Read again my comment in #2. The numbers should be differing size. Weapon numbers were smaller than regiment and companie numbers. The three bayonets in #8 look OK for marks, note the classical number style and the number "3" for example. Note how different they look to the numbers in photo #4.
I compared these stamps. The differences are obvious. This is modern work! And how can we evaluate the latest photo stamp shelf normal?
The stamps are problematic, same as the partly remove of barell ring, a bayonet for G88 wout barell could used only as a Seitenwaffe not as bayonet.
Other point when You look inside of the stamps, there is rust cleaned surface inside of the stamp, so the stamping was already done on chemically cleaned surface. b.r.Andy
Good day! Thanks for the reply. About the cut ring-what do you see as a problem? The cut ring is often found in alterations bayonets. The shape of the cutout or something else?by AndyB
Yes, there is such rust. And on the other side of the handle-the number is French-there is no such rust. Very interesting observation. Thanks.
Offcourse You will not found a bayonet for G88 without barell ring, other point is the back of handle should be stepped not as here, so here is when real a Seitenwaffe also non attachable bayonet on a rifle, with faked unit stamp. The half cut of ring and area of backside of handle is newer made as sample rusting surface inside of barell ring. It was made max 30 years ago, not 110 years ago.b.r.Andy
Perhaps this photograph was taken as a sample?
photo in comparison
Yes, You are right about this, could be done to similar configuration as here pictured, which is already a Sidearm and not a Bayonet, attached on rifle. b.r.Andy
Many bayonets don't have a ring. Especially German.
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks