Extra set of eyes for NSKK RZM M7/83 and SA RZM M7/68 1941 - possible parts daggers?

[akriener]

I think these are fine, but would like a second set of eyes.

Came across a couple estate finds I've presented an opportunity to buy ($575 NSKK, $425 SA) and I was hoping to get a second set of eyes on these. I tend to stay away from RZM blades because of the plating flaking issues on the cross guards, but to me these both look like they have unmarked, nickel cross guards? Maybe they are plated and just haven't started lifting, but I am having a hard time telling in these photos. You can see what appears to be some spotting on the lower rear of the NSKK cross guard.

They don't appear transitional to me, which would explain the nickel cross guards if that was true. That aside - Is a combination of a non-transitional RZM blade and nickel guards an automatic indicator of parts daggers? Or were there exceptions?

On the lower right of the NSKK eagle there is some interesting looking damage to the wood - perhaps the eagle was replaced or just normal wear?

There is some gapping on the SA dagger but it is consistent on the same side and I believe in allowed variances.

The 83 is Richard Pluemacher Sohn, Solingen and the 68 is Tigerwerk Lauterjung & Co., Solingen.

Why do some RZM blades have a date and others do not?

Thanks!

NSKK
nskk1.jpg
nskk2.jpg nskk3.jpg nskk4.jpg nskk5.jpg nskk6.jpg




SA
sa1.png
sa2.jpg sa3.jpg sa4.jpg

[Matt G.]

I will just comment on the first dagger, the NSKK. -- The crossguards certainly look like the early nickel type to me. It is interesting to see that the pommel nut appears to have some corrosion/rust (meaning....plated) while the crossguards do not. Also, look at the lower crossguard and its low "step." This seems to be a crossguard of an early Suhl produced dagger (Kober, Sauer, Haenel). The upper crossguard does not seem to have this low-step feature. If my opinion is correct (and my opinion is that it is a parts dagger), someone went to a hellva lot to get all of the "fits" nice and tight. I'm anxious to see what others have to say.

[akriener]

I will just comment on the first dagger, the NSKK. -- The crossguards certainly look like the early nickel type to me. It is interesting to see that the pommel nut appears to have some corrosion/rust (meaning....plated) while the crossguards do not. Also, look at the lower crossguard and its low "step." This seems to be a crossguard of an early Suhl produced dagger (Kober, Sauer, Haenel). The upper crossguard does not seem to have this low-step feature. If my opinion is correct (and my opinion is that it is a parts dagger), someone went to a hellva lot to get all of the "fits" nice and tight. I'm anxious to see what others have to say.

Here's some photos. The estate seller tells me they were passed down through the family (or so the story goes from the client). But yes, I noticed these fittings look really good.

I also noticed on both daggers that the grooves on the top of the cross guard on the right side look kinda funky and curved.

NSKK
nskk top1.jpg nskk top2.jpg



SA
sa top1.jpg sa top 2.jpg

[Matt G.]

Thanks for the additional photos. Let's see what others say.

[akriener]

Thanks for the additional photos. Let's see what others say.

I'll just throw the Sauer up here too for kicks that I wasn't interested in. It's a little salty. Also priced at $425.

Larry C over at WR echoed your sentiments that the lower cross guard of the NSKK does appear to be Suhl and he is also of the opinion it is parts. He didn't comment on the others though.

IMG_1859.jpg IMG_1858.jpg IMG_1860.jpg IMG_1862.jpg IMG_1861.jpg

[Billy G]

The first dagger shown, 7/83 (Richard Plümacher) appears to be a parts piece made up of an early grip and crossguards paired with a later period RZM blade, you can see the poor blade shoulder to crossguard fit. The guards and grip emblems are nickel which was only used in the early period, not when RZM blades were produced. Since the grip seems to fit the crossguards well, I suspect they are original to each other.

The pictures become somewhat muddled after so I can't tell which dagger is which but the 7/68 (Tigerwerke) might be a parts piece as well. Probably best to avoid them at those prices.

[akriener]

The first dagger shown, 7/83 (Richard Plümacher) appears to be a parts piece made up of an early grip and crossguards paired with a later period RZM blade, you can see the poor blade shoulder to crossguard fit. The guards and grip emblems are nickel which was only used in the early period, not when RZM blades were produced. Since the grip seems to fit the crossguards well, I suspect they are original to each other.

The pictures become somewhat muddled after so I can't tell which dagger is which but the 7/68 (Tigerwerke) might be a parts piece as well. Probably best to avoid them at those prices.

Thanks Billy. I've added some formatting to better separate the photos of the two. I'm leaning towards parts as well on the SA.

To that point...where would you get unmarked nickel cross guards that appear to have a factory finish?

What do you think about the Sauer blade?

[Matt G.]

[QUOTE= Probably best to avoid them at those prices.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100%.