AndyBsk Posted 22 February , 2020 Share Posted 22 February , 2020 By missing grip and cracked left grip is on place question are the parts origin there, are numbered to tang? so any opinions should be made after answering that questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 22 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 22 February , 2020 Good point Andy. I have never taken apart any of my Waffenfabriks and so have never checked for tang and grip markings. I have only done this on one of my Imperial German ones, an un-dated IS 98, where all these parts were indeed numbered. Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakysk Posted 22 February , 2020 Share Posted 22 February , 2020 Julian and Andy thanks for replies. There are couple more stamps hidden under grip and flash guard. Number 3 on spine under flash guard and number 4 stamp (inside of pommel?). I don't see any stamps on the grip. Would any of these two mentioned numbers be on grip? Looking at the flash guard, it looks little odd the way that about half of it has dents on top, but grip and pommel do not show same kind of damage, so maybe it is replacement. On the other hand color of flash guard metal under the grip is light, oppose to darker one on exposed side, so I guess the grip must have been off for a while. Here are few more pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 22 February , 2020 Share Posted 22 February , 2020 Could be of same piece, as the flashguard was damaged by hits on spine of it, so it was damaged the tang too and left grip cracked, possible the right one was cracked too. Normally there are serial numbers on tang to locking nut or parts, the 3 on tang upper part and crossguard could be assembly number, on grips they are pencil marked numbers in chanel area or between screws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 22 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 22 February , 2020 With that grinding on the tang it could just be a transitional. Made in 1915 as a S.98/05 aA with 'high ears' with the Schutzbleche added in September 1915, requiring the tang and the ears to be ground down - but I don't think so, as usually with transitionals the grips are modified by shaving down the upper surface to fit around the Schutzbleche. An interesting piece! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakysk Posted 23 February , 2020 Share Posted 23 February , 2020 9 hours ago, AndyBsk said: Could be of same piece, as the flashguard was damaged by hits on spine of it, so it was damaged the tang too and left grip cracked, possible the right one was cracked too. That would make sense, as there is no other visible damage on the bayonet. 8 hours ago, trajan said: With that grinding on the tang it could just be a transitional. Made in 1915 as a S.98/05 aA with 'high ears' with the Schutzbleche added in September 1915, requiring the tang and the ears to be ground down - but I don't think so, as usually with transitionals the grips are modified by shaving down the upper surface to fit around the Schutzbleche. An interesting piece! Trajan This is my first 98/05 bayonet, so without any knowledge I'll just try to back up your theory (which I think make sense) with more pictures. Out of curiosity I also tried to put on grip without the flash guard and it sits nice flush with the metal (pommel)........... Thanks guys for helpful information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 23 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 23 February , 2020 1 hour ago, rakysk said: ... Out of curiosity I also tried to put on grip without the flash guard and it sits nice flush with the metal (pommel)........... Pretty certainly a transitional then - made and fitted without a Schutzbleche. BUT, in your opinion, do the 'ears' on either side of the muzzle rest show signs of being ground down? I.e., was this an alte Arte that was modified to become a neue Arte What do you think Andy? Also, can you let me know the weight with everything put back together? And the width of the blade at the widest point? All the 1915 ones I have weighed and measured are between 53.2 to 54.2 gr., with the broadest part of the blade 34.5 cm, compared to the specified weight of 51.5 gr. and width of 34.5. The 1916-1918 ones are significantly heavier and narrower. Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 23 February , 2020 Share Posted 23 February , 2020 When Mauser got the contract later 1915 is possible that already made the newer version, even by subcontractor. I personally dont have a stamped Mauser S98/05, so i couldnt compare it . The measure and weight test could help. In Voronov or Carter reprint there is mentioned only nA S98/05 bayonets, earlier as 1915 not . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 23 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 23 February , 2020 1 hour ago, AndyBsk said: When Mauser got the contract later 1915 is possible that already made the newer version, even by subcontractor. I personally dont have a stamped Mauser S98/05, so i couldnt compare it . The measure and weight test could help. In Voronov or Carter reprint there is mentioned only nA S98/05 bayonets, earlier as 1915 not . Hi Andy, The Mauser records indicate they rented space from Unionwerk Mea G.m.b.H. Elektrotechnishe Fabrik Eisenwerk at Feuerbach, for 5 years from 1st July 1915 to 1st July 1920 to make these bayonets, intending to produce between 1 ½ and two million “Seitengewehr und blanken Waffen” (bayonets and edged weapons). I do know of one Waffenfabrik-made transitional S.98/05 a.A., a ‘high-eared’ version with a Schutzbleche, and so I am wondering if this is/was a second. If so, the original production of this one was in early July 1915.... I guess Waffenfabrik, like other S.98/05 factories, was a little confused about what to do with all these changes being ordered, especially as they had only started making the S.98/05 at the start of July 1915! Julian PS: I can pass on privately my sources and details if needed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 23 February , 2020 Share Posted 23 February , 2020 In july of 1915 i would believe the production of ASG were in high point so already a new S98/05nA started, but i dont have archive materials when exactly started the change to S98/05nA, and how long was the transition period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakysk Posted 23 February , 2020 Share Posted 23 February , 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, trajan said: Also, can you let me know the weight with everything put back together? And the width of the blade at the widest point? All the 1915 ones I have weighed and measured are between 53.2 to 54.2 gr., with the broadest part of the blade 34.5 cm, compared to the specified weight of 51.5 gr. and width of 34.5. The 1916-1918 ones are significantly heavier and narrower. Weight of bayonet (with one grip) 568 grams. Weight of grip only (with 2 screws) 12 grams. Blade width at widest point 34.16 mm So it is heavier and narrower than your 1915 ones. Edited 23 February , 2020 by rakysk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 24 February , 2020 10 hours ago, AndyBsk said: ... archive materials when exactly started the change to S98/05nA, and how long was the transition period. What I have seen is: 13th July 1915, Schutzblechen to be fitted to all S.98/05 then under manufacture; 3rd September, Schutzblechen to be retrofited to all S.98/05 and S.98 in use by soldiers armed then armed with the Kar.98 AV. That 3rd September date seems also to be when the 'high ears' began to be removed from bayonets that had them, and I assume that the making of S.98/05 bayonets with low ears began in July, when they first started to be made with the Schutzbleche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 24 February , 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, rakysk said: Weight of bayonet (with one grip) 568 grams. Weight of grip only (with 2 screws) 12 grams. Blade width at widest point 34.16 mm So it is heavier and narrower than your 1915 ones. Many, many thanks! That weight - taking the missing grip into account - places it closer to what was being produced in 1917, as does the width. Problem, is, I have such a limited number of 1915 examples to work from, lots of 1917 ones... Edited 24 February , 2020 by trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 24 February , 2020 Share Posted 24 February , 2020 Hey Julian, you keep mentioning ASG ? Who or what was that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 25 February , 2020 5 hours ago, Steve1871 said: Hey Julian, you keep mentioning ASG ? Who or what was that? Not me - it was Andy! I assume he means Ersatz - but he'll answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 25 February , 2020 Share Posted 25 February , 2020 (edited) Aushilfe SeitenGewehre are correct or period name used by germans in WW1 for all ersatz or emergency/replacement bayonets. Carter use the designation of Ersatz bayonet, which is in doubble language designation - ersatz as origin german terminus and bayonets as english name. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ersatz Edited 25 February , 2020 by AndyBsk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 February , 2020 Author Share Posted 25 February , 2020 Thanks Andy, I just couldn't remember what the 'A' was for! Some German documents do use other terms, but that one will do as the more common. By the way, Carter got the term from Charles Dangre, the first person to publish and attempt to classify them in 1928-1931, under the name "Bayonettes 'ersatz' allemandes" - German Ersatz bayonets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2020 Share Posted 30 April , 2020 My blade too has an ‘N ‘ stamped o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2020 Share Posted 30 April , 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 May , 2020 Author Share Posted 1 May , 2020 On 30/04/2020 at 03:33, Paul AB said: Hi Paul, and welcome to the GWForum. Thanks for showing. These crossguard marks are found on several bayonets. It is assume that they are somewhow connected to the manufacturing / quality control process. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 9 May , 2020 Share Posted 9 May , 2020 The flash guard was shone here on and off the bayonet with the grips off. I had thought the flash guard was brazened on , so was permanent?? What is to stop fakers from taking off to try and make them scarcer to sell. A little confused here. Trajan, You know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 9 May , 2020 Share Posted 9 May , 2020 Hi Steve1871, Although your question is addressed to Trajan I am interested in the S98/05 Transitional bayonets and I hope he won't mind me attempting to answer it. The first issue is whether it would be worthwhile someone attempting to alter a standard 98/05 n/A to a 98/05 n/A Transitional. My experience of the collector market is that there is not a huge interest in the Transitional models and they seem to sell for much the same price as standard models so financially it would, perhaps, hardly be worth the effort. The next issue would be that the faker would need a 1915 dated S98/05 n/A. Then there is the risk that damage may be caused in removing the grips. Perhaps a minor point but Carter at Vol. I p.6 cautions against doing it as the grips are easily damaged and marks may be left on the nuts securing the bolts arousing suspicion. Next, when the grips are re-fitted, there will be gaps between the wood and tang where the flashguard was fitted and a collector who is prepared to pay extra for a Transitional model will, almost certainly, notice. Finally, the metal along the top of the tang which was covered by the flashguard will probably not match the rest. Anyway, thanks for your interesting question and perhaps Trajan will come along and add to the answer. Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 9 May , 2020 Share Posted 9 May , 2020 Here's mine Julian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 9 May , 2020 Share Posted 9 May , 2020 Thank you very much Michael. That was great answer. Guess I did not think it through. Like many collectors, I never took grips off to study. Think fear of damage screws and not knowing if grips will fit back flush or be permanently loose. The bayonet above W-15 shown apart with flash guard on and off is what has me puzzled. Thought they were permanently brazen on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 25 May , 2020 Author Share Posted 25 May , 2020 Hi one and all, it has been very busy here with the end of teaching approaching, final essays coming in, plus two boys to supervise as they do their own work! Henc the very late reply... On 09/05/2020 at 12:04, Michael Haselgrove said: Hi Steve1871, Although your question is addressed to Trajan I am interested in the S98/05 Transitional bayonets and I hope he won't mind me attempting to answer it. The first issue is whether it would be worthwhile someone attempting to alter a standard 98/05 n/A to a 98/05 n/A Transitional. My experience of the collector market is that there is not a huge interest in the Transitional models and they seem to sell for much the same price as standard models so financially it would, perhaps, hardly be worth the effort. The next issue would be that the faker would need a 1915 dated S98/05 n/A. Then there is the risk that damage may be caused in removing the grips. Perhaps a minor point but Carter at Vol. I p.6 cautions against doing it as the grips are easily damaged and marks may be left on the nuts securing the bolts arousing suspicion. Next, when the grips are re-fitted, there will be gaps between the wood and tang where the flashguard was fitted and a collector who is prepared to pay extra for a Transitional model will, almost certainly, notice. Finally, the metal along the top of the tang which was covered by the flashguard will probably not match the rest. Anyway, thanks for your interesting question and perhaps Trajan will come along and add to the answer. Michael. Michael, you are spot-on there! And your comment on the relative value of transitionals versus a.Arte and n.Arte strikes a chord - they are undervalued, given their scarcity, rather like the equally undervalued sawback-removed ones... On 09/05/2020 at 15:08, Gunner Bailey said: Here's mine Julian. A nice one with a very nice Ersatz scabbard as well! On 09/05/2020 at 15:29, Steve1871 said: Thank you very much Michael. That was great answer. Guess I did not think it through. Like many collectors, I never took grips off to study. Think fear of damage screws and not knowing if grips will fit back flush or be permanently loose. The bayonet above W-15 shown apart with flash guard on and off is what has me puzzled. Thought they were permanently brazen on? Steve, in my (unfortunate) experience it is indeed easy to damage the grooves on the top of those screws... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now