Hello everyone,
since these don´t come too often I would appreciate your thoughts on this one.
Many thanks!
Klaus
butschek antiques
Hello everyone,
since these don´t come too often I would appreciate your thoughts on this one.
Many thanks!
Klaus
butschek antiques
Moved it to the Third Reich Dagger forum Klaus.
Looking for LDO marked EK2s and items relating to U-406.....
I thinks he's an original.
Logo is fine, although it seems that some parts are painted again.
Regards
Vedran
Hello Klaus, During the 1960s and 70s,,thousands of this type of dagger flooded the market place mostly coming out of Russia. These type daggers have been reproduced very well and it is very hard to discern the difference between what is repro and authentic.
I can only touch on a few areas of this dagger as i see there are red flags. I do not collect this type and I will give you my best opinion,,, Overall condition especially in the grip area has caught my attention first. I have enclosed below a few GDC photos for comparison.
Overall condition of the grip looks worn and has pressure marks,, but yet the grip eagle is crispy looking and detailed. What is commonly seen is the grip eagle on the left and is more worn. Look at the difference in wing feathering.
Another attribute that I see is the Crossguard eagle eyebrow that is to the side of the eye..looks like a crescent. On Authentic examples, ( Top Photo ),you will notice the eye brow is a little longer than compared to the shorter brow and looks like a crescent with no bend or length. ( see photos below )
The logo is hard to discern the difference at this point and would need an extreme closeup as this part is crucial to discern,,but from what I can see is that it lacks any depth.
Te scabbard looks to be a repaint and I thank you for that photo....look at the paint rolled back in the one photo you have supplied. After 70 years i would not think paint would roll back but it would chip off from age.
I would like to see photos of the tang ( full length ) especially in the blade shoulder areas.
I thank you Klaus for posting this dagger here but IMO and from what I have studied about this dagger it has some areas of concern.
This dagger is very close in detail to matching an authentic period example.....but not close enough. These are my findings and my opinion on this dagger. Best regards Larry
It is not the size of a Collection in History that matters......Its the size of your Passion for it!! - Larry C
“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” - Winston Churchill
looks great
There a difference in the eagle thats for sure.
Other than paul weyersburg was there anybody else that made these to merit a slight difference?
Looking at my book no, but there was a non-maker type?
Giving it the benefit of the doubt I think it could be a parts dagger mixed from different periods war time and post war.
This would answer the stamped crossguard (ive never seen a fakey with stamps) and what appears a recentish paint job of the scabbard.
From the very apparent differences in the chest and wing feathers of the eagle, for this reason alone, I would have to pass on this piece. As Larry pointed out also, the brow of the Eagle shows a marked difference to the originals posted and Wolfe's beautiful example shown. The small chip on the scabbard paint does not instill confidence either-not only from the rolled aspect of it, but the appearance of the metal beneath it looking shiny and new despite 70 years of patina. Sorry, but I could not accept this one.
William
"Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."
And here I am thinking the thing was beautiful
Similar Threads
Bookmarks