-
-
12-01-2013 07:23 PM
# ADS
Circuit advertisement
-
Searching for anything relating to, Anton Boos, 934 Stamm. Kp. Pz. Erz. Abt. 7, 3 Kompanie, Panzer-Regiment 2, 16th Panzer-Division (My father)
-
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
-
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
-
by
gerrit
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.
-
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."
-
If you go there Chris76 will you inform them of these "shady" objects as I guess they are selling them on commision!
-
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?
-
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
-
by
Larry C
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?
Bookmarks