Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Results 1 to 9 of 9

SS Dagger serial number 127950?

Article about: Hello Gentleman Just acquired this SS dagger with a number on the cross guard. Does anyone have a way to identify the SS man that owned it from his SS number. Any and all information will be

  1. #1

    Default SS Dagger serial number 127950?

    Hello Gentleman
    Just acquired this SS dagger with a number on the cross guard.
    Does anyone have a way to identify the SS man that owned it from his SS number.
    Any and all information will be appreciated.
    thanks
    Michael
    Click to enlarge the picture Click to enlarge the picture Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dagger 005.JPG 
Views:	76 
Size:	118.2 KB 
ID:	66790   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dagger 007.JPG 
Views:	88 
Size:	136.0 KB 
ID:	66791  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dagger 008.JPG 
Views:	79 
Size:	171.2 KB 
ID:	66792   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	dagger 012.JPG 
Views:	87 
Size:	157.9 KB 
ID:	66793  


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

  3. #2

    Default re: SS Dagger serial number 127950?

    Drop a line to Mike Constandy mjc@westmorelandresearch.org
    Super chap, wealth of knowledge and reasonably priced (No its not free)

    or try John P. Moore j.moore153@verizon.net another top guy

    Tell him I told you

    mind you, looking at the piece, it doesn't fit too well?

  4. #3

    Default Re: SS Dagger serial number 127950?

    Hi Michael, I know this is an old thread now, but as I love named items, did anything come of getting this one researched?

    Cheers, Ade.
    Had good advice? Saved money? Why not become a Gold Club Member, just hit the green "Join WRF Club" tab at the top of the page and help support the forum!

  5. #4

    Default Re: SS Dagger serial number 127950?

    Is it me or in the 2nd photo the lower crossguard to blade shoulder fit,,is really bad!! I can actually see some of the lower tang and it should not be seen at all!! I dont remember seeing any Herder daggers having this poor fit,, let alone any early SS daggers. I would expect it more from the Late types. 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

  6. #5

    Default

    Ade, Larry, 5 years is a long time for another reply but I've only just found this thread!

    I think the cause of the poor fit is the result of much force being used to impress the original owner's membership number in to the disassembled cross-guard, which has resulted in it being distorted somewhat and therefore on reassembly it's not gone together very well.

    Chris.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote by theaussie View Post
    Ade, Larry, 5 years is a long time for another reply but I've only just found this thread!

    I think the cause of the poor fit is the result of much force being used to impress the original owner's membership number in to the disassembled cross-guard, which has resulted in it being distorted somewhat and therefore on reassembly it's not gone together very well.

    Chris.
    There have been many misfitted early daggers with bad shoulder fits..and none of them had any hammered numbers beneath the crossguard. The occurrence of beneath the cross guard SS number stampings are not highly common. How do we explain this ?

    In this thread there is no proof of this crossguard being hammered down to create this gapping. There is no grip to guard photo to show a bent guard. Your theory is warranted ...but it is more common to see poorly fitted Late RZM daggers than precisely fitted early SA and SS daggers.

    My thoughts would lean towards a saddle type attachment so as to prevent any bending during this hammering process...if the guard is totally removed from the grip....or maybe the grip was left on during the process as there is a crack that runs bottom right going up to the left of the grip.

    Thoughts anyone ?

    Regards 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

  8. #7

    Default

    The guard is a solid nickel one and I doubt much if tapping the numbers into it would result in this much distortion. To me, at least, from the poor grip to guard fit of the wood-along with the huge tang gap, I would lean towards someone swapping out the lower guard for one that had a number on it and had been salvaged from a wrecked piece.
    William

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

  9. #8

    Default

    Well, we all have a view and that our prerogative! Mine remains as above that a heavy handed individual used a lump hammer to impress his (or his mate's) service number, hence what appears to be the flattening of the guard in the last photo and on reassembly thought bugger (and yes you did a right Charlie of a job)!!

    Chris.

  10. #9

    Default

    All opinions are always welcome
    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

Similar Threads

  1. K98: just a serial number

    In World Firearms
    11-04-2011, 04:29 PM
  2. US Soldiers serial number?

    In Equipment and Field gear
    01-14-2010, 09:56 AM
  3. Thompson serial number help.

    In World Firearms
    01-01-2010, 07:53 PM
  4. US DSC W/serial number.

    In WW1 Allies: Great Britain, France, USA, etc 1914 - 1918
    12-15-2009, 02:28 PM
  5. 11-23-2008, 02:35 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
  •