, the SS are already the top runners, so my opinion about one real to nine fakes is already obsolete. Yesterday on a german show added a new collector ask about a sawback piece. The piece is clearly fake sawback, same as the piece is missmatch with missmatched flashguard and unserialed grips. The best thing is the untouched scabbard. The piece was upgraded from a export contract.
I think that the main point above that Andy was trying to make, was as regards what is happening with fakes from the former East Bloc and Germany. Here is a much older period companion piece to the fake sawtooth bayonet he posted. Which is essentially a bargain basement version of the same type export bayonet - no doubt made for those looking for "SS" items. Also note the "beater" quality, which is not at all uncommon for fakers, to boost the prices for otherwise not very desirable items. With the example posted here being at the lower end of the scale as far as the amount of effort used to make it an "SS" item.
FP
FP,
You do not need to explain for Andy, he has been comming across loud and clear. My SS bayonet collection is a major part of my hobby, it is my enjoyment & passion. I have devoted many years to niche collecting extremely focused on the SS bayonet. I have shown some bayonets that have not been seen outside of the SS Collecting network. I know foums such as this are monitored by people who are out there to defraud the honest collectors and historians. I have tried to share some knowledge with all so as to have a more informed collector community that will not be taken in by the people who make a living preying on honest collectors. SS bayonets deserve a rightful place in the collecting community and the best documented publication is my goal. About 6 years ago I thought that I was ready to do a publication. I thought I had seen all of the different types of bayonets that existed. Boy, was I wrong. I had only scratched the surface. In my sharing of informaton regarding SS bayonets, I have not revealed all. Enough is held back so as to discourage the fabrication of reproduction fakes.
I hope Denny gets to post the pictures that I sent to him this afternoon at 4:00. Hope you enjoy them.
Richard K
Linge & Forum,
This is somewhat where the SS Bayonet Thread got started. The discussion about the White Frog.
Richard K
Linge & Forum.
Shown are 2 LAH White Rigs. Only one has the Combat Suspenders.
Richard K
Linge & Forum,
Note the following on the 98/05 White Frog.
1. The material of the frog is a substitute leather.(Possibly a compressed paper.)
2. The White finish on the frog is almost like a paint. Could be due to age.
3. Note the maker on the Frog. Can someone make it out, I need it for my documentation.
4. Last but not least is he SS Property Stamp. Not easy to see the detail but it is there.
Richard Kuchta
Linge & Forum,
The SS White Bayonet Frog with the purple ball portapee is an 84/98 SS LAH Frog.
1. Frog has the Fischer Berlin Stamp.
2. 1938 date.
3. I do not believe the material of the frog is leather. I do not know what it is made from.
4. Note the SS Property Stamp.
Richard K
Forum,
The SS 84/98 bayonet from the LAH White Rig has the fo;;owing description:
1. Blanko Blade
2. WA 88 on the pommel.
3. Accountability # 248 stamped into the scabbard and bayonet.
4. Blade has high polish and very high blue. Quality far exceeds the normal SS combat bayonet.
5. Bayonet has a different style of SS Property Stamp. I have not shown this to you before.
6. Property stamp is below the blue.
Richard Kuchta
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures for us.
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
Do you have any questions that I can answer for you on the White Frogs and LAH Rigs?
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
You’ve caught me a little off guard. Because I wasn’t expecting one of the no maker marked bayonets so soon to do a comparison as we had discussed. So I had to pull up some images from an old photo shoot years ago. (Note: My apologies up front for the quality of my images, with the less than optimal (florescent) lighting that I was using at the time.)
Posted below are a couple of side by side images with your no maker marked Waffenamted bayonet. Beside one of mine of the same approximate vintage, with mine possibly being just a ‘tad’ earlier (?) (but not much).
PS: My thanks to Denny also for posting them.
Best Regards, FP
To Your white frog Fischer 1938 it should be leather or special pressed material, the marking should be under white paint, as the maker is under it and the DH is over the white paint, i believe the DH is no same period marked.
-1. Blanko Blade
-wood grips are correct on this, but should be serialed with tang
2. WA 88 on the pommel.
-there is 883 with no visible 3 on end
3. Accountability # 248 stamped into the scabbard and bayonet.
-its a normal serial number
4. Blade has high polish and very high blue. Quality far exceeds the normal SS combat bayonet.
- it was part of Portugal contract that was not realised
6. Property stamp is below the blue.
-that shouldnt be as the stamp were added on a fullended bayonets, so the blueing must be under as the DH is engraved
-to 41 ddl as already mentioned before its equiped with late war grips, so probably a late war rework?
To Your white frog Fischer 1938 it should be leather or special pressed material, the marking should be under white paint, as the maker is under it and the DH is over the white paint, i believe the DH is no same period marked.
Andy,
If the SS Property stamp was under the white paint it would be a fake. The frogs are purchased items finished in white. Received in and then property stamped.
Richard Kuchta
-1. Blanko Blade
-wood grips are correct on this, but should be serialed with tang
2. WA 88 on the pommel.
-there is 883 with no visible 3 on end
3. Accountability # 248 stamped into the scabbard and bayonet.
-its a normal serial number
4. Blade has high polish and very high blue. Quality far exceeds the normal SS combat bayonet.
- it was part of Portugal contract that was not realised
6. Property stamp is below the blue.
-that shouldnt be as the stamp were added on a fullended bayonets, so the blueing must be under as the DH is engraved
-to 41 ddl as already mentioned before its equiped with late war grips, so probably a late war rework?
To Your white frog Fischer 1938 it should be leather or special pressed material, the marking should be under white paint, as the maker is under it and the DH is over the white paint, i believe the DH is no same period marked.
Andy,
If the SS Property stamp was under the white paint it would be a fake. The frogs are purchased items finished in white. Received in and then property stamped.
Richard Kuchta
-1. Blanko Blade
-wood grips are correct on this, but should be serialed with tang
2. WA 88 on the pommel.
-there is 883 with no visible 3 on end
3. Accountability # 248 stamped into the scabbard and bayonet.
-its a normal serial number
Andy,
The number was asses by the SS.
4. Blade has high polish and very high blue. Quality far exceeds the normal SS combat bayonet.
- it was part of Portugal contract that was not realised
6. Property stamp is below the blue.
-that shouldnt be as the stamp were added on a fullended bayonets, so the blueing must be under as the DH is engraved
-to 41 ddl as already mentioned before its equiped with late war grips, so probably a late war rework?
FP,
The SS Blanko was not to throw you off guard. I had the bayonet with my LAH Rigs. I saw that it was a WA blanko and decided to post it.
It would be a great breakthrough to identify the blanko blades. I was thinking about making a detailed drawing of a bayonet with all of the measurement positions indicated. Then we would all be measuring from the same specified points. What do you think?
Richard K
Thanks for picture of white frogs, already these frogs shouldnt be have DH, because DH was not marking of LAH, LAH is well documented with doubble rune SS marks, so it must be from other part of SS. There exist real samples marked with same producer and LAH stamp but without any DH stamps. I assume Your pieces should be TKV units probably.
Richard- The material in the frogs is an artificial leather that was specified in police regulations requiring the discontinuance of the use of leather in the manufacture of most of the parade dress accouterments in the 1937/38 period. Some leather had to remain where extreme flexibility was needed. Please note that when these materials were produced seventy-three years ago, they were still pliable and capable of accepting stampings and impressions into the surface.
The make of the white frog in the photos at the bottom of pg 37 is Hans Romer of Berlin, a well-known manufacturer of police accessories including shakos. I sold a parade dress set of belt, shoulder harness and instrument hanger similar to yours a year or two ago to a dealer. I notice the impression of the TK on the frog at the top of p 38 has broken the surface of the hardened material, while the original markings of the manufacturer applied 70+ years ago are impressed into the material. How would you explain why that TK marking shows the obvious signs of being impressed into a hardened surface to the extent that the finish cracked?
And also on p 38 near the top, I can't say that I am impressed by the marking you call a police star L on the S84/98 that also has some kind of TK mark engraved. It is quite crudely done and looks nothing like any Prussian police acceptance marking as seen here on a police bayonet. Notice the L was engraved to the side of what is supposed to be a star/sunburst,unlike any other Prussian acceptance marks.
And as Andy pointed out. Why would white parade accessories used by the LAH be marked with a TK and not the LSAH marking. I have show a faked LAH marking applied to a white police frog.
No TK units used white parade accessories. The only SS unit with white was the LSAH. So you are saying that these TK marked pieces are LSAH? Or they are not original.
Richard- The material in the frogs is an artificial leather that was specified in police regulations requiring the discontinuance of the use of leather in the manufacture of most of the parade dress accouterments in the 1937/38 period. Some leather had to remain where extreme flexibility was needed. Please note that when these materials were produced seventy-three years ago, they were still pliable and capable of accepting stampings and impressions into the surface.
The make of the white frog in the photos at the bottom of pg 37 is Hans Romer of Berlin, a well-known manufacturer of police accessories including shakos. I sold a parade dress set of belt, shoulder harness and instrument hanger similar to yours a year or two ago to a dealer. I notice the impression of the TK on the frog at the top of p 38 has broken the surface of the hardened material, while the original markings of the manufacturer applied 70+ years ago are impressed into the material. How would you explain why that TK marking shows the obvious signs of being impressed into a hardened surface to the extent that the finish cracked?
And also on p 38 near the top, I can't say that I am impressed by the marking you call a police star L on the S84/98 that also has some kind of TK mark engraved. It is quite crudely done and looks nothing like any Prussian police acceptance marking as seen here on a police bayonet. Notice the L was engraved to the side of what is supposed to be a star/sunburst,unlike any other Prussian acceptance marks.
And as Andy pointed out. Why would white parade accessories used by the LAH be marked with a TK and not the LSAH marking. I have show a faked LAH marking applied to a white police frog.
No TK units used white parade accessories. The only SS unit with white was the LSAH. So you are saying that these TK marked pieces are LSAH? Or they are not original.
Joe,
On both White frogs you can see that the manufacturer's stamp was put into the leather before the white coating was aapplied. If you also look closely at the 98/05 frog you will see stress cracks all around the manufacturers stamp.
On the 84/98 frog there is cracking by the date,.
Both TK show cracking. Similiar principle is seen with cement and sharp corners. You get stress ceacking.
Joe I have never seen LAH markings on any leather or metal.However; I am not saying that it does not exist because I have not seen it. Can you post some for us to see. The rig that you recently sold, was that LAH marked.
Richard K
Joe,
In regards to the SS Police Star L, I showed you what was on the spine of the blade. I have had the bayonet for a considerable period of time and never noticed the mark. I pulled it last week when the discussion was about WA SS marked bayonets. I only have limited expertise with police items. Does this bayonet fit into the serial numbers for a police bayonet? The frog that is on this SS TV Police marked bayonet is 1940.
I have called the marking on the spine of the blade police star L. That is what it looked like to me. It is not that easy to determine.
Richard K
Joe,
When I look at the police bayonet, I can not make out a TK by the star L. I needed a magnifying glass just to make out the blurred geometry. Again, just because I can not see it does not mean that it is not there. The smallest TK that I ever saw was on a VZ-24 bayonet and that would have been bigger than the mark that we are looking at.
Richard K
Joe,
On both White frogs you can see that the manufacturer's stamp was put into the leather before the white coating was aapplied. If you also look closely at the 98/05 frog you will see stress cracks all around the manufacturers stamp.
On the 84/98 frog there is cracking by the date,.
Both TK show cracking. Similiar principle is seen with cement and sharp corners. You get stress ceacking.
Joe I have never seen LAH markings on any leather or metal.However; I am not saying that it does not exist because I have not seen it. Can you post some for us to see. The rig that you recently sold, was that LAH marked.
Richard K
Richard,
I think that I can see in the image what Joe was referring to. The broad outline of the skull has broken not only through the paint. But it has also broken the laminated layer beneath. And I can attest to the very brittle nature of the laminated frogs that have become more or less “fossilized” (after 70 plus years) from broken in half examples that I have looked at very closely. But what IMO is even more important is that even after breaking through, why is it that the small details of the skull are virtually invisible? Was it because the paint was also too hard for the stamp to make a proper impression?
I’m also thinking about your suggestion to take measurements, but I want to look at a few things first.
Best Regards, FP
The star marking L looks like engraved, certainly not same as seen on period police bayonets, Richard You should compare it with Your other ACS police bayonets spine proofs.
The white frog have cracking by date area because of the area is moving on belt,this is a rivet line, the area where is the DH is behind the belt so it should be not cracked in no way. I believe Joe is right on this. The DH was there stamped much later. You didnt answer why there is a DH on LAH equipment?
To other piece the frog on 41ddl marked with additional DH and 41, i am not expert on this area on frogs, but maybe FP could help, one well known frog collector of Germany, is member here too, mentioned a short middle stitching frog were delivered only to one branch of Army.
Same as You have other army pieces here kvz 1943 not SS marked on a SS piece, why are the frogs, when there from beginn, not SS marked?
Joe,
I just called my friend Steve Wolfe and asked him for some information about LAH marked equipment. He said that in his career he can only remember seeing about 3 belts that were LAH marked. He said that he never saw an LAH marked frog. As for the suspenders, belts, cross straps, and belt loop equipmnt rings that they are almost always marked with a set of runes and the FISCHER stamp.
Richard Kuchta
Joe,
On both White frogs you can see that the manufacturer's stamp was put into the leather before the white coating was aapplied. If you also look closely at the 98/05 frog you will see stress cracks all around the manufacturers stamp.
On the 84/98 frog there is cracking by the date,.
Both TK show cracking. Similiar principle is seen with cement and sharp corners. You get stress ceacking.
Joe I have never seen LAH markings on any leather or metal.However; I am not saying that it does not exist because I have not seen it. Can you post some for us to see. The rig that you recently sold, was that LAH marked.
Richard K
Come on Richard, those are stress cracks on the Romer frog running horizontally in the frog through the maker's mark created by bending pressure when the frog was attached to a belt. The belt loop is right above the marking and if that point is fixed to a belt, any movement of the frog away from the belt would create horizontal stress marks. They are not cracks from applying the marking. It would debate whether the maker marks were applied before the white finish. In either case, the Po marking on my frog did not crack or indent the finish like the LAH marking above or the TK on yours.
Your white Fischer frog shows similar horizontal bending cracks at the point of the maker mark below the belt loop while the TK that was recently applied above to the rock hard surface shows stress fracture following the circumference of the stamp.
I do not know what you mean by cement and sharp corners. These frogs were made of pliable materials 70+ years ago. You get stress fractures when bending or stamping with a metal stamp after the fact.
The leather set I sold was marked with commercial maker mark and ink stamped police markings.
I am not familiar with any LAH marked leather goods. Aside from the police and the LAH, what other military or party formation used white leather for parade purposes?
The star marking L looks like engraved, certainly not same as seen on period police bayonets, Richard You should compare it with Your other ACS police bayonets spine proofs.
The white frog have cracking by date area because of the area is moving on belt,this is a rivet line, the area where is the DH is behind the belt so it should be not cracked in no way. I believe Joe is right on this. The DH was there stamped much later. You didnt answer why there is a DH on LAH equipment?
Andy & Joe,
The cracking that is occuring on the frogs that I pointed out is not from movement. These frogs haven't moved in 60 years. You have shrinkage & stress.
As far as an SS Property Stamps on a LAH piece of equipment what is your problem. I thought the LAH was part of the SS? I just checked with Steve Wolfe and one of my fellow SS collectors and neither have seen LAH marked frogs. Steve is the only person who has seen LAH marked belts.Only Belts. Both people said the same thing that the White belt and accessories are almost always marked with the Fisher Stamp and runes. Are you saying that there should not be property stamps on Germania & Deutchland equipment also??
Now you tell me why there should not be an SS Property stamp on LAH equipment. Where is it documented that there should be no SS Property Stamp on LAH Equipment. As I told you before, I have passed up alot of bayonets and frogs because there has been no SS Property stamp on them.
To other piece the frog on 41ddl marked with additional DH and 41, i am not expert on this area on frogs, but maybe FP could help, one well known frog collector of Germany, is member here too, mentioned a short middle stitching frog were delivered only to one branch of Army.
Same as You have other army pieces here kvz 1943 not SS marked on a SS piece, why are the frogs, when there from beginn, not SS marked?
I do not understand your question. Please elaborate.
Richard K
Joe,
I just called my friend Steve Wolfe and asked him for some information about LAH marked equipment. He said that in his career he can only remember seeing about 3 belts that were LAH marked. He said that he never saw an LAH marked frog. As for the suspenders, belts, cross straps, and belt loop equipment rings that they are almost always marked with a set of runes and the FISCHER stamp.
Richard Kuchta
Well I certainly welcome Steve's observations over a lengthy career, but "...LAH marked" certainly doesn't cut it for detail. There is a bogus LAH mark on my white frog. If they are just LAH initials, they better be as well struck as the maker mark's and date or they are bogus in my opinion. The material was soft when made and took a stamping of maker and date as well as the Po. Anything the shows a crack or indentation around the mark would indicate a recent application, that is to say sale to militaria enthusiasts.
I have not looked for LAH leather markings. But how they are marked is irrelevant to our discussion. Because the LAH was the only unit that was permitted to wear white parade dress equipment. And you have shown us white frogs with TK that are with bayonets with TKs that you say indicate TK units.
I would not be uncomfortable with the idea that white Fischer, Larsen or Romer equipment with only maker marks could have been used by the LSAH.
Both people said the same thing that the White belt and accessories are almost always marked with the Fisher Stamp and runes.My question was about the DH, maybe for Joe not so important, You believe the DH is a overall property stamp of SS, thats really not, the LAH was the first unit that got directly the runes SS and have it incorporate in the name, i know about 2 collectors that have the LAH real frog stamped with runes, there are not DH, as it were not the property stamp of LAH.Both frogs are Fisher made and white. When no other frog of SS should be white, so Your DH there is a new fake stamp.n When TKV used white equipment and the frog DH stamp is real, then it could be other branch of SS.
Richard,
It might help at this point if you presented your views on where the pieces of the puzzle fit. LAH, SS-TK, and the SS-VT, with Germania and Deutschland being a part of the SS-VT. Which I had assumed was OK with you as the users of the “VA” marked frogs. And if we take it a step further, are the later Death's Head markings supposed to be just for Eicke’s men?
Best Regards, FP
Forum,
Another SS Bayonet with WA. Bayonet is described as follows:
1. Blanko Blade.
2. WA 883 on the pommel.
3. serial #10170
4. Letter e
5. Blanko Scabbard
6. SS Property Stamped
7. Large R on rear side Tang
8. B & G & 3 on front side Tang
9. Brown Grips WA 385
Richard Kuchta
FP,
I do not know if I understand your question correctly but I will express my opinion on what I think you are asking. If I am not correct, please explain what you are looking for.
1. Germania, Deutchland started off as VT then to Waffen SS.
2. LAH men were all member of the SS (Early function was Honor Guard / Allegheime SS).
3. SS TV went from KZ guards to a very effective fighting division.
4. All of the early SS had great difficulty obtaining first class weapons.
5. The majority of the early SS weapons ( rifles & bayonets) were WW1 reworks that had property stamps put on them.
6. The SS property stamps were found on rifles & bayonets throughout the war.
7. The SS TK property stamps can be found on 1945 bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the details of the SS Property Stampings I can only give an opinion. I do not know how they actually performed the stamping operation or how they backed up the belt loop on the frog, and how sharp the Property Stamp was. In addition being a mechanical engineer I know that you can get stress cracking in materials when sharp corners and shrinkage is involved.
Furthermore, looking at some of my other frogs with the property mark stamped into real quality leather a dull image with lack of details can also be found. I saw no cracking on any of the frogs of real leather with a SS Property Stamp.
Now let us address the 98/05 frog with the SS Property Stamp.I am looking at it now under a glass and the details of the TK are perfect. However, there is a stress riser at the same place on the upper skull as the TK on the 84/98.
Why is one stamped TK better detailed than the other? One must look at all of the variables in order to make a good decision.
Quality of workmanship is also a big factor. I have numerous bayonets and one Death Head Luger that have double strikes. The double strike definitely affects the appearance of the Property Stamp. As for the 84/98 TK, I can not tell if it is double struck or not.
Richard Kuchta
Same as previous this piece have nothing to do with SS.
1. Blanko Blade.
2. WA 883 on the pommel.
3. serial #10170
4. Letter e
5. Blanko Scabbard
6. SS Property Stamped
7. Large R on rear side Tang
8. B & G & 3 on front side Tang
9. Brown Grips WA 385
Your piece is a well known blank 41 crs piece, reported by various members of BCN, Fred should have the number 10160 so 10 digits lower as Yours, the piece should be in 41 crs scabbard or the scabbard should be 883 stamped, the brown grips should be WaA883 stamped.As he dont mentioned a SS stamp same as on other of the e range not reported any SS stamps, so i must believe the property stamp of Yours is a fake.
FP,
In regards to the details of the SS Property Stampings I can only give an opinion. I do not know how they actually performed the stamping operation or how they backed up the belt loop on the frog, and how sharp the Property Stamp was. In addition being a mechanical engineer I know that you can get stress cracking in materials when sharp corners and shrinkage is involved.
Furthermore, looking at some of my other frogs with the property mark stamped into real quality leather a dull image with lack of details can also be found. I saw no cracking on any of the frogs of real leather with a SS Property Stamp.
Now let us address the 98/05 frog with the SS Property Stamp.I am looking at it now under a glass and the details of the TK are perfect. However, there is a stress riser at the same place on the upper skull as the TK on the 84/98.
Why is one stamped TK better detailed than the other? One must look at all of the variables in order to make a good decision.
Quality of workmanship is also a big factor. I have numerous bayonets and one Death Head Luger that have double strikes. The double strike definitely affects the appearance of the Property Stamp. As for the 84/98 TK, I can not tell if it is double struck or not.
Richard Kuchta
Richard while I wasn’t an ME myself, one of my roommates was, another an Aeronautical Engineer etc. so I have an appreciation of stress cracking and some other technical matters. With the one I pointed out the result of an impact - not stress from bending or shrinking.
“Andy, there are definitely different styles of SS Property skulls. You can see this quite readily on the SS rifles. There has to be some significance to the different style of skulls. Please see Angolia's Cloth Insignia of the SS: pages 189 to 195. Some of these Collar Tab TKs show up on property marks.
I just looked at my SS Ammo Pouches and they are all SS Property Stamped. SS VT; SS TV; Waffen SS ...... All of my 15 SS Combat Belts are SS Property Stamped. SS VT; SS TV; Waffen SS.
If they property stamped all of the above items, why would they not property stamp Bayonets & Frogs????
Could you get some dimensions using a micrometer and calipers. This could at least give us a stake in the ground so as to compare known blanks to the SS blanks.”
With the focus of my question, not really the history of the SS, but only as it related to bayonet frog markings. And if we use the “VA” frogs as our
“stake in the ground” for the SS-VT (which I had assumed was OK with you as the users of the “VA” marked frogs). What do you think an LAH marking should look like, versus the SS-TK. And if we take it a step further, are the Death's Head markings on the later frogs supposed to be just for Eicke’s men? In other words some kind of a general outline, so that we understand each other, and are all talking about the same thing.
Best Regards, FP
Andy,
Thank you for your kind words as usual.
And as usual I strongly disagree with your opinion on SS Bayonet 10170.
What it started out as and what it ended up as are 2 different bayonets. I couldn't say for sure if is a battlefield salvage bayonet or a rework bayonet. However, from the bluing on both the blanko scabbard and the blade there is a definate match up. The Blade has an excellent SS Property Stamp applied after blue.
FP,
I am still not quite sure what you ar asking? But here goes.
In regards to the LAH Frogs I can provide the following:
1. I have never seen a LAH marked white frog.
2. I would not consider a white frog without an SS Property stamp to be LAH. A white frog with the typical Fischer Stamp and Runes could be considered LAH but I have never seen such an item.
3. I have never seen an LAH marked black combat frog. Checked with Steve W. and one of my SS collector friends. Neither has seen anythng that denotes LAH.
4. None of my SS Frogs, Bayonets, and rifles have any LAH markings.
All frogs in my collection except for the KS frogs have a SS Property Stamp.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
A quick comparisson of a SS/VT Frog and a Waffen SS Frog is the following.
SS/TV Frog has:
1. SS Property Mark
2. SS/TV Standarte mark
3. Usually a date
4. Over 90% of the TV frogs have hilt straps.
5. The serial number of the bayonet will sometimes be found on the frog.
The SS/VT and Waffen SS only have a SS Property Stamp and sometimes a date.
Richard K
Has anyone seen any pictorial evidence of the use of white parade uniform accessories (belt, cross-straps, cartridge pouces, sword hangers, etc.) used by any military or para-military organization other than the Leibstandarte AH or the Schutzpolizei? I seem to recall a photo of a navy parade with white fittings? Anyone recall that?
These would be the only users of white parade accessories, unless exported to other countries? The police marked theirs with Po or similar acceptance. Sometimes unit ink stamps are seen on the natural leather of some pieces. So it would seem those pieces marked only with maker mark and nothing else could only be LSAH or? But no other SS unit.
FP,
Both TKs show a stress fracture at the top of the skull. Looking closer at the TKs under the glass the 98/05 TK looks bigger. Have nothing to measure with at home. However size is not the issue here. The depth of the 84/98 TK into the material is as well as the detail. I can only express my opinion and provide some of the variables that can cause this type of distortion and fracture,
Joe,
I can tell you one thing that is unique about the LAH belt buckle. I have seen in several collections the area that is inside of the wreath is painted white to set off the swaz..
I do not think that imitation leather bayonet frogs would be a big export item due to their perceived quality.
Richard K
FP,
A quick comparisson of a SS/VT Frog and a Waffen SS Frog is the following.
SS/TV Frog has:
1. SS Property Mark ( a Death's head?) 2. SS/TV Standarte mark ( a number?)
3. Usually a date 4. Over 90% of the TV frogs have hilt straps. 5. The serial number of the bayonet will sometimes be found on the frog.
The SS/VT (a dated "VA" stamp?) and Waffen SS only have a SS Property Stamp and sometimes a date.
Richard K
Richard,
Thank you.
An SS/TV Frog has: # 1. SS Property Mark * ( a Death's head?) # 2. SS/TV Standarte mark * ( a number?) # 3. * Usually a date # 4. * Over 90% of the TV frogs have hilt straps. # 5. * The serial number of the bayonet will sometimes be found on the frog.
The SS/VT: * (a dated "VA" stamp?)
And the Waffen SS: # 1. * only have an SS Property Stamp (a Death’s Head?) #2. * and sometimes a date.
How am I doing for getting what you stated correctly?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
A quick comparisson of a SS/VT Frog and a Waffen SS Frog is the following.
SS/TV Frog has:
1. SS Property Mark ( a Death's head?) 2. SS/TV Standarte mark ( a number?)
3. Usually a date 4. Over 90% of the TV frogs have hilt straps. 5. The serial number of the bayonet will sometimes be found on the frog.
The SS/VT (a dated "VA" stamp?) and Waffen SS only have a SS Property Stamp and sometimes a date.
FP,
I have only 2 SS VA Stamped Frogs. I am suspicious of the one. Need some help to determine actual authenticity. I have not come across SS VA frogs while collecting. Never got an actual SS marked bayonet in one. Have not seen them in collections.
I also have 2 SS WBD Marked Frogs. Both were purchased from vendors. I do not discuss them because I have no real providence on them. Never got a SS bayonet in one of them.
