Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Quick ID and thoughts

Article about: Hello all I was just sent a couple of pics showing a bayonet style I am not familiar with The fittings appear to be chromed ?? any thoughts? Regards G.

  1. #11


    For me the information that the bayonet is diverted from argentine combat bayonet is important, as no many similar bayonets occured, same as we dont have details of the bayonet stamping, dimmension etc, there should be normally a WKC maker mark. Certainly a german soldier would order a dress bayonet inspired by real S71/84 or S84/98 piece as have here a castrat of unknown bayonet delivery. The finish looks like a chromed. So the refurbishment to a dress bayonet date is unknown here. b.r.Andy

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement Quick ID and thoughts
    Join Date
    Advertising world

  3. #12


    Parade bayonets were also made by a large number of small makers, often unmarked, who bought parts they didn't make from these larger companies like WKC, Eickhorn,Klaas etc. This is clear with the KS98 and Fire Bayonets, many with no maker's mark, some marked by known small producers. I suspect this is made by one such small company. But cutting down blades is not uncommon. That photo is not sharp enough to be clear which blade it may have come from. Maybe a Venezuelan m1900.

  4. #13


    Quote by Anderson View Post
    Fred, i'm not quite sure what point you are making, but you may be inferring the plating on this bayonet dates from post ww2. If so, I'd point out the wood grip plates are riveted to the bayonet with original type rivets used on the S1871/84. In other words they can't be removed. My understanding is you would not attempt metal plating with attached wood grips.
    Another point I'd add is I have seen a Reichwehr used S98/05 (butcher bayonet) that has been cut down to the dimensions and size of the S84/98. There was a period in the early 20th century, where Germany was using several different patterns of bayonets and it wasn't really until 1934 and Third Reich and arrival of the 3rd type S84/98 that standardization was achieved.

    A couple of photos, a parade/private purchase S1871/84 and a photo from 1923 and SA men, the officer at the right still happy to wear his parade S1871/84, even though a obsolete pattern.
    Anderson, My reasoning briefly that is from the images, I'm going to stick with post-period (also possibly post WW II) and what looks to me also to be chrome plating. The Germans during the later Imperial era using an older type of nickel plating, that was superseded during the TR era - usually discernible in hand or with good quality closeup imaging. I also see what looks like non-nickel (blued?) finishes in two areas of the handle. The grips usually removable using the proper tools (but not screwdrivers for machine screws or spanner nuts). Not disputing at all that Imperial era makers could and did use nickel plating for all sorts of things including guns, swords, bayonets, etc. etc. Not in hand - the example here IMO a later reworking of a period example of indeterminate origin (no discernible markings for additional clues). Best Regards, Fred
    Click to enlarge the picture Click to enlarge the picture Quick ID and thoughts   Quick ID and thoughts  

    Last edited by Frogprince; 09-20-2018 at 09:17 PM. Reason: minor clarification

  5. #14


    Fred those photos are of such poor quality. That plus the flash light reflection makes it impossible, in my opinion, to say what type of plating is used. The grips are held by rivets from what I can see. We really need the OP to provide better sharp photos and possibly only an in hand inspection would settle the matter. I still can't see how you could arrive at a "post war" re-working or replating opinion, based on what we can see, on what is a rare oddity of a bayonet to begin with. But that is a secondary question, the identification of the bayonet was the main point and it would appear we agree it is made to conform largely to the style of the S1871/84, but without muzzle ring. Maker unknown, but very likely German. Anymore than that at this point (without better images), is matter of opinion, which we will probably continue to disagree over.
    One final thought; chromium electroplating commercially developed in 1924 was widespread in use by 1926.

  6. #15


    Anderson, There's no argument from me that with the low quality images at hand - and some other factors that assessing this bayonet is going to involve some guesswork. In hand my usual course of action if I'm not sure is taking the item out into sunlight. With one of the things about chrome plating being that it does not build up a layer of the soft whitish matte looking nickel oxide common to many uncleaned old period nickel plated items. The reworking also referring to the (most likely) cut down blade and no muzzle ring. That said, my bias towards a postwar scenario probably is due to my early exposure to businesses that involved automobiles and different manufacturing sectors in the general area that I lived in. That after the war attracted veterans for multiple reasons who sometimes brought their (usually chrome if it was plated) Japanese and German etc. souvenirs to shows. Best Regards, Fred

  7. #16


    I wanted to thank everyone for the Great discussion.I appreciate all of the input if I am able to acquire the pieces I will definitely post some better photos.


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Question A quick one...Yes or No?

    In SS Buckles
    01-25-2016, 09:36 PM
  2. Question A quick question~

    In Uniforms and Insignia of the RKKA, Red Army, & Soviet Army
    03-23-2013, 03:18 PM
  3. A quick question

    In Battlefield history and relics
    05-29-2010, 05:38 PM
  4. Quick Question

    In Steel Helmets
    04-25-2010, 01:43 AM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts