Mint blade, mint crossguard. Leather wather into the crossguard is present.No maker mark. Scabbard without any crack.One unturned screw on the scabbard.

550 euros + post cost.

Francisque88@aol.com

2

3

4

5

6

7

I think this dagger should be discussed a reproduction IMO.

Can you please explain your mind?
Attached other photos...

...

..

And the "Certificat of Authenticity" of the seller. I'd buy this dagger in 1996.

I see nothing unusual about this dagger and have seen these offered on many websites as very late war lufts. I know I had a few of these two years ago at the MAX and sold both to a prominent dealer-collector.

I never have liked these scabbard bands or this pommel with the hash marks in-between the circles lets here some more opinions.

I know this dagger is late war but 100% original. I try to do the best photos I can for have any doubt about the dagger. All other comment are welcome.

Last price 500 euros + post cost.

WW2 collector-Would you classify this crossguard eagle as a goonie bird type like the one akdawg posted?? It looks like the same crossguard as my arthur schuttlehoffer,and it is by no means a goonie anything,,,could you please reference the postings of goonie bird eagle you refer too,,I did a search but came up with nothing,,I would like to read them, thanks

Niblet If you read the other post Fitzer is the one who noted Goonie Bird maybe he can point you to the thread. I have not said one thing about the crossguard on this dagger? Your opinion of the pommel & scabbard bands on this dagger?

I apologize,,no disrespect intended to anyone,,
what I dont understand about this dagger is, yes, the scabbard and pommel i would have to look at more closely,,but the rest of the piece seems fine,,,so why would those two items be suspect if the rest looks ok,,maybe a parts dagger?? just my 2 cents here,,certainly not gospel

I could be wrong myself -I personally have never accepted those bands and pommel to be original-The engraving on the top of this guard looks suspect to me as well-I really didn’t want to say anything about the engraving because frankly I am not 100% about that the crossguard may be OK maybe -not. But you add it all up and well...

IMO-From what I can see--100% original. A bit different but there are MANY differences in parts you don't see every day.

Nothing wrong with this late war 2nd Luft Dagger IMO.
I have seen ones like it before.
Best wishes,
Ian

www.simplydaggers.co.uk

Is this a for sale forum or what?
If you feel it is not correct don't buy it. If you have questions about it not being original contact the moderator and he will have it removed if he deems it not original.
Just my two cents.

Waterlo this is a copy of the add in the for sale forum it posts in both at the same time. I had some concerns about the daggers authenticity but the main forum consensus is otherwise.

Some members are having trouble posting on this thread I believe it is because it is a copy from the for sale section I have asked Dave to fix this so all the members can comment on this topic.

Posted for Mr Nolan...
Ps, as I do not have permission to post on the other 2nd Luft topic by Matarese I will say here that I would never own a Luft with those scabbard bands, that is not to say that the whole dag is bad but looking at the gaps around where the bands lie on the scabbard body suggests they may be replacements. This type of band is exactly the same pattern as seen on the chinese repro's.

Nolan