UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons The BCN Bayonet Forum material rivets 98k bayonet frogs

hello. yes i only meen the breadbag ones... not the blue DAK ones.

I don’t question that both the standard frogs, and the tropical frogs have been and are being faked. I’ve seen a number of examples myself and sometimes you really have to study an item before coming to a conclusion. Although usually it only takes a second or two. I am also remiss in that looking at the various other issues I failed to properly address one item that was mentioned: A “strange, black rubberlike colour”. The leather should look, feel, and smell like a 60 plus year old Luger holster (leather). If it does not then you start looking at other things very, very closely. I would also mention that especially with some of the Indian/Pakistani made items they have made some very good stamps which rival the originals. I am speaking directly to some swords made a few years back that exactly copied the originals. There is no doubt in my mind that originals were sent there and were copied faithfully. If they can copy those markings, then (IMO) they can copy anything they want to reasonably accurately. My point here being that any stamping is only one part of the equation, because mistakes and errors are seen on fully inspected Wehrmacht issue items. And I think that you have to look at the complete item in context before making a judgement.

As for the hollow rivets we see them with Breadbag frogs and some other standard types. And just about every M42 I have seen uses one of several types of hollow rivets inside the pouch to attach it (it's virtually impossible to use the standard washer/rivet staking tool inside the pouch). And I have at least one example where the same kind of rivets were used on the upper part of the frog for some reason (the frog is not a modern fake). My point being that I think we have to be careful how we describe things. Because a general statement without some clarification can give new collectors the wrong idea about is legitimate and what is not. And we have to take into account that there might be legitimate differences between how and with what different period makers made items. (Pictures of the fakes would also be very helpful for comparison purposes.)

Also I think we have to be careful when describing what is called a “nib” (?). Which is normally at both ends of the stud when it is machined and is removed afterward. You can see partial “nibs” (if we are talking about the same thing) on two of the frogs I have posted (the red arrow points). I have others where the “nib” is more pronounced. Again I’m not saying fakes cannot have them. But I don’t think that you can say every frog is automatically a fake if it has one, and some more clarification is needed. (I will say this: Generally some effort was usually made to try and flatten the “nib”, but more so with earlier items than late production.)

The effort to alert collectors is very much appreciated by myself and I'm certain many others reading the thread. And what I am really trying to say is that with especially pictures collectors can be better educated to avoid fakes. Versus statements which can possibly be misinterpreted or taken out of context. My own personal preference being side by side images (where possible).

Posted below is part of a very small sample of studs that was looked at as a group but without focusing on the “nibs”.

Here are the tie strap studs themselves closeup. Looking at how some of them appear, some could have been made by swaging or die casting. While others appear to have been machined. After I saw one particular example I went: “OK - maybe there is too much variation to make an absolute rule”. [I’ll let everyone guess which one. ] Best Regards to All, FP

Hello,

i never said the things you make me responsible :-)
the thing i said is: the fakes i know... and this are realy fakes, bear wrong markings... most time a lack of a 1 in the r.B.Nr, the bear ths stud i posted and the all bear a colour out of ruber like material. often with fades in it.
the lense typ stude always found on fakes. and often this fakes had 4 or only 2 hollow riftes. I only write about the fakes!!

i never said this or this frog stud is not ok... i know very well about the differents by originals. this is not what i said or what i meen.

serveral makes had often the same suppliers. differnts in produktiopn are normal. this is not a sign for a fake.

the fake frogs were sold in germany.. often as a copy, sometimes as a orignial

here one pic more of a early fake with a lense stud. tataly wrong r.b.nr. O/001/0088

so... now one of the neuest M42 copys.
sold in germany as a copy by serval trades. aged contition. fantastic stud copy... but with flat doomed riftest. and with wrong R.B.Nr. 0/1151/0038. The original is 0/1001/0038.

number

the original frog maker Schaub lederwaren existst until now and produced frogs in the same way in with the same materials from 1936-1944. you can order:

http://www.schaub-lederwaren.de/uniform%20uniformzub.HTM

here another copy of the germnan market. the stud is not so perfectly made

and i found the lense typ copy by an american trader:

http://www.atthefront.com/g_gear_frogs.htm

but now better ons of this type are availlabe, aged etc.

As promised the pics of my 98k bayonet frog. A used gfg 1942 (Karl Hepting & Co, Stuttgart) with steel rivets. I have always thought it was a normal army issue frog, but I find the surface finish of the pouch rather peculiar. It appears that there is some sort of black paint or lacquer or perhaps a rubbery substance on it. I don´t know what it is.

Rear side

i never said only the stud makes out an original or not.
i only tell about the fake market in germany... with open informations european collectors have.

The alu frogs were prodced are totaly the same as 1935-1940 in alu and 1940-45 in steel until now for german police eqipment and other staff. It is very easy to get the parts needed for a super looking fake. The only differnt often is only the age.

hier a pic of german police eqipment. made by ASKH.

Detail

Rivet

Pouch

Other view

Side view

And finally the maker mark. There are no other markings on it.

Hello Kilian. you own a example of a Luftwaffe frog made by carl Hepting Stuttgart (Württemberg) out of 1942.

you said correct there are scraps of black collour.

the leather out of the frogs were prodced were coated with black colour. this starts in 1940. former the most luftwaffe frogs only were coated with brown colour.

here pics of an nearly anworn gfg43 frog

and the back:

Gardist,
I can see what you were talking about, and hope that I was not misunderstood.

I don’t like the leather most especially with the first M42 frog. The rivets also look strange, although I can’t get a really good look at them. For the second frog I don’t particularly care for its look either, and likewise can’t get a really good feel for it from the image. It looks a little bit like one or two late war frogs I have seen made from poor quality leather that crazed (not man made, every piece of leather is unique and finishes differently). But it’s certainly not something that I would buy without a personal inspection first.

I’m OK with the 0/1001/0038 frog not having certain kinds of rivets. But I have an old well worn 0/0838/004(unknown if there is a number beyond that) M42 which has very slightly domed flat hollow rivets holding the pouch. This frog is not a fake. What does that mean in all this?

PS: Thanks for the link. I’m very glad this stuff was not common when I stated collecting !!!

PS To Killian: The frogs were usually finished with a paint like leather finish. Smooth leather on top - smooth finish. Rough leather on top (most common) a rougher finish. With age (etc.) when the finish cracked it left a crazed surface, and could pull away in chunks. At some point (possibly because of a lack of chemicals(?) they changed the formulation using a duller, more durable finish that was not quite as prone to cracking. There was quite a bit of variability between makers. And if that was not bad enough, some makers who used to finish their leather had to stop because of lack of supplies.
Regards to All, FP

A quick question. The black Luftwaffe (LBA) marked frog in the image of Luftwaffe only frogs is 1940 dated. They were still marking them beyond that date? FP

what frog do you mean? in your overview?
at my knowlege. LW frogs were stamped until 1940 with LBA(S) mark. LBA is very early. LBAB.. i found until 1936.


can you post a pic of he rbnr. of the m42 frog?

Sorry, I forgot to attach the image. And it could be a (LBA) Luftwaffe Bekleidungsamt (S) Sammelstation marking as I don't have it in front of me (and sometimes they are poorly stamped or worn). I will also have to take the image of the M42 this evening. Unfortunately, when it was stamped it was near the edge, which is why I could not see if it had a number or not at the far right hand side. FP

back to the DAK frogs... green or blue.

i hope i shock nobody with the following observation.

few years ago i get the 3 boys shown in the pic.
most of the time i think...great originals. realy every part is correct...the studs...the canvas...the stiching, the Materials...everything. Totaly unworn, stockware... UV test...ok.
The backs and the fronts total the same colour (saharina and kaki) only the three versions of straps are the differents.

On one you can see the tailers chalk for stitching the parts in the correct form.
the leatherpice on the back of the straps are in every case totaly new.

i was realy in the opinion there are originals.
There were made totaly in the same way as other ones with trademark of Offermann-Bensberg i own.

in the last time...after many dissussions and observations i´m not realy sure there are not new made ones.
Well nown traders sell comparable frogs as "very good reprodctions" to a low price.
More and more came into the german market.

hmm.. now... i don´t know... original? made on orignal maschines? totaly new or realy stockware out of a depot... or original stock parts put together.

the material is realy realy like an original one. look the pics.

so... to the blue frogs.

Last 2-3 years few examples of the frog you are showing were sold. realy totaly the same typ with new looking alu studs. i got many pictures send from private.
This is the cause i said this is a copy. I show you...the studs in the original form are still in produce until now...espacally in germany.

out of this reason i wrote you a personal message.

so the pics start

pic

pic else

now this

and this

the end

We´re discussing different topics in the same thread, but personally I don´t mind as a lot of interesting info on German frogs is brought together in one place.

