Fake SS Bayonet?

[Brooklyn379]

Just wondering if these are real or if someone punched them this way for a few extra bucks. Would appreciate any help.
Thank you

[Willmore]

Hi, Is there any stamping on the leather frog?

The reason I ask is because, I’m pretty sure the frogs were stamped, but not the actual bayonets.

[Brooklyn379]

I asked the seller about any marking on the frog. Awaiting reply

[Anderson]

It is a bogus fake SS mark. Someone has slipped in the fake SS mark in between the true stamped serial numbers on the ricasso. There was often a wide gap that gives a space for this to be done. Likewise the runes on the hilt are a fake post war mark. Here is a ASW44 photo showing the ricasso marks and you can see the space fake marks could fit into. This space can vary widely, so this particular bayonet was chosen as it was wide enough. The real mark was 71aa. This bayonet's value is now greatly reduced.

[Frogprince]

The "SS" markings on the bayonet are fake and the scabbard a replacement from a different type of bayonet. The frog also seems to be from somewhere else, but better photos are needed. And in any event, it does not look like period legitimate examples which is time sensitive. Best Regards, Fred

[Brooklyn379]

I appreciate this information, what are the odds of coming across a genuine SS bayonet?

[Anderson]

You could come across one but not realise it. Bayonets used by the SS were not marked. Frogs from the 1930's were, but late war probably not. The SS acquired its hardware from a variety of stores, including captured bayonets. But they were not stamped with runes. So very difficult to prove if a bayonet had been used by the SS.

[Sleepwalker]

The frog and the scabbard are turkish and heavily used

[AndyB]

This piece was already reported some years ago, the 44asw early doubble letter piece is here completed with turkish scabbard and frog. The SS stamps are problematic as mentioned already by others.