|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942
|
OP
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942 |
Hi all, lots of items coming in at the moment that I require help with. I would like thoughts please on this SS which I believe of the maker is by Robt. Klaas. There are no Roman numerals on the crossguards but I believe this is possible. Sorry the pictures are not the best. Any coments welcome. Thanks, Wendy www.simplydaggers.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942
|
|
OP
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942
|
|
OP
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942
|
|
OP
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,037 Likes: 4
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,037 Likes: 4 |
There should not be a groupe mark on this dagger. The only RZM daggers with marks are very early ones, like the 120/34's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,201 Likes: 3
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,201 Likes: 3 |
Personally i dont like the fit of the balde to the crossguard - from the pics provided there is a definite gap. This appears to be despite it being very agressivley set in (pic 3).
GDC silver member #393
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,077
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,077 |
It's difficult to tell from the photos, but it appears the dagger and scabbard fittings are nickel-silver, not plated. If such is the case, it appears an original early dagger may have been fitted with a later "RZM" blade. The blade should go with plated fittings, not solid nickel-silver ones.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 498
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 498 |
This dagger certainly doesn't have the quality of earlier nickel and RZM daggers. I the grip eagle inletting is wanting a bit, detail/lines of cross guards and grip are less than I would expect. Not sure if it just my old eyes, but the drag detail looks different than most I have seen. It sure would be nice if someone would post some pictures of other daggers by this maker.
I certainly wouldn't be able to say if it was a repro, but I would sure be a little nervious until I saw other daggers of the same maker marks.
Thanks, Blademan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I sort of thought there was something odd about the actual grip itself, something just doesn't look right but I'm not that experienced to be able to judge a piece for sure. JohnJ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 915
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 915 |
There's a few things that look strange to me... The rounded grossguards, the poorly shaped grip, the throat fit and gap, the blade recess in the crossguard (found on originals but frequently on repros), the rounded scabbard ball chape, also the blade looks a bit narrow.
What is the width of the blade where it meets the crossguard, it should be 34mm, the fakes are usually 32mm. This one has way too many red flags for my liking. Have you bought this Wendy?
Red
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942
|
|
OP
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 942 |
Thanks for the info. I have not bought this , but a friend is asking advice on it. Thanks , Wendy www.simplydaggers.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,977 Likes: 33
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,977 Likes: 33 |
Blade could be okay. Ridge on lower fitting looks a little pronounced and odd to me as well. I do not like the crossguards at all. The handle looks okay as does the eagle and the sigrunen. Overall too many questions unanswered unless the price was a bargain (price for parts) cheers, Ryan
|
|
|
|
Forums42
Topics31,685
Posts329,251
Members7,536
| |
Most Online5,900
Dec 19th, 2019
|
|
|
11 members (Turok, The_Collector, Mikee, ado, Luftbud, Tanker, Stephen, kreta1961, seany, Evgeniy, Documentalist),
268
guests, and
101
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