Back to my, what has turned out to be, Luftwaffe (airforce) frog. I know that the German Fallschirmjäger (paratroopers) were part of the Luftwaffe. And that these, I believe after the German invasion of Crete, were generally used to fight as normal ground troops.

I was wondering which Luftwaffe personnel would have been issued with the 98k rifle, bayonet and bayonet frog. I don´t think the aircrew were carrying rifles, so there remains ground crews, guard personnel and Fallschirmjäger. Correct? Would the Fallschirmjäger have carried the brown Luftwaffe frogs, or were they issued the post 1940 black ones only?

I did some searching and found the internet site of a small local museum in Holland that shows several Fallschirmjäger items taken from prisoners from the 6th Fallschirmjäger Regiment in April 1945. If you scroll about halfway down on the page there is a 98k bayonet with a black frog, made in 1940 by the Landes Lieferungs Genossenschaft Niedersachsen in Hannover.

Achterhoeks Museum

My conclusion is that the Fallschirmjäger did at least carry the black Luftwaffe frog. I am not sure if my specimen was used by Fallschrimjäger, but it would be a possibility.

Any thoughts or comments on the use of these Luftwaffe frogs?

Gardist, I don’t know what to tell you. When the Berlin Wall fell and the two Germany’s were reunited a small flood of Russian and German military items came into the U.S. (old stock, there was not enough time to manufacture new items). Here and there were some absolutely never issued WW II German items. Some items looked like they had been stored at the bottom of a well. Others were in much better shape. I used to see for sale stacks of never issued German holsters that the Russians had captured.

Perhaps, 10 years ago (?) I saw similar frogs that were supposed to have come from France where there had been made during the war. With the frogs claimed to be old stock. Most of the new frogs I have seen used at least some synthetics somewhere in their construction. If a frog is or appears to be original materials that is a plus.

But given the fact that new items are entering the marketplace my best guess at htis point is to take a wait and see attitude regarding further acquisitions. Until we see just what the fakers are selling. Best Regards, FP

i first thout there are 100% originlas.

i thout you say this :-) so i must shown you the joker of argemnetation.

but i found serval with numbers... hmm.. do you know the mark? RB.tr-Nr. 0/268/304 ????

these stamps and others came sudden with the shown frogs...

a crude misstake... such r.b.nr. is a funny joke.

and these frogs came more and more... not less.
few traders in germany sells... on ebay... there are available.

To Kilian. Yes it is a very interessing websinde.

The airforce type you can recognize at the short midle stichting. Also the airforce carried the strap typs. Before 1940 there were colourd brown after 1940 there were colloured black. the black strap ones you can not recognize as Luftwaffe issue... because after 1940 all were black, without proofmark or unit mark.

until 1940 luftwaffe frogs often bare a unit mark.

you are correct when you said only groundpersonls..but fighting groups, like paratropers use them too.

Flack units, groundpersonals of fighter wings or bomber wings, luftwaffe-field-divisions, members of the flightscools, storm-artillerie-units, intelligence and comunikation untis were issued with bayontes. often you can find the unit markings on the backsides.

But not only SG84/98 bayontes... often they get VZ24, austrian M95, or other captured material.
Often air force groud personal use norwegian Krag-Jörgensen rifls and bayonts/frog combination.

The airforce also used captuerd and altered czech/austrian frogs...

very interessting ist the belt. The boucle ist the fist modell produced only one year 1935-1936. Very scare.

here is a pic of a belt, blue painted boucle, czech/austrian frog and bayonet SG84/98 3Mod. i get from a member of a luftwaffe-field-division. this was like a infanterie-division...consiered out a luftwaffe members who were available for fighting unit.

here is one from the pilot scool magdeburg Flugzeugführerschule Magdeburg

many stamps of differnt bomber units = kampfgeschader = K.G.

the frog has a long history. found together with a VZ24 bayonet.

flak (anti-airkraft) unit mark.

Flightschool and comuniction unit markings


these are only examples... many many markings exist until 1940.

I had forgotten that the FLAK units were also part of the Luftwaffe. Thanks for remembering me.

Danke für die Infos, Sleepwalker.

Maybe Arnaud from France is kind enough to post a few pics from his collection here as well?