There are some question that should be answered:
Why they used similar DH on piece as WW1 Haenckel, that should be reworked in early 30ies and a Clemen Jung 39 that was 100% a army contract? You spoke about 25 variation of DH but here are minimum of 5-6 years difference with similar proofs. I believe because they came from one source.
The most problematic piece for me is the Police SS bayonet, as there have nothing to do the DH stamp, as it was already a SS property. Same as S/244.36 which has post 1943 grips have similar stamp as the earlier ones??
The using of various materials didnt means that germans or SS have not a certain directives how to accept equipment into service or property. This is certainly not here the point, more problematic is that You compare a early prewar , with early war and late war period, thats the problem, dating of the stamping, same as SS was increased and changed in short period.
I have a rule, when a problematic piece came from a certain source, so the complete source is problematic. For this i have only one resume. I dont like these DH stamps. So You should compare each piece where it came from. Anyway it is a interesting discussion.
best regards,Andy
Last edited by AndyB; 11/24/2010 12:42 PM.
