Translate German to English - Click here to open Altavista's Babel Fish Translator Click here to learn about all those symbols by people's names.

leftlogo.jpg (20709 bytes)

Upgrade to Premium Membership

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#84501 03/16/2006 06:33 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
Gentlemen,

Do you think this frog is legit ?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=6610406353

Keith


<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84502 03/16/2006 06:56 AM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,199
Offline
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,199
Too heavy stamped marking, i would be carefully, wait for other opinions.best regards,Andy

#84503 03/16/2006 02:29 PM
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 5
Offline
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 5
This frog looks correct to me and the stamping is probably a Luftwaffe re-issue unit stamping as these were utilized by the Luftwaffe, especially the RLM.
Ron Weinand
Weinand Militaria


MAX CHARTER MEMBER

LIFE MEMBER OVMS
#84504 03/16/2006 02:58 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 147
T
Offline
T
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 147
Keith, I would say it is OK. Most unit markings I see have that flat stamp impression (probably heat with pressure) as opposed to the V type cut of a manufacturer marking. Also, too obscure of a marking for a fake. Now if it said SS I'd be worried! Nice frog I hope you get it.---Jeff

#84505 03/16/2006 06:19 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
Offline
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
Keith, Less common than the �V� type of characters, I also have at least one example of a broad flat style Luftwaffe unit marked frog, but for the 84/98 (and some other slightly narrower ones). I agree and it looks OK to me also. Good Luck!! FP

#84506 03/18/2006 09:18 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
Many thanks Gentlemen for the excellent input. I was watching the auction but didn't bid. A bit steep for me though !

Cheers,

Keith


<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84507 03/18/2006 10:19 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Offline
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
mistake

#84508 03/18/2006 10:20 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Offline
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
.

#84509 03/18/2006 10:20 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Offline
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Ronald,

why do you think that the "BAM"-mark is a Luftwaffe Stamp?

I would say, it means Bekleidungs Amt Marine. Luftwaffe marks BAL.

Best regards

Kolibri

#84510 03/18/2006 08:50 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
Offline
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,274
Kolibri, A minor point, but as early as 1935 Third Reich era 84/98 Luftwaffe frogs were marked �L.B.A.� so I think that you may have changed the order with �BAL� ?? It also occurred to me that there could be other possibilities for �BAM� given the complexity and contradictions of some of the German marking systems, and the fact that the frog is brown. But WW I field gear/uniforms is not an area where I have a lot of expertise and I�m more than willing to expand my knowledge with input from a specialist or specialists in that collecting area. Best Regards, FP

#84511 03/19/2006 07:28 AM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Offline
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 900
Fred,

at first, you are right. LBA not BAL.

The Navy marked in this time only BAK or BAW (Kiel or Wilhelmshaven).

The frog looks without any doubt like a reissued WW1 frog, but a Luftwaffe-mark seems me impossible. There was no Airforce in Germany 1930 and the mark means BA, not LBA. BAM 9-30 must mean "Bekleidungsamt M�nchen, September (?) 1930".

I dont know, why it is brown. In the past I found more than one Reichswehr belts in brown leather. But may be, it was a private bought frog - look at the thin thread, the thin leather and it seems me a little bit to shiny for a chamber-piece. The markings could be put later on the frog, to sell it a little bit better.

Only for showing a LBA mark on a knot.

Regards

Kolibri

reduz.knot.jpg (55.11 KB, 87 downloads)
#84512 03/19/2006 10:23 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
Actually the reason I asked about this frog is because I have a similar one but it was obviously a fake. The markings are identical to the one at eBay but the date on mine is 1914 instead of 1915.

DSC08141.JPG (67.44 KB, 82 downloads)

<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84513 03/19/2006 10:26 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
Same BAM 9 30 stamped on the back side. I said its a fake because this frog use aluminum rivets. It smells new and the corners / edges are real sharp.

DSC08139.JPG (50.21 KB, 80 downloads)

<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84514 03/19/2006 10:33 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
This frog came with a Weimar reissue police bayonet / sidearm. The seller honestly admitted that he made up this rig with a frog that "purchase at fleamarket". If examine closely, this frog is thinner than comtemporary butcher frogs.

I am not sure about the one at eBay, I was thinking are all BAM 9 30 marked frogs are fakes or only those dated 1914 ???

Thanks again for the input Wink

Keith

DSC08140.JPG (48.4 KB, 79 downloads)

<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84515 03/20/2006 12:24 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2
M
Offline
M
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2
Keith,

I got a couple of those frogs out of a junkbox at a show over 18 years ago now, so they've been round a few years at least. There were a couple more that had seen better days; the stitching was going & they were oil soaked. Like yours they're also smooth side out, thinner leather than normal service versions, but have steel rivets & although they were obviously a reasonable age, they had never held a bayonet. All 1914 & 1915 dates. Every one I've seen to date has the same 'property' mark... I'd say they're more like a dress frog though.

Mick

#84516 03/21/2006 10:47 AM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
A
aurelia Offline OP
OP Offline
A
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 608
Hi Mick,

First of all, welcome to the forum.

Many thanks for the input. These frogs are very well made and in time I think they will pass as real stuff like those fake daggers and even engraved 98Ks.

Cheers,

Keith


<img src="http://www.germandaggers.com/images/member1.jpg">
#84517 03/22/2006 02:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2
M
Offline
M
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2
Hi Keith,

thanks! Who knows where they came from, but they are quite well made as you say.

Surely you wouldn't put them in the same class as those garish engraved 98k's though! I'd have to go to the trouble of dragging those frogs out from wherever they're hidiong & getting rid of them. :-)

Mick


Link Copied to Clipboard
Popular Topics(Views)
2,267,877 SS Bayonets
1,764,813 Teno Insignia Set
1,133,958 westwall rings
Latest New Threads
Can you determine authenticity of SS dagger?
by AnatoliyD - 05/17/2024 04:22 PM
SS dagger KM7/91
by zwoerf - 05/17/2024 06:56 AM
My first bayonet
by Cameron - 05/16/2024 03:33 PM
How do flotation tubs differ from traditional bathtubs?
by Aquant Seo - 05/16/2024 11:25 AM
Odd Manufacture ring
by Gaspare - 05/15/2024 11:28 PM
Latest New Posts
Can you determine authenticity of SS dagger?
by AnatoliyD - 05/17/2024 04:22 PM
SS dagger KM7/91
by Dave - 05/17/2024 02:11 PM
Interesting TK ring
by equirhodont - 05/17/2024 04:28 AM
Iron Crosses!
by derjager - 05/16/2024 08:59 PM
Odd Manufacture ring
by benten - 05/16/2024 05:18 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics31,685
Posts329,246
Members7,535
Most Online5,900
Dec 19th, 2019
Who's Online Now
11 members (Pat from France, Honestmike, zwoerf, derjager, Ric Ferrari, C. Wetzel-20609, Cameron, OWN, AnatoliyD, Documentalist, Stephen), 267 guests, and 51 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5