Early m33 ss 121/34 - comments?

[inimicus]

yes and I sweated plenty negotiating to get it!

but thanks kevin.

SWEAT piece, enjoyed looking! Merry Christmas! an congrats! Kevin.

[Ed Sunday]

A very fine looking dagger.

[Craig H]

Can you take one straight on the trademark Dave ?

[inimicus]

happy to oblige, craig. two for the price o'one....

[inimicus]

1st dead-on 2nd at slight angle. I must say this dagger looks right as rain to me tho I've only owned a few over the years I do study up - even contributed one to t. wittmann's book.....

[inimicus]

thanks ed! want to remove hanger and the old verdigris to see ss marks but worried the leather mt. split tho it seems very strong anyhow not a mistake I want to make...

A very fine looking dagger.

[Ed Sunday]

thanks ed! want to remove hanger and the old verdigris to see ss marks but worried the leather mt. split tho it seems very strong anyhow not a mistake I want to make...

That's a tough call. It may look strong but maybe a bit dry and brittle !

[inimicus]

wise counsel noted.

[The Red Baron]

Looks beautiful to me!!! Just had one of these!

[inimicus]

many thanks red. I agree with colleagues who say they're the equal of the 'non-rzm' maker-marked pieces in looks and quality.

[The Red Baron]

I would also agree. I have had both 121 and 120/34 and both have all the quality of my other early maker marked pieces. I also don't mind the cool maker mark with the runes

[juoneen]

Hanger has been on that scabbard for a long time....I like the green at the throat, and pimply etching typical of some makers...I like it too.
Is any light visible between the blade and guard when held up to the light? I wouldn't think it would bleed light, but like you said photos are tough to see it all on blades...i like to take shots just a little on the dark side, then brighten them up with photoshop...lighting. It takes a lot of shots to get the lighting just right, and the focus to get a good shot, and the various lighting shots of the MM show it well..., but your correction , after first set, did a good job...i give it a thumbs up, as my first impression. By the way without looking it up, who is that maker anyway??
What's the story on this dagger? Some don't care for stories, but i do. Thanks for showing it. Congratulations are in order. I like to see a little more drag mark,and not so JRish, but then again, i also like a little more "cowbell" . ha-hah.Anyway.. Merry christmas to you.

[Billy G]

I agree, the newer pics don't seem to accentuate the crossgraining as much (perhaps the 1st pics accentuated it too much?) & it looks much better now. The rest of the piece looked quite correct & the little verdigris in just the right places helped too. Now it just looks like a cherry early RZM with excellent quality, you should definitely be happy with it.

[inimicus]

thank you all fellows for expertise and comments. there's actually no light leak between the blade shoulders and guard. and, does anyone care about caster marks inside the guards? I'll take a look-see if you want.

I don't know it's history other than that a roofing buddy told me about it.

regretfully, I'll probably need to estand this piece soon. what's fair? I was thinking somewhere betwixt $3 & $4K; say, $3400?

happy christmas & good hunting in '12.

[zozole]

Your dagger looks great! there is nothing wrong with the crossgrain,
I picked up a 121/34 from a guy that was rebuilding an old staircase in an old German house
It was tucked away since the war, a totally unmessed dagger, when taking pics of it I noticed the same type looking crossgrain,

I would like to see a better pic of the pin on your dagger
.
Congrats on a nice find

Emil