Richard K
Richard,
Thank you.
An SS/TV Frog has: # 1. SS Property Mark * ( a Death's head?) # 2. SS/TV Standarte mark * ( a number?) # 3. * Usually a date # 4. * Over 90% of the TV frogs have hilt straps. # 5. * The serial number of the bayonet will sometimes be found on the frog.
The SS/VT: * (a dated "VA" stamp?)
And the Waffen SS: # 1. * only have an SS Property Stamp (a Death’s Head?) #2. * and sometimes a date.
How am I doing for getting what you stated correctly?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
In regards to the SS Property Marked Bayonet Frogs, I need to express an opinion about the placement of the SS Property Stamp. In comparing all of my marked frogs, the SS property Stamp is in one of 3 places. I feel that there is signifiance in the placement but can not link it to anything specific at this time. In addition there are some different sizes and styles of SS Property stamps.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Regrettably I’ve got some things to tend to now, so this will be brief. The greater L.A. area (before the Internet) used to be a great place to find all sorts of things. And while fakers can and do make copies and bad items - there are real SS “VA” frogs. As for the WBD types, at first I was skeptical of them. And I still am for some. But with others I’m more inclined to put them in the early 'SS/TV' category.
FP,
In regards to the SS Property Marked Bayonet Frogs, I need to express an opinion about the placement of the SS Property Stamp. In comparing all of my marked frogs, the SS property Stamp is in one of 3 places. I feel that there is signifiance in the placement but can not link it to anything specific at this time. In addition there are some different sizes and styles of SS Property stamps.
Richard Kuchta
And please don’t take this the wrong way. But the entry posted above is why I asked for a clarification of a “ SS property Stamp”. Maybe it's just me, but sometimes I was not quite sure just which type of stamps were being discussed (unless of course it was pictured).
Best Regards, FP
FP,
There are several different types of property stamps:
1. TK Medium Size Property Stamp covers 96% Bayonet Frogs
2. Runes Over TK covers 1% of the Bayonet Frogs
3. Large TK covers 2% of the Bayonet Frogs
4. Small TK covers 1% of the Bayonet Frogs
FP, I hope this hels you to get a better picture.
Richard K
Forum,
I pulled the last bayonet for the day. This SS Bayonet is very interesting and rare. It was originally mated with a Steyer bnz Single Rune 43.
The bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Blade.
2. No WAs
3. SS Accountability #742 on the Ricasso.
4. Blanko Scabbard with #742
5. Excellent SS Property Stamp.
6. Single Rune on the Crossguard
7. 742 Numbered Grips
8. Wooden Grips
9. Grip SS Property Stamped
10. Grip dated 1943.
My opinion is that this bayonet could have been assembled and issued with the 1943 Steyer BNZ Single Rune Rifle.
Note: The grips seem oversize for the tang area. Grip sticks above Pommel & Crossguard.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Regrettably I’ve got some things to tend to now, so this will be brief. The greater L.A. area (before the Internet) used to be a great place to find all sorts of things. And while fakers can and do make copies and bad items - there are real SS “VA” frogs. As for the WBD types, at first I was skeptical of them. And I still am for some. But with others I’m more inclined to put them in the early 'SS/TV' category.
FP,
I will have to get some pictures up of these frogs. I could use some help evaluating them if you would.
FP, would you post some examples of what you consider original VA Frogs & SS WBD Frogs.
Thanks,
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the SS Property Marked Bayonet Frogs, I need to express an opinion about the placement of the SS Property Stamp. In comparing all of my marked frogs, the SS property Stamp is in one of 3 places. I feel that there is signifiance in the placement but can not link it to anything specific at this time. In addition there are some different sizes and styles of SS Property stamps.
Richard Kuchta
And please don’t take this the wrong way. But the entry posted above is why I asked for a clarification of a “ SS property Stamp”. Maybe it's just me, but sometimes I was not quite sure just which type of stamps were being discussed (unless of course it was pictured).
Best Regards, FP
About the 10170e You must not believe, for us speaks the dbase samples, there is no mentioning of SS stamps on other samples, the piece is well known 41crs piece with missing maker stamp, partly on bayonet and scabbard.
To Your last piece, WKC is certainly a commerzial bayonet, the grips should be plastic, as seen on many bayonets of this producer and middle war era period, it would be nice to see the single rune stamp and compare it with rifle stamping. Anyway the dating of grips are not typical same as the single rune is enough for proofing no need other "SS property stamp"
As mentioned before the DH shouldnt be stamped on LAH frogs or items, so the DH is not the SS property stamp for all branches of SS for me. The TKV should have the DH as their property stamp.But it doesnt mean they should stamp with DH everything.
The WBD are well documented on Wheeler book same as there exist samples on various leather items, there were no any DH found on them only the SS runes when i am correct. On one was found a VA stamp.
best regards,Andy
Andy,
In regards to the 10170 e SS Bayonet, I do not agree that it is not SS. Your database has no mention of any SS affiliation for this particular bayonet and or any other bayonet and that is apparent.
My opinion is that the bayonet is a rework and or battle field salvage. It has all of the characteristics of either. The SS Property Mark was put on for a particular reason and that is usually that the SS did something to the bayonet and then made it property of.
Richard K
When on the other pieces were some special stamping it were reported to our dbase, as Fred M. has the nearest piece, You should ask him, As the grips are WaA proofed same as pommel, the piece should be not reworked, but without a picture is hard to say. Anyway a this WaA piece was not destined for SS but ordered by Army. Should not have a property markings of SS as is early war piece. By rework it could be possible.
There are great books about SS mainly with history , very interesting reading Andrew Mollo, Uniforms of the SS, 1991 published in UK, very nice insignias and some really interesting information, the white forgs were used by LAH since 1936 only by the Berlin duty Battalion.Vol.3 is about VT 1933-39. the vol4. is about TKV. best regards,Andy
Andy,
In regards to the 10170 e SS Bayonet, I do not agree that it is not SS. Your database has no mention of any SS affiliation for this particular bayonet and or any other bayonet and that is apparent.
My opinion is that the bayonet is a rework and or battle field salvage. It has all of the characteristics of either. The SS Property Mark was put on for a particular reason and that is usually that the SS did something to the bayonet and then made it property of.
Richard K
Richard,
If I can summarize what I seem to be seeing: The central part of the argument is that once an acceptance marked bayonet somehow made its way to a SS Depot, a camp, or some other place controlled by them. And was reworked in some fashion. It also had what have been called the “SS Property” (the DH/skull) marks engraved or stamped on the item, and was therefore an item for re-issue to the SS.
An interesting point of view, which brings to mind the German Army rework markings, and I will have to look into what can be seen there.
As for the WBD - VA marked frogs: Andy mentioned George Wheeler’s excellent “Seitengewehr: History of the German Bayonet 1919 - 1945” where he has a portion devoted to the WBD frogs. And I recall posting a VA marked one about 4 years ago that may have had some portions redacted. But if you have some that you want an opinion on, as always, please feel free to email them to me at any time for a look.
Best Regards, FP
FP & Andy,
I am having a difficult day today at the plant. One of my managers (48 years old) had a heart attack. His backup is also ill with Bells Palsy. Not much time for the forum today.
I am going to try to send some pictures to Denny. Denny, please don't be upset because all I could do was to get them scanned. The pictures are of some SS property marks taken from my rifles and items awhile ago. It is a good item to use and compare with.
Richard Kuchta
═
.jpg "Kuchta008 (Medium).jpg")
╬
*
^
Richard firstly sorry about Your man in work, i hope all would be better, with them.
To Your scans, certainly some of them are confirmed,i mean the DH, but as mentioned earlier they are from rework rifles, that were done only for short period, majority should be proofed with commerzial Nitro proof, and it doesnt mean that the stamp used prewar should be continued to end of war on items, that were not destined for.The DH in lower part of 9552 looks like engraved, and i have my doubts about it. It looks like on rifle slot of bayonet? Anyway there are certainly proper stamped DH but for what for purpose there are stamped i dont know still. Is only opinions as exist no documents about this type of stamps. Unfortunally the small pictures without link to real items could hard explain the overall proofing system. Timeline is very importing thing, as 1933-39 were one period of SS and 1940-45 other period.best regards,Andy
Other dress frog were asked on german forum, the stampings are clear and correct, problem is that were stamped only few years ago, as clearly seen on the damaged leather. So clear fake too.
Denny,
Thank you for putting up the scans of the different types of property marks encountered on the SS rifles. This is by far not all of the variations. Once I get things going in the plant I hope to be able to pick up where we left off. There is a lot to talk about.
Richard K
#
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures of the SS RZM Helmets, SS Standard Bearer's Gorget, and LAH Bayonet.
Richard K
FP,
Can you put up some original VA Frogs for us to see?
Richard K
When on the other pieces were some special stamping it were reported to our dbase, as Fred M. has the nearest piece, You should ask him, As the grips are WaA proofed same as pommel, the piece should be not reworked, but without a picture is hard to say. Anyway a this WaA piece was not destined for SS but ordered by Army. Should not have a property markings of SS as is early war piece. By rework it could be possible.
Andy,
I agree with you that the early WA bayonet was not destined for the SS. However, at some point it was battfield salvage and or reworked. It then received the SS Property Stamp.
Richard K
Andy,
Thanks for the information on LAH in MOLLOW'S Books. I have some but not the whole set.
The LAH Band also wore the white frogs. I do not know if they were members of the same regiment that you stated. I have pictures of them wearing the 98/05 white frogs.
As I stated early on how the band director of LAH had committed suscide because he had rounded up some Poles during the war and had his band members execute them.
FP,
Can you put up some original VA Frogs for us to see?
Richard K
Richard,
First, I would like to extend my best wishes to those at work with some serious health issues.
As for the VA frogs, the one photo I was able to find immediately is I think a non-redacted version of the one I posted 4 or 5 years ago. As can be seen I think, I was probably trying to use sunlight to highlight the markings. And I’m sure that by the time we see some of these other items that have been mentioned like the consecutively serial numbered bayonets, I will have found most if not all of the other VA frog pictures I have. And might even get a chance to use a different camera to take some better pictures of mine.
Best Regards, FP
Andy,
In regards to the 10170 e SS Bayonet, I do not agree that it is not SS. Your database has no mention of any SS affiliation for this particular bayonet and or any other bayonet and that is apparent.
My opinion is that the bayonet is a rework and or battle field salvage. It has all of the characteristics of either. The SS Property Mark was put on for a particular reason and that is usually that the SS did something to the bayonet and then made it property of.
Richard K
Richard,
If I can summarize what I seem to be seeing: The central part of the argument is that once an acceptance marked bayonet somehow made its way to a SS Depot, a camp, or some other place controlled by them. And was reworked in some fashion. It also had what have been called the “SS Property” (the DH/skull) marks engraved or stamped on the item, and was therefore an item for re-issue to the SS.
An interesting point of view, which brings to mind the German Army rework markings, and I will have to look into what can be seen there.
FP,
My opinion is that the battfield savalge (a bayonet with no scabbard and or broken parts was sent to a SS Weapons Work Camp where an item was either repaired ; salvaged for parts; and or used as is. We got somewhat into the discussion on the 1945 Phospate Finish, Consecutive Numbered bayonets that were taken from such a facility. The work camps were located more inside of the borders of Germany and the Death Camps were further out.
Richard Kuchta
As for the WBD - VA marked frogs: Andy mentioned George Wheeler’s excellent “Seitengewehr: History of the German Bayonet 1919 - 1945” where he has a portion devoted to the WBD frogs. And I recall posting a VA marked one about 4 years ago that may have had some portions redacted. But if you have some that you want an opinion on, as always, please feel free to email them to me at any time for a look.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Thank you for your concern for my ill Manager & supervisor. My whole Assembly Department got wiped out over night. I was able to move people around and get coverage for the different model lines.
Also, thank you for posting the frog. I think I can recognise a difference allready. Do the fake VA Frogs have all of the geometry stamped within a rectangle?
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
Thanks for the dress “SS” frog you posted. While I would hope that a casual observer could see that it is a fake as you pointed out (with the newly applied “SS” markings). The point I would like to make is that collectors really have to look closely at what they are looking at. And pay attention to the small details. Here is a minor enhancement of the one you posted which clearly shows that it’s a fake.
And another dress bayonet to add to the visual collection of fake “SS” bayonets. First, the long view which really doesn’t show much. Usually the emblems of these fakes are relatively closely fitted. But the best part with this example is that the faker did a really bad inletting the emblem. And had to use some black epoxy to glue in the button!!
Best Regards, FP
FP,
An excellent example of what collectors need to look out for. I now that there will soon come a number of fakes of what we have been looking at and discussing. However, as I stated before, I have held back some critical items that will allow the fakes to be readily recognised,
Richard K
About the 10170e You must not believe, for us speaks the dbase samples, there is no mentioning of SS stamps on other samples, the piece is well known 41crs piece with missing maker stamp, partly on bayonet and scabbard.
To Your last piece, WKC is certainly a commerzial bayonet, the grips should be plastic, as seen on many bayonets of this producer and middle war era period, it would be nice to see the single rune stamp and compare it with rifle stamping. Anyway the dating of grips are not typical same as the single rune is enough for proofing no need other "SS property stamp"
As mentioned before the DH shouldnt be stamped on LAH frogs or items, so the DH is not the SS property stamp for all branches of SS for me. The TKV should have the DH as their property stamp.But it doesnt mean they should stamp with DH everything.
The WBD are well documented on Wheeler book same as there exist samples on various leather items, there were no any DH found on them only the SS runes when i am correct. On one was found a VA stamp.
best regards,Andy
Andy,
Eventhough the 2 White Frogs that Denny posted for me had SS Marked bayonets in them when I got them. I have to say that the SS Property Marks were no different than what I have seen on SS VZ-24 bayonets and SS TV bayonets. The only comparrison difference I have seen to date has to do with the accountability number location.
I have talked to several of my collector friends over the last several days and none of them have a rifle and or bayonet that they could say is definitely LAH.
All bayonets and rifles have similiar Property Marks. I had Denny post some different SS Rifle and luger property marks from my collection. As to date there is no one type of Property Stamp that has been recognised as to represent the LAH. SS Collectors really have not even seen LAH stamped and or engraved into anything.
Richard K
Andy,
Thank you for the kind words about my people. I really appreciate it.
Richard K
Andy & FP,
Please look at the grouping of SS Property Marks that Denny Posted. There are several pictures showing rifles with WA 623 stamps on them along with SS Property Stamps. I have not looked at these rifles in years but I would bet the bank that they all received some type of rework of some sort. Rifles usually receive an Eagle N or a Crown N when the SS Property Stamp is applied.
Richard K
Andy,
You stated somewhere in the recent posts that you had concerns about the Engraved Death Head and Runes shown in the SS Property Stamps.
The picture of the Engraved Light Bulb Death Head And Runes is off of one of my SS Snipers. I think it is the short side rail system. They engraved the scope with the Property Stamp because you could not hit the scope with a stamp and hammer.
That same Property Stamp is used on almost all SS VT 98/05 Bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
My opinion is that the battfield savalge (a bayonet with no scabbard and or broken parts was sent to a SS Weapons Work Camp where an item was either repaired ; salvaged for parts; and or used as is. We got somewhat into the discussion on the 1945 Phospate Finish, Consecutive Numbered bayonets that were taken from such a facility. The work camps were located more inside of the borders of Germany and the Death Camps were further out.
Richard,
I understand the idea of an SS repair facility. And have some idea as to some of the camps that had access to the equipment needed as it relates to arms. But am really more interested in looking at the items to see how the rebuilding/conversions were accomplished.
Also, thank you for posting the frog. I think I can recognise a difference allready. Do the fake VA Frogs have all of the geometry stamped within a rectangle?
If by “geometry” you mean configuration, I’ve seen other kinds of SS items with VA markings inside borders that could be considered rectangular. And some otherwise generic frogs that have the markings within a stamped border. But not VA marked frogs with the markings inside of stamped rectangular borders.
Andy & FP,
Please look at the grouping of SS Property Marks that Denny Posted. There are several pictures showing rifles with WA 623 stamps on them along with SS Property Stamps. I have not looked at these rifles in years but I would bet the bank that they all received some type of rework of some sort. Rifles usually receive an Eagle N or a Crown N when the SS Property Stamp is applied.
Richard K
From memory, WaA 623 is seen with a number of new manufacture items: rifles, machine guns, pistols, some holsters and parts. So maybe it’s just a marking on a new barrel? But not by itself a rework stamp.
Best Regards, FP
"The LAH Band also wore the white frogs. I do not know if they were members of the same regiment that you stated. I have pictures of them wearing the 98/05 white frogs."
Hello Richard, firstly about the LAH band i believe it was a part of LAH Regiment, so when needed they play by visits and similar, so probably mostly in Berlin by the presentation and Guard unit. After changing to Division i dont know what for part they was? maybe still of Regiment Nr.1,there is one article in Mollo about the LAH.
"SS Collectors really have not even seen LAH stamped and or engraved into anything." this is unfortunally not right, there exist white frogs with origin LAH proof, we know minimum about 2 pcs, both are early pre war period. there is no DH stamp. The timeline prior 1939 is important as the DH is not a overall property stamp of SS.
-the piece when reworked it could have certainly some of the marking, but as mentioned to sample WKC late war have a wood grips with 1941 i dont believe this is a real possibility of rework. Same as You mentioned matching WaA883 pieces of grips on this 10160e bayonet, without seeing it, is hard to say about a reworking. You mentioned a nice condition, so probably in origin condition still.
As mentione earlier i dont like the property marks inside of grip, as they are not visible and have no reason.
WaA623 is of Steyr production, i believe the part of production were realised in Mauthausen, so some rifles could have the camp production mixed with work? These rifles were made in other period as the Gew.98 reworks,so its new production of K98k, it couldnt be mixed, same as the property stamps on SG98/05 are there from early 30ies and the sniper rifle is what date?
best regards,Andy
To the mentioned salvaged reworks it would be to awaiting same marking, to sample same proofing of parts, or You believe that every depot or repair facility have own system of marking? The army repair pieces are normally reserialed numbers on blade or scabbard, reserialed grips or assembly numbers and reblued, no new WaA there as the inspectors were only by firms. best regards,Andy
FP,
In regards to the VA marked frogs and other items, I am not knowledgeable. I mentioned the VA marking within a rectangle because I saw a holster with that type of stamp. I will try to post some pictures of my VA marked frogs and we can see if they are good or bad.
RICHARD K
FP,
Almost forgot about the SS WBD marked frogs. Can you post a good one and any bad ones if you have them. I have 2 and I will pull them and try and get some pictures so that they can be evaluated.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the WA 623 I did not mean that that alone was a Rework Stamp. It just happened that the SS rifles that I took pictures of were so stamped and had SS Property Stamps.
My opinion is that at some time period in the 1940s the SS received direct shipments of rifles and bayonets from the Army contractors.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
As per the Wood Grips with SS Markings and dates in them, they are seen in the early SS VT Bayonets, SS Early & Late TV Bayonets and Waffen SS Bayonets. These grips are referred to as Camp Grips. Usually whatever you find them on has been reworked: reblued, accountability numbered, etc.
However, The camp grips are usually95% always found on SS VZ-24 bayonets. This model of SS Bayonet has always been modified & or reworked.
Andy,
Another thought, as per you having a problem with SS Markings being in a place where you can not see them.
Take for instance the SS Property mark on A VZ-24 rifle. Want to take a guess where the SS Property Mark is located? The SS Property Stamp on the VZ-24s are very consistent where they are placed. The mark is below the stock line and you have to remove the top barrel protector. That is not a very easy job to do. It is about 100 times more difficult to do than removing the grips from a bayonet. Why did the SS Property Mark the VZ-24 rifles where they did? Why put it where you can not see it? Good question to answer.
Richard Kuchta
"The LAH Band also wore the white frogs. I do not know if they were members of the same regiment that you stated. I have pictures of them wearing the 98/05 white frogs."
Hello Richard, firstly about the LAH band i believe it was a part of LAH Regiment, so when needed they play by visits and similar, so probably mostly in Berlin by the presentation and Guard unit. After changing to Division i dont know what for part they was? maybe still of Regiment Nr.1,there is one article in Mollo about the LAH.
"SS Collectors really have not even seen LAH stamped and or engraved into anything." this is unfortunally not right, there exist white frogs with origin LAH proof, we know minimum about 2 pcs, both are early pre war period. there is no DH stamp. The timeline prior 1939 is important as the DH is not a overall property stamp of SS.
Andy,
I checked with Steve Wolfe in California, Steve is one of the largest dealers in high end German Militaria in the world. He stated that "he himself had never seen an LAH marked bayonet frog and had never heard of a LAH Marked frog in anyones collection." He also stated that he had seen 2 LAH marked belts and nothing else. As far as the marked LAH belts, he could not substantiate there originality. No one else in the SS Weapons Collecting field has seen any marked Weapons & or accourtements with LAH markings.
The only bayonet that has been substantiated as being LAH was shown to you the other day along with 2 different SS RZM DD Helmets and the SS Standard Bearer's Gorget from Standarte #67 in Erfurt. The LAH Bayonet came from the Rochester, New York area in the 1960s and was purchased by a major dealer. Again, this is a KS 84/98 bayonet and there are no property stamps and or LAH markings on the frog. This bayonet was included in a work by the late Dr. Julian Milestone.
Richard Kuchta
-the piece when reworked it could have certainly some of the marking, but as mentioned to sample WKC late war have a wood grips with 1941 i dont believe this is a real possibility of rework. Same as You mentioned matching WaA883 pieces of grips on this 10160e bayonet, without seeing it, is hard to say about a reworking. You mentioned a nice condition, so probably in origin condition still.
As mentione earlier i dont like the property marks inside of grip, as they are not visible and have no reason.
WaA623 is of Steyr production, i believe the part of production were realised in Mauthausen, so some rifles could have the camp production mixed with work? These rifles were made in other period as the Gew.98 reworks,so its new production of K98k, it couldnt be mixed, same as the property stamps on SG98/05 are there from early 30ies and the sniper rifle is what date?
best regards,Andy
"The LAH Band also wore the white frogs. I do not know if they were members of the same regiment that you stated. I have pictures of them wearing the 98/05 white frogs."
Hello Richard, firstly about the LAH band i believe it was a part of LAH Regiment, so when needed they play by visits and similar, so probably mostly in Berlin by the presentation and Guard unit. After changing to Division i dont know what for part they was? maybe still of Regiment Nr.1,there is one article in Mollo about the LAH.
"SS Collectors really have not even seen LAH stamped and or engraved into anything." this is unfortunally not right, there exist white frogs with origin LAH proof, we know minimum about 2 pcs, both are early pre war period. there is no DH stamp. The timeline prior 1939 is important as the DH is not a overall property stamp of SS.
-the piece when reworked it could have certainly some of the marking, but as mentioned to sample WKC late war have a wood grips with 1941 i dont believe this is a real possibility of rework. Same as You mentioned matching WaA883 pieces of grips on this 10160e bayonet, without seeing it, is hard to say about a reworking. You mentioned a nice condition, so probably in origin condition still.
As mentione earlier i dont like the property marks inside of grip, as they are not visible and have no reason.
WaA623 is of Steyr production, i believe the part of production were realised in Mauthausen, so some rifles could have the camp production mixed with work? These rifles were made in other period as the Gew.98 reworks,so its new production of K98k, it couldnt be mixed, same as the property stamps on SG98/05 are there from early 30ies and the sniper rifle is what date?
best regards,Andy
Andy,
There are some very good pictures of my guns in Senich's The German Sniper.The TK and runes were used on the Ajack short side rail elevation adjustment base. This SS Marking was used from the 30s thru till the end of the war.
Richard Kuchta
........ WaA623 is of Steyr production, i believe the part of production were realised in Mauthausen, so some rifles could have the camp production mixed with work? These rifles were made in other period as the Gew.98 reworks,so its new production of K98k, it couldnt be mixed, same as the property stamps on SG98/05 are there from early 30ies and the sniper rifle is what date? best regards,Andy
Really a topic unto itself, in 1944 Himmler boasted of 1/3 of gun barrel production made in Germany was as the result of the workforce under the control of the SS. But then he also claimed 1/3 of fighter aircraft production as well. So while there is some truth in the mater, there is also considerable exaggeration as well. (And then there were also those “guest/other” workers who were not in the camps.)
To the mentioned salvaged reworks it would be to awaiting same marking, to sample same proofing of parts, or You believe that every depot or repair facility have own system of marking? The army repair pieces are normally reserialed numbers on blade or scabbard, reserialed grips or assembly numbers and reblued, no new WaA there as the inspectors were only by firms best regards, Andy
The above looks like a valid observation. I think that it has been stated on multiple occasions that the “geometry” (type and placement) of the markings has a significance. And it certainly could have some significance. But with the items I’ve seen presented so far, I can’t detect a pattern that seems to make sense.
FP, Almost forgot about the SS WBD marked frogs. Can you post a good one and any bad ones if you have them. I have 2 and I will pull them and try and get some pictures so that they can be evaluated. Richard Kuchta
I think that the WBD photos are probably with the VA photos. The one I posted just happened to be with some others I had seen recently.
FP, ................ My opinion is that at some time period in the 1940s the SS received direct shipments of rifles and bayonets from the Army contractors. Richard Kuchta
There is some documentation and evidence relating to arms deliveries. But much too involved to address with a short answer.
Andy, As per the Wood Grips with SS Markings and dates in them, they are seen in the early SS VT Bayonets, SS Early & Late TV Bayonets and Waffen SS Bayonets. These grips are referred to as Camp Grips. Usually whatever you find them on has been reworked: reblued, accountability numbered, etc.
However, The camp grips are usually95% always found on SS VZ-24 bayonets. This model of SS Bayonet has always been modified & or reworked.
Could you please expand or explain further about these other bayonets. I remember something about the Vz. 24 grips. But not some of these other ones.
Andy, Another thought, as per you having a problem with SS Markings being in a place where you can not see them.
Take for instance the SS Property mark on A VZ-24 rifle. Want to take a guess where the SS Property Mark is located? The SS Property Stamp on the VZ-24s are very consistent where they are placed. The mark is below the stock line and you have to remove the top barrel protector. That is not a very easy job to do. It is about 100 times more difficult to do than removing the grips from a bayonet. Why did the SS Property Mark the VZ-24 rifles where they did? Why put it where you can not see it? Good question to answer. Richard Kuchta
This also is a new area that I don’t remember. And it’s been a while since I’ve had one disassembled. How do you know which Vz. 24 to take apart?
And I would be remiss to not include something new to look at. Here is an original item that was altered to appeal to the “collector market”. The first image shows the backstrap. And in the second we see the engraved pommel with the "SS" motif. And in the third we see not only a a pair of Sigrunes made with something like sharpened chisels or screwdriver blades. But, apparently lacking a set of period number stamps. They made their own “1” stamps adding the upper part of the “1” separately as is pointed out. But not illustrated with markers are the "5" and "4" that were done the same way as the "1".
Which is also why you want really good photos before you buy an item.PS: When trying to read through long quotes to find new material it's very easy to miss something. If the characters could be made
"bold face". Or the new text added to the end of the quote, it makes it a lot easier to see a response to a comment, or new material.
Best Regards to All, FP
FP,
Really great photos of SS Reproductions. I had a vendor send me similar pieces, could have even been the same pieces, to evaluate and purchase. These particular reproductions jump out at you. I have seen numerous SS reproductions with the backstrap engraving.
Thanks FP,
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the Camp Grips on other bayonets are you referring to the SS TV 98/05 & SS TV 84/98 and the Waffen SS bayonets? I do not remember saying much about Camp Grips on these bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Thank you.
I think that I have another one made by the same guy (faker). And some swords that really belong on the Sword Forum. With my problem being that my filing system (which was not that good to start with) has gotten unmanageable. And I really need to reorganize it, but don't seem to have the time right now to do so.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
In regards to knowing which VZ-24 rifle to look at for the SS Property marks there are two quick checks:
1. Check the stock for a SS Property Mark. They are usually on the pistol grip of the stock.
2. Check to see if the Sling has an SS Property Stamp.
However, sometimes none of these areas are marked. Then you must look under the wood. Remove the top wood which surrounds the rear sight. You need to be careful or uu can damage this piece. Next, remove the action retainer bolts and move action & barrel out of the stock slightly. Property Mark is under the stock line near the rear sight on the side opposite the bolt
handle.
Andy has a problem with SS Marks under the grips. You have to do some work yo get to see the SS Property Mark on the VZ-24 Rifle.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
I know the feeling. I had all of my data organised at one time and thought that I had everything that I would need. Then low and behold I was provided the opportunity to obtain SS Bayonets from 2 Large SS Rifle Collectors in addition to inheriting a number of key pieces. The new pieces and data have caused me to start over from the beginning.
A week ago when I pulled the one SS TV Bayonet with the Police Star L, I did not know that the Police marking was on the spine of the Bayonet. The Bayonet was in SS TV Standarte 9 section.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
When addressing quotes I shall make it more noticeable and easier to find. I have had to break my posts up into smaller segments or when I hit the submit button the system locks up.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Thanks, that would help. In a long posting it sometimes got very confusing. And I had to go and color code them just to try and figure out who said what.
As for the grips what you said I think was : “Andy, As per the Wood Grips with SS Markings and dates in them, they are seen in the early SS VT Bayonets, SS Early & Late TV Bayonets and Waffen SS Bayonets. These grips are referred to as Camp Grips. Usually whatever you find them on has been reworked: reblued, accountability numbered, etc. However, The camp grips are usually95% always found on SS VZ-24 bayonets. This model of SS Bayonet has always been modified & or reworked.”
Your words not mine, and I was looking for clarification.
As for the Vz. 24 rifles, how do you tell something like a Romanian rework from a German one? It’s been a long time since I’ve looked at them, but I seem to recall some out of place markings with some of the imports. And the same thing with the slings. Czech made, versus those made elsewhere after the war.
PS: My own estimate of the time needed to rebuild my files is at least a month. So I can understand the problem with data management that is out of control.
With the good news being that it's not everything, with some segments in (more or less) reasonable shape
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I am not that knowledgeable of the names given to the specific styles of rework done on the VZ-24 Bayonets. I have such a variety of different styles of rework that the VZ-24 could be a study of its own. One thing nice about the SS VZ-24 Bayonets is that there is a variety of property Marks and we have dates in the grips. I think that it would be fairly easy to make a time line predicated upon dates, Property Marks, and style of rework.
It would be beneficial to know where the majority of the rework was done on the VZ-24 Rifles and bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
I also have a reworked Polish Bayonet with an SS Property Mark. It looks like the blanko scabbard had internal modifications made to it to accept the bayonet.
Richard Kuchta
........ WaA623 is of Steyr production, i believe the part of production were realised in Mauthausen, so some rifles could have the camp production mixed with work? These rifles were made in other period as the Gew.98 reworks,so its new production of K98k, it couldnt be mixed, same as the property stamps on SG98/05 are there from early 30ies and the sniper rifle is what date? best regards,Andy
Really a topic unto itself, in 1944 Himmler boasted of 1/3 of gun barrel production made in Germany was as the result of the workforce under the control of the SS. But then he also claimed 1/3 of fighter aircraft production as well. So while there is some truth in the mater, there is also considerable exaggeration as well. (And then there were also those “guest/other” workers who were not in the camps.)
To the mentioned salvaged reworks it would be to awaiting same marking, to sample same proofing of parts, or You believe that every depot or repair facility have own system of marking? The army repair pieces are normally reserialed numbers on blade or scabbard, reserialed grips or assembly numbers and reblued, no new WaA there as the inspectors were only by firms best regards, Andy
The above looks like a valid observation. I think that it has been stated on multiple occasions that the “geometry” (type and placement) of the markings has a significance. And it certainly could have some significance. But with the items I’ve seen presented so far, I can’t detect a pattern that seems to make sense.
[b]FP,
I need to get a picture posted that shows a large group of these frogs with the SS Property Stamps. What I am trying to say can better be seen looking at a grouping of TV Bayonet Frogs.
Richard Kuchta[/b]FP, Almost forgot about the SS WBD marked frogs. Can you post a good one and any bad ones if you have them. I have 2 and I will pull them and try and get some pictures so that they can be evaluated. Richard Kuchta
I think that the WBD photos are probably with the VA photos. The one I posted just happened to be with some others I had seen recently.
FP, ................ My opinion is that at some time period in the 1940s the SS received direct shipments of rifles and bayonets from the Army contractors. Richard Kuchta
There is some documentation and evidence relating to arms deliveries. But much too involved to address with a short answer.
Andy, As per the Wood Grips with SS Markings and dates in them, they are seen in the early SS VT Bayonets, SS Early & Late TV Bayonets and Waffen SS Bayonets. These grips are referred to as Camp Grips. Usually whatever you find them on has been reworked: reblued, accountability numbered, etc.
However, The camp grips are usually95% always found on SS VZ-24 bayonets. This model of SS Bayonet has always been modified & or reworked.
Could you please expand or explain further about these other bayonets. I remember something about the Vz. 24 grips. But not some of these other ones.
Andy, Another thought, as per you having a problem with SS Markings being in a place where you can not see them.
Take for instance the SS Property mark on A VZ-24 rifle. Want to take a guess where the SS Property Mark is located? The SS Property Stamp on the VZ-24s are very consistent where they are placed. The mark is below the stock line and you have to remove the top barrel protector. That is not a very easy job to do. It is about 100 times more difficult to do than removing the grips from a bayonet. Why did the SS Property Mark the VZ-24 rifles where they did? Why put it where you can not see it? Good question to answer. Richard Kuchta
This also is a new area that I don’t remember. And it’s been a while since I’ve had one disassembled. How do you know which Vz. 24 to take apart?
And I would be remiss to not include something new to look at. Here is an original item that was altered to appeal to the “collector market”. The first image shows the backstrap. And in the second we see the engraved pommel with the "SS" motif. And in the third we see not only a a pair of Sigrunes made with something like sharpened chisels or screwdriver blades. But, apparently lacking a set of period number stamps. They made their own “1” stamps adding the upper part of the “1” separately as is pointed out. But not illustrated with markers are the "5" and "4" that were done the same way as the "1".
Which is also why you want really good photos before you buy an item.PS: When trying to read through long quotes to find new material it's very easy to miss something. If the characters could be made
"bold face". Or the new text added to the end of the quote, it makes it a lot easier to see a response to a comment, or new material.
Best Regards to All, FP
Apologies for breaking up your topic / debate which I found to be very interesting. I posted this at the start of the thread, that a Heer dagger was also posted in the army dagger section with a " Heinz Brenner " inscription.
The font is identical which is nothing unusual on etched pieces but the fact that one is on an SS marked blade and the other on an army dagger is stretching my imagination
Coincidence?.
This post has gone way beyond an individual item so please feel free to ignore my enquiry.....
I dont know what should be stamped on a SS reworked Vz.24 rifle, but without any additional infos about the piece, mainly the czechoslovak origin markings is hard to made a opinion, i assume Yours is marked similar on barell as the reworked Gew.98. Thats the point about the reworking, You compare the period of 1935-37 as same as the period of 1942, because earlier were not reworked the Vz.24 rifles, are well known manuals and orders when it were reworked, as You already see here on page the various pictures of SS soldiers of Russia war where they still use the unreworked bayonets with barell rings on crossguard. So the pieces were dated with wrong stamps on inner side of grips, same as You have there a "reworked" A80 piece, which neednt any reworks as they were produced already as SG24(T). Same as majority of the Dh are there engraved. When a piece was damaged by WSS i believe they had a field armorer so the bayonets will not go back to camps, only TKV or guard units could have reworked the pieces there.
To LAH frog, when anyone found a belt marked properly with this marking so i assume the frogs could be found too, it doesnt mean that 2 or 3 people when not hear about it that they dont exist, one of the pieces that are real was found in France, as You probably know the LAH fighted there in 1940 same as later in 1944. best regards,Andy
Sndy,
In regards to the LAH marked frog, none are in SS weapons collections nor have the major dealers seen them and or dealt them.
Collectors are skeptical of LAH markings. Those that are out there are fake and are done in different geometric patterns using a metal letter stamp. In this particular case, an SS collector is referring to a map case.
What type of bayonets are in those supposed LAH Frogs that you know of? How are the bayonets marked? Are the frogs on a white belt and suspender set? If so how are they marked? We would all like to believe that there are LAH marked items out there but to date no one has really seen any.
Andy, my opinion is that the LAH used the same property stamps as seen on all of the other SS equipment: rifles, bayonets, binoculars,lugers, and leather goods.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
In regards to the SS VZ-24 rifle, I used this as an example of the SS placing a Property Stamp in a place that you could not see it unless you work at it. You said that you have a problem with SS markings being in the grips of SS bayonets where they can not be seen. I do not know the answer to your cooncern as to why the SS markings are placed where you can not see them. But the SS did this for some reasom. Later today I should be able to tell you of some other marks the SS placed in areas that you can not see them without disassembly.
Richard Kuchta
"We would all like to believe that there are LAH marked items out there but to date no one has really seen any." who didnt see it, You and some of Your friends? but there is community around of world, that collect items, some of them are not focused on SS but have a good position to find some real items, i know about russian collectors that found many real items, direct from fighting areas. When You dont believe is no my problem, i could only say the Mollo book about the LAH, has there a piece which is similar marked as the frogs.The frogs were white painted and are from proper maker.
The WBD is real piece and have no DH stamp, same as is early 1935-37 period too,so on 2 evidently SS items are not DH stamps, because the DH is not a property stamp of SS it could probably only TKV property stamp or only a SS rework stamp, when this theory real.
same as the last mentioened VA stamped items dont have any DH on them, the majority of colthing items in all of the vollumes are clearly stamped or signed with RZM which is the acceptance major administrator of real SS pieces. Is no stamps there of DH. When so only with runes.best regards,Andy
Andy,
In regards to SS LAH Bayonet Frogs, you said that you knew of collectors in France that had some and now you know of some in Russia.
Steve Wolfe is a World Wide vendor of German Militaria. He along with alot of other vendors know what I collect and if these vendors knew of such an item or had such an item. I know that I would be informed. Basically, no one has seen such an item as a LAH marked frog. In my opinion, just because I have not seen such an item nor any of the collectors and vendors such as Wolfe & Hardin, doesn't mean that the LAH frog might not exist. However, the frog would have to be analysed and determined to be original. Just knowing of some guys that have white frogs does not make your opinion about them correct.
Richard Kuchta
"We would all like to believe that there are LAH marked items out there but to date no one has really seen any." who didnt see it, You and some of Your friends? but there is community around of world, that collect items, some of them are not focused on SS but have a good position to find some real items, i know about russian collectors that found many real items, direct from fighting areas. When You dont believe is no my problem, i could only say the Mollo book about the LAH, has there a piece which is similar marked as the frogs.The frogs were white painted and are from proper maker.
The WBD is real piece and have no DH stamp, same as is early 1935-37 period too,so on 2 evidently SS items are not DH stamps, because the DH is not a property stamp of SS it could probably only TKV property stamp or only a SS rework stamp, when this theory real.
same as the last mentioened VA stamped items dont have any DH on them, the majority of colthing items in all of the vollumes are clearly stamped or signed with RZM which is the acceptance major administrator of real SS pieces. Is no stamps there of DH. When so only with runes.best regards,Andy
Andy,
I never said that the SS VA marked frogs and the SS WBD Frogs were not original. I said that I was not knowledgeable of them. I said that I never got an SS bayonet in a frog that was so marked. You said because there is no TK on these frogs that the TK is only for the TK Division which is a completely wrong statement. Single Rune and double runes are also used as SS Property Stamps. Look again at the SS Styer Single Rune on the receiver of the SS BNZ 43 rifle.
Did Mollo get into the specifics of how the LAH White Rig is marked?
Richard Kuchta
Apologies for breaking up your topic / debate which I found to be very interesting. I posted this at the start of the thread, that a Heer dagger was also posted in the army dagger section with a " Heinz Brenner " inscription.
The font is identical which is nothing unusual on etched pieces but the fact that one is on an SS marked blade and the other on an army dagger is stretching my imagination
Coincidence?.
This post has gone way beyond an individual item so please feel free to ignore my enquiry.....
Degens,
You ask a good question and I really do not have an answer as to why to different Heinz Brenner daggers. What I can tell you is that about 2 to 3 years ago I engaged the services of one of the major SS researchers to try and obtain information on the owner of the bayonet. What was reported back to me was that were were a considerable number of SS Men with that name. I would assume that the name is quite common. To research so many Heinz Brenners was not realistic at that time because it would be difficult to determine who was the corrct Heinz Brenner. If the name is that popular there could be Heinz Brenners in the Army; however, it does not explain the same font etc.
Thanks for the good question.
Richard Kuchta
I said the piece LAH was found in France, the other piece was found in Europe too,when i correctly remember. The pieces found in Russia were not marked by LAH but with other classical SS stamps. I only would explain that there exist items that Your friend or dealer has no evidence. Thats all.The one of WBD piece was found in east Germany in "kessel" of Halbe, we spoked with FP about it some years ago. It was found a near a Dachau marked identification mark. The condition was certainly not great, there was no bayonet in the frog.Anyway there was no DH on backside or anywhere.George Wheeler has a great frog marked WBD in the book. that is much more better as the items found in east Germany, i have evidence of ammo pouch found in Russia with same marking.
Mollo has detailed picture of the overall white equipment, same as some stamping on knots and mainly clothing, but they have there a item dedicated only for LAH the name and how is the writen, is clear confirmation of the reality of this stamping.
The using a links between a frog and bayonet is very problematic, i could remove a frog from bayonet in 10 second and give them other piece on. Similar is to see as Your 41ddl piece have a frog with added DH? but the other SS piece have a normal Wehrmacht kvz piece. The tracing of originality of complete bayonet-frog, after 70 years is very hard, only some attic founds could be to 90% declared that they are so from war. For 100% is for me not real.
The using a links between a frog and bayonet is very problematic, i could remove a frog from bayonet in 10 second and give them other piece on. Similar is to see as Your 41ddl piece have a frog with added DH? but the other SS piece have a normal Wehrmacht kvz piece. The tracing of originality of complete bayonet-frog, after 70 years is very hard, only some attic founds could be to 90% declared that they are so from war. For 100% is for me not real.
Are you saying that items that have been in an attic for years means that they are 90% pre 1945 items???? Andy,to prove authenticity you must do much better than the item was in an attic.
Richard Kuchta
The using a links between a frog and bayonet is very problematic, i could remove a frog from bayonet in 10 second and give them other piece on. Similar is to see as Your 41ddl piece have a frog with added DH? but the other SS piece have a normal Wehrmacht kvz piece.
Andy,
You are trying to compare Apples to Oranges. An army bayonet would not have the addition of any SS Property stamps unless it was battlefield salvage picked up by the SS and or contract shipped directly to the SS. In this particular case it is my opinion that this particullar 41 ddl bayonet was shipped directly to the SS. The time frame is in the range to when the SS was getting shipments of weapons from the major Army suppliers.
Richard Kuchta The tracing of originality of complete bayonet-frog, after 70 years is very hard, only some attic founds could be to 90% declared that they are so from war. For 100% is for me not real.
I would only explain the situation, as here are many items found in untouched condition because stored in houses for long time.
When piece was found in a SS marked frog doesnt mean it automatically, it was there from war. So Your 41ddl piece as mentioned before for me is a normal WaA piece, ordered by Army and has nothing to do with SS, same as i dont believe Your opinion about engraving there a DH for property stamps after rework. Partly because there is no sign of propper reworking. The piece has not origin grips but no other signs of reworking.
Andy,
In regards to the VZ-94 SS Rifle (I was calling it a VZ-24 Rifle which is incorrect) it is as you suggested. It is marked similiar to that of a Gewhere rework. There is the SS Property Stamp on the barrel below the stock line and the receiver has the Crown N proof. Also SS Property mark on stock.
Richard K
As mentioned before without seeing details or have the info about the czechoslovak origin markings, is hard to made any opinions.Crown N is no possible as real, it should have it the Eagle N as this stamp replaced the Crown N on early 1939 as commerzial proof. The rifle were captured probably march 1939 and should be not reworked prior 1941/2 period.
I dont know what should be stamped on a SS reworked Vz.24 rifle, but without any additional infos about the piece, mainly the czechoslovak origin markings is hard to made a opinion, i assume Yours is marked similar on barell as the reworked Gew.98. Thats the point about the reworking, You compare the period of 1935-37 as same as the period of 1942, because earlier were not reworked the Vz.24 rifles, are well known manuals and orders when it were reworked, as You already see here on page the various pictures of SS soldiers of Russia war where they still use the unreworked bayonets with barell rings on crossguard.
Andy,
I have several SS VZ-24 Bayonets that retain the muzzle rings and have SS Property marks. I just took the grips off of one SS VZ-24 bayonets with a muzzle ring and the grips are marked as follows:
1. Accountability #57 matches bayonet.
2. SS Property Stamp.
3. 1939 date stamp.
Another SS VZ-24 With Muzzle Ring.
1. Serial #482
2. SS Property Stamp.
3. 1939 date stamp.
Another SS VZ-24 with Muzzle Ring:
1. Grips accountability #1484.
2. SS Property Stamped.
3. 1939 date stamped.
You are mistaken about your statemnt that the wrong date stamp was used. These SS Bayonets were reworked in 1939.
Richard Kuchta So the pieces were dated with wrong stamps on inner side of grips, same as You have there a "reworked" A80 piece, which neednt any reworks as they were produced already as SG24(T). Same as majority of the Dh are there engraved. When a piece was damaged by WSS i believe they had a field armorer so the bayonets will not go back to camps, only TKV or guard units could have reworked the pieces there.
To LAH frog, when anyone found a belt marked properly with this marking so i assume the frogs could be found too, it doesnt mean that 2 or 3 people when not hear about it that they dont exist, one of the pieces that are real was found in France, as You probably know the LAH fighted there in 1940 same as later in 1944. best regards,Andy
As mentioned before without seeing details or have the info about the czechoslovak origin markings, is hard to made any opinions.Crown N is no possible as real, it should have it the Eagle N as this stamp replaced the Crown N on early 1939 as commerzial proof. The rifle were captured probably march 1939 and should be not reworked prior 1941/2 period.
I shall get some pictures of the VZ rifle so that you can see better what was reworked.
Richard K
As already mentioned the piece with 1484 is wrong because there was used the czechoslovak number, the fakers didnt understand what is there stamped on pommel, thats the reason why they used this serial, same as You dont know what for mean have this number.In 1939 there were not any reworks of Vz.24 rifles. Same as Your dates stamps are always different, is no other pcs of equipment that would be so overdated as this.The piece was reblued as part of reworking, so it was done later not in 1939.
As already mentioned the piece with 1484 is wrong because there was used the czechoslovak number, the fakers didnt understand what is there stamped on pommel, thats the reason why they used this serial, same as You dont know what for mean have this number.In 1939 there were not any reworks of Vz.24 rifles. Same as Your dates stamps are always different, is no other pcs of equipment that would be so overdated as this.The piece was reblued as part of reworking, so it was done later not in 1939.
SS VZ-24 bayonet with accountability #1484 is not stamped on the crossguard or blade. I do not know where you came up with that. As I said before, you need to get your facts straight when the bayonets and rifles started to be reworked by the SS. I went through three SS VZ-24 bayonets with muzzle rings and all were dated 1939.
Richard Kuchta
As mentioned earlier, who added the 1484 on grips didnt understand what is the reason of the 1484 stamp, germans didnt serialed the pommel area, so the grips are postwar serialed, same as the circle SS stamps is there postwar.The reworks of Vz.24 were started in pre Russia campaign and was full reworked mainly to first lost in winter 1941, there are rework orders scribed for LW by Goering and similar exist for Heer and other branches, same as You could see the bayonets on the pictures of SS in Karelia or Police division are blank not blued.
As mentioned earlier, who added the 1484 on grips didnt understand what is the reason of the 1484 stamp, germans didnt serialed the pommel area, so the grips are postwar serialed, same as the circle SS stamps is there postwar.The reworks of Vz.24 were started in pre Russia campaign and was full reworked mainly to first lost in winter 1941, there are rework orders scribed for LW by Goering and similar exist for Heer and other branches, same as You could see the bayonets on the pictures of SS in Karelia or Police division are blank not blued.
Please post your SS documentation regarding the reworking of Czech bayonets and rifles by the SS.
I just pulled an unblued SS VZ -24 Bayonet. Accountability # 174. Grips are numbered and date stamped 1939. This bayonet also has the muzzle ring removed.
As per your statement the SS VZ-24 bayonets were reworked by fakers after the war. Who are you trying to kid? VZ-24 Bayonets were worthless after the war and up thru the 1970s. I guess the fakers all went broke and went out of business. No one even knew what the SS Property Marks were until just recently.
Some SS VZ-24 bayonets were imported into this country by Mr. DeRuiter from Sarco. Mr De Ruiter was a member of the original Carbiners Collectors Network. He sold some rare SS VZ-24 bayonets to some of us for the exorbtant price of $12.50. An original SS frog for the VZ-24 was another $1.50. He really made a killing. He had bayonets ranging in quality from being run over by a tank to Very Good plus condition.
Richard Kuchta
Forum Members,
In regards to SS Property Marks being out of the line of sight, The Steyer reworks SS ZZ A2 are below the stock line on the reworked rifles.
Richard Kuchta
This is an interesting and informative thread.
Please respect each others points of view when posting. Feel free to disagree but please do it without trying to be sarcastic or poke the other guy.
Thanks,
Dave
Forum Members,
Does anyone have any questions on the SS RZM DD Helmets?
Any questions on the SS Flag Bearer's Gorget?
Any questions on the LAH KS Bayonet?
Richard K
Forum,
In regards to a Frog with a Manufacturer's Stamp and a SS Property Mark, I just came across a KURT SEIDEL, BERLIN W57, 1940. Frog is a black combat frog with no hilt strap. As stated before, the majority of the SS Bayonet Frogs were made in the Work Camps.
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
Does anyone know the thread size or requred Tap for the bayonet retainer screw in the side of the bayonet scabbard?
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
Does anyone know the thread size or requred Tap for the bayonet retainer screw in the side of the bayonet scabbard?
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Apparently while I was taking some time elsewhere to do what I have to, there has been a
lot of discussion. And there is nothing wrong with (respectfully) arguing this point or that. But right now I would imagine that for a lot of bayonet (and rifle) collectors reading this thread - a large part of the discussion is just “
vaporware”. With nothing to relate to visually, or to be learned. And if what is being argued can’t be seen. How do you get to the next level??
And right after I finish reading all the back and forth. I will dig out one of my thread gauges to give you the answer for the retainer screw question.
Best Regards, FP
It's not metric, but a 6-36 will probably be close enough. FP
Richard,
There was a lot of discussion earlier today, but here are three items that caught my interest more than the others.
.................. As I said before, you need to get your facts straight when the bayonets and rifles started to be reworked by the SS. I went through three SS VZ-24 bayonets with muzzle rings and all were dated 1939.
................. I just pulled an unblued SS VZ -24 Bayonet. Accountability # 174. Grips are numbered and date stamped 1939. This bayonet also has the muzzle ring removed.
All 1939 dated, both with and without the muzzle ring. And I’m assuming that all of them have the Death’s Head/Skull type markings on them somewhere? But what does concern me a little is the fact that you state the forth one is not blued (which means that the three with muzzle rings are blued?). But the forth one has the muzzle ring removed which is not seen until circa 1941 with new production. But why isn't it blued like the other 1939's, or the later production types which are blued? And still remains bright finished like the early full muzzle ring types. And with all of them having 1939 dates, why are they configured so differently? So is it possible to have some images posted of all the markings you’ve mentioned for these four bayonets. And possibly a few that include the original production dates?
................. Some SS VZ-24 bayonets were imported into this country by Mr. DeRuiter from Sarco. Mr De Ruiter was a member of the original Carbiners Collectors Network. He sold some rare SS VZ-24 bayonets to some of us for the exorbtant price of $12.50. An original SS frog for the VZ-24 was another $1.50. .......... He had bayonets ranging in quality from being run over by a tank to Very Good plus condition.
As for this statement, is it possible to see exactly which bayonets, and the frog that came from Sarco. From Mr. De Ruiter’s hands to your hands? That would no doubt help us establish a baseline in case some unscrupulous individuals had decided to fake the bayonets after the supply from Sarco ran out. And if you can, with some really good pictures, so we can all see exactly what you are talking about. Helping us to visualize the points you are making. Thanks.
Best Regards, FP
I believe we already discussed it 4 years ago, but for the main info that i had my reasons, i believe FP had it already mentioned:
1.You have a bunch of different upgraded Vz.24 bayonets, from untouched czechoslovak condition to total rework of Vz.24 bayonet, so i assume certainly not done in one rework facility, as by reworks You could see from a one source are the reworks made in same manner
2.the all the DH on the pieces have been different in size, in design and all are hand engraved not pantographed
3. the all grips are there pictured are origin no one is a new rework grip
4. majority of them have the identical SS runes stamp
5.majority of the grips have the large date stamping, that is no observed on any german bayonets to this time, i believe already someone had it solved as the fonts are in inch so american size not in metric size.
6. some of the fonts of digits of date are typical postwar fonts, not seen on real german pieces
7.some of the bayonets have there a assembly numbers that has no reason there as no changed grips or some have no rework signs.
8. the 1484 assembly numbers is wrong as mentioned because its a part of czechoslovak stamping
9. A Sg24(t)made in Povazska Bystrica has already all the marking from production of reworked so no need anything stamp inside of grips.
From this all moments, and from other 200 german reworked bayonets that i personally observed and many of them dissasembled and have about 50 Vz.24 bayonets in my collection i could say that this marking is not real.It were done to prepare a SS pieces.
Here a picture of a Vz.24 reworked by germans, no any stamps on grips, the slot of cleaning rod was full of rest of insects.
It's not metric, but a 6-36 will probably be close enough. FP
I am at work today and am having difficulty posting.
Richard K
Richard,
There was a lot of discussion earlier today, but here are three items that caught my interest more than the others.
.................. As I said before, you need to get your facts straight when the bayonets and rifles started to be reworked by the SS. I went through three SS VZ-24 bayonets with muzzle rings and all were dated 1939.
................. I just pulled an unblued SS VZ -24 Bayonet. Accountability # 174. Grips are numbered and date stamped 1939. This bayonet also has the muzzle ring removed.
All 1939 dated, both with and without the muzzle ring. And I’m assuming that all of them have the Death’s Head/Skull type markings on them somewhere? But what does concern me a little is the fact that you state the forth one is not blued (which means that the three with muzzle rings are blued?).
FP, The Pommel, tang, & crossguard are blued the blade is parked / light gray. Andy stated that he could see blades in the white in the pictures that he was looking at; however, the blades could be the light gray parkarize.
Richard K But the forth one has the muzzle ring removed which is not seen until circa 1941 with new production. But why isn't it blued like the other 1939's, or the later production types which are blued? And still remains bright finished like the early full muzzle ring types. And with all of them having 1939 dates, why are they configured so differently? So is it possible to have some images posted of all the markings you’ve mentioned for these four bayonets. And possibly a few that include the original production dates?
................. Some SS VZ-24 bayonets were imported into this country by Mr. DeRuiter from Sarco. Mr De Ruiter was a member of the original Carbiners Collectors Network. He sold some rare SS VZ-24 bayonets to some of us for the exorbtant price of $12.50. An original SS frog for the VZ-24 was another $1.50. .......... He had bayonets ranging in quality from being run over by a tank to Very Good plus condition.
As for this statement, is it possible to see exactly which bayonets, and the frog that came from Sarco. From Mr. De Ruiter’s hands to your hands? That would no doubt help us establish a baseline in case some unscrupulous individuals had decided to fake the bayonets after the supply from Sarco ran out. And if you can, with some really good pictures, so we can all see exactly what you are talking about. Helping us to visualize the points you are making. Thanks.
Best Regards, FP
I believe we already discussed it 4 years ago, but for the main info that i had my reasons, i believe FP had it already mentioned:
1.You have a bunch of different upgraded Vz.24 bayonets, from untouched czechoslovak condition to total rework of Vz.24 bayonet, so i assume certainly not done in one rework facility, as by reworks You could see from a one source are the reworks made in same manner
2.the all the DH on the pieces have been different in size, in design and all are hand engraved not pantographed
3. the all grips are there pictured are origin no one is a new rework grip
4. majority of them have the identical SS runes stamp
5.majority of the grips have the large date stamping, that is no observed on any german bayonets to this time, i believe already someone had it solved as the fonts are in inch so american size not in metric size.
6. some of the fonts of digits of date are typical postwar fonts, not seen on real german pieces
7.some of the bayonets have there a assembly numbers that has no reason there as no changed grips or some have no rework signs.
8. the 1484 assembly numbers is wrong as mentioned because its a part of czechoslovak stamping
9. A Sg24(t)made in Povazska Bystrica has already all the marking from production of reworked so no need anything stamp inside of grips.
From this all moments, and from other 200 german reworked bayonets that i personally observed and many of them dissasembled and have about 50 Vz.24 bayonets in my collection i could say that this marking is not real.It were done to prepare a SS pieces.
Here a picture of a Vz.24 reworked by germans, no any stamps on grips, the slot of cleaning rod was full of rest of insects.
I do not remember discussing and or posting during this discussion the items that you are talking about above.
Please post some of your SS VZ-24 Bayonets so that we can make comparissons as to what you are talking about above. I can probably get pictures tomorrow. Please post for discussion.
Richard K
Forum,
Last night when I was looking through my SS VZ-24 bayonets it occurred to me that both styles of VZ-24 bayonets were required ASAP. The VZ Rifle needs a muzzle ring on the bayonet to hold it securely. I think that the reworked SS Gew Rifles and new Mausers could not use the Muzzle ring on the VZ-24 because of tolerance problems. FP, can you check this out.
Richard K
"The Pommel, tang, & crossguard are blued the blade is parked / light gray. Andy stated that he could see blades in the white in the pictures that he was looking at; however, the blades could be the light gray parkarize" the blades are from factory sanded and lightly browned so no parkerisation in reality as it made a grey finish, the light browning is well known procedure used on czechoslovak origin prewar bayonets, was done in ZB, has nothing with germans, the handle was polished, so when You have a blued handle and parkerised blade its a postwar finish, as germans blued the overall piece. But not in 1939 more 2 years laters, as there exist exact orders how it should be made.
"The VZ Rifle needs a muzzle ring on the bayonet to hold it securely." they neednt any barell rings because the 4cm slot is same by german rifles as by Vz.24 rifles, but the czechoslovak have no design without barell ring. The germans wouldnt that anything touch the barell so it could vibrate freely by shooting, as is documented that by adding bayonets with barell the shooting hit area goes down, but is no so important because a normal soldier could in reality hit people targets max to 400=600 meters.
The each reworked Vz.24 bayonet by germans could be a SS owned, they neednt stamp additional property stamp,as since 1941/2 could obtain a WSS any arms or bayonets through the army system. The pictures that You provided few years ago i unfortunally lost by my PC crash, but i had the resume that was already sent to You, same as You posted some of Your SS bayonets some years ago on BCN mails.I know Your reports since 2001. best regards,Andy
Andy,
Thank you for the input on the VZ-24 Muzzle Ring. I remember trying to put a VZ-24 on my SS 98a and it would not go on easily at all.
Richard K
When looking for additional pictures, it would be great to post the wood grip of WKC blanko done in camp same as the Elite Diamant with lazy S DH stamped? Thanks.
Richard,
While I imagine that a lot of us are eager to see the 1939 and some other bayonets that have been mentioned. I understand what it’s like to try and keep on top of multiple things all going on at one time. But if you have the time, in addition to Andy's request if you have anything else ready to go for either bayonets and frogs that would be great also.
Some general observations: Barrels vibrate upon firing and a muzzle ring can affect accuracy. And the Germans chose to not use muzzle rings for that reason. But at more practical ranges the effect is not that severe, so we see muzzle rings for other nations. But why they (the Germans) cut off the muzzle rings of some of the Vz. 33 carbine bayonets. Which have 3 cm bayonet lugs (versus 4 cm) I really don’t understand.
While the later Czech weapons had superlative quality (H. Himmler liked them), the early ones not so much. With one problem being the standardization - interchangeability of parts. Which (as was already mentioned) is probably why the early Vz. 24 bayonets were numbered. Also having a couple of numbered 98/22’s that don’t seem to want to fit on a standard 4 cm bayonet lug. I also never tried to put a Vz. 24 bayonet on a Kar. 98a myself, but am not that surprised it didn’t fit. But to be blunt, some WW I German rifles IMO were (and still are) substandard. And to me a much more serious concern than fitting a bayonet, would be the soft receivers.
As for the finishing of bayonets, the later Czech types under the Germans were blued. While the domestic Czech bayonets, and early German, (there is some variation with export models) had polished steel tangs and pommels. And the crossguards and blades were sandblasted. But to me, it looks like some of them might also have been lightly phosphated as well as an aid to rust prevention. But not with a period conventional U. S. 'Parkerized' type finish*.
* PS: U.S. finishes are variable between time period and maker, but overall have a different look.
Regards to All, FP
The Vz.33 have probably only 2.5cm function slot so i believe the cutt of barell ring determined the bayonet to only side weapon function, not attachable on rifles and useable, as the complet would be not enough strenght by using in normal way.
To late 30ies finish its more matted as no classical phosphate finish was used, the phosphate finish is typical for postwar production.
To interchangeability,the Vz.22 rifle has the older WW1 german parts, so when You use a Vz.24 bayonet from any years between 1925 to 1950 is fully functionable on all rifles Vz.24, the problem is mainly with german bayonet adapters.best regards,Andy
The Vz.33 have probably only 2.5cm function slot so i believe the cutt of barell ring determined the bayonet to only side weapon function, not attachable on rifles and useable, as the complet would be not enough strenght by using in normal way.
To late 30ies finish its more matted as no classical phosphate finish was used, the phosphate finish is typical for postwar production.
Andy,
We are talking about the reworking of the VZ-24 Bayonet by the SS. I do not have their rework specifications nor do you. We will have a picture of my bayonet to look at when I can get my tech some free time. In the mean time can you please post your SS VZ-24 bayonets so that we can make comparrisons as to your areas of technical concern.
Richard KTo interchangeability,the Vz.22 rifle has the older WW1 german parts, so when You use a Vz.24 bayonet from any years between 1925 to 1950 is fully functionable on all rifles Vz.24, the problem is mainly with german bayonet adapters.best regards,Andy
I already answered Your question, the piece presented here could be used by SS, there is no need stamps additional property stamp. I have some 7-10 other reworked bayonets same as some origin SG24(T) made in german order.
Same as i mentioned here already pictures with unreworked bayonets from Polizei Division and Karelia teritorry where You could made exact dating.
John Jacobi,
I didn't forget about you. You will be receiving the pictures of the consecutive numbered SS 1945 Bayonets.
Richard K
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures of the SS Frogs.
Richard Kuchta
Richard (and Denny),
Thanks for posting the pictures. I haven't done any enhancements yet, but the second from the top I'm not sure about. With the rest looking OK at first glance.
Andy,
You may have some information that I don't have access to, but when I look at the juncture of this rivet to the adjoining crossguard. From what I am seeing it looks like it's filled in with something like a gray phosphate finish. With the bayonet being a wartime example from Bystrica.
Regards to All, FP
Richard,
I tried to get a better look at the second frog from the top, but the image was not as good as I would have liked. In the circle to the left - is that a skull of some kind? And are the numbers to its right individually hand stamped?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I compared a grip from a SS VZ-24 dated 1939 to a grip fom a SS 84/98 WKC Accountability # 368.
The resuls are as follows:
1. Diameter of the Runes Stamp 0.236 (Same on both grips)
2. Height of numbers: WKC 1941 date: Height of numbers 0.198
VZ-24 1939 date: Height of numbers o.198
The heights of the numbers in the dates are the same and the diameter of the Runes Circle are also the same.
What are the comparable numbers that Andy has in his SS VZ-24 Bayonets and or other SS Bayonets?
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I tried to get a better look at the second frog from the top, but the image was not as good as I would have liked. In the circle to the left - is that a skull of some kind? And are the numbers to its right individually stamped?
Best Regards, FP
I just sprinkled some white powder onto the stamping and I can read it alot better: VA 401/37 Runes in a circle.
Richard K
Richard,
I tried to get a better look at the second frog from the top, but the image was not as good as I would have liked. In the circle to the left - is that a skull of some kind? And are the numbers to its right individually stamped?
Best Regards, FP
I just sprinkled some white powder onto the stamping and I can read it alot better: VA 401/37 Runes in a circle.
Richard K
Richard,
It's this one, the one above it.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I compared a grip from a SS VZ-24 dated 1939 to a grip fom a SS 84/98 WKC Accountability # 368.
The resuls are as follows:
1. Diameter of the Runes Stamp 0.236 (Same on both grips)
2. Height of numbers: WKC 1941 date: Height of numbers 0.198
VZ-24 1939 date: Height of numbers o.198
The heights of the numbers in the dates are the same and the diameter of the Runes Circle are also the same.
What are the comparable numbers that Andy has in his SS VZ-24 Bayonets and or other SS Bayonets?
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
RE: SS 84/98 WKC. I just went through the complete thread to find the WKC mentioned here to see what the marking (runes stamp) looked like. But the only WKC I found was the picture posted by Andy which had not been taken apart. Also, for dated production in 1941, wasn't WKC using a three letter code? Self correction: It depends on the letter block which was not specified, unless it is the # 368.
Any chance for some pictures so that we know that we are at least talking about the same thing?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I am looking at the SS VZ-24 Bayonet ;Accountability #174; dated 1939 with Phospate finish on the blade. Internal tang looks bright but the external edges are blued?
Czech marking on blade ricasso CSZ over T
Richard Kuchta
FP,
I made a mistake and picked up the wrong frog. Getting tired. Put powder on this one also and the circle to the extreme left has an RZM in it. The circle to the extreme right has runes in it. The numbers look like 100/41.
Sorry,
Richard K
FP,
I am looking at the SS VZ-24 Bayonet ;Accountability #174; dated 1939 with Phospate finish on the blade. Internal tang looks bright but the external edges are blued?
Czech marking on blade ricasso CSZ over T
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
The "bluing" at the edges might just be age - but without seeing it that is just a guess. I am also going to guess that if you did not see it on the blade, the tang/spine will (or should) be marked with a date and some other things. And if this is the bayonet with a cut down muzzle ring. Aside from that, what if anything sets it apart from and makes it an SS Vz. 24 as compared with your other 1939 dated bayonets. ie: are the markings the same, or are they different in any way?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I made a mistake and picked up the wrong frog. Getting tired. Put powder on this one also and the circle to the extreme left has an RZM in it. The circle to the extreme right has runes in it. The numbers look like 100/41.
Sorry,
Richard K
Richard,
When I tried to enhance the image it still looks like a skull to me. Can you change the lighting?
Best Regards, FP
To FP i wrote about the prewar production, firstly i dont know what You have there for piece, is for germans or its a romanian export? The pieces of late 1939 production with slovak acceptance have the browned blade as should be have.
Thanks to Richard for adding the great WBD frog really nice piece.The other VA piece looks same nice and should be probably correct, the other mentioned by FP with 100/41 have the die stamp visible so no probably a correct stamp, the other point that was not mentioned here from no one is the frog has a KM Eagle M proof? how goes the piece to a SS mark?
You could see the difference between the hard visible VA or KM eagle as proper period marked and the new 100/41 stamped digits with visible borders of the die.
"2. Height of numbers: WKC 1941 date: Height of numbers 0.198
VZ-24 1939 date: Height of numbers o.198"
it means only Your bouth piece were made by one source, be renumbering to metric system the height of numbers are 5,1mm which is too big for all german digits, the main digits were 3mm high.You could compare it with normal 98k production.
"Phospate finish on the blade. Internal tang looks bright but the external edges are blued? Czech marking on blade ricasso CSZ over T"
the finish is in reality origin czechoslovak but matted, same as the blueing done by germans were realised in a solution, so it must be dissasembled and totally given there. Your piece is hand blued postwar then as no blueing under grips.
FP,
I am looking at the SS VZ-24 Bayonet ;Accountability #174; dated 1939 with Phospate finish on the blade. Internal tang looks bright but the external edges are blued?
Czech marking on blade ricasso CSZ over T
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
The "bluing" at the edges might just be age - but without seeing it that is just a guess. I am also going to guess that if you did not see it on the blade, the tang/spine will (or should) be marked with a date and some other things. And if this is the bayonet with a cut down muzzle ring. Aside from that, what if anything sets it apart from and makes it an SS Vz. 24 as compared with your other 1939 dated bayonets. ie: are the markings the same, or are they different in any way?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I brought the bayonet to work to get a few pictures. The following are answers to your question:
1. SS Property marked with Runes over Death Head. Not the most common property mark found on a VZ-24.
2. Accountability # on the ricasso and below the lip of the scabbard.
3. No markings at all on the tang.
4. Looking at the Tang/Pommel Area it could be possibly patinaed out.
5. Grips are accountability numbered and dated.
Richard K
"2. Height of numbers: WKC 1941 date: Height of numbers 0.198
VZ-24 1939 date: Height of numbers o.198"
it means only Your bouth piece were made by one source, be renumbering to metric system the height of numbers are 5,1mm which is too big for all german digits, the main digits were 3mm high.You could compare it with normal 98k production.
Andy,
We are looking at SS reworked VZ-24 bayonets. The font type & size is fairly consistent on the SS marked grips on all of the different models. You can not compare apples with oranges. I am not familiar with the specifications of the fonts on the army combat bayonets. The SS did not go by the army standards. The SS accepted and used rejected army bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Andy,
The piece is an Waffenamt Eagle/607 marked Vz. 24. But you bring up a good point about the export models, with for example the wartime Romanian Vz. 24 that is blued over sandblasting. And I have some earlier CZ bayonets made for Czechoslovakia that I can look at later to see if I can see some differences.
I’m not claiming to be an expert, but I do know a little about metal finishes and how they are used to control corrosion (rust). And while I am more familiar with U.S. practices, I’ve done some research on period German methods of corrosion control because of my collecting interests. So I’m wondering first if it may be something like a translation problem? (As an example here, one of the things that some English language writers have had problem with over the years is the German use of “browning”, and some other terminology.)
With my second thought being that there were many ways to finish metal. And a sandblasted finish could be coated with oil (just like bluing is oiled) to help it fight rust. But over a bare metal, once the oil or grease is gone it can rust. And what is or was usually done was something to clean or chemically neutralize the surface before the oil/grease was applied. Such as bluing or some kind of phosphate. And for period U.S. arms, over time many have had oil/grease induced color changes in the protective phosphate layer over steel. With a brown or brownish tint not being uncommon.
And if you could see me now I am hanging my head in shame. I missed it. And you are absolutely right, that is a KM marking and they are scarce. So some faker messed up a legitimate hard to find period artifact to make it an “SS” frog???
Best Regards, FP
Richard
Here is a photo of some of the white police parade dress band equipment. Most is marked either Po or with an ink police stamp.
Your photo of the LSAH band equipment you have was at some distance. Are the individual pieces marked in any way, as to make or date? You wrote that you had never seen an LSAH marked piece of white leather I believe? That is certainly understandable, given the size of the unit. Band equipment would be even more rare. If the equipment is not Po marked, I would consider it LSAH. Here is some more police equipment. Do you have a white LSAH parade drum hanger like my police one?
Joe,
What a wonderful and extremely rare collection of Police Band White. I do not have the White LSAH Parade Drum Hanger. You would have to ransom your first born in order to get one. Joe who is the manufacturer of the White? Is It Kurt S.?
Richard K
Firstly the font is not consistent as You send pictures about minimum 3 font of digits types, the die used by germans, same as by czechoslovak were not larger as 4mm, similar high digits about 5mm was not observed on any real pieces to this day.
Andy,
The piece is an Waffenamt Eagle/607 marked Vz. 24. But you bring up a good point about the export models, with for example wartime Romanian Vz. 24 that is blued over sandblasting. And I have some earlier CZ bayonets for Czechoslovakia that I can look at later to see if I can see some differences.
I’m not claiming to be an expert, but I do know a little about metal finishes and how they are used to control corrosion (rust). And while I am more familiar with U.S. practices, I’ve done some research on period German methods of corrosion control because of my collecting interests. So I’m wondering first if it may be something like a translation problem? (As an example here, one of the things that some English language writers have had problem with over the years is the German use of “browning”, and some other terminology.)
With my second thought being that there were many ways to finish metal. And a sandblasted finish could be coated with oil (just like bluing is oiled) to help it fight rust. But over a bare metal, once the oil or grease is gone it can rust. And what is or was usually done was something to clean or chemically neutralize the surface before the oil/grease was applied. Such as bluing or some kind of phosphate. And for period U.S. arms, over time many have had a oil/grease induced color changes in the protective phosphate layer over steel. With a brown or brownish tint not being uncommon.
And if you could see me know I am hanging my head in shame. I missed it. And you are absolutely right, that is a KM marking and they are scarce. So some faker messed up a legitimate hard to find period artifact to make it an “SS” frog???
Best Regards, FP
The camera brings out things that you can not see by eye. I brought the other frog to work today with the powder on it. I hope to get some new pictures. Please comment on the particular stamping on the frog. How close is it to the original?
Richard K
Firstly the font is not consistent as You send pictures about minimum 3 font of digits types, the die used by germans, same as by czechoslovak were not larger as 4mm, similar high digits about 5mm was not observed on any real pieces to this day.
We are talking about the SS and the rework being done in work camps. You can not compare SS rework number stamping to that done by Czech & or German. You have to compare SS Number stamping to SS Number stamping. The SS perhaps wanted their documentation to stand out from pre existing numbering and geometry.
To Fred P. no problem with no seeing the other eagle stamp as You were focused on the RZM stamp, You are experts on this, so i only waited who will answer it, certainly the Eagle M is nice and is bad that was damaged with a aditional SS stamp, that is max. 10 years old, through the die borders visible on frog.
To browning, certainly is hard word to word translate, as in original manual is used the czech or slovak word "hnedeni" which means a finish with brown color result, the solution was so mixed that the endproduct was not of blue color but more of brown color, they didnt different the various colours of finish, but the scabbard is clearly blued finish. So the blades on were used only other solution that dont realised the typical blue finish as seen on german items, but looks like matted only. The scabbard were blued in similar chemicals like german do.
To Your E/607 could be not fully finished as germans ordered a blued finish, so maybe the chemicals were not good already or the finish was not fullended. before the blueing was applied acid solvent to remove and clean the blade before blueing, so it could be remains of this? Is only speculates, but i dont saw other example of 607 without finish or with phosphate finish.
And if you could see me know I am hanging my head in shame. I missed it. And you are absolutely right, that is a KM marking and they are scarce. So some faker messed up a legitimate hard to find period artifact to make it an “SS” frog???
Richard K
Richard,
If we are talking about the Kriegsmarine marking, it's spot on to some I have. And later I can pull one out and probably give you the name of the maker, which now seems to be eradicated by the new stamping.
Best Regards, FP
to Richard we know about army reworks, that are marked on visible parts, to sample SuWW /1937 on a reworked SG98/05, the grips are normally serialed but no dated, by controling of the rework must be the stamp visible, and have no reason to be inside of grip, as You couldnt see which is reworked or no. The all proof is marked with one stamp and the date 1937 is so small that is visible only with large glass. Stamp dies 1.5mm max to 2mm.
You should ask You why SS made so no logical thing as date a inside of grips?, with various digits and with same SS rune stamp, same thing was found on a WKC late war and with 1941 grips but with 25 variation of engraved DH? That have not same design or same size.
I believe the pieces came from one fakers workshop.You should compare of all the dated Vz.24 pieces where they came from? You certainly have a good pieces, but these SS Vz.24 are not real by my opinion.
to Richard we know about army reworks, that are marked on visible parts, to sample SuWW /1937 on a reworked SG98/05, the grips are normally serialed but no dated, by controling of the rework must be the stamp visible, and have no reason to be inside of grip, as You couldnt see which is reworked or no. The all proof is marked with one stamp and the date 1937 is so small that is visible only with large glass. Stamp dies 1.5mm max to 2mm.
You should ask You why SS made so no logical thing as date a inside of grips?, with various digits and with same SS rune stamp, same thing was found on a WKC late war and with 1941 grips but with 25 variation of engraved DH? That have not same design or same size.
I believe the pieces came from one fakers workshop.You should compare of all the dated Vz.24 pieces where they came from? You certainly have a good pieces, but these SS Vz.24 are not real by my opinion.
Andy,
Here you go again shooting from the hip. You make statements without documentation and or expertise. I asked you to post your SS Bayonets and I can assume by now that you do not have any. You said that you have SS Bayonets from Policeia Division because you saw pictures of them in a book and they look like what you have. I do not think so. You are making statements consistently that everything is a fake. Well my friend if you want to see some real fake SS bayonets go into your own collection and look at your Policeia.
You try to make comparissons of SS bayonets to Army bayonets. You are so postwar fake oriented that perhaps you had some involvement in this. Czech bayonets were never high on the list for fakers they were always considered junk. The items that I have shown you, you have never seen before. You are extremely talented, making value judgements with no knowledge of SS bayonets. Oh I forgot, you are Andy from Czechlosvakia!
Andy,
Here you go again shooting from the hip. You make statements without documentation and or expertise. I asked you to post your SS Bayonets and I can assume by now that you do not have any. You said that you have SS Bayonets from Policeia Division because you saw pictures of them in a book and they look like what you have. I do not think so. You are making statements consistently that everything is a fake. Well my friend if you want to see some real fake SS bayonets go into your own collection and look at your Policeia.
You try to make comparissons of SS bayonets to Army bayonets. You are so postwar fake oriented that perhaps you had some involvement in this. Czech bayonets were never high on the list for fakers they were always considered junk. The items that I have shown you, you have never seen before. You are extremely talented, making value judgements with no knowledge of SS bayonets. Oh I forgot, you are Andy from Czechlosvakia!
Richard,
First and most importantly, if you disagree with the man that is not a problem. But as Dave has already warned, we should all try to be respectful of one another.
FP
Andy,
Here you go again shooting from the hip. You make statements without documentation and or expertise. I asked you to post your SS Bayonets and I can assume by now that you do not have any. You said that you have SS Bayonets from Policeia Division because you saw pictures of them in a book and they look like what you have. I do not think so. You are making statements consistently that everything is a fake. Well my friend if you want to see some real fake SS bayonets go into your own collection and look at your Policeia.
You try to make comparissons of SS bayonets to Army bayonets. You are so postwar fake oriented that perhaps you had some involvement in this. Czech bayonets were never high on the list for fakers they were always considered junk. The items that I have shown you, you have never seen before. You are extremely talented, making value judgements with no knowledge of SS bayonets. Oh I forgot, you are Andy from Czechlosvakia!
Richard,
First and most importantly, if you disagree with the man that is not a problem. But as Dave has already warned, we should all try to be respectful of one another.
FP
Respect goes both ways. You can not demand respect, you earn it. I full respect opinions and criticism that are backed up by fact & or documentation. I do not know everything and am willing to learn. I have shared information readily and openly so that all can learn & enjoy. Understand one thing, the amount of activity on this thread is good but I am getting alot of activity off line because collectors are afraid of posting items here and then be criticised & stoned. Everyone is trying to learn. The forum was established to have an interchange of ideas and provide a learning process. Some people come to the forum with their own agenda.
Richard K
Denny,
I have some more pictures comming thru. Would you please post them.
Thanks,
Richard K
Thanks FP for nice words,but i hope that i could bring some lights into this discussion, firstly i already stated here that You have there some nice items, i waited a 55 thread pages that i could say You have a nice WBD frog, or nice VA frog, sorry when You were so experts on frogs You already knows that on the RZM marked frog is KM eagle property M stamp. Same as You would now the difference between cvl and cul, and other SG84/98 specialitys. We in BCN are focused on these bayonets and know alot of them,same as we made some estimation of overall production, and members like Fred M., John the founder, FP , Joe and others solved some important question about many variation of these bayonets. When You were so expert on frogs You already knows how dies were stamped in leather and what for stamp is old and what is new.
Sorry same thing is the czechoslovak Vz24 bayonet area,You didnt understand about production markings that should be there, about units marking and how they were reworked and You speak from Yours 15 bayonets as they all are SS correct pieces. I already inspected a huge amount of these, because here in Slovakia are the Vz.24 most frequeantable and my friends have collections of hundrets of pieces, no one was still reported here. When You would bring a detailed pictures of each and measure one pieces we could bring it further but only by speaking about where are the evidences of SS reworking is no possible.
I already mentioned that SS dont need property stamped their bayonets, mainly the WSS, the blanko WKC is already long time confirmed piece by them, same as reworked Vz.24 could be used by them but must be not so teribble damaged by fakers with the DH like many of Your collection. When You believe they are correct, so no problem. I will offer only my opinion as this is a free forum. When You are interested we could made a confrontation on the 4TK piece that You sent last month, where are the major errors of the fakers.I could it made too confidential, as it would be probably better, but i believe You will not hear about this or?
I have mentioned about Police that i have a ACS and P.Weyersberg, i dont known about Police divisions, but when Police was under SS since 1938 or earlier so already these both are too SS police bayonets.
I am one that will fight again fakers because they ruin some of great bayonets and make problematic the collecting area. I could already through some of the articles here in Czechia and Slovakia help beginners in bayonet collecting stop of buying of the etched bayonets with SS motivs on SG84/98,that were here declared as real . The fakers dont like me extra,that is true.
Joe,
What a wonderful and extremely rare collection of Police Band White. I do not have the White LSAH Parade Drum Hanger. You would have to ransom your first born in order to get one. Joe who is the manufacturer of the White? Is It Kurt S.?
