UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons The BCN Bayonet Forum Deaths head bayonet.

I am totaly open to any discussion on this one.

Looks like a nice bayonet. It has a deaths head on the grip. It is very nicely done. It is on top of the grip plate. It does not move.

I have taken photos of both grip plates to try and determine if the rivets have been replaced.

Thank you

deathshead

reverse grip

Jim,

The rivets look OK from what I can see. Since the skull doesn't move, is it possible it was either glued into place or inserted by being pressed into the plate with an underside pin?

Hi Billy,

I see no sign of glue, and the deaths head is fitted well to the grip.

There is one small chip to the grips along one edge.

This bayo does not appear to have been "messed" with.

Can you identify the type of bayonet for me?

Thank you

Jim

It is a KS 1898 or KS98 Bayonet, Dress.

Jim,

It does not look like the rivets have been replaced from what I can see. The problem with all of these KS98 with grip insignia is that most of them are postwar enhanced. Some bayonets, such as police, had grip insignia installed at the factory. This skull would have been installed after it left the factory. It is very difficult to tell if it was installed during the war or in 1960. I would be very skeptical about this type of enhanced bayonet if I were buying it.

Thanks guys.

This belongs to a friend of mine and he does not want to sell it. He took it in with some daggers and is probably going to keep it in his collection.

I have to agree that all these non standard attachments, even on daggers, are always suspect.

Thank you all

Jim

Jim,

You can't go wrong with Orpo's advice. I'd say it's not a bad looking unit but something that was likely tarted up post 1945. A shame too.

Jim, I�m afraid that I'm going to have to agree with Billy and George. Over the years I�ve seen a lot of �tarted up� (I really like that description ) bayonets with added HJ emblems, SS runes, skulls etc. etc. Where I have a problem with this example is that in addition to the inletting (which IMO is a tad amateurish). The outer surface of the skull seems to relatively unblemished. Sticking that far out it should be noticeably more abused than the rest of the bayonet, but in the one fairly closeup image of the grip it does not appear to be. And where it is inletted the closer it is to the skull the more protected it should be. But instead it is damaged (the arrows). Which looks like to me the work of a postwar amateur trying to make more salable an otherwise original but less than pristine bayonet condition with a broken grip. FP

I agree with all that was said above but what I find unusual is that I don't remember ever seeing that style of skull in that size.

If it is trying to mimic a visor cap skull, then, unfortunately it is a bad fake.

Thanks guys.

There is nothing better than putting up someone elses daggers/bayonets, when you hear it is "tarted up".

Thanks guys and keep up the good work.

Jim