Heer Army Dagger

[MILITARYMAN1000]

Hello, ive been offered this dagger by my boss at work and would like some opinions on it. Ive looked it over and it looks good. The only thing is the loose crossguard it has and it cant be tightened anymore. (sorry about the pictures my phone was dead and I had to use my bosses phone)

[MILITARYMAN1000]

re

-

[MILITARYMAN1000]

Re

--

[MILITARYMAN1000]

re

---

[MILITARYMAN1000]

Re

----

[Bulldog]

The pictures are poor but from what I can see I think the blade has been swapped out, WKC type 4 "tomahawk" crossguard and I think the other fittings are also WKC but with an Eickhorn blade, this could be the reason why the crossguard is loose if the fit is bad and the tang is not all the way through the guard. Im no army dagger expert and I do know these two companies did trade with each other though I think it was only scabbards. Lets see what the army guys think. Russ.

[Schlange]

From these photos looks like part dagger. Crossguard is WKC 3. type. Ferrule and pommel also looks like WKC product. Im not shure for scabbard.
Blade is Carl Eickhorn (1936 - 1939) product.


Schlange

http://www.mojalbum.com/schlange88/album

[dr01]

I agree with Bulldog. It's a type 4 WKC guard. For a long time collectors thought WKC produced only three types of crossguards but a few years ago a crossguard was found which we now call the type 2 guard. That' type is actually pretty rare so I can understand that Schlange is calling this a type 3 guard.

Concerning the dagger. It would say it's a parts dagger.

Regards
Danny

[Schlange]

These type of crossguard was first named 1.6.


Schlange

http://www.mojalbum.com/schlange88/album

[simply daggers]

Army Dagger

It has been covered above but to confirm you have a genuine Army (Heer) dagger made up with parts from 2 daggers (WKC and Eickhorn).
If you wish to keep the dagger as it is the fit could be improved by replacing the leather buffer pad under the cross guard so that the pommel can be tightened.
This cone be done by unscrewing the pommel, remove the grip and crossguard, replace the leather washer/buffer pad so that the edges of the blade meet the leather instead of the inside of the cross guard.

As stated above this was probably as a result of having a blade from one dagger put in the fittings of another.
That said this can also happen on daggers from one maker where the leather washer fails and the blade edges 'cut through' it so that the pommel cannot be tightened.

Hope all this makes sense.

Ian

[dr01]

These type of crossguard was first named 1.6.


Schlange

http://www.mojalbum.com/schlange88/album

Type 1.5 actually :-) But since the type doesn't look anything like a type 1 it's now called type 2 because it's certain it came after the first type.

[Schlange]

Yeh, wrong number.


Schlange

http://www.mojalbum.com/schlange88/album

[WW2-Collector]

Type 1.5 actually :-) But since the type doesn't look anything like a type 1 it's now called type 2 because it's certain it came after the first type.

Being the collector who discovered and introduced this guard I did name it the 1.5 not because it looked like a Type-1 but because I chronologically placed it between the type-1 and Type-2 hence the 1.5 it is now listed as a Type-2 on my army crossguard reference page http://tom-kendall.com/ww2-collector...reference.html as to avoid confusion. Another guard I discovered and introduced I initially named the Voos high lift and have reclassified it as an (Early Generic) EG Type-4

[fdodge]

I think everybody was on the same page regarding the crossguard but the dagger is a parts piece.

[WW2-Collector]

but the dagger is a parts piece.

Frank I agree with that !