Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Ernst Rohm Dagger - opinions

Article about: The Eickhorn factory was the only one who worked with benchmark numbers, so if you see a benched crossguard you will know its an eickhorn and would be attached on a Eickhorn dagger only! So

  1. #1

    Default Ernst Rohm Dagger - opinions

    Hi everyone,

    This dagger is up for auction in Sweden right now, and I'd like to have some opinions.
    I have some "problems" myself with it.

    The Gau Mark is Nrh - to my knowledge F.Dick never delivered daggers to this Gau.
    The "m" in Rohm looks a bit different to the ones I have seen before.
    The hanger has an RZM mark which must mean it does not belong to the dagger originally.

    Well?
    What do the experts say?

    Best Regards
    Chris
    Click to enlarge the picture Click to enlarge the picture Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	967 
Size:	165.7 KB 
ID:	604010   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	716 
Size:	202.7 KB 
ID:	604011  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	155 
Size:	129.0 KB 
ID:	604012   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	822 
Size:	218.7 KB 
ID:	604013  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	445 
Size:	138.2 KB 
ID:	604014  

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    P
    Many
     

  3. #2

    Default

    You can reference the Gau marks here.
    SA Gruppe marks known to Dagger Producers and Manufacturers
    Ralph.
    Searching for anything relating to, Anton Boos, 934 Stamm. Kp. Pz. Erz. Abt. 7, 3 Kompanie, Panzer-Regiment 2, 16th Panzer-Division (My father)

  4. #3

    Default

    Hi Chris ... It is not known for the SA gruppe "Nrh" to be distributed at all by this producer... But never say never..... In these photos though the poor grip fit to the crossguard also supports that it was not designated to go there. The curvature of the wood is very noticeable and does not belong to this dagger at all. A rarity in itself is the across the blade variant logo... Not sure of the etch do to the dirty looking blade. Some parts of the etch are weak . The scabbard is Late RZM type. Mixed parts with a questionable motto if better photos could be afforded a better opinion could be said. This dagger is parts and would rather not trust my money to an auction house in the condition this dagger is in or reputation of an auction house if any. Regards Larry
    Last edited by Larry C; 12-02-2013 at 11:58 AM.
    It is not the size of a Collection in History that matters......Its the size of your Passion for it!! - Larry C

    One never knows what tree roots push to the surface of what laid buried before the tree was planted - Larry C

    “The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” - Winston Churchill

  5. #4
    ?

    Default

    Larry is spot on!
    Parts dagger all the way, they even spoiled some acid below the Rohm dedication near the cutting edge when they postwar etched it.
    Its a clean etch, no damage at all on a garbage like blade..Always a bad sign.

    Bad all the way.

    Ger

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote by gerrit View Post
    Larry is spot on!
    Parts dagger all the way, they even spoiled some acid below the Rohm dedication near the cutting edge when they postwar etched it.
    Its a clean etch, no damage at all on a garbage like blade..Always a bad sign.

    Bad all the way.

    Ger
    That´s a very interesting observation Gerrit, about the spilled acid.
    I might make a visit to the auction house and look "for real" on it.

  7. #6

    Default

    As said more than adequately above=a complete mish-mashed parts dagger abomination with a fake inscription.
    William

    "Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."

  8. #7

    Default

    If you go there Chris76 will you inform them of these "shady" objects as I guess they are selling them on commision!

  9. #8

    Default

    I think it's been established that this dagger is a parts dagger. I have a question though. In one of the pictures you can see he bench stamp "3" on the crossguard. Which makers had these bench number stamps?

  10. #9

    Default

    Good eyes Chris..Eickhorn was the sole maker of benchmarking their lower crossguards..which puts the final nail in the coffin of making this a parts dagger. Eickhorn benchmarked crossguards were not sold or traded off. Another good reason why the grip to guard is a bad fit. Larry
    It is not the size of a Collection in History that matters......Its the size of your Passion for it!! - Larry C

    One never knows what tree roots push to the surface of what laid buried before the tree was planted - Larry C

    “The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” - Winston Churchill

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote by Larry C View Post
    Good eyes Chris..Eickhorn was the sole maker of benchmarking their lower crossguards..which puts the final nail in the coffin of making this a parts dagger. Eickhorn benchmarked crossguards were not sold or traded off. Another good reason why the grip to guard is a bad fit. Larry
    So if I understand you correct, if a crossguard (on an SA dagger) has a bench number, the crossguard itself is always made by Eickhorn? And if the rest of the dagger isn't Eickhorn, the dagger is always a parts dagger?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Eickhorn Rohm SS dagger Partial Rohm signature

    In SS Dienstdolch, 1933 & 1936
    03-15-2013, 10:58 PM
  2. Need Help! Would like opinions on Numbered Partial Rohm SS Dagger...

    In SS Dienstdolch, 1933 & 1936
    03-04-2013, 10:24 PM
  3. 08-28-2012, 06:18 PM
  4. Need opinions on SS Rohm Hammesfahr dagger...

    In SS Dienstdolch, 1933 & 1936
    10-03-2011, 03:46 PM
  5. 07-20-2009, 11:27 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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