I think '38-'39 production ith the horizontal mark? and whose generic fittings, please? all comments welcoime and appreciated.
-
-
5-8 -
9-12Comment
-
13-16Comment
-
17-20Comment
-
21-24Comment
-
25-28Comment
-
lastComment
-
It’s a nice dagger but I don’t like the fact that there is an Eickhorn pommel on this dagger. It doesn’t seem to fit that well eighter.
DannyComment
-
thanks danny! but then we know many of these, hand-finished and fitted tho they were, were cobbled together from different maker's parts bins.
n this one's case the pommel has a tiny gap with the grip that doesn't show unless you look close (as with nacro fotos), and in wear would be invisible.
and is an Eick pommel really a reg flag on an early tiger?
anyone else?Comment
-
IMO these is mid - later Tiger Solingen Heer dagger.
Scabbard band are also incorrect generic type A.
Schlange
https://mojalbum.com/schlange88
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=916564Comment
-
I don't see much wrong with this piece, just because its not textbook doesn't make it wrong.
GaryComment
-
thanks for the input, fellows. wittmann's book clarifies the point about mixing different makers' parts to finish daggers, and notes sometimes companies needing parts bought surpluses from the competition. I forgot to mention the blade buffer is AWOL. if any of you guys have more, please chime in!Comment
-
Im no expert on these but with the size of the scabbard rings and the reverse centre screw the scabbard looks like an Alcoso product, perhaps the army guys will know for sure. With an Eickhorn pommel, generic A crossguard (correct for Tiger) and another companies scabbard it is too much of a mix for one i would be happy with.
Russ.Last edited by Bulldog; 08-24-2018, 07:39 AM.Comment
-
okay thanks! I think I'll just pull it apart and sell the parts- probably worth more that way than as a slapped together 'frankenstein monster,' eh? ~
Comment
Comment