|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
Can someone ID this knife for me? Age, if authentic,,maybe a value..
It's very light,,seems to be made very well. No name on blade.....
1.JPG (82.11 KB, 187 downloads) 2.JPG (88.5 KB, 187 downloads) 3.JPG (84.25 KB, 187 downloads) 4.JPG (60.9 KB, 186 downloads) 5.JPG (94.24 KB, 187 downloads) 6.JPG (105.82 KB, 186 downloads) 7.JPG (95.93 KB, 186 downloads)
Last edited by Gaspare; 07/26/2014 06:03 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,682 Likes: 53
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,682 Likes: 53 |
looks like a ww1 knuckle knife! Its not in the proper scabbard!
Without the scabbard I quess 200.00 to 250.00
450.00 to 550.00 with scabbard but they sit for a long time at that price!
PVON
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,834
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,834 |
The Model 1917 had a triangular stiletto blade. I'm no expert, but have never seen one with the blade configured as yours. Your blade is similar, but not identical, to the Mark I 1918 trench knife. Could this possibly be some sort of transition between the two? Hopefully, someone will be able to give you more info.
WANTED TO REPURCHASE!! Walther pistol Model PP - ac code - Ser. No. 382000P - REWARD FOR INFO ABOUT THIS PISTOL!!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
thanks guys! [Andy too!]
Don't know how to explain but the blade, [besides being incredibly sharp] has like a cross grain, lines running horizontal....
Handle a very light wood , but a secure feeling piece. Really fits good in hand!
So is the determination is,, a transition piece with a non standard leather scabbard. [?]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
- well here is the 1918...
Very similar blade , although the blade on mine seems to be a much higher quality than the one shown in these photos..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
- here is a 1917:
blade of course different,,,but knuckle guard and attachment device at end of handle the same. Wood handle a little different on mine,,and probably different type wood.
MilitaryNut has a very interesting theory.. It could be a re-issue, or a 'find and modify' piece for the U.S. Viet Nam soldiers! [?]
Last edited by Gaspare; 07/27/2014 03:54 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,682 Likes: 53
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 10,682 Likes: 53 |
Denny is right!
I took a fast glance! The type gaspare shows would have a triangular blade for the models I have seen!
Now the 1918 one Gaspare shows is one they sure made alot of fakes of!
Maybe Jerry will chime in!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
yeah the 1918s are all over the place. We even used one last year for a shifter handle on a H-D chop..
- So my next question is,,,do the reproduce the 1917s and do they look like my example?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,084 Likes: 96
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 15,084 Likes: 96 |
I've not seen faked M1917 with the triangular blade. I think Gaz's is just a variant rather than a fake. The blade is well seated and the rest looks good.
I don't think that scabbard has much to do with the dagger.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,439
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,439 |
I think it may be a WWI that was reworked for WW2 usage. I agree with the aforementioned statements that the triangle blade was used on the 1917s and the 1918s blades are different. I can't say what the blade may be from (almost looks like a DRK leader, but much more tapered).
Many of the WW1 trench knives were used with some modification by paratroopers and other soldiers in WW2. I have heard rumors that the triangle blade was outlawed by the Geneva convention, as it left a non-healable triangular wound - but that may just be collector lore. But I have not see any of the 1917s carried into WW2, so that may explain the re-blading of it.
Neat knife though!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 550
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 550 |
I have heard rumors that the triangle blade was outlawed by the Geneva convention, as it left a non-healable triangular wound - but that may just be collector lore. I've heard the triangular blade part attributed to both the Geneva and Hague conventions, but I've never been able to find anything in either one about it. I'm guessing it's collector lore as well.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274 |
If I had to make a guess. WW I trench knives were reissued to the troops at the start of WW II, but the Army was not satisfied with it and wanted a new model. Aerial Cutlery Company (A.C.C.) submitted a design that with a few small changes became the M-3 fighting knife. And when it was decided to put a bayonet on the M-1 carbine, a batch of new designs was submitted with the winning design the M-3 trench knife that with a new cross guard and pommel attaching mechanism became the M-4 bayonet. With my thinking being that this might be one of the new designs for a trench knife from Aerial Cutlery Company that lost out in the competition with the M-3 (and possibly others) ?? PS: As for the scabbard it has some vague similarities to the M-6 which was subcontracted, but it also could be a later addition? Interesting knife!! Best Regards, Fred
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274 |
An alternative to the above scenario involves the American Cutlery Company in the WW I time frame that's outside the scope of my comfort zone as a non-specialist in the outside the normally seen variations. But using the same methodology as a trials or experimental piece. Fred
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275
|
OP
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099 Likes: 275 |
don't think its lore,,,nations military are not supposed to produce bayos and fighting knifes with triangle blades and saw back blades etc... Anyone with the actual rules/regulations for any country?
Probably going to bring the knife to the MAX..
Thanks for all the help guys!
Last edited by Gaspare; 09/08/2014 01:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274 |
This is from memory - the Germans were criticized during WW I for the saw back type of blades, and subsequently not only stopped making them, they ground off the saw teeth for many preexisting bayonets. With the teeth really on the bayonets to cut wood such as the posts for barbed wire etc. (But most or many nations had gone to steel posts so it didn't really make much of a difference if saw teeth were there or not.) Then many years later, we have the (admittedly) less aggressive saw teeth on the Russian Kalashnikov bayonets, the Stoner bayonets etc. With during WW II some different spike type bayonets from France and in the UK for the No. 4 Lee Enfield, the U.S. Johnson M 1941 rifles, and of course the German FG 42. With the trend to blades IMO probably having more to do with the desire for a dual purpose weapon. Best Regards, Fred
|
|
|
Forums42
Topics31,652
Posts328,708
Members7,501
|
Most Online5,900 Dec 19th, 2019
|
|
13 members (seany, Tanker, The_Collector, Herman V. (aka Herr Mann), Documentalist, OWN, C. Wetzel-20609, benten, Simone, Mikee, Jonesy, Dave, Vern),
347
guests, and
104
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|