Steve1871 Posted 25 April , 2021 Author Share Posted 25 April , 2021 (edited) Hey Gray C Thanks, with specific units, regiments there, now feel like I am starting all over again on these units. I thought it was simple. Ersatz were only battalions, I just have no room to keep a library of books in the truck.I wonder if the average German soldier even kept up with all the changes to unit organization? Great post there!! As the old saying goes... It is wonderfully Frustrating!😊 Edited 25 April , 2021 by Steve1871 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyC Posted 25 April , 2021 Share Posted 25 April , 2021 I agree, the formation organisation of the German army was quite complex. What makes it even more confusing is that the "normal" Ersatz-Btl. were usually back home and meant to compensate losses of the active units whereas the (Reserve)-Ersatz-Regimenter were usually fighting at the frontlines themselves. GreyC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 26 April , 2021 Author Share Posted 26 April , 2021 I need to grab hold of something her GrayC, you are making my poor head spin😳😱🥺 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 26 April , 2021 Author Share Posted 26 April , 2021 Thanks again, I will be using these post of yours a lot, I think, looking over my photo’s for future post’s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 1 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 1 May , 2021 Bayonet # 32 5/01/21 Saturday 71/84mS. Saw Back Maker. Soemmerda no unit marking on Guard Recasso has the Crown over L. And acceptance stamps or markings to either side Yet the acceptance stamps are not on pommel which is standard. I believe this is a standard Bavarian Army piece, but a good chance it was held back in armory stores, training or something. The overall condition had me thinking it is too good a shape to have been in the Great War ( I wish otherwise). Still an outstanding piece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 1 May , 2021 Share Posted 1 May , 2021 (edited) Nice piece, this was certainly cleaned from rust. Interestingly the scabbard lower fitting is bavarian unit stamped to 9.Infantry Regiment. Frog when steel rivets is for WW2 period S84/98 probably, on back side could be a remains of maker. Scarce sawback bayonets. Edited 1 May , 2021 by AndyBsk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 1 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 1 May , 2021 Yes Andy, it was cleaned to a degree, some rust. The Ricasso on both sides has very tiny pitting, where light rust must have collected. The cross guard/ ring look to have survived that. The teeth show where the rust collected. often it is the case when bayonets were stored, armory or somewhere, any humidity or dampness in the air. Once it seeps in side a scabbard, no way to escape and rust or at least dark patina will start to form. I also agree it must have been polished many decades ago, I have never cleaned any of my bayonets. Still I believe it was in armory stores. Accepted by Bavarian Army. Still for the rarity, it is a nice piece for any collection . Simply enjoy it if you can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 2 May , 2021 Share Posted 2 May , 2021 (edited) On 01/05/2021 at 09:48, Steve1871 said: Bayonet # 32 ... The overall condition had me thinking it is too good a shape to have been in the Great War ( I wish otherwise). Still an outstanding piece It is indeed! I can't recall seeing unit marks on a scabbard chape before... Julian Edited 2 May , 2021 by trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 6 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 6 May , 2021 Bayonet #33 5/6/21 71/84mS. Saw Back Bavarian B.3.R.R. 3.188 (I do not know how to make script letters or smaller numbers, sorry) Think 3rd Bavarian Reserve Regiment, 3rd Conpany, Weapon 188 Maker Soemmerda Recasso, Crown over L. And 91, the common year. The brown in top of fuller is hard dried grease, not rust. You should be able to identify that. Never had time to clean it up any. Actually, I have never cleaned any. Bayonet, only have small amount of time when get home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 7 May , 2021 Share Posted 7 May , 2021 The bayonet is in very good condition, most real when loocking on fuller remains, and glossy wood of grips, it was painted with noncolor lack which changed in years to light golden tone, the unit should be Bavarian 3. Reserve Regiment, 3.company and weapon nr.188, normally was used the second R. for Rekruten depot, possible this was only designation of Regiment. I dont see any proofs on scabbard fittings? is probably not matching piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 May , 2021 Share Posted 8 May , 2021 On 07/05/2021 at 02:50, Steve1871 said: (I do not know how to make script letters or smaller numbers, sorry) You have to juggle with the 'font' system, but it is ok to do as is, except of course the first 'R', for which you need to italicise that letter. Another nice example Steve! I have yet to see a Soemmerada in the flesh, never mind own one - do you have them all????!!!! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 16 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 16 May , 2021 Bayonet # 34 71/84 mS Ring Removed Another Soemmerda Crown over a C ( I think) Crown over L 91 B.9.R..5.1 Baval 9th Infantry Regiment,5th Company, first weapon Original Saw Back, a ring removed, Leaving “Ear’s” from base of ring, in at least 2 or 3 books, several variations of ring removed are shown in photos. I may be wrong, but because of several variations, I believe it would be armorers in the field, using what they had in war time. I only have seen 2 for sale, got both, other will post next This bayonet is “ As Is”, ( saying in U.S.), not great, but not bad either, and rare. This one, blade is in pretty good shape, light patina, saw teeth, no gritty rust, inlarging pic, little darker patina, Pommel, crown over “C”, think, Guard has matching patina. The screw heads, we’re filed mostly flat, have no idea why, believe original.The grips have small knicks , dents, the left one is so light, think someone try clean, too much, long time ago, right just knicks, no cleaning. For what it’s worth, I have been collecting close to 30 years, on, off. Sure I have missed pieces over the years, but these 2 are the only ones I have come across, bought, also a lot cheaper than regular 71/84mS are. Hope you like, Post other one next time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 16 May , 2021 Share Posted 16 May , 2021 (edited) When period done so the piece was used as Sidearm not as Bayonet as no possible holding correctly on rifle because of no ring of barell and the bayonet nut is too short to fix it corectly for using complete bayonet with rifle in his purpose as stacking units in combat bayonet fight. Rivets were probