Guys, I picked this up recently. It is marked RFV on the crossguard, but with a font that differs from what I see in text books and posted here.

It also has a 35-41 seated squirrel TM, which seems a little late for these items... most of the ones that I have seen are pre-1935, right?

What do you think about this?

John

Pic 2

Pic 3

Last pic:

John

Hi John,

I am not sure about it. I would not want it in my collection at all. From what I recall these were stamped. This looks like it was engraved and not very well for that matter. You are also right that these were earlier pieces, not like this one.

JAN

John,

It does not appear to be a proper RFV die stamp to me either I am afraid. It is certainly not one of the polished steel contract pieces.

I agree that this one's stamping was made with a different die set than the ones more commonly seen but I've seen this same font on other alleged Customs pieces before. Steven C. has at least one & I hope he chimes in here.

Clearly this piece, by virtue of the maker mark, would have been made in 1935 or after. Isn't it possible then that were this piece produced in a 2nd run for the RFV that a different stamp have been used? The majority of these pieces that we've seen were likely produced in the Weimar period.

Here's an early maker mark Alex Coppel with the same font, courtesy of Ron Reide's site.

Here's another early mark Alcoso which was posted by Kirby on WAF. This one also had a similarly marked "RFV" frog.

It does not look at all like an etched stamp.

Here are some closer shots of the initials.

John

The R

The F

The V

J,

Definitely looks stamped to me Did you get one of those Terry Kissinger blade microscopes?

Heres mine.
Check this link.
http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/...940042943#4940042943

John, it would not surprize me to find that the stamping is not done with a die made form, but 'loose' pieces/punches that were used individually to make up the letters..look at the f and the v and you will see the arms have been stamped by the same tool..

At first blush, the fonts on the ones that Billy posted look a little like the font on the Eick piece that I posted.

But, as Doug pointed out, it looks like the Eick piece was stamped differently... the V looks like it was done as two stampings, not one.

The question is whether the late TM on this piece and the fact that the stampings are different depending on the time and the maker, as Terry's thread link discusses, are legit RFV markings or are they spurious?

Let me tell you that the cost of this bayo was not ridiculously higher than the cost of a regular KS98, but it was higher. So, if a fake, it sure isn't a lucrative fake.

And, yes, Billy, I have an electronic microscope that I use occasionally to go in really close. It is amazing how an etched piece has these wrinkly edges whereas a stamped piece does not.. so obvious under the mic.

John

John.

I am not liking the looks of this one.in IMO the founts are not what you would see on a Eick.

from what i have seen there are two types of founts on these. the Weyersberg and Alcoso have the block lettering. and the Horster and Eickorn have the more curved style type.

but they all will have the 10 1/4 inch blade, and bigger type heavyer hilts. and 99% of the time a wheep hole in the grip plates i hope this helps i have a few pics.

steve

I also forgot to ad, they do not have periods between the lettering. they are more of a square type die.

steve

3

4

left to right. Weyersberg, Alcoso, Horster and Horster. still missing the Eick.

I have NEVER seen an RFV without the vent hole in the grip.
JMO,
Ron Weinand

Ron I did not want to get into this shade of gray today but. here is an early Alcoso, duel TM name on one side scales on the other. 10 1/4 inch blade T-slot. I know it is stamped upside down. but i have seen one other just like it.

steve

For what it is worth, my RFV marked 98K (S84/98) combat bayonet is dated 1936. I'm assuming as a part of Germany becoming more militarized. As for the stamping on the thread starter bayonet, I think he got his "specialized tooling letter set" from the same place as the guy who made this "SS" bayonet. The Sharpened Screwdriver Blade Company. Or it could have been a common chisel with the blade ground at an angle. Who knows? FP

Ron,Could you please tell me what the vent slot was used for? Thanks...Sepp

GDC 0292 Gold

Sepp,

The so called "weeping holes" were to allow moisture within the hilt to escape without rusting the bayonet from within. It was a feature common on Weimar era bayonets, I believe Imperial era as well.

Steve,

Thanks for posting your pieces & your thoughts on these pieces.

Thanks Steve,
I have many KS98 Bayonets,I just looked at around 50 or so pictures of some of them and the only one I have with this "Weeping Hole" is my RFV.
I also have Many Bayonets for the K98, and the pictures I just looked at of them I only have two that don't have this slot.

Thanks again,

Sepp

98K bayonet flashguards have a corresponding slot to those in the grip plates. The hole(s) had another very important and practical purpose besides letting moisture out.

That was to help in removing dirt/mud etc. from the cleaning rod channel without having to take the bayonet’s handles off. If dirt or other foreign matter got compacted in the channel it prevented mounting the bayonet. And they did not want the soldiers to discard the cleaning rods.

With especially the experiences of trench warfare in WW I, you can see why it was adopted as a standard feature for German military issue Mauser type bayonets. FP

I had to run a few service calls tonight. but got a chance to add a better pic of the Alcoco with out the drain holes.

steve

heres mine