Richard K [/color]
Richard
If the drum hanger is marked I cannot make it out with the creases and cracks in the white finish. The major producer was Fischer. I am not aware of a Kurt S. The major producer of police gear was Fischer, Sindel and Larsen. There were some others but not as frequently encountered. The last LSAH drum hanger I saw was Zyla I think. I am trying to understand what the larger square leather piece with a strap and buckle. Some kind of protective piece for another drum?
Thanks FP for nice words,but i hope that i could bring some lights into this discussion, firstly i already stated here that You have there some nice items, i waited a 55 thread pages that i could say You have a nice WBD frog, or nice VA frog, sorry when You were so experts on frogs You already knows that on the RZM marked frog is KM eagle property M stamp.
I have owned the RZM FROG for probably about 3 months and as I stated earlier that I did not even enter these frogs into my collection because they have not been researched and I have no knowledge of them. This frog was on a listing of items from a major militaria dealer. How could you say that I already know there is a KM marking on the frog?
Same as You would now the difference between cvl and cul, and other SG84/98 specialitys. We in BCN are focused on these bayonets and know alot of them,same as we made some estimation of overall production, and members like Fred M., John the founder, FP , Joe and others solved some important question about many variation of these bayonets. When You were so expert on frogs You already knows how dies were stamped in leather and what for stamp is old and what is new.
Sorry same thing is the czechoslovak Vz24 bayonet area,You didnt understand about production markings that should be there, about units marking and how they were reworked and You speak from Yours 15 bayonets as they all are SS correct pieces. I already inspected a huge amount of these, because here in Slovakia are the Vz.24 most frequeantable and my friends have collections of hundrets of pieces, no one was still reported here. When You would bring a detailed pictures of each and measure one pieces we could bring it further but only by speaking about where are the evidences of SS reworking is no possible.
I already mentioned that SS dont need property stamped their bayonets, mainly the WSS, the blanko WKC is already long time confirmed piece by them, same as reworked Vz.24 could be used by them but must be not so teribble damaged by fakers with the DH like many of Your collection. When You believe they are correct, so no problem. I will offer only my opinion as this is a free forum. When You are interested we could made a confrontation on the 4TK piece that You sent last month, where are the major errors of the fakers.I could it made too confidential, as it would be probably better, but i believe You will not hear about this or?
I have mentioned about Police that i have a ACS and P.Weyersberg, i dont known about Police divisions, but when Police was under SS since 1938 or earlier so already these both are too SS police bayonets.
I am one that will fight again fakers because they ruin some of great bayonets and make problematic the collecting area. I could already through some of the articles here in Czechia and Slovakia help beginners in bayonet collecting stop of buying of the etched bayonets with SS motivs on SG84/98,that were here declared as real . The fakers dont like me extra,that is true.
Thanks FP for nice words,but i hope that i could bring some lights into this discussion, firstly i already stated here that You have there some nice items, i waited a 55 thread pages that i could say You have a nice WBD frog, or nice VA frog, sorry when You were so experts on frogs You already knows that on the RZM marked frog is KM eagle property M stamp.
I have owned the RZM FROG for probably about 3 months and as I stated earlier that I did not even enter these frogs into my collection because they have not been researched and I have no knowledge of them. This frog was on a listing of items from a major militaria dealer. How could you say that I already know there is a KM marking on the frog?
Same as You would now the difference between cvl and cul, and other SG84/98 specialitys. We in BCN are focused on these bayonets and know alot of them,same as we made some estimation of overall production, and members like Fred M., John the founder, FP , Joe and others solved some important question about many variation of these bayonets. When You were so expert on frogs You already knows how dies were stamped in leather and what for stamp is old and what is new.
Sorry same thing is the czechoslovak Vz24 bayonet area,You didnt understand about production markings that should be there, about units marking and how they were reworked and You speak from Yours 15 bayonets as they all are SS correct pieces.
You are correct that I do not know about all of the Czech unit markings etc. But I do know about SS Marked bayonets. I have seen many collections and handled many bayonets. In addition I was a collector of SS rifles & sniper rifles. Knowing rifles is a prerequisite to collecting bayonets because the same markings are used. In addition the Czech unit markings on the SS Bayonets meant nothing. The SS reworked the VZ-24 Bayonets into what thy needed to support their weapons requirements.
I already inspected a huge amount of these, because here in Slovakia are the Vz.24 most frequeantable and my friends have collections of hundrets of pieces, no one was still reported here. When You would bring a detailed pictures of each and measure one pieces we could bring it further but only by speaking about where are the evidences of SS reworking is no possible.
I already mentioned that SS dont need property stamped their bayonets, mainly the WSS, the blanko WKC is already long time confirmed piece by them, same as reworked Vz.24 could be used by them but must be not so teribble damaged by fakers with the DH like many of Your collection. When You believe they are correct, so no problem. I will offer only my opinion as this is a free forum. When You are interested we could made a confrontation on the 4TK piece that You sent last month, where are the major errors of the fakers.I could it made too confidential, as it would be probably better, but i believe You will not hear about this or?
I have mentioned about Police that i have a ACS and P.Weyersberg, i dont known about Police divisions, but when Police was under SS since 1938 or earlier so already these both are too SS police bayonets.
I am one that will fight again fakers because they ruin some of great bayonets and make problematic the collecting area. I could already through some of the articles here in Czechia and Slovakia help beginners in bayonet collecting stop of buying of the etched bayonets with SS motivs on SG84/98,that were here declared as real . The fakers dont like me extra,that is true.
^
TOP GRIP: SS 84/98; WKC; BLANKO
BOTTOM GRIP: SS VZ-24 BAYONET
SS VZ-24 PARKARIZED (sic)
Richard,
First, I want to thank you for presenting these items for the forum members to look at and study. With the following being my impressions of what has been brought forward for discussion. And whether or not you happen to agree or not with any of my opinions. I want you to know that I am putting forth my best honest effort to be “straight up” with you, based on my own personal past experiences in this collecting field. And from what I have gathered from other serious minded collectors.
The German Navy - “RZM” marked frog has multiple problems: 1) the Navy marking 2) the individual hand stamps 3) the overlapping zeros, and another issue that I don’t particularly want to disclose. So I have an
exceptionally low confidence level that it’s real.
With the image of the stripped down bayonet the only thing I can see in the image is a Vz. 24 bayonet body that looks just like some of the many, many, thousands that were imported. But there is nothing to match it up to, unless what you trying to show is what a Vz. 24 conversion looks like with the muzzle ring removed.
If what you are showing is that it was the same stamp that made the sigrunes inside a circle as seen on the Vz. 24, I’m in agreement. It looks to be the same stamp from what I am seeing in the image. As for top grip pictured that is labeled as a WKC blanko - that presented a little bit of a problem. As the only description I was able to find is as follows:
“Forum,
I pulled the last bayonet for the day. This SS Bayonet is very interesting and rare. It was originally mated with a Steyer bnz Single Rune 43.
The bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Blade.
2. No WAs
3. SS Accountability #742 on the Ricasso.
4. Blanko Scabbard with #742
5. Excellent SS Property Stamp.
6. Single Rune on the Crossguard
7. 742 Numbered Grips
8. Wooden Grips
9. Grip SS Property Stamped
10. Grip dated 1943.
My opinion is that this bayonet could have been assembled and issued with the 1943 Steyer BNZ Single Rune Rifle.
Note: The grips seem oversize for the tang area. Grip sticks above Pommel & crossguard.” But with this grip I see a 1940 date and no numbers. So what bayonet did it come from? Because it can't be the 1943 that was described at some length.
Which brings me to this last one:
"Andy,
I have several SS VZ-24 Bayonets that retain the muzzle rings and have SS Property marks. I just took the grips off of one SS VZ-24 bayonets with a muzzle ring and the grips are marked as follows:
1. Accountability #57 matches bayonet.
2. SS Property Stamp.
3. 1939 date stamp."I don’t know if this is supposed to be one of the “camp made” bayonet grips that you mentioned or not. But it's clear to me that the stampings were made after the fact. On the surface of a grip plate that was next to a rusted/grease (whatever) inner tang surface.
Best Regards, FP
Thanks Richard for posting of the pictures,as i would preffer the discussion goes on, i have nothing personally against You, that should be clearly declared, so no need any strong words as lately.
To Your Vz.24 piece is certainly very important to know how are the czechoslovak markings, same as how it were reworked, because all were done in some orders, differences are between the each realisation, but the ground basis is same. You forgot one thing these are czechoslovak bayonets and their started life as so, the germans only used them and some reworked thats all, it remains still a czechoslovak Vz.24 bayonet.Other point is the german order of SG24(T) that was made already in work with upgrades that ordered germans.
So to Your Vz.24 bayonet, the blade is not parkerised its a prewar normal czechoslovak finish. as You could see the tang area same as the blade is no blued and the handle is i would tip to a postwar blueing with hand.
To grips that You presented, for me these both are origin grips, they are not camp made or reworked, the Vz.24 grip is a late one, the all mentioned bayonets Vz.24 have this 6mm high circle rune stamp, the date is made from same height or 5mm die with older font. As correctly mentioned FP the area was greased and the discoloration was realised for long year pressing of wood to tang, the stamps were applied much more later as in war.
TO WKC i believe FP mixed two of Yours WKC, i believe the one mentioned earlier is the with the wood grips.These wood grips is origin and i believe from a late war army piece as there is no assembly number and no WaA.The date is too high so as the circle stamp,and new font, that was not used in war period.
WKC Marked Blade, Rough grind on blade
Minimum polish on blade 85% / 90% blue on blade
Marks on tang: Large H; Large Ar; #5 on oppsite side of tang.
No WAs
SS Property Mark: Stamped Runes 2 over TK rotated.
Accountability #: 368. Looks pantagraphed engraved.
Blanko Scabbard with pantagraped engraved 368.
Grips: Wood / Camp Made Grips Marked: 1941 & Runes so here are the report error as there is 1940, but this grip have no serialing, so we dont know is from the piece or not.
I have a rule, when from a source came a one bad marking or fake stamping, all the items of same source are problematic.
Richard,
First, I want to thank you for presenting these items for the forum members to look at and study. With the following being my impressions of what has been brought forward for discussion. And whether or not you happen to agree or not with any of my opinions. I want you to know that I am putting forth my best honest effort to be “straight up” with you, based on my own personal past experiences in this collecting field. And from what I have gathered from other serious minded collectors.
The German Navy - “RZM” marked frog has multiple problems: 1) the Navy marking 2) the individual hand stamps 3) the overlapping zeros, and another issue that I don’t particularly want to disclose. So I have an exceptionally low confidence level that it’s real.
Thank you for the evaluation of the frog. As I stated previously that I was not knowledgeable of the VA Style Frog and had never got a SS Bayonet Bayonet in one. I never saw the Navy markings on the frog. Good job guys. I hope I can get my money back. the tag is still on that frog. Technical question. Is that RZM stamping a complete bogus or is that found on a VA style of stamped Frog? I have to agree that a Navy Marked Frog would not be restamped for the SS at this point in time.
Good Work,
Richard K
With the image of the stripped down bayonet the only thing I can see in the image is a Vz. 24 bayonet body that looks just like some of the many, many, thousands that were imported. But there is nothing to match it up to, unless what you trying to show is what a Vz. 24 conversion looks like with the muzzle ring removed.
The stripped VZ-24 bayonet is posted to discuss what I believe to be a phosphate finish on the blade. The tang area is shiny in some places as if hinting of some type of plating. Note the crossguard and pommel are dark in color. You suggested that it could be patina?
This particular SS bayonet is dated 1939 in the grips. The muzzle ring has been removed and yet the bayonet was not blued? Any answers as to why the bayonet was not blued. SS Property mark on the crossguard
Richard Kuchta
If what you are showing is that it was the same stamp that made the sigrunes inside a circle as seen on the Vz. 24, I’m in agreement. It looks to be the same stamp from what I am seeing in the image. As for top grip pictured that is labeled as a WKC blanko - that presented a little bit of a problem. As the only description I was able to find is as follows:
“Forum,
I pulled the last bayonet for the day. This SS Bayonet is very interesting and rare. It was originally mated with a Steyer bnz Single Rune 43.
The bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Blade.
2. No WAs
3. SS Accountability #742 on the Ricasso.
4. Blanko Scabbard with #742
5. Excellent SS Property Stamp.
6. Single Rune on the Crossguard
7. 742 Numbered Grips
8. Wooden Grips
9. Grip SS Property Stamped
10. Grip dated 1943.
My opinion is that this bayonet could have been assembled and issued with the 1943 Steyer BNZ Single Rune Rifle.
Note: The grips seem oversize for the tang area. Grip sticks above Pommel & crossguard.”
But with this grip I see a 1940 date and no numbers. So what bayonet did it come from? Because it can't be the 1943 that was described at some length.
The SS WKC Blanko is accountability #368. SS Property mark is Runes 2 over Death Head; Rotated. No WA. Matching scabbard. Just pulled this bayonet so as to make a grip comparrison.
Richard K
Which brings me to this last one:
"Andy,
I have several SS VZ-24 Bayonets that retain the muzzle rings and have SS Property marks. I just took the grips off of one SS VZ-24 bayonets with a muzzle ring and the grips are marked as follows:
1. Accountability #57 matches bayonet.
2. SS Property Stamp.
3. 1939 date stamp."
I don’t know if this is supposed to be one of the “camp made” bayonet grips that you mentioned or not. But it's clear to me that the stampings were made after the fact. On the surface of a grip plate that was next to a rusted/grease (whatever) inner tang surface.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
As per the SS Camp Grips which have accountability #57 on them, they are matched to the accountability # on the bayonet & scabbard / same stamp. The grips are of extremely better condition than the scabbard and do not show the heavy usage as the scabbard. I do not agree that these numbers were put on after the war. This is a Glenn de Ruiter bayonet that was inported into this country in barrels. When I got the bayonet it was still coated in some heavy type of oil that that it had been stored in or was shipped in. I discussed the pricing that Glenn had on his bayonets previously.
Richard K
Andy,
In regards to the 1940 dated SS WKC Bayonet you state that the date is too high for an SS Bayonet. The date is too high as compared to what. What documention & or reference are you referring to? I have other SS Bayonets with higher dates. I mentioned before that I have 2 consecutive numbered SS bayonets with 45 dates. The dating of bayonets by grip marking is somewhat of a standard procedure for reworked bayonets.Richard K
I have a dated Vz. 23 military issue that I can pull out to check later. But for now, here is an undated Vz. 23 commercial phosphate CZ example that my best recollection says is the same. And I no longer have any postwar CZ bayonets, but my best recollection with them is that the phosphate color is not as dark. So time or perhaps something else like the grease used etc may be a factor as well (?).
But the answer to the question from what I can see at a distance as regards the no muzzle ring bayonet that is pictured, is it looks like to me also that just the exposed parts are blued(?). And ‘in hand’ I would be looking for evidence of cold chemical bluing that is sometimes used to cover up flaws, new work, etc.
To the wood grips, here are a pair of late light colored ones from commercial Eickhorns(?) and they would not be serial numbered. And while late military WKC bayonets have (IMO) somewhat less well done wood grips (also not numbered), the WKC commercials use plastic. As for stampings in wood grips in general, I will have to see if I can find some images to explain what I seem to be seeing.
And for the RZM marked frogs - let me just say that I give them a
lot of extra attention when I see one.
Best Regards to All, FP
Really enjoying this "lively" thread , Andy and F.P. have always been very helpful to me in my collecting endeavours , and Richard has a great deal of knowledge to offer , I look forward to future respectful posts,
Regards
Will.
I have a commercial W.K.C with bakerlite compound grips ,is it worth removing the grips to look at the markings ? I dont think they have ever been off though ? dilemma?
Regards
Will
Will,
Thank you for your earlier comment, and I think it depends to some extent on whether or not it's an early black gripped WKC commercial or a late one. Because the late ones tend to have less markings. But if there is no active rust, sight unseen, I would probably leave it alone.
Best Regards, FP
The image here serves several purposes. It is of a German numbered Vz. 24 that was made in 1937, just before Czechoslovakia was peacefully taken over. So it probably did not see much service (if at all) then. But was relatively well used by the Germans, also having a date matched scabbard and blade.
In the pictures of SS troops with the bright finished Vz. 24 bayonets in use in combat. While the images are not that clear, they don’t appear to look like ‘factory fresh’ examples. And as the wear patterns of this one are studied - I think that observers can also get a better feel for reworked ones.
PS: Sorry for the image quality - I did not foresee this discussion when I took it. And would probably have ‘trashed’ it if my files were in good order. Best Regards, FP
Will,
I am glad that you are enjoying the SS Bayonet Thread. There are so many other areas yet to cover. The SS 98/05 Models; the SS TV Bayonets; SS Polish Bayonet, Belt rigs; portapees, SS rifles with bayonets.
As you see we sometimes strongly disagree on specific issues.
Richard K
Mr. John Jacobi,
Your pictures of the 45 dated,phospated, consecutive numbered bayonets with capture papers have been sent out. Hope you get them ASAP.
Richard K
Will,
I am glad that you are enjoying the SS Bayonet Thread. There are so many other areas yet to cover. The SS 98/05 Models; the SS TV Bayonets; SS Polish Bayonet, Belt rigs; portapees, SS rifles with bayonets.
As you see we sometimes strongly disagree on specific issues.
Richard K
With the plus side of vigorous discussions being the learning experience. As I recall, Richard has stated earlier a time or two, there is an active "collector community" out there that he has been in contact with that has been sending him messages of support. What was done in the Hühnlein NSKK dagger discussion was the transmission of data/pictures anonymously for inclusion in the discussion. And what I would suggest is that the same could be done here for this discussion. And the collectors in that community could send to whomever they want to in the discussion, so that we could all learn. Thereby protecting the identities of those who may be reluctant to post, but have either information or examples to look at that may be of interest.
FP
Will,
I am glad that you are enjoying the SS Bayonet Thread. There are so many other areas yet to cover. The SS 98/05 Models; the SS TV Bayonets; SS Polish Bayonet, Belt rigs; portapees, SS rifles with bayonets.
As you see we sometimes strongly disagree on specific issues.
Richard K
With the plus side of vigorous discussions being the learning experience. As I recall, Richard has stated earlier a time or two, there is an active "collector community" out there that he has been in contact with that has been sending him messages of support. What was done in the Hühnlein NSKK dagger discussion was the transmission of data/pictures anonymously for inclusion in the discussion. And what I would suggest is that the same could be done here for this discussion. And the collectors in that community could send to whomever they want to in the discussion, so that we could all learn. Thereby protecting the identities of those who may be reluctant to post, but have either information or examples to look at that may be of interest.
FP
I would also like to see as many collectors participate in the Forum as possible. Every question is important. No question is to basic. SS Bayonets is a very broad topic with specific segments such as LAH that gets down to answering some important questions and clearing up some very gray areas. If there is something you don't understand just ask. Someone will have an answer for you.
Linge, I did not forget about you and I will look through the VZ-24s to get you an answer.
Richard K
Denny,
I have some more pictures ready to put up if you would sir.
Thanks,
Richard K
Richard,
While we are waiting. With as I recall: 120 SS marked bayonets, 75 SS marked frogs, and all the other things that collectors tend to accumulate. I can certainly understand where managing such a large large group has its own problems keeping track of everything. So from a reader’s perspective I think that you can probably understand where it is not always easy to follow the discussion as to what is being discussed or pictured. For example:
I pulled the last bayonet for the day. This SS Bayonet is very interesting and rare. It was originally mated with a Steyer bnz Single Rune 43.
The bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Blade.
2. No WAs
3. SS Accountability #742 on the Ricasso.
4. Blanko Scabbard with #742
5. Excellent SS Property Stamp.
6. Single Rune on the Crossguard
7. 742 Numbered Grips
8. Wooden Grips
9. Grip SS Property Stamped
10. Grip dated 1943.
My opinion is that this bayonet could have been assembled and issued with the 1943 Steyer BNZ Single Rune Rifle.
Note: The grips seem oversize for the tang area. Grip sticks above Pommel & crossguard.”
WKC Marked Blade, Rough grind on blade
Minimum polish on blade 85% / 90% blue on blade
Marks on tang: Large H; Large Ar; #5 on oppsite side of tang.
No WAs
SS Property Mark: Stamped Runes 2 over TK rotated.
Accountability #: 368. Looks pantagraphed engraved.
Blanko Scabbard with pantagraped engraved 368.
Grips: Wood / Camp Made Grips Marked: 1941 & Runes
The SS WKC Blanko is accountability #368. SS Property mark is Runes 2 over Death Head; Rotated. No WA. Matching scabbard. Just pulled this bayonet so as to make a grip comparrison.
But what we then saw was a 1940 dated grip plate. Is it from another WKC marked bayonet, or was it from from some other maker? Also, do you consider the Sigrunen inside of a circle marking an SS property stamp, some kind of rework stamp, or a camp identifier mark? Because with the Death's heads, Death's heads with runes, Single Sigrunes, Double Sigrunes, the SSZZA marks, and probably some types of marks we have not even seen yet it can tend to make it a little difficult to know which kind of grouping the marking of an item should be in. And any input would be greatly appreciated to try and sort this all out.
Best Regards, FP
Richard,
While we are waiting. With as I recall: 120 SS marked bayonets, 75 SS marked frogs, and all the other things that collectors tend to accumulate. I can certainly understand where managing such a large large group has its own problems keeping track of everything. So from a reader’s perspective I think that you can probably understand where it is not always easy to follow the discussion as to what is being discussed or pictured. For example:
I pulled the last bayonet for the day. This SS Bayonet is very interesting and rare. It was originally mated with a Steyer bnz Single Rune 43.
The bayonet is as follows:
1. WKC Blade.
2. No WAs
3. SS Accountability #742 on the Ricasso.
4. Blanko Scabbard with #742
5. Excellent SS Property Stamp.
6. Single Rune on the Crossguard
7. 742 Numbered Grips
8. Wooden Grips
9. Grip SS Property Stamped
10. Grip dated 1943.
My opinion is that this bayonet could have been assembled and issued with the 1943 Steyer BNZ Single Rune Rifle.
Note: The grips seem oversize for the tang area. Grip sticks above Pommel & crossguard.”
WKC Marked Blade, Rough grind on blade
Minimum polish on blade 85% / 90% blue on blade
Marks on tang: Large H; Large Ar; #5 on oppsite side of tang.
No WAs
SS Property Mark: Stamped Runes 2 over TK rotated.
Accountability #: 368. Looks pantagraphed engraved.
Blanko Scabbard with pantagraped engraved 368.
Grips: Wood / Camp Made Grips Marked: 1941 & Runes
The SS WKC Blanko is accountability #368. SS Property mark is Runes 2 over Death Head; Rotated. No WA. Matching scabbard. Just pulled this bayonet so as to make a grip comparrison.
But what we then saw was a 1940 dated grip plate. Is it from another WKC marked bayonet, or was it from from some other maker? Also, do you consider the Sigrunen inside of a circle marking an SS property stamp, some kind of rework stamp, or a camp identifier mark? Because with the Death's heads, Death's heads with runes, Single Sigrunes, Double Sigrunes, the SSZZA marks, and probably some types of marks we have not even seen yet it can tend to make it a little difficult to know which kind of grouping the marking of an item should be in. And any input would be greatly appreciated to try and sort this all out.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Another factor that comes into play and I do not know the full
signifiance of it is the orientation of the property marks. I havent got into that yet. Just do not know.
I hope Denny can get the Death Head Lugers up along with the 45 dated SS bayonets yet today. I am heading home now. Long day with snow.
Richard K
o
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures. Too tired tonight to post. I shall describe evrything tomorrow morning. Enjoy the new items.
Richard K
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures. Too tired tonight to post. I shall describe evrything tomorrow morning. Enjoy the new items.
Richard K
Richard (& Denny),
My thanks also. For some reason I had a problem with the lighting, and to a lesser extent the definition in the images. So much so, that the two numbered bayonets didn't look like they had phosphate finishes.
Best Regards to All, FP
FORUM,
Denny has posted alot of pictures for us to look at. I would like to first address the relationship of the SS Death Head Lugers to the SS Bayonets with the SS Property Stamp of a Lazy S over a TK.
FORUM,
The SS Death Head Luger is really the first item out there with an SS Property Stamp on it that was acknowledged by Collectors and Gun Writers. The Lazy S over the TK was first thought to be a marking for The Flame Thrower units in WW1. It was then written up to be a unit marking for the German Grave Diggers who would sometimes have to use their pistol to finish off wounded soldiers in order get them in the grave.
It has been only within the last 25/30 years that these Lazy S over Death Heads have been associated with SS Weapons such as: Lugers, Rifles & Bayonets.
FORUM,
Also note the pictures showing the Crown/N proof marks. The legitimate SS Firearms will 90% of the time have either C/N or E/N Proof Marks on them to show that they are safe to use.
Richard K
FORUM,
The Death Head Lugers were reworked and assembled in the same Weapons Work Camps as the rifles. The Lugers for the early SS/VT & SS/TV were made from old worn out Luger Pistols from the first WW1. Most of these Death Head Lugers will be made up of numerous mismatched parts. A complete functioning Luger was assembled using whatever salvaged parts were necessary to make it function properly.
FORUM,
I have seen Death Head Lugers that had been completely reblued. I have also seen Death Head Lugers that had a complete mismatch of finishes. All Death Head Lugers that I have seen in collections were mated up with a Holster that had either the large TK on the front flap and or the smaller TK located on the back of the holster.
FORUM,
The SS must have had extensive Leather Work shops within their camp system. Numerous SS Marked leather items such as: Frogs, Belts, Holsters,Pouches,etc. are readily seen.
So Lugers with Death Heads and Luger Holsters with Death Heads have been acknowledged for a substantial period of time by Gun Collectors and writers. The Death Heads were acknowledged on the Lugers & Holsters but the relationship to the SS was not made until recently.
Richard Kuchta
FORUM,
The Lazy S over the TK is the usual property mark for over 80% of the Death Head Lugers. There are two othe styles of Property Marks that are also found on the SS Lugers that are also seen on SS Bayonets. I myself always like to see the C/N and or the E/N on the SS Firearms that are marked with an SS Property Stamp.
Richard K
FORUM,
We just covered the relationship of the Death Head Lugers to the SS Marked bayonet with the Lazy S over the TK. The SS Weapons System used the same Property Stamps on the Lugers, Bayonets & Rifles.
Next step we have to touc on the SS Property Marks for the rifles. You need to go back quite a few pages and take a look at the SS Property Marks used on rifles. There are quite a few different styles shown in the pictures and there are still some others that are not shown.
Again, the SS Property Marks found on the SS Rifles are also used on the SS Bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
FORUM,
Sorry for all of these short posts. But if I dont make them short the post hangs up the system when I hit submit.
Richard K
FORUM,
The second grip from the top is a VZ-24 dated 1941. The bayonet has no accountability #. The SS property Mark on the bayonet is under the blue.
The date stamps on the VZ-24 bayonets are all the same size and match the date stamps on Camp Grips of the 84/98 bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
To the wood grips, here are a pair of late light colored ones from commercial Eickhorns(?) and they would not be serial numbered. And while late military WKC bayonets have (IMO) somewhat less well done wood grips (also not numbered), the WKC commercials use plastic. As for stampings in wood grips in general, I will have to see if I can find some images to explain what I seem to be seeing.
And for the RZM marked frogs - let me just say that I give them a lot of extra attention when I see one.
Best Regards to All, FP
In regards to the RZM marked frog, I am not sure that I understand your answer. Is there such an original SS RZM marked Frog??
Richard Kuchta
Denny,
Have sent you the last pictures for the week to post for us. There is a Double Stamp, Single Rune dated 1943 and a Guard Helmet from the Steyer Works where they used slave to fabricate & assemble rifles. My opinion is that they also assembled the SS bayonets to go with the SS Rifles.
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
The Capture Papers with the SS 45 Bayonets is a photocopy of the original. Original is framed and hanging on the wall.
Richard K
Forum,
The Capture Papers with the SS 45 Bayonets is a photocopy of the original. Original is framed and hanging on the wall.
Richard K
FP,
In regards to the RZM marked frog, I am not sure that I understand your answer. Is there such an original SS RZM marked Frog??
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I’m sorry that this will be so brief, but I’ve got some things to get done before this evening. There are various and sundry period leather items with SS and RZM markings. But there are also a lot of fake/altered frogs. And a quick question: I saw the copy of the document you posted, but what connected it to the KZ? Was it a service record or something else?
Best Regards, FP
Forum,
The Capture Papers with the SS 45 Bayonets is a photocopy of the original. Original is framed and hanging on the wall.
Richard K
FP,
In regards to the RZM marked frog, I am not sure that I understand your answer. Is there such an original SS RZM marked Frog??
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I’m sorry that this will be so brief, but I’ve got some things to get done before this evening. There are various and sundry period leather items with SS and RZM markings. But there are also a lot of fake/altered frogs. And a quick question: I saw the copy of the document you posted, but what connected it to the KZ? Was it a service record or something else?
Best Regards,
FP
Walther said that he had taken the rifle and bayonets from an SS Weapons Depot & factory located in the Wobbelin Concentration Camp. There were no guards or soldiers when his batallion arrived there.
Richard K
Richard, I don't mean to throw a monkey into this, but the Lazy S TK is far from accepted by Luger collectors as III Reich period. To most of them, as discussed on the Luger.gunboard.com, the marking could be Imperial, Freikorps, or perhaps SS. This was in discussion in the first Luger books in the 1960s.
Have you done any research on the "SS Weapons System" that you mention above. Have you located any arsenals, the control center of procurement, duplication of effort?
I find it interesting with all the multiple markings found on these weapons you show, the .22 trainers purchased by the SS and shipped to numerous units of the Allegemeine SS were marked simply with the RFSS stamp in the stock.
Richard,
I spent most of one summer, and one other visit living about 50 km southwest from the camp. So I have some idea of what the general area looks like and was curious about what kind of unit Walther might have been in. What I found was this from a unit history:
“On May 2, 1945 ........., the 82nd American Airborne Division liberated ......... Wobbelin (which) had been created only 10 weeks earlier .......... to serve as a work camp ......... The camp had no infrastructure and no sanitation or food facilities. It consisted merely of barracks with open spaces and no doors.” It then goes on to describe over a thousand dead inmates and a mass burial. From another source:
“The SS had established Wöbbelin to house concentration camp prisoners whom the SS had evacuated from other camps to prevent their liberation by the Allies. At its height, Wöbbelin held some 5,000 inmates, most of whom were suffering from starvation and disease. The camp was freed on May 2, 1945.” From still another source:
"On 12 February 1945 a group of inmates were transported to build a larger camp, now called KZ Wöbbelin. The SS-physician Alfred Trzebinski stated during his trial, that 648 people were held at Wöbbelin camp until the end of March 1945. In mid-April several transports from subcamps of Neuengamme and Ravensbrück concentration camp with more than 4,000 inmates arrived. On May 2, 1945, the 8th Infantry Division and the 82nd Airborne Division encountered Wöbbelin. Living conditions in the camp when the U.S. 8th Infantry and the 82nd Airborne arrived were deplorable. There was little food or water and some prisoners had resorted to cannibalism. When the units arrived, they found about 1,000 inmates dead in the camp. In the aftermath, the U.S. Army ordered the townspeople in Ludwigslust to visit the camp and bury the dead.”And generally speaking. It was not U.S. Army policy to leave weapons (especially guns) behind unguarded so that any potentially hostile forces in the area could easily arm themselves. Maybe you have some information I don’t that could help explain what I found. I'm sorry, but it doesn’t look or sound like it was a functioning SS Weapons Depot & factory from the historical record I've looked at so far.
Attached: John posted a link to a picture of the front gate. Here is the camp with GI’s in it walking around, and no doors visible in the photo.
Best Regards, FP
Walther was in the 552 Engineers Heavy Pontoon Boat Batallion.
Richard K
Walther's batallion was at the camp in April and early May of 1945.
Richard K
Joe,
The number of rifles with the same Lazy S Death Head and C/N proof that were brought back from WW11 says very louldly that these were SS Camp Weapons. The SS Collecting community recognises the Death Head lugers as SS WW11 Weapons. Joe, there are lugers out there that are fairly new with dates in the 30s and 40s displaying the Lazy S over the Death Head along with SS Marked Holsters. There are Death Head Lugers on capture papers that I have seen in collections. You have not thrown a wrench into the works but rather afforded an opportunity to clear up soome misconceptions on the Death Head Luger. I made the point prior about about what some writers had written aboout te Death Head Lugers. At that period of time, little was known about the SS Property Stamps.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
In regards to the SS Weapons Depot at Wobbelin, I can only repeat what a soldier stated when he was there. Would you post the documentation on the Camp that you have. I do not have anything in depth as you must have. Your pictures are great and I have never seen any of the KL but they also look as you have stated as barracks. Were there work shops inside of the camp or out? Slave Labor was sometimes transported.
You stated that weapons are not left for other armies and or soldiers to retrieve. I can relate to one other Work Camp, Dachau KL where the storehouses were filled with rifles and bayonets as well as other items. I got many items from soldiers who were stationed at Dachau. We will get into that when we talk about the SS 98/05 bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
I hoped you enjoyed the post of the Guard's Helmet from the Steyer Works along with the SS 84/98 Double Stamp Bayonet/ Single Rune.
My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler.
The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped.
The particular double stamped bayonet with single rune has markings in the grips reflecting 1943. This is too much of any possible coincidence.
I have also had posted a picture of a BNZ 43 Single Rune Rifle along with the bayonet that it came with. This rifle was traded to Robert Jensen for a Death Head Luger many years back. The Death Head Luger is one of the two that I had posted along with a Lazy S over TK Death Head. Robert Jensen was a gun writer and collector and he firmily believed that the Death Head Luger was an SS Weapon from the WW11 period.
Richard Kuchta
FORUM,
In regards to what is believed about Lugers, there is a lot of bad information out there. You have all heard about the Black Widow Luger. It is written up and referred to in most luger books.
Well there was no such Luger as a Black Widow Luger! The name Black Widow was given to that particular style of Luger with black plastic grips and dated 41 and 42 by a collector dealer in Arizona to stimulate sales. Also, they were not made for and used by the Gestapo,SD, & or SS exclusively.
There is still alot of erronious data being published on German weapons and especially SS.
Collectors, remember the old saying about the German item that you are buying. You are buying the item and not the story. Whatever you buy must support itself. As a forum member related, he has bayonets just like in some of the pictures of his reference books; however without a direct link to an organization such as the SS or Army it is extremely hard to substantiate. Direct linkage is shown through such things as WA, SS Property Stamps, etc.
Richard K
Forum,
I hoped you enjoyed the post of the Guard's Helmet from the Steyer Works along with the SS 84/98 Double Stamp Bayonet/ Single Rune.
My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler.
The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped.
The particular double stamped bayonet with single rune has markings in the grips reflecting 1943. This is too much of any possible coincidence.
I have also had posted a picture of a BNZ 43 Single Rune Rifle along with the bayonet that it came with. This rifle was traded to Robert Jensen for a Death Head Luger many years back. The Death Head Luger is one of the two that I had posted along with a Lazy S over TK Death Head. Robert Jensen was a gun writer and collector and he firmily believed that the Death Head Luger was an SS Weapon from the WW11 period.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Berg, Coppel, Eickhorn, R. Herder, Hörster, WKC and I'm sure some others that don’t immediately come to mind, all used wood or plastic for later production at some point after the black grips were first introduced. What was reported is what is normally seen with some OEM factory production, and it is generally a time sensitive matter. None of the Solingen makers made their own plastic grips, they were all subcontracted. The significance of the Type 41 plastic is that it was formulated to conserve the use of the chemicals used in production.
And if I may ask. I don’t think that we ever saw the 98K wood 1945 dated grips (or obverse side markings if present). Are the markings otherwise identical to those you’ve posted or are they different? And if so, how are they different?
PS: What you saw earlier about the camp was the result of my searching the Internet. And I have to go back and see what information came from what site. Because I abstracted portions of the data as I went along from one to the next. When I have it all put back together with the appropriate links I will repost.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I have the pictures of the grips for the SS Phospate 45 dated bayonets. I promised John Jacobi that he would be the first to see the bayonets. I will try to send them out yet this evening.
Richard K
FP & Forum,
In my understanding of the SS KL System, Work & detenion camps were located more in the center of Germany. The extermination camps were located further out and in the adjacent captured countries. The KL located in Germany were used to supply slave labor to the war industries as well as fill the treasury of the SS.
Richard K
FP,
Sorry for asking the same question over so many time regarding the RZM SS Frog. Was there a legitimate SS RZM frog?
Richard K
FORUM,
In regards to the quality of the SS Proprty Stamps, mention was made of the overstamp on the SS 84/98 Horster. Please see the picture of the two lugers that were posted. One luger has an overstamp on the chamber. Overstamps are seen on SS Weapons. It does not look that great but it still provides the direct linkage to SS Property.
FORUM,
Are there any more questions regarding Death Head Lugers and or myths about Black Widow Lugers.
Collectors who bought the lugers because of the Story regarding the "Black Widow" name ended up paying 50% more than what the luger should have sold for.
Another piece of information regarding Lugers associated with the SS & KLs is that of the KL Lugrers. The Lugers are really marked KI but the I looks like an L. KI lugers are for the Kadette Institute but again it was hyped to mean Concentration Larger Luger. The guns were misrepresented and oversold.
Remember, you are not buying the story, you are buying the item that must stand on its own.
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
I hoped you enjoyed the post of the Guard's Helmet from the Steyer Works along with the SS 84/98 Double Stamp Bayonet/ Single Rune.
My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler.
The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped.
The particular double stamped bayonet with single rune has markings in the grips reflecting 1943. This is too much of any possible coincidence.
I have also had posted a picture of a BNZ 43 Single Rune Rifle along with the bayonet that it came with. This rifle was traded to Robert Jensen for a Death Head Luger many years back. The Death Head Luger is one of the two that I had posted along with a Lazy S over TK Death Head. Robert Jensen was a gun writer and collector and he firmily believed that the Death Head Luger was an SS Weapon from the WW11 period.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Berg, Coppel, Eickhorn, R. Herder, Hörster, WKC and I'm sure some others that don’t immediately come to mind, all used wood or plastic for later production at some point after the black grips were first introduced. What was reported is what is normally seen with some OEM factory production, and it is generally a time sensitive matter. None of the Solingen makers made their own plastic grips, they were all subcontracted. The significance of the Type 41 plastic is that it was formulated to conserve the use of the chemicals used in production.
And if I may ask. I don’t think that we ever saw the 98K wood 1945 dated grips (or obverse side markings if present). Are the markings otherwise identical to those you’ve posted or are they different? And if so, how are they different?
PS: What you saw earlier about the camp was the result of my searching the Internet. And I have to go back and see what information came from what site. Because I abstracted portions of the data as I went along from one to the next. When I have it all put back together with the appropriate links I will repost.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Thanks for trying to get some additional information on the Wobbelin Concentration Camp. I wish that Walther was still alive to provide some additional information on the SS Weapon's Depot and where exactly it was located.
Richard K
Forum,
I hoped you enjoyed the post of the Guard's Helmet from the Steyer Works along with the SS 84/98 Double Stamp Bayonet/ Single Rune.
My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler.
The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped.
The particular double stamped bayonet with single rune has markings in the grips reflecting 1943. This is too much of any possible coincidence.
I have also had posted a picture of a BNZ 43 Single Rune Rifle along with the bayonet that it came with. This rifle was traded to Robert Jensen for a Death Head Luger many years back. The Death Head Luger is one of the two that I had posted along with a Lazy S over TK Death Head. Robert Jensen was a gun writer and collector and he firmily believed that the Death Head Luger was an SS Weapon from the WW11 period.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
Berg, Coppel, Eickhorn, R. Herder, Hörster, WKC and I'm sure some others that don’t immediately come to mind, all used wood or plastic for later production at some point after the black grips were first introduced. What was reported is what is normally seen with some OEM factory production, and it is generally a time sensitive matter. None of the Solingen makers made their own plastic grips, they were all subcontracted. The significance of the Type 41 plastic is that it was formulated to conserve the use of the chemicals used in production.
And if I may ask. I don’t think that we ever saw the 98K wood 1945 dated grips (or obverse side markings if present). Are the markings otherwise identical to those you’ve posted or are they different? And if so, how are they different?
FP,
May I ask what you have observed to date on the 2 SS Phospate Finished, Consecutive numbered bayonets??
Richard KPS: What you saw earlier about the camp was the result of my searching the Internet. And I have to go back and see what information came from what site. Because I abstracted portions of the data as I went along from one to the next. When I have it all put back together with the appropriate links I will repost.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Thanks for trying to get some additional information on the Wobbelin Concentration Camp. I wish that Walther was still alive to provide some additional information on the SS Weapon's Depot and where exactly it was located.
Richard K
FP,
May I ask what you have observed to date on the 2 SS Phospate Finished, Consecutive numbered bayonets??
Richard K
Richard,
While the flash and/or lighting has made it hard to identify the type of finish, I see two dark finished bayonets with wood grips and what looks like matching/consecutive numbers. With a "Death's Head" on the underneath of each pommel. But if there are 1945 dates on them somewhere, maybe your eye can see them. But they don't show up on my monitor.
Best Regards, FP
Hello, to Your consecutive numbers and 45 date, we dont see the date stamp, but i believe both could be only when the scabbards are matching made by 2 fabrics Eickhorn or Hoerster, no other fabric used the doubble letter producing, when i assume its a wood grips it could be a Eickhorn 43 production from letter aa. Or Hoerster 1944 production, but the grips should be plastic and riveted, the serial numbers could be done by the contractor, certainly too nice for a 45 dated camp grips, the overall finish looks like 1943 and i believe it should be 1943 production.
To Lugers i am not expert on this here but all pictured all reworks of WW1 so when there was a N proof added i probably hard to determine, the other production speaks about switch to Eagle/N in early 1939, it would be nice to know more about the lazy S DH on the bayonet its a WKC blanko piece?
The single rune piece is probably a blanko with added stamp, it doesnt look like a rework.best regards,Andy
FP,
Sorry for asking the same question over so many time regarding the RZM SS Frog. Was there a legitimate SS RZM frog?
Richard K
Richard,
Sorry I missed this. But with the number of entries something was bound to get lost. For the combat frogs I’ve seen a bunch of fakes, or at best questionable items. But not one that I felt comfortable purchasing. Dress frogs are not where my main interests are so I will leave that to those who are in that area (although I’ve seen many items that were clearly fakes there as well).
And I also saw where the 1945 date markings will be posted in the near future.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
May I ask what you have observed to date on the 2 SS Phospate Finished, Consecutive numbered bayonets??
Richard K
Richard,
FP,
The 2 SS Phospate Finished Bayonets are dated 45 inside of the grips along with an SS Property Stamp. The server must be down at work because I can not remote access it from home.
FP, please look very carefully at the bayonets and you can see where they have been scrubbed. Also note where the SS Property Stamp is in relationship to the phospate. Tell me what you see?
Richard KWhile the flash and/or lighting has made it hard to identify the type of finish, I see two dark finished bayonets with wood grips and what looks like matching/consecutive numbers. With a "Death's Head" on the underneath of each pommel. But if there are 1945 dates on them somewhere, maybe your eye can see them. But they don't show up on my monitor.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Sorry for asking the same question over so many time regarding the RZM SS Frog. Was there a legitimate SS RZM frog?
Richard K
Richard,
Sorry I missed this. But with the number of entries something was bound to get lost. For the combat frogs I’ve seen a bunch of fakes, or at best questionable items. But not one that I felt comfortable purchasing. Dress frogs are not where my main interests are so I will leave that to those who are in that area (although I’ve seen many items that were clearly fakes there as well).
And I also saw where the 1945 date markings will be posted in the near future.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Do you have a real RZM style VA type of frog that you could post for the Forum to look at?
\
Richard K
Hello, to Your consecutive numbers and 45 date, we dont see the date stamp, but i believe both could be only when the scabbards are matching made by 2 fabrics Eickhorn or Hoerster, no other fabric used the doubble letter producing, when i assume its a wood grips it could be a Eickhorn 43 production from letter aa. Or Hoerster 1944 production, but the grips should be plastic and riveted, the serial numbers could be done by the contractor, certainly too nice for a 45 dated camp grips, the overall finish looks like 1943 and i believe it should be 1943 production.
To Lugers i am not expert on this here but all pictured all reworks of WW1 so when there was a N proof added i probably hard to determine, the other production speaks about switch to Eagle/N in early 1939, it would be nice to know more about the lazy S DH on the bayonet its a WKC blanko piece?
The single rune piece is probably a blanko with added stamp, it doesnt look like a rework.best regards,Andy
Good to have you back again.
Richard K
FORUM,
Thanks again to Joe Wotka for opening up a topic related to proofing.
The Death Head Lugers both have Crown N proofs, Charles Kenyon and Jan Still list the Crown N as a commercial Proof used after 1920. The SS used th Commercial Proof because they did not have access to the military proof testing.
All of my SS rifles & lugers have these proofs that fakers have failed to recognise as being necessary.
Richard K
Forum,
About 20 to 25 years ago there was a dealer from Pittsburgh, PA who was very creative. He made up P-38s with Palm Tree over Runes. Presentation SS Lugers and exotic 98K rifles. Easy to tell his work because he never had any proofs on his weapons.
Richard K
Hello, to Your consecutive numbers and 45 date, we dont see the date stamp, but i believe both could be only when the scabbards are matching made by 2 fabrics Eickhorn or Hoerster, no other fabric used the doubble letter producing, when i assume its a wood grips it could be a Eickhorn 43 production from letter aa. Or Hoerster 1944 production, but the grips should be plastic and riveted, the serial numbers could be done by the contractor, certainly too nice for a 45 dated camp grips, the overall finish looks like 1943 and i believe it should be 1943 production.
To Lugers i am not expert on this here but all pictured all reworks of WW1 so when there was a N proof added i probably hard to determine, the other production speaks about switch to Eagle/N in early 1939, it would be nice to know more about the lazy S DH on the bayonet its a WKC blanko piece?
Andy,
The Lazy S over the TK is a WKC Blanko with accountability # 490. Grips unmarked.
Richard K The single rune piece is probably a blanko with added stamp, it doesnt look like a rework.best regards,Andy
"My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler."
"The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped."
- there is no evidence of sending unfinished bayonets from WKC to any camps, the bayonets were finished by the maker who is stamped on blade, same as FP correctly mentioned that plastic grips has no link to producer, as it were chemical firms that produced plastic grips.
In reality about the single rune piece, is the camp was located in Austria, and is named exactly, i believe is described by the new book of Mike Steves and Bruce Karem, the work was only under control of Steyr fabric.
Thanks for adding of additional details of WKC piece with lazy S DH, looks interesting. The accountability number is where stamped on blade? the grips should be serialed to flashguard probably.
FP,
The 2 SS Phospate Finished Bayonets are dated 45 inside of the grips along with an SS Property Stamp. The server must be down at work because I can not remote access it from home.
FP, please look very carefully at the bayonets and you can see where they have been scrubbed. Also note where the SS Property Stamp is in relationship to the phospate. Tell me what you see?
Richard,
Here are I think the three best quality images that I have. I don't have any images where the dates and maker markings would normally be. I only have the serial number side. Is the other side where they were scrubbed? With possibly traces of the original markings like maker/dates? Because with these pictures where in the the images am I supposed to be looking? And what exactly is it that I should looking for?
FP,
Do you have a real RZM style VA type of frog that you could post for the Forum to look at?
\
Richard K
Do you mean an RZM marking like that on the Navy frog? Because I’m really not clear by what you mean by a “VA type of frog” - if it’s different than the one I posted.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Do you have a frog marked similiary as the frog with the Navy Stamp? If so would you post it.
FP,
The bayonets have a finish as if they have been buff ground. On the one scabbard rear you can just make out Cof. The pommels show this buff ground type of finish. Any WA would have been removed. Grips do not match the pommel & cross guard geometry very well. Phosphate finish is real heavy. SS Property Stamp is below the phosphate finish!
Richard K
FP,
There are no dates on the bayonets and scabbards.
Richard K
"My opinion is that the Single Rune 84/98 Bayonet was assembled at the Styer Works for the SS to go along with SS rifles being supplied as per order of Himmler."
"The SS Double Stamp / Single Rune is on a WKC Blanko Blade. It is my opinion as well as other SS Weapons collectors that WKC also furnished just blades which were then assembled into bayonets at work camps & factories such as Styer.
A factor that has continuously come up during our discussions is that a WKC should have plastic grips. Wooden grips could more easily be fabricated in a Work Camp than plastic grips that require a sosphicated molding machine along with die maintenance. The wooden grips are almost always dated and property stamped."
- there is no evidence of sending unfinished bayonets from WKC to any camps, the bayonets were finished by the maker who is stamped on blade, same as FP correctly mentioned that plastic grips has no link to producer, as it were chemical firms that produced plastic grips.
In reality about the single rune piece, is the camp was located in Austria, and is named exactly, i believe is described by the new book of Mike Steves and Bruce Karem, the work was only under control of Steyr fabric.
Thanks for adding of additional details of WKC piece with lazy S DH, looks interesting. The accountability number is where stamped on blade? the grips should be serialed to flashguard probably.
Richard K
FP,
Do you have a frog marked similiary as the frog with the Navy Stamp? If so would you post it.
.......... For the combat frogs I’ve seen a bunch of fakes, or at best questionable items. But not one that I felt comfortable purchasing. .........
Richard,
As I said earlier, I haven't found one that I was comfortable with as being an original. And if I can summarize the last few comments, they ground off almost all of the markings (how about underneath the flashguard?). And dumped them in a refinishing tank of some kind (I'm still not convinced it's actually a phosphate type finish). And then were left unprotected in the elements/environment.
Best Regards, FP
About the guards i dont know but i assume the camp works were organised by SS probably, so they guarded the prisoners probably too. In Steyr self was probably the Werkschutz and FW schutz which could be the helmet off.
The cof pieces have a normal finish on blades, the other 1236 was probably mashined on blade,why i dont know, certainly this is a not typical phosphate finish like seen on late war german arms. I dont believe its the origin finish.Its too dull.Have You dismantled the grips? are there any WaA under flashguard?
- the WKC of Steyr piece, the grips are not correctly fitted so i believe You have there a normal WKC blanko, that was serialed and hat got a single rune stamp,why i dont know, the grips should be normal plastic as the finish looks like 1943 piece. best regards,Andy
FP,
May I ask what you have observed to date on the 2 SS Phospate Finished, Consecutive numbered bayonets??
Richard K
FP,
The 2 SS Phospate Finished Bayonets are dated 45 inside of the grips along with an SS Property Stamp. The server must be down at work because I can not remote access it from home.
FP, please look very carefully at the bayonets and you can see where they have been scrubbed. Also note where the SS Property Stamp is in relationship to the phospate. Tell me what you see?
Richard K
Richard,
While the flash and/or lighting has made it hard to identify the type of finish, I see two dark finished bayonets with wood grips and what looks like matching/consecutive numbers. With a "Death's Head" on the underneath of each pommel. But if there are 1945 dates on them somewhere, maybe your eye can see them. But they don't show up on my monitor.
Best Regards, FP
Richard,
I think that I can see where some of this misunderstanding/miscommunication might be coming from. Not too long ago I looked at an RZM marking that to me in the image posted looked like a skull. You had it in hand, and could see it was an RZM marking, but I could not. So it may be the same thing here with a misinterpretation of something that you can see, but those on the other end of the conversation physically cannot.
On the Steyr topic, I remember seeing something about guarding inmates who were workers in the factories, and guards in factories in general. My best recollection is that there were both, and I will have to see if I can find the reference,
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Do you have a frog marked similiary as the frog with the Navy Stamp? If so would you post it.
.......... For the combat frogs I’ve seen a bunch of fakes, or at best questionable items. But not one that I felt comfortable purchasing. .........
I could not determine your answer previously. Feeling comfortable and being a legitimate SS marking is like walking the fence. I guess I feel the same way but on the 3 markings VA, RZM, & WBD. As I stated before, I never got an SS Bayonet in a frog with those markings. I talked to several other collectors and they never got an SS Bayonet in a frog with those markings either. Being that no one has actually obtained a bayonet with a frog marked as above does not mean that they are not legitimate SS frogs. For me the frogs need more research.
Richard KRichard,
As I said earlier, I haven't found one that I was comfortable with as being an original. And if I can summarize the last few comments, they ground off almost all of the markings (how about underneath the flashguard?). And dumped them in a refinishing tank of some kind (I'm still not convinced it's actually a phosphate type finish). And then were left unprotected in the elements/environment.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Do you have a frog marked similiary as the frog with the Navy Stamp? If so would you post it.
.......... For the combat frogs I’ve seen a bunch of fakes, or at best questionable items. But not one that I felt comfortable purchasing. .........
I could not determine your answer previously. Feeling comfortable and being a legitimate SS marking is like walking the fence. I guess I feel the same way but on the 3 markings VA, RZM, & WBD. As I stated before, I never got an SS Bayonet in a frog with those markings. I talked to several other collectors and they never got an SS Bayonet in a frog with those markings either. Being that no one has actually obtained a bayonet with a frog marked as above does not mean that they are not legitimate SS frogs. For me the frogs need more research.
Richard KRichard,
As I said earlier, I haven't found one that I was comfortable with as being an original. And if I can summarize the last few comments, they ground off almost all of the markings (how about underneath the flashguard?). And dumped them in a refinishing tank of some kind (I'm still not convinced it's actually a phosphate type finish). And then were left unprotected in the elements/environment.
Best Regards, FP
I am at home today mostly cleaning and putting my collection back into the showcases. I just took one of the SS Phospate Bayonets down as per your request to determine what is under
the flashguard. I assume you mean what is on the tang? On the tang there is a number 9719 and a mark that looks likea ).
As per the finish on the blade and scabbard, it is definitely a coating of some sort. The best that I can relate to is a black/gray phospate.
Richard K
KLINGE,
I went over all of my VZ-24 Bayonets today and all of the bayonets seem to be in the following range:
1. E LION 25
2. E Lion 26
3. E LION 27
4. E LION 29
I have no bayonets in the 30s.
Richard K
Denny,
I have the pictures of the SS 45 dated Grips comming to you. Please post for us.
Thank you,
Richard Kuchta
...
FP,
Can you see the finish better on thes pictures. Nothing was dipped and put out into the elements.
Richard K
Denny,
Thank you for posting the pictures.
Richard K
Forum & FP,
Note the unique way in which the SS Accountability numbers were put into the grips.
R Kuchta
Forum,
Note the SS Property Stamp in the Grips.
Richard K
Forum,
Can someone explain the signifiance of the 6 & H on the tang of the 36 bayont?
richard K
Thanks for adding the details, the piece is dull blued which i believe is a postwar blueing done or the origin blueing as not so good on the rough mashinihg was coated in a unknown solution?, similar finish was never observed by german items, is too dark and dull. The grips are correct of the piece, unfortunally should be serialed with flahsguard or not serialed et all,i believe the DH and 45 markings are new, the overall mashining spures corespond with the blanko pieces pictured from Denny and Klinge in the Eickhorn thread. The pieces started as normal cof 43 production and was not serialed, i assume a normal commerzial contract. the serial numbers were added later, it should be compared of grips and blades that are made by one dies size. The H letter is so called forging letter and corespond with the date already destined by the mashining and the series letters of scabbards.
9719 or what on tang could be the assembly number of lock nut, that should be visible on protruding part by pressing button.
You should have bayonets Vz.24 made later as 1930, but the date is not on blade.
Andy,
I do not agree with any of your statements that you made concerning the 45 dated SS bayonets. These bayonets along with a rifle were returned by PFC DUNN in 1945 as stated on the capture papers. You are making comparissons of finishes based upon no knowledge of what the SS rework specificatins were. You are quick to state post war finish. You are again making comparrisons of SS Bayonets using only your knowledge of army bayonets which in this case does not work. You have no knowledge and or expertise of SS Bayonets. I know you do not have any in your collection because I asked you numerous times and you presented nothing to us.
I purchased these bayonets from the family of PFC Dunn. For you to make the statements that you have made that these bayonets are post war done shows your complete lack of knowledge of this topic of SS Bayonets. You have no knowledge of the SS Property Marks and have no substantiation for the statements that you make.
It was just a short while ago when you had seen 25 SS Nederlands Bayonets with the insignia pinned on the back and you said that mine was post war embelleshed like those that you had seen. However, my bayonet was not like those 25 bayonets you had looked at. You do not even know what the grip insignia looks likeon a Nederlands Bayonet. I asked you to describe the bayonets and you provided nothing.
Your opinions of this postwar embellishment are really something. The idea that GIs would do things to make bayonets more valuable before sending them home in 1945 is really reaching.
If you have been following the posts in this thread, you should have been able to dtermine that SS Property Marks were not readily known about except by some rifle collectors as of about 20 to 25 years ago.
I have nothing against you personally Andy, it is just your shoot from the hip statements backed up by nothing.
Richard K
Thanks for adding the details, the piece is dull blued which i believe is a postwar blueing done or the origin blueing as not so good on the rough mashinihg was coated in a unknown solution?, similar finish was never observed by german items, Do you have the SS specifications for the rework and finishing of bayonets?? R. Kuchta
is too dark and dull. The grips are correct of the piece, unfortunally should be serialed with flahsguard or not serialed et all,i believe the DH and 45 markings are new, the overall mashining spures corespond with the blanko pieces pictured from Denny and Klinge in the Eickhorn thread. The pieces started as normal cof 43 production and was not serialed, i assume a normal commerzial contract. the serial numbers were added later, it should be compared of grips and blades that are made by one dies size. The H letter is so called forging letter and corespond with the date already destined by the mashining and the series letters of scabbards.
9719 or what on tang could be the assembly number of lock nut, that should be visible on protruding part by pressing button.
Thanks for adding the details, the piece is dull blued which i believe is a postwar blueing done or the origin blueing as not so good on the rough mashinihg was coated in a unknown solution?, similar finish was never observed by german items, Do you have the SS specifications for the rework and finishing of bayonets?? R. Kuchta
is too dark and dull. The grips are correct of the piece, unfortunally should be serialed with flahsguard Please show us the SS specification that relates to the numbering of the flashguard and or grips. R. Kuchta or not serialed et all,i believe the DH and 45 markings are new, the overall mashining spures corespond with the blanko pieces pictured from Denny and Klinge in the Eickhorn thread. The pieces started as normal cof 43 production and was not serialed, i assume a normal commerzial contract. the serial numbers were added later, it should be compared of grips and blades that are made by one dies size. The H letter is so called forging letter and corespond with the date already destined by the mashining and the series letters of scabbards.
9719 or what on tang could be the assembly number of lock nut, that should be visible on protruding part by pressing button.
Thanks for adding the details, the piece is dull blued which i believe is a postwar blueing done or the origin blueing as not so good on the rough mashinihg was coated in a unknown solution?, similar finish was never observed by german items, Do you have the SS specifications for the rework and finishing of bayonets?? R. Kuchta
is too dark and dull. The grips are correct of the piece, unfortunally should be serialed with flahsguard Please show us the SS specification that relates to the numbering of the flashguard and or grips. R. Kuchta or not serialed et all,i believe the DH and 45 markings are new,Based on what knowledge & expertise of SS bayonets do you make this statement. I can show 42 & 43 dated SS bayonets for comparrison. What is your statement based on??? R. Kuchta the overall mashining spures corespond with the blanko pieces pictured from Denny and Klinge in the Eickhorn thread. The pieces started as normal cof 43 production and was not serialed, i assume a normal commerzial contract. the serial numbers were added later, it should be compared of grips and blades that are made by one dies size. The H letter is so called forging letter and corespond with the date already destined by the mashining and the series letters of scabbards.
9719 or what on tang could be the assembly number of lock nut, that should be visible on protruding part by pressing button.
Richard.
First my thanks for posting the new pictures. And I think that I understand the points that you are trying to make. But look at this image you posted. What do you see? What don't you see? And how does it compare to all of the areas that you say were ground away - which could be a reference check for your stated opinion?
Best Regards, FP
Richard.
First my thanks for posting the new pictures. And I think that I understand the points that you are trying to make. But look at this image you posted. What do you see? What don't you see? And how does it compare to the areas that you say were ground away - which could be a reference check for your stated opinion?
FP,
What I wanted to know is if you could see the type of rough finishes on the bayonet. One scabbard has about 95% of the manufacturer and date removed. You can not see that from the pictures that you have. But this same type of buff grind finish is also on the blade and pommel area. Note that the SS Property Stamp is in Excellent Condition and under the finish. The point is, why was such an extensive rework done to these bayonets when the war was in its last stages. Like the old sayng, "Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." These were battfield salvaged bayonets. Why do anything to them. The rifle that Walther sent home was dated 1943 and when I looked at it, the gun was reblued and coated with a cosmoline type grease. I do not know if the Germans put the grease on or if Walther did it.
Richard K
Best Regards, FP
What I wanted to know is if you could see the type of rough finishes on the bayonet. One scabbard has about 95% of the manufacturer and date removed. You can not see that from the pictures that you have. But this same type of buff grind finish is also on the blade and pommel area. Note that the SS Property Stamp is in Excellent Condition and under the finish. The point is, why was such an extensive rework done to these bayonets when the war was in its last stages. Like the old sayng, "Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." These were battfield salvaged bayonets. Why do anything to them. The rifle that Walther sent home was dated 1943 and when I looked at it, the gun was reblued and coated with a cosmoline type grease. I do not know if the Germans put the grease on or if Walther did it.
Richard K
Richard,
First, these are consecutively matched pieces, so I would think that all of the operations on them would have been done at the same time. And they would have stayed together in the same storage conditions from 1945 to now. I will see what pictures I have that can illustrate what I was trying to say - but let me see if this works. Phosphoric acid etches the metal, it does not leave a bright glossy appearance.
And while the lighting leaves some uncertainty, to me it looks like rust “speckling” (small rust nodules) over a blued surface. But some of what is strange to me is that one of the bayonets has a lot of “speckling” on the tang where the grips would have covered it, including the non-exposed portion of the flash guard. And especially one of the blades is “speckled” when it should have had a scabbard protecting it. And the scabbards look a little strange as well, but I can only see the upper portions, so no conclusions have been made where they are concerned.
Maybe it’s just the photos, and if I have misperceptions they can be cleared up with new photos just like the RZM frog. But for now, I will have to go with what I can physically see in front of me.
Best Regards, FP
What I wanted to know is if you could see the type of rough finishes on the bayonet. One scabbard has about 95% of the manufacturer and date removed. You can not see that from the pictures that you have. But this same type of buff grind finish is also on the blade and pommel area. Note that the SS Property Stamp is in Excellent Condition and under the finish. The point is, why was such an extensive rework done to these bayonets when the war was in its last stages. Like the old sayng, "Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." These were battfield salvaged bayonets. Why do anything to them. The rifle that Walther sent home was dated 1943 and when I looked at it, the gun was reblued and coated with a cosmoline type grease. I do not know if the Germans put the grease on or if Walther did it.
Richard K
Richard,
First, these are consecutively matched pieces, so I would think that all of the operations on them would have been done at the same time. And they would have stayed together in the same storage conditions from 1945
The bayonets have been together since the war. However, it is hard to assume that the quality of the coating process may have been the same for both bayonets. I do not know the condition of the bayonets prior to rework. I said that I could see a rough finish. The end result of the coating is determined by the quality of the surface of the item being coated / plated. On the bayonet scabbard that is missing some finish I can see pits using a magnifying glass. On the blade of bayonet 1237 I can also see small pits in the blade surface using a magnifying glass. In addition there is a grind gouge on the cutting edge of 1237 that has buff grind marks going through it. The coating is the same on both bayonets. The surface finishes are not. More pitting on 1237. It is what would be expected from battlefield salvage rework done by slave labor. Richard Kto now. I will see what pictures I have that can illustrate what I was trying to say - but let me see if this works. Phosphoric acid etches the metal, it does not leave a bright glossy appearance.
And while the lighting leaves some uncertainty, to me it looks like rust “speckling” (small rust nodules) over a blued surface. But some of what is strange to me is that one of the bayonets has a lot of “speckling” on the tang where the grips would have covered it, including the non-exposed portion of the flash guard. And especially one of the blades is “speckled” when it should have had a scabbard protecting it. And the scabbards look a little strange as well, but I can only see the upper portions, so no conclusions have been made where they are concerned.
Maybe it’s just the photos, and if I have misperceptions they can be cleared up with new photos just like the RZM frog. But for now, I will have to go with what I can physically see in front of me.
Best Regards, FP
What I wanted to know is if you could see the type of rough finishes on the bayonet. One scabbard has about 95% of the manufacturer and date removed. You can not see that from the pictures that you have. But this same type of buff grind finish is also on the blade and pommel area. Note that the SS Property Stamp is in Excellent Condition and under the finish. The point is, why was such an extensive rework done to these bayonets when the war was in its last stages. Like the old sayng, "Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." These were battfield salvaged bayonets. Why do anything to them. The rifle that Walther sent home was dated 1943 and when I looked at it, the gun was reblued and coated with a cosmoline type grease. I do not know if the Germans put the grease on or if Walther did it.
The bayonets have been together since the war. However, it is hard to assume that the quality of the coating process may have been the same for both bayonets. I do not know the condition of the bayonets prior to rework. I said that I could see a rough finish. The end result of the coating is determined by the quality of the surface of the item being coated / plated. On the bayonet scabbard that is missing some finish I can see pits using a magnifying glass. On the blade of bayonet 1237 I can also see small pits in the blade surface using a magnifying glass. In addition there is a grind gouge on the cutting edge of 1237 that has buff grind marks going through it. The coating is the same on both bayonets. The surface finishes are not. More pitting on 1237. It is what would be expected from battlefield salvage rework done by slave labor.
Richard K
Richard,
Attached is a pair of bayonets by the same maker. From the same general late 1944 time period, showing the transition from bluing to a phosphate type finish. It also shows how the light reflects differently depending on the angle, and the quality of the surface finish. I understand metal finishing more than you might (ordinarily) think. I also know what I am looking at in person, and most times with digital images. Having seen not only quite a few period reworks, but those done after the war as well. And I still stand by my preliminary conclusions that something has happened to the bayonets that is out of the ordinary. Until of course, something to the contrary comes along that shows otherwise.
Best Regards, FP
Thanks for FP for make a brighter the picture, i believe the 1237 is origin blueing on blade, is very important to make a good picture of them to made a exact opinion. Firstly Richard You dont know how the bayonets were marked by assembling, thats the reason why we could estimate the maker without see the area of ricasso or scabbard where are the maker remains marking. Same as You dont know how were parts serialed by the makers, the bayonets were marked by the maker not by SS or Army, so majority of markings were made by maker, where was only difference by the commerzial name or the codes accepted by Army.
We know already the pieces were made by Eickhorn,so why is the 1236 remashined on blade i dont know, the finish on handle looks like dull, but maybe it should be cleaned and oiled and take photo by sunlight. The Dh on grips are for me fakes,same as 45 dates.The grips should be probably not serialed. I believe both pieces are normal Eickhorn 1943/4 blankos.As mentioned earlier You should compare it with pieces pictured by FP or Denny on the Eickhorn thread.
Thats there are some DH stamped or engraved it doesnt mean it was made by SS, thats the wrong opinion that You are presented from beginn, the bayonets were made only by bayonets producers.
I already posted bayonet that was used by WSS as they neednt be marked with additional markings, by the mixing of apple with oranges for me is this as You declare it should be same property marking on "SS" rework bayonets like Vz.24 or prewar SG98/05 and bayonets made in end of war like the commerzial cof 43 or WKC late blanko. The bayonets were marked with W-SS marking only in prewar period, not post 1941 when the army material were used too. The cof43 blankos have the origin grips so no reworks, same as the WKC 742 or other mentioned pieces. As they are not reworks it should be not remarked for me.
What I wanted to know is if you could see the type of rough finishes on the bayonet. One scabbard has about 95% of the manufacturer and date removed. You can not see that from the pictures that you have. But this same type of buff grind finish is also on the blade and pommel area. Note that the SS Property Stamp is in Excellent Condition and under the finish. The point is, why was such an extensive rework done to these bayonets when the war was in its last stages. Like the old sayng, "Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." These were battfield salvaged bayonets. Why do anything to them. The rifle that Walther sent home was dated 1943 and when I looked at it, the gun was reblued and coated with a cosmoline type grease. I do not know if the Germans put the grease on or if Walther did it.
The bayonets have been together since the war. However, it is hard to assume that the quality of the coating process may have been the same for both bayonets. I do not know the condition of the bayonets prior to rework. I said that I could see a rough finish. The end result of the coating is determined by the quality of the surface of the item being coated / plated. On the bayonet scabbard that is missing some finish I can see pits using a magnifying glass. On the blade of bayonet 1237 I can also see small pits in the blade surface using a magnifying glass. In addition there is a grind gouge on the cutting edge of 1237 that has buff grind marks going through it. The coating is the same on both bayonets. The surface finishes are not. More pitting on 1237. It is what would be expected from battlefield salvage rework done by slave labor.
Richard K
Richard,
Attached is a pair of bayonets by the same maker. From the same general late 1944 time period, showing the transition from bluing to a phosphate type finish. It also shows how the light reflects differently depending on the angle, and the quality of the surface finish. I understand metal finishing more than you might (ordinarily) think. I also know what I am looking at in person, and most times with digital images. Having seen not only quite a few period reworks, but those done after the war as well. And I still stand by my preliminary conclusions that something has happened to the bayonets that is out of the ordinary. Until of course, something to the contrary comes along that shows otherwise.
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Please explain the relationship of what you are looking for as to what we are discussing about bayonets. I too am also quite experienced with metal surface finishes and platings and coatings. The products that we produce at our plant must have extremely high finishes or else any imperfection in the surface of the press plates will be transferred into the garments. Platings and finishes are on everything that we do. When there is pitting in the steel the etching chemical enters in and in some cases comes out after the plating runing the whole job.
Please explain what type of comparrison you are trying to make and for what reason.
Richard KuchtA
I already posted bayonet that was used by WSS as they neednt be marked with additional markings, by the mixing of apple with oranges for me is this as You declare it should be same property marking on "SS" rework bayonets like Vz.24 or prewar SG98/05 and bayonets made in end of war like the commerzial cof 43 or WKC late blanko. The bayonets were marked with W-SS marking only in prewar period, not post 1941 when the army material were used too. The cof43 blankos have the origin grips so no reworks, same as the WKC 742 or other mentioned pieces. As they are not reworks it should be not remarked for me.
What SS documentation are you citing that states that bayonets and rifles did not have to be SS Property Stamped after 1941. There are alot of rifles and bayonets that ended up getting SS Property Stamps on them along with the WA after 1941. Richard K
Same documentation as You mentioned that they are confirmed WaA proofed bayonets and marked with SS property without seeing any rework stamps.I saw in this thread to this time no real piece that is WaA and SS marked on same piece, only possible thing is the Hoerster 38 without serial number, but i have other opinion, but the only one is stamped DH.
FP,
Please explain the relationship of what you are looking for as to what we are discussing about bayonets. I too am also quite experienced with metal surface finishes and platings and coatings. The products that we produce at our plant must have extremely high finishes or else any imperfection in the surface of the press plates will be transferred into the garments. Platings and finishes are on everything that we do. When there is pitting in the steel the etching chemical enters in and in some cases comes out after the plating runing the whole job.
Please explain what type of comparrison you are trying to make and for what reason.
Richard KuchtA
Richard,
While I am sure that you are well versed in the methods used to make the products coming from your plant, that might not necessarily translate as well to other types of products. And one of the purposes of the the picture I posted was to show the matte finish of a typical phosphate finish from that period. That it’s a period German one is just a fortuitous circumstance (I also collect U.S. from that era and they are also matte finishes). With a phosphate finish not being an oxide finish like bluing, but a physical crystalline coating on steel not unlike in some respects electroplating. And what I am seeing on the blades looks like bluing. And in some of the images what looks like corrosion byproducts, and some other things that should not normally be there if the images are true representations (meaning accurate) of the items being discussed.
Best Regards, FP
The 1945? dated pieces have no sign of reworks, the DH are engraved, the rough finish is typical for this type of commerzial pieces, so as same pieces exist owned by other members here is the question why are the pieces 45 stamped? which could be a assembly numbers in reality, as is not in full date format? same as the grips looks correct there. Why they are DH and serialed on grips?
FP,
Please explain the relationship of what you are looking for as to what we are discussing about bayonets. I too am also quite experienced with metal surface finishes and platings and coatings. The products that we produce at our plant must have extremely high finishes or else any imperfection in the surface of the press plates will be transferred into the garments. Platings and finishes are on everything that we do. When there is pitting in the steel the etching chemical enters in and in some cases comes out after the plating runing the whole job.
Please explain what type of comparrison you are trying to make and for what reason.
Richard KuchtA
Richard,
While I am sure that you are well versed in the methods used to make the products coming from your plant, that might not necessarily translate as well to other types of products. And one of the purposes of the the picture I posted was to show the matte finish of a typical phosphate finish from that period. That it’s a period German one is just a fortuitous circumstance (I also collect U.S. from that era and they are also matte finishes). With a phosphate finish not being an oxide finish like bluing, but a physical crystalline coating on steel not unlike in some respects to electroplating. And what I am seeing on the blades looks like bluing. And in some of the images what looks like corrosion byproducts, and some other things that should not normally be there if the images are true representations (meaning accurate) of the items being discussed.
Best Regards, FP
How do you know what the SS finish should be at this stage of the war? I am calling this a phospate finish because it does not look like a blueing. On the scabbard where the finish is missing in one area, I can see nothing in the pores of the metal on the scabbard. Everything seems to be gone. Richard K
The 1945? dated pieces have no sign of reworks, the DH are engraved, the rough finish is typical for this type of commerzial pieces, so as same pieces exist owned by other members here is the question why are the pieces 45 stamped? which could be a assembly numbers in reality, as is not in full date format? same as the grips looks correct there. Why they are DH and serialed on grips?
Andy,
I understand what you are saying, and as we already know period Solingen made bayonets have an external “45” marking which signifies the year they were manufactured.
I’m also not making any other judgements, but I would argue that they are most likely supposed to represent a (hidden from view) 1945 date of manufacture/reworking. With the other wood grips seen to date with some type of “SS” marking on them, we’ve seen four digit dates. But with these last two examples we see a matching serial number with a “DH” on one grip. But only the last two of the matching numbers on the opposite side. But also having a “45” marking which is noticeably larger. Without a matching “45” assembly number on the tang, what else could it be?
Best Regards, FP
The 1945? dated pieces have no sign of reworks, the DH are engraved, the rough finish is typical for this type of commerzial pieces, so as same pieces exist owned by other members here is the question why are the pieces 45 stamped? which could be a assembly numbers in reality, as is not in full date format? same as the grips looks correct there. Why they are DH and serialed on grips?
R. Kuchta
How do you know what the SS finish should be at this stage of the war? I am calling this a phospate finish because it does not look like a blueing. On the scabbard where the finish is missing in one area, I can see nothing in the pores of the metal on the scabbard. Everything seems to be gone. Richard K
Richard,
First, I know because I've got multiple original OEM period examples to look at. And I don't think that the SS would have had its own special technologies when it came to finishes on steel. And if they had done anything like that - it would have been using what we would now call an "industry standard". Having to procure the necessary chemicals and equipment from the same places as German arms makers.
To "cut to the chase" - I think that what you are looking at mostly is the scabbard which is blued over sandblasting, and misinterpreting it as a dark phosphate. And if you look more closely at the late examples I posted I think that you will better understand why I made the statements I did.
Maybe some better pictures of the entire piece(s) inside and out will change my mind. But not with what I've seen so far.
Best Regards, FP
First i dont believe the grips are camp made, there is no evidence of this, mainly the cof pieces, same as the other WKC piece, have origin grips that should be for this time of producing not matched!
You dont answered about the 9719 assembly number?
the piece should be marked on other parts tang, flashguard, as the numbers important by renumbering by new finish by overall rework. When we assume hypoteticaly that the piece was reworked, so the finish was done, the parts were not numbered like lock nut and flashguard how You could made it together? The acountability number has no reason to be under grips.
You have many grips reported already date stamped but only with SS runes and no acountability number? why? the pieces are not matching then.a WKC with 1941 dated grips is not to confirm as real of this piece because there is no number on grips.It could be grips from other piece, as they are because the WKC was made 1943.
For me this have only one reason the dated grips are problematic, because there is always a DH or a SS runes but assembly or "acountability " numbers not always!! Why? Because link the piece with SS. There are many WKC blankos reported to this time from various members to this time, no one have a similar marking, its not little suspicious for You? I assume as a well known member of SS collecting community that are You already, You could be a target of SS fakers.Certainly You have there a very nice real pieces, but unfortunally some problematic too. Same as certainly some faked.
Richard,
This has been a very interesting and valuable discussion/debate on a near and dear subject. I look forward to you continuing your presentation of SS related items.
Scott
*
" The serial numbers of these bayonets are: 1236 & 1237. The bayonets were never issued. We now have bayonets and scabbards that have the manufacturers codes as well as the serial numbers and dates removed. Blades look to be unpolished but heavy coating of phospate looks beautiful. On the tang of the 1237 SS bayonet, the old serial number of 9718 remains. On the tang of the 1236 SS bayonet, you find the old serial number 5738 and a large H and 6. The WAs have been scrubbed from the pommel. Inside of the new grips is a new geometry style, full frontal TK; serial # and 45 date. Yes, the bayonet is SS Property Marked. The 45 dated bayonets do have new wooden grips. There is not a scratch on them. The inside of the grips provide great documentation for the SS bayonet."
It would be great to see the other numbers on tang when possible, same as it would be nice to see the removed cof marking or the WaA removed? The 9718 and 5738 are not old serials but assembly numbers for me, the system of the marking is typical for normal Eickhorn production. The grips are not new for me.
Hi Scott,
How are you doing. Haven't heard from you in awhile. Hope all is well.
Very interesting discussion, I did get the Lazy S over TK from the gentleman in Germany that was discussing SS bayonets on another forum.
Richard K
Richard,
Thanks. Been very busy with much travel.
Yes - a very interesting discussion, which I hope continues and expands into the other items you mentioned.
Good for you on the Lazy S TK. If its the example I am thinking of - it appeared completely period correct and compares very favorably to others I have examined.
Scott
First i dont believe the grips are camp made, there is no evidence of this, mainly the cof pieces, same as the other WKC piece, have origin grips that should be for this time of producing not matched!
1. The grips have been replaced on these bayonets, The condition of the grips are excellent ++ to mint. The condition of these bayonets before rework (looking through a magnifying glass)consisted of rusted pitted blades that were heavily buff ground. Now, usually the blade is the most protected surface of a bayonet and these were rusted & pitted. No way that the grips that are on these bayonets were original to the piece.
You dont answered about the 9719 assembly number?
2. Number 9719 is stamped into the tang. What SS Rework Document do you have that says that the tang number should be on all of the bayonet components?? The majority of my SS bayonets do not come close to having such a matchup of numbers. I shall use the SS Death Head Lugers as a prime example of components not being matched. The objective was to produce Lugers that functioned from being assembled from scrapped lugers that were not acceptable to the Army.
the piece should be marked on other parts tang, flashguard, as the numbers important by renumbering by new finish by overall rework. When we assume hypoteticaly that the piece was reworked, so the finish was done, the parts were not numbered like lock nut and flashguard how You could made it together?
The acountability number has no reason to be under grips.
3. Why does the accountability number have no reason to be under the grip where you can not see it?? What SS documention do you cite to substantiate your statement. The SS did not always include the accountability number under the grips of bayonets. The SS 98/05 bayonets very seldom have an accountability number & or SS Property Stamps located there.
SS TV Bayonets may sometimes include the following information under the grips: 1. STANDARTE #
2. DATE
3. Accountability #
4. SS Property Mark
SS TV Bayonets may sometimes have the following information on the outside of the grips: 1. STANDARTE #
2. SS Property Mark
3. KL ID
There are alot of variations as to what markings are on the inside of the grips and a few as to what markings are on the outside of the grips and on certain bayonets and or models nothing at all on the grips. Andy, you are trying to say that SS bayonets must follow some strict rules as to what should be on the grips or else it is a fake. I take your statements as made being based upon lack of knowledge & experience with SS Bayonets.
WKC with 1941 dated grips is not to confirm as real of this piece because there is no number on grips.It could be grips from other piece, as they are because the WKC was made 1943.
4. Does the WKC with 1941 dated grips with no accountability number on the grips become a fake?? Did the bayonet even have an accountability #??
What did you use again for criteria to determine when the blade was made??
WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor. I have several pieces to show later that represents the extremely crude workmanship and quality produced. If you have SS documentation that states that WKC did not provide bayonet components to the Camps,please post it for us to see.
For me this have only one reason the dated grips are problematic, because there is always a DH or a SS runes but assembly or "acountability " numbers not always!! Why? Because link the piece with SS.
There are many WKC blankos reported to this time from various members to this time, no one have a similar marking, its not little suspicious for You?
5. How about all of the SS Collectors that have the SS Property Stamped Rifles, and bayonets in their collections. What does this mean to you?? The only thing that is suspicious are your shoot from the hip comments. Your direction and comments readily indicate that Andy from Czechlosvakia does not know what he is talking about when it comes to SS weapons. You make statements with no substantiation of SS Reference and or SS Bayonets. You make statements that it is suspicious that you and some of your collector friends have not seen any SS marked bayonets. SS Bayonets and rifles are rare. They are still out there and they are in collections.
I assume as a well known member of SS collecting community that are You already, You could be a target of SS fakers.Certainly You have there a very nice real pieces, but unfortunally some problematic too. Same as certainly some faked.
6. I do not agree with your statement that I have fake SS bayonets in my collection. You make value judgements based on no knowledge and or expertise of SS weapons. As you indicated before it is suspicious you and some of your collector friends have not seen any. This lack of knowledge of SS Property Marks, Locations, & variations is very evident in your statements. I have tried to show the relationships between the markings on the firearms and those of the bayonets.
RICHARD KUCHTA
What did you use again for criteria to determine when the blade was made??
RICHARD KUCHTA
Richard,
I can’t speak for Andy, but what I use to date unmarked items are usually OEM dated military bayonets to compare them with. Which is why it’s really nice to be able to see things close up. And without that, what do you have to actually have to evaluate a specific item?? So all you can do is guess. Do you have your own method for dating?
Best Regards, FP
Scott,
I have gotten one other SS bayonet from the same area. Please jump in when you want. I have some bayonets with the M over the Death Head. Similiar to the SS Property stamp on a rifle.
Richard K
What did you use again for criteria to determine when the blade was made??
RICHARD KUCHTA
Richard,
I can’t speak for Andy, but what I use to date unmarked items are usually OEM dated military bayonets to compare them with. Which is why it’s really nice to be able to see things close up. And without that, what do you have to actually have to evaluate a specific item?? So all you can do is guess. Do you have your own method for dating?
Best Regards, FP
FP,
I do not have an exact science method to determine the date of the bayonet. I do a blade comparrison using calipers to check against known dated blades.
The theory of camp made bayonets using slave labor somewhat distorts the overall dating process of the bayonet. Blade blanks might be accurately dated but the final Assembly process might be a year or two off depending on how the material moves through the system. Also the factor of battlefield salvage enters into play and older bayonets may end up a new finish and new dated grips.
Richard K
There must be not know the SS marking, because You dont understand how the bayonets were made, the problem is that You r opinion about made the bayonets by SS is wrong, all the pictured bayonets were made by bayonet producers and from them there were exact rules how they were mashined and stamped.
to nr.1 You should compare the other pieces in this forum, mainly the Eickhorn blankos, they have same markings, so there is no reason to believe the grips are new, the 1237 have the origin blade finish.
nr.2 why speak about half of site about Your hypothesis but bring no picture of the serials there on left tang, same as remove the lock nut and bring the stamps of there
nr.3 that are only Your hypothesis about the SS marking under grips,there is no evidence of similar marking
nr.4 every expert on SG84/98 could You say when was a piece made, against a special finish, marking,and various stamps, as You could not say this from the pieces, i assume You understand not the area of SG84/98 german bayonets
nr.5 and 6 all the posted here Vz.24 bayonets marked of inside of grips all in reality are not correct SS pieces. Thats my opinion, You mustnt trust me. But there is no reason to stamp the items so.
There must be not know the SS marking, because You dont understand how the bayonets were made, the problem is that You r opinion about made the bayonets by SS is wrong, all the pictured bayonets were made by bayonet producers and from them there were exact rules how they were mashined and stamped.
to nr.1 You should compare the other pieces in this forum, mainly the Eickhorn blankos, they have same markings, so there is no reason to believe the grips are new, the 1237 have the origin blade finish.
nr.2 why speak about half of site about Your hypothesis but bring no picture of the serials there on left tang, same as remove the lock nut and bring the stamps of there
nr.3 that are only Your hypothesis about the SS marking under grips,there is no evidence of similar marking
nr.4 every expert on SG84/98 could You say when was a piece made, against a special finish, marking,and various stamps, as You could not say this from the pieces, i assume You understand not the area of SG84/98 german bayonets
nr.5 and 6 all the posted here Vz.24 bayonets marked of inside of grips all in reality are not correct SS pieces. Thats my opinion, You mustnt trust me. But there is no reason to stamp the items so.
You are expressing your opinion not a fact. Provide SS documentation to support your statements and or other legitimate SS bayonets.
Richard K
FORUM,
In regards to the bottom left photo showing a Crown N Proof Mark, please see Death Head Luger Pictures (toward the end) and you will see the same type of commercial proof used by the SS on the lugers.
Richard K
"WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor. I have several pieces to show later that represents the extremely crude workmanship and quality produced. If you have SS documentation that states that WKC did not provide bayonet components to the Camps,please post it for us to see."This is only Your opinion, firstly there is nothing to do when sending blades and components as only assemble it, and when mashined by firm that make a stamp on blade for their name and quality so they will not give any parts that were not fullended, the WKC certainly saled the parts for dress bayonets, but their were never marked on visible parts as blade or pommel with maker marks.
I dont know why You couldnt made the shots of left tang of the 1237 piece and remove the lock nut that will be clear what for stamps are there?
FP,
I do not have an exact science method to determine the date of the bayonet. I do a blade comparrison using calipers to check against known dated blades.
The theory of camp made bayonets using slave labor somewhat distorts the overall dating process of the bayonet. Blade blanks might be accurately dated but the final Assembly process might be a year or two off depending on how the material moves through the system. Also the factor of battlefield salvage enters into play and older bayonets may end up a new finish and new dated grips.
Richard K
Richard,
Do you have a couple of 'textbook/best case' examples to look at to demonstrate visually the idea of camp made bayonets - your choice. That you could use to walk us through in detail the process (but it doesn't have to be ultra complicated), to illustrate what you are saying as to how they were made. For both the:
"WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor." And the
"battlefield salvage" type. I'm curious to see how the pieces might fit together,
Best Regards, FP
Denny,
Would you please post a few pictures that I just sent. The pictures are of the SS Consecutive Numbered Bayonets showing the Tang Numbers and Latch Numbers.
Richard K
FP,
I do not have an exact science method to determine the date of the bayonet. I do a blade comparrison using calipers to check against known dated blades.
The theory of camp made bayonets using slave labor somewhat distorts the overall dating process of the bayonet. Blade blanks might be accurately dated but the final Assembly process might be a year or two off depending on how the material moves through the system. Also the factor of battlefield salvage enters into play and older bayonets may end up a new finish and new dated grips.
Richard K
Richard,
Do you have a couple of 'textbook/best case' examples to look at to demonstrate visually the idea of camp made bayonets - your choice. That you could use to walk us through in detail the process (but it doesn't have to be ultra complicated), to illustrate what you are saying as to how they were made. For both the:
"WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor." And the
"battlefield salvage" type. I'm curious to see how the pieces might fit together,
Best Regards, FP
FP,
Perhaps you might have some text books on SS Camp Made Bayonets that would readily show the rework & or assembly of these SS Bayonets. I myself have no such "text book" and I would give anything to have such documentation. The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed. I would really be interested in seeing any references that are out there pertaining to SS bayonets. Perhaps we are pioneering new territory. There really has not been much new introduced into the field of bayonet collecting in over 30 years.
Richard Kuchta
Vern & Forum,
Still having trouble posting. My system locks up every time I try to submit a large post.
Richard K
FP,
Perhaps you might have some text books on SS Camp Made Bayonets that would readily show the rework & or assembly of these SS Bayonets. I myself have no such "text book" and I would give anything to have such documentation. The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed. I would really be interested in seeing any references that are out there pertaining to SS bayonets. Perhaps we are pioneering new territory. There really has not been much new introduced into the field of bayonet collecting in over 30 years.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
As a specialist in the area. If you had period SS textbooks showing the KZ reworking, and the new manufacture of bayonets I don't think that we would be having this discussion. And I’m flattered that you might even think for a moment that I might have such books. But if I did - why would I have asked:
“Do you have a couple of 'textbook/best case' examples to look at to demonstrate visually the idea of camp made bayonets - your choice. That you could use to walk us through in detail the process (but it doesn't have to be ultra complicated), to illustrate what you are saying as to how they were made. For both the: "WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor." And the "battlefield salvage" type. I'm curious to see how the pieces might fit together." ??Because what I was actually asking for were some examples that you could use to illustrate your point of view. With my thinking being that if you don’t have documentation - sometimes the next best thing is “reverse engineering”. And it was more of an across the board (wide spectrum) look at not just the WKC types. But some of the Vz. 24 reworks as well which seem to be more diverse (but relatively ignored in this discussion) which could be as equally instructive.
And it would seem that we are
"on the same page" with how to approach looking into how they were made/remanufactured:
"The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed."Best Regards, FP
|
Thanks for the details, as You could see we asked this picture, because there are no serial numbers, but assembly numbers typical for the bayonet producer for the lock nut, the grips as You could see are dyed only on obverse surface, this is not typical for german production, so its very possible the light color wood of grips that is clear visible on the previous pictures were later dyed to dark.The finish is typical for middle -late war period and the finish under grips is dull blued not phosphate, as there are many different pictures, i only could say that the finish on blade of 1237 is probably origin, the overall piece should be cleaned in alcohol and then oiled by gunoil and made a picture on sunlight.
Richard,
My thanks also for an interesting insight into both of the bayonets reported from Wöbbelin. From what I have seen, both grip interiors seem to have that light/whitish look typical of the late wood grips that were made (presumably) from sapwood. But especially with one set of the grips, there is a relatively strong reddish exterior color. And the blue on # 1237 is closer to what I would expect as well - but to be honest about it, the lighting is really a key player. And there is just not enough reliable data right now with the limited views - just some indicators (from my perspective) that they could be from different batches.
But perhaps the most interesting part of them at the moment are the matching assembly (tang/bayonet catch) numbers. Which are 2,020 numbers apart. And while the “7” and “8” are fairly close. The “3” stamps are significantly different. Which at a minimum, indicates either different work stations, or the passage of enough time to necessitate replacements.
Best Regards, FP
FP & Andy,
I am not an expert at taking pictures and have no access to sophisticated equipment & lighting. From what you are both saying, the finish is of a blue type of some sort not phosphate. The outer surfaces of the bayonet do not look as blue as the scabbard & or bayonet blade.
A question? How many bayonets have you seen where the numbers, dates & manufacturers stamps have been scrubbed off of the bayonets and scabbards?
Why was such extreme rework done at this period in the war?
Richard Kuchta
Forum,
After reading Andy's post about cleaning the bayonet in alcohol, I had a thought. These bayonets were taken from an SS Weapons Depot. Could they have been coated with some type of preservative oil that has now hardened over the last 60 years? That would explain the differences to me of the parts such as the internal flash guard, & tang that look blue and were protected by the grips etc.
Richard K
There is certainly not phosphate on blade (1237) and under tangs, the finish of scabbards are more like matted and looks not in this light like typical blue, more as dull blue. The scrubbed markings is not so rare seen, mainly in late war period, the serials there were probably not stamped, there is only remains of series letters on bards, the cof other side we dont saw to this time, but You should compare the thickness of blade with other normal cof43 piece, same as You could compare the finish of the piece. Certainly the wood grips were dyed from obverse, which is not typical. I personally dont believe the 45 are dates on inside of grips.best regards,Andy
Richard,
From a not very good picture* that I took 10(?) years ago. Here is a typical no-oil/no-grease phosphate finish on a U.S. WW II era M-4 bayonet blade. The finish is a crystalline layer on the steel. In the image: the crystals have being flattened and smoothed by the scabbard inserts when the blade was taken out. And put back in. The Germans used an older process but the end result is still basically the same, just not as pronounced.
* I have lot of problems with imaging myself. But if I need to specifically illustrate a point I might have to take a lot of pictures (but just keep one or two). And I keep shifting my position to try and catch the light just right. Which is why the one on top is “washed out”. But the bottom one shows the bluing reasonably well along with the final grinding. And the same type of grinding underneath a matte gray phosphate finish. And side by side IMO is best for comparisons, because the lighting should be relatively equal for the items being imaged.
Best Regards, FP
Denny,
Thank you for posting the new pictures of the SS Bayonet.
Richard Kuchta
FORUM,
SS Bayonet with Accountability #735 is an example of a blanko bayonet with a Crude Camp Made Scabbard. The scabbard exhibits very crude peening on the seams that are to deep to even clean up. Note the frog stud is large without adequate bevel to allow entry into the frog. Also the frog stud tends to rotate.
Richard Kuchta
FP,
Perhaps you might have some text books on SS Camp Made Bayonets that would readily show the rework & or assembly of these SS Bayonets. I myself have no such "text book" and I would give anything to have such documentation. The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed. I would really be interested in seeing any references that are out there pertaining to SS bayonets. Perhaps we are pioneering new territory. There really has not been much new introduced into the field of bayonet collecting in over 30 years.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
As a specialist in the area. If you had period SS textbooks showing the KZ reworking, and the new manufacture of bayonets I don't think that we would be having this discussion. And I’m flattered that you might even think for a moment that I might have such books. But if I did - why would I have asked:
I to am quite flattered that you think that I might have such documentation. You are also correct that if such documentation existed then this discussion would not be necessary. However, it does not seem that the SS documentation is readily available and we must persist on into the unknown to document the SS Bayonets.
Richard K“Do you have a couple of 'textbook/best case' examples to look at to demonstrate visually the idea of camp made bayonets - your choice. That you could use to walk us through in detail the process (but it doesn't have to be ultra complicated), to illustrate what you are saying as to how they were made. For both the: "WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor." And the "battlefield salvage" type. I'm curious to see how the pieces might fit together." ??Because what I was actually asking for were some examples that you could use to illustrate your point of view. With my thinking being that if you don’t have documentation - sometimes the next best thing is “reverse engineering”. And it was more of an across the board (wide spectrum) look at not just the WKC types. But some of the Vz. 24 reworks as well which seem to be more diverse (but relatively ignored in this discussion) which could be as equally instructive.
And it would seem that we are
"on the same page" with how to approach looking into how they were made/remanufactured:
"The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed."Best Regards, FP
FP,
Perhaps you might have some text books on SS Camp Made Bayonets that would readily show the rework & or assembly of these SS Bayonets. I myself have no such "text book" and I would give anything to have such documentation. The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed. I would really be interested in seeing any references that are out there pertaining to SS bayonets. Perhaps we are pioneering new territory. There really has not been much new introduced into the field of bayonet collecting in over 30 years.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
As a specialist in the area. If you had period SS textbooks showing the KZ reworking, and the new manufacture of bayonets I don't think that we would be having this discussion. And I’m flattered that you might even think for a moment that I might have such books. But if I did - why would I have asked:
I to am quite flattered that you think that I might have such documentation. You are also correct that if such documentation existed then this discussion would not be necessary. However, it does not seem that the SS documentation is readily available and we must persist on into the unknown to document the SS Bayonets.
Richard K“Do you have a couple of 'textbook/best case' examples to look at to demonstrate visually the idea of camp made bayonets - your choice. That you could use to walk us through in detail the process (but it doesn't have to be ultra complicated), to illustrate what you are saying as to how they were made. For both the: "WKC provided blades & components to some of the SS work camps where the bayonets were assembled using slave labor." And the "battlefield salvage" type. I'm curious to see how the pieces might fit together." ??FP,
It would stand to reason that if the SS reworked rifles & Lugers why would they not rework & or Assemble bayonets. We have seen numerous pictures of the shops using slave labor to work on rifles. We also in some pictures can see bayonets. I have never seen any pictures of Lugers being reworked and or assembled but we have such pieces in collections today. I have seen numerous Czech Pistols that have had the SS Property stamp added to them and were refinished to a beautiful high blue.
Now getting back to bayonets. The work camps could not forge blades because of the machines and skill that was required to produce the blade. However, the work camps could make bayonet grips, flash guards, screws, nuts,scabbards, latches, etc. as well as do secondary finishing. During the period when the SS was in desperate need of weapons they were able to get replacement barrels for rifles & pistols that they were salvaging. Why would the SS not be able to obtain bayonet blanks and finish them with the massive amount of labor that they had at hand. I still can not buy into total blanko bayonets being fabricated for the SS. Also, the rejected blades that were used by the SS would not have been assembled up into a complete bayonet by the manufacturer. I will get into the variations and the salvage bayonets later tonight.
Richard KBecause what I was actually asking for were some examples that you could use to illustrate your point of view. With my thinking being that if you don’t have documentation - sometimes the next best thing is “reverse engineering”. And it was more of an across the board (wide spectrum) look at not just the WKC types. But some of the Vz. 24 reworks as well which seem to be more diverse (but relatively ignored in this discussion) which could be as equally instructive.
And it would seem that we are
"on the same page" with how to approach looking into how they were made/remanufactured:
"The best that I can provide is an actual SS Bayonet showing the quality of workmanship that we have discussed."Best Regards, FP
FORUM,
SS Bayonet with Accountability #735 is an example of a blanko bayonet with a Crude Camp Made Scabbard. The scabbard exhibits very crude peening on the seams that are to deep to even clean up. Note the frog stud is large without adequate bevel to allow entry into the frog. Also the frog stud tends to rotate.
Richard Kuchta
Richard,
I can’t really see it that well in the image to make a 100% ID. But it looks like a 98%, and I am going to guess that the scabbard might one of the stamped ones that were made by A. Wallmeyer Maschinenfabrik (code “can”). Being a welded scabbard that almost always has a ground off marking (if it ever had one). And the frog stud brazing has broken loose. Sometimes from use, and other times by fooling around. Here is an image showing the excess material from the weld with a scabbard which has been sand blasted, and then blued. With some scabbards the welding is as obvious as this one (or worse), and with others you may have to study them for a while to try and figure out if it's welded or not.
PS: Andy has the best data, but the one posted here I believe came with a Hörster (“asw”). But they were not the only ones to use these later war scabbards, manufactured using this production method.
Best Regards, FP
Yes i believe FP is right on this, the scabbard has typical signs of late war piece, that was welded together, similar were observed in late 44asw, or fnj production, some of with can marked scabbards, the piece have a typical marking of asw production the lock nut is not serialed, the grips are not correct as the fg and one grip is serialed with 21 and the grip is waa proofed , the other piece is not so visible but there should be too WaA. It would be interesting to see if there is a WaA on ball finial, when not i assume is not the can scabbard.Then is probably a correct asw blanko scabbard? Interesting is too the DH on crossguard as it looks like stamped? But probably no possible determine from the picture.What for WaA is on the grip? Thanks.best regards,Andy
FP,
It would stand to reason that if the SS reworked rifles & Lugers why would they not rework & or Assemble bayonets. We have seen numerous pictures of the shops using slave labor to work on rifles. We also in some pictures can see bayonets. I have never seen any pictures of Lugers being reworked and or assembled but we have such pieces in collections today. I have seen numerous Czech Pistols that have had the SS Property stamp added to them and were refinished to a beautiful high blue.
Now getting back to bayonets. The work camps could not forge blades because of the machines and skill that was required to produce the blade. However, the work camps could make bayonet grips, flash guards, screws, nuts,scabbards, latches, etc. as well as do secondary finishing. During the period when the SS was in desperate need of weapons they were able to get replacement barrels for rifles & pistols that they were salvaging. Why would the SS not be able to obtain bayonet blanks and finish them with the massive amount of labor that they had at hand. I still can not buy into total blanko bayonets being fabricated for the SS. Also, the rejected blades that were used by the SS would not have been assembled up into a complete bayonet by the manufacturer. I will get into the variations and the salvage bayonets later tonight.
Richard K
Richard,
That there was KZ involvement in the German arms industry is not in question. And as you probably recall I mentioned a photo of some seemingly never used lathes in Dachau at the end of the war. Himmler's claims of xxxxxx thousand gun barrels made etc. etc. But I think that we have to look at things on an example by example basis. If Solingen makers subcontracted the plastic grips - would the KZ system have made them? I seriously doubt it. And what does it take to make wood grips? First you have to have the right machinery. But what about the wood? Could you just cut down a tree (if the foresters would let you, and the Wehrmacht did not lay claim to it first), and make it into bayonet grips? Or are you going to have to let the wood first season adequately so that it won't warp? And are you going to do it one tree at a time, or in quantity to make it economically worthwhile?
With my point being that what seems fairly simple at first glance, in reality might not have been that viable or easy in Germany 70 years ago.
Best Regards, FP
"SS reworked rifles & Lugers why would they not rework & or Assemble bayonets." There is important the timeline, i dont believe the SS reworked rifles as Gew98 or Lugers post 1939. Same as i dont believe is real the hypothesis of batlefield salvage bayonets, the period of post 1942 is mentioned as very problematic period, when every month were lost about 50 thousand of rifles and bayonets in war, other point is that the rifles that were in late 1944 produced already have not the bayonet adapter, Kriegsmodell K98k rifle,Stg44, K43, STg45, VG rifles, thats the reason why the 1945 bayonet production is from only 2 firms. The bayonet production was already stopped as not important.Because the material were needed in other important arms production, like by panzerfaust production. The major part of a bayonet is the mashining of rifle slot, which could be done only by special mashines and certainly not by a camp labor employment. There should be used special caibers to made the bayonet attachable on every rifle used by Wehrmacht and SS, the parts as springs, screws and other were done by small firms, not by the bayonet producers, the scabbards are too hard to made by a small works, because You need a special press mashines.best regards,Andy
"SS reworked rifles & Lugers why would they not rework & or Assemble bayonets." There is important the timeline, i dont believe the SS reworked rifles as Gew98 or Lugers post 1939. Same as i dont believe is real the hypothesis of batlefield salvage bayonets, the period of post 1942 is mentioned as very problematic period, when every month were lost about 50 thousand of rifles and bayonets in war, other point is that the rifles that were in late 1944 produced already have not the bayonet adapter, Kriegsmodell K98k rifle,Stg44, K43, STg45, VG rifles, thats the reason why the 1945 bayonet production is from only 2 firms. The bayonet production was already stopped as not important.Because the material were needed in other important arms production, like by panzerfaust production. The major part of a bayonet is the mashining of rifle slot, which could be done only by special mashines and certainly not by a camp labor employment. There should be used special caibers to made the bayonet attachable on every rifle used by Wehrmacht and SS, the parts as springs, screws and other were done by small firms, not by the bayonet producers, the scabbards are too hard to made by a small works, because You need a special press mashines.best regards,Andy
Andy makes some good points here. By '45 the bayonet was an obsolete weapon of little use in the war the Germans found themselves fighting. As to "battlefield salvage", well, from '43 onwards the battlefields were left in the hands of Germany's foes allowing little opportunity for "salvage".
Len
MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE,
I have a few days off now and will get back to the SS bayonets.
Richard Kuchta
Happy New Year! very interesting read i must say!
As we spoke about some fakes, already on german forum other restamped Portugal contract piece with SS in diamond.
A minor variation from postwar markings seen before, the Portuguese contract bayonets have been known for some time as good candidates for added markings. With a very good profit to be made from either lesser quality or “beater” bayonets, that could originally be purchased for next to nothing like the example posted just above.
Here is a period rework, with an added armory rework marking. Which from datable specimens, seems to be seen most commonly on bayonets that would probably have needed some work in the period from 1939 to possibly early 1941. But of course with this undated, no Waffenamt example of a commercial WKC, dating is not as easy. But it's also obviously not one of the "mid-war" period bayonets, being much earlier. FP
Gentlemen,
I just got back from China last week. Due to my Manufacturing Manager not being able to travel, I was called to take his place over Christmas. Business is now completed and I got back last week. Looks like there is alot to catch up with.
Richard Kuchta
Richard welcome back from China! Glad u made it home safely. I went thru my 15 or so late war commercial unmarked bayonets both wood gripped and bakelite. I looked under the pommel but did not see any stamps on them. i did not remove the grips for i fear i will damage the bolt screws.
There are other stamped WKCs, i have one near Yours in 8XX range, unfortunally without matching scabbard, it is not confirmed it went to WSS, i mean the serialed samples, the flashguard is probably missmatch.
Sorry to kick up what seems to be an old topic but it seems to me there's still a lot of room for discussion here. Most of you probably don't know me, I'm new to the forum and trying to find some answers about a new 98/05n.A. in my collection. I've been collecting about ten years on amateur level, mostly WW1 german bayonets, I don't collect much WW2 or SS stuff because there are too many fakes out there and the prices can reach sky high, then safer and cheaper to collect WW1 edged weapons, also interesting. The reason I join the discussion in this topic is that I picked up a nice 98/05na weimar rework bayonet that appears to have some SS II stamps on bayonet and scabbard. It was listed as WW1 bayonet, the seller claimed to know nothing about it and it wasn't until I held the piece in my hands that I noticed the SS stamps. I have over 20 books on bayonets and German edged weapons but none of the specify on 98/05's being issued to SS. I've taken a few hours to read this entire topic and there have appearantly been SS men equipped with 98/05's. I've seen SS and totenkopf markings on gew98's before but have never seen them on 98/05 bayo's and I've had quite a few going though my hands in the past years. My 98/05 weimar was made in 1917 by Durkopp and Rich.A.Herder in 1917 and has been reworked, blued, frogstud adapted for 1920 weimar reissue. All seems ok and in nice condition. It has a LAH monogram and SS II stamp ont the blade and scabbard throat and I wonder if these could be original, I've never seen it before. As said the seller claimed to know little about bayonets and the price was normal for a weimar reissue 98/05 in good condition. It came with a plain brown frog with an 90% faded indecipherable makers mark. Here are some pictures below, I'm curious about the stamps and wonder if somebody could have done them postwar but didn't ask more after the trouble of putting fake markings?
Thanks gentlemen, I'm curious about your opinions.
This is already posted twice.
Please use pictures, not links
Dave
I had bought the Heinz Brenner SS bayonet on a hotel buy from the actual veteran, quite a few years ago. That was in Dallas ,TX. I never could understand why there are not more SS engraved bayonets, there are plenty of Army and Luft ones.
Thanks,
Bob
In TW's book that encompassed the contributions from many individuals, with some of them very, very enlightening - that the average individual might never have a chance to see in person. That said, it also has some flaws and omissions including the bayonets section that had some indisputably bad information/examples. And unless I'm mistaken the only pictures of a "Heinz Brenner etched SS bayonet" only showed a part of the blade. Best Regards, Fred
Fred,
Can you show us the rest of the blade ?
Dave
Fred,
Can you show us the rest of the blade ?
Dave
Dave, The pictures I referred to are two black and white images of a part of both sides of the blade on page 570. If there are others that show more then I missed them. Best Regards, Fred
Gentlemen,
The Heinz Brenner SS KS98 bayonet by WKC is also pictured on pages 76-77 in Wayne Techet's book "German Etched Dress Bayonets"
An interesting example. From what I can see the frog is not a correct one for a dress bayonet - does it have SS markings? Best Regards, Fred
Oh, one of the very rare troddels with six black stripes in the band and one black/two white strands in the acorn! The bayonet really looks interesting and the etching seems well excuted. I would not mind a combat frog on a walk out bayonet because 1 we never know when it was married and 2 when material became bad (-Ersatzmaterial-) I can imagine somebody did use a better durable frog and we know also the oddest combinations from the period.
I am no expert in this but is the font also KLAAS or only the side ornaments or better have we noticed such distinct font in other etchings of KLAAS or another maker?
Regards,
Wotan:
The bookends are Klaas for sure, the dedication is unique (especially the capital letters, look at that 'D'). I haven't seen that lettering an any other etch so far.
John
Strange even the "Dienste" word, some letters are not same font probably, not typical D and S. the frog is certainly from S84/98 as visible on front area, there was larger hook of scabbard, so certainly not correct here. Question is the trodell for extra KS98 bayonet or for combat bayonet. With this dedication it should be presentation piece, or gift, strange too the red buffer, not typical on bayonets. With brown backside and alu rivets, i assume the frog is a early period 1937-9.
.jpg "100_4173 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "100_4174 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "100_4178 (Medium).jpg")
.JPG "100_5461 (Medium).JPG")
.jpg "Kuchta001 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta002 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta003 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta004 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta006 (Medium).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta007 (Small).jpg")
.jpg "Kuchta011 (WinCE).jpg")
