Opinions on Army Officer Dagger

[bigjeff]

Hello,
New to the forums.
Would appreciate any opinions on this army officer dagger which I have just purchased !

[85ronnies]

Hi Jeff welcome to the forum, the dagger looks origional to me but has been apart as the blade has been put in back to front
hope this helps,
cheers Ronnie

[Adrian Stevenson]

Hi Jeff, welcome to the forum!

I wouid agree with Ronnie's comments.

I would very carefully unscrew the pommel and turn the blade around. But before replacing it I would give it a clean.

Cheers, Ade.

[gerrit]

Hi Jeff,

this is a very nice dagger, prob. produced in 1936.
This logo fits this time period.
It has the later type 3 crossguard but it has still the earlier type 2 fittings (14 leaf pommel)
and it looks like the later type scabbard.
Take the grease off, put some renwax on,put the blade with the logo on the backside and you have a great dagger!

Cheers Ger

[Larry C]

Army dagger collectors know that some of these produced after 1936 and towards the end of the war ,, were pretty much a mixed bag of parts. I see nothing wrong with this dagger ,,but just for some light trivia only,,who were the producers for the Pommel cap and ferrule ring,,as they both are not Alcoso made. Regards Larry

[gerrit]

Larry i was wondering about the big achorns between the leaves on the pommel too
Thx for confirming this with your reply!

Ger

[Rancid66]

Frankenstein - very poorly constructed.
Example correct AC dagger:

Wittmann Militaria #33556 Army Officer Dagger by Alcoso

Regards
Vedran

[gerrit]

Vedran,

you compare different daggers, the logo displays different time periodes in which the daggers are made.
Like larry pointed out after 1936 a mixture of different periods parts are used.
Also in 1940-1941 even pommels, scabbards etc were bought from different makers because of the shortness of parts.
To speak about this dagger as a Frankenstein and a poorly made dagger is very harsch, and do not do the dagger any justice.
This is certainly no poor build dagger.
Constructive opinions are highly appreciated......it is very easy to say something negative about an object, but i dont think the owner will learn something about his relic that way.

Cheers Ger

[Rancid66]

Ger,
with these post, i do not want to offend you.
But then, we can not know whether the dagger prepared during or after the war.
When? Who knows?
I'm talking about 3 ACS crossguard.
The blade is reversed, it means someone is divorced dagger.
In the end, mixing parts is fine, for generic daggers. (1940)
This one is not.
ACS is a large company, and had some of his standards until the end.

Regards
Vedran

[Larry C]

Gents,,as of right now I am at work,, and I am unable to provide photos in the differences in parts....for the sake of this topic,,could either Vedran or Gerrit,,or anyone else for this matter post a couple of pics in the difference in parts. I myself I see a difference,,as my question above points to Eickhorn that made the pommel and ferrule ring. I feel photos would be the best judge, in discerning the difference,,and would be a useful tool for future resource. Regards Larry