What is your feeling about that dagger, please.

I cannot see clearly at the pics, if the scrabbard is newly painted????

2

3

4

Piece of s...t. Wrong etching and wrong mm.

Gottlieb... please be more specific about what you think is wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Gottlieb:
Piece of s...t. Wrong etching and wrong mm.

Seems a very angry opinion

The grip eagle appears wrong to me with the eagle set to high, though it could be the the angle of the picture. Also the closed circle RZM daggers have always been somewhat under suspicion. From my knowledge only one version of the closed circle RZM is accepted as period made and even that one is disputed. I forgot which one that is though. Further more most RZM SS/SA used plated cross guards not nickle silver, though again a few early RZM pieces had the nickle silver guards. I would love better pictures to make a definitive answer on this dagger, these pictures stink.

@ Adam

TM is correct with closed circle.
the 34 dated is also legit on 120 and 121 one's
This type were equip.with nickelsilver X guards

Gerd

RZM 121/34 must have MM in closed circle, the 120/34 too. And both have the solid nickel fittings.

I have no other pics, believe, that the position of the eagle is due to the angel.

For me it looks OK, I never saw a copy of the 121/24 in this quality.

Gottlieb,

Read the Code of Conduct and don't do it again please. Also note the if you don't like something you should say why.

Dave Admin

While I vehemently disagree with the complete takeover of PC politics on this site which has cut participation by what seem like 75%. I agree that the proper etiquette when saying something is bad is to at least explain why. That seems a legitimate rule.

Secondly I agree that there are good points to this dagger it just doesn't feel right visually to me. But like I said may be the pictures or I could just be stupid. To be honest I think all RZM's are garbage. Poor construction, fit, etc.. .. Maybe that's what I don't like about it.

Adam... I disagree that "all RZM's are garbage". One of the nicest SS daggers I have owned was a 121/34. Solid nickel fittings on the dagger and scabbard. Many have blued scabbards. It was the only SS dagger that I believed had a real ebony grip. The dagger shown above, in my opinion, is a good and original example of a 121/34. It has the classic toad body grip shape, and the chipped areas look like it may also be ebony. Contrary to what Gottlieb has stated, the etch and RZM code are consistant with known originals.

The etch.

RZM code.

Though the SS number 71 646 is not in the SS-Dienstalterslistes, it is identifiable to a SS-Rottenführer.

From table BW02 at The Max...

Ross Kelbaugh
www.ssdaggers.com
www.HistoricGraphics.com

Hey Adam, I agree with Skyline, that dagger is "right as rain". As far as RZM's go, perhaps you could show us all your early, maker-marked S/S daggers that have perfect construction, fit etc. Leipzig

First my post wasn't directed against anyone who collects RZM's or their right to do so. I personal don't like RZM M-33 daggers i.e. SS/SA's. Yes you can find early RZM daggers with the quality fittings and fit. And I should not have made a blanketing statement that they are all are garbage, and I apologize if I offended anyone's collecting taste, but I didn't think I'd have to defend my opinion. I'm actually surprised I got any response to be honest. There is hardly any activity on this forum anymore. I guess I lit a fire. Nevertheless, Roger you are correct that not even early ones are perfect. I only have one SS(early Gottlieb) now though I've handled many in the 15 years I've been collecting and I have certainly ascertained the valid point that for the most part early SS/SA's are of far superior quality. Early made dagger are and always will be synonymous with better quality. Though there is always exceptions to any rule. As far as this particular dagger it wasn't listing in my archive of good daggers and with the poor picture's I wasn't about to say it was good. Maybe saying I didn't like it was rash, but I hardly feel sorry for commenting on it. As previously noted responses are hard to come by nowadays. I also didn't say it was bad definitively I ask for better pictures before I would decide personally. Maybe I'll be a bit more reserved with my comments from now on. Because you good gentlemen certainly know your stuff on the dark side. Which honestly has never been my primary area of collecting $$$.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Hohaus:
Gottlieb,

Read the Code of Conduct and don't do it again please. Also note the if you don't like something you should say why.

Dave Admin

SORRY - WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN !!!!!!!!!

I love blanket statements I think they do more to kill this hobby.If I don't think something is right I will look it up before writing and if I don't have the right info I'll wait for it.I also have a 1196/38 RZM that looking at my Boker and this one All NS except for the bottom scabbard fitting.

Is that copper rune-button seen on early daggers like these? I have not seen them on daggers pre- ca 1936/7 before.

Cheers,

Come on Gentelmen, I find myself very sorry for my statment. My fault sorry again. All of us makes mistakes in judging items. Maybe I'm wrong and I should explain my thoughts when I wrote my "short sentence". I have only 120/34 and ething is a little different from what I can see above. Even T.Wittman's reference shows different etching for 121/34. Looks like never too late to learn. Sorry again and forgive young collector

Its unforgivable to betray the darksider's with such a short and unruly statements.

But only great people can admit to the error

I just love to make long bloviated statements. But it always comes back to haunt me and then I gotta admit my errant ways. So all the mistakes I admit too I must be a great man.

Welcome to the club

Hi Everyone,these 2 threads are sort of related,plus it will make good reading "Gottlieb"
nats

http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/...473/m/9850073524/p/1

where is this forum going/headed....???? I won't say much because I do not want to offend anyone's sensitivities and I do not need anymore unsolicited emails but this dagger is as right as rain, the etch, and the eagle and everything else... I have collected SS daggers since 1982 and I remain dumbfounded by the current clique of collector and self professed "experts" who bash most of what has always been considered as acceptable and period and correct...I mean no offence guys but c'mon already...cheers to all, Ryan

I see no problems with that dagger. The copper runic pin is maybe not typical to this model, but still original and IMHO acceptable.

What drives people away from this forum/hobby are the elitist and know it all's that cannot accept when someone makes an error in evaluation or if their opinions differ on pieces, etc.. You all outta know that there will always be differences of opinion on certain pieces and a forum it a place for differing opinions. But regardless of what is said. There has and always will be a cloud of doubt hanging over these closed circled RZM's. It's just as time goes on more and more people have accepted them as "right as rain". I've seen dozens of SS daggers come out of the woodwork yet never a closed circle RZM. Not saying they don't but I don't like them. I will say the scabbard, fittings, etch, all look okay. I just personally don't have a place for closed circle RZM daggers in my collection. If you own one sorry my opinion should mean crap to you anyway. I won't budge on my view of them, maybe its unfortunate that I'll miss out on some very nice RZM daggers? Which by the way almost nobody liked up until 5-6 years ago when prices made the early ones unaffordable to most. Prices, egos and elitism will destroy this hobby more than any mere opinion ever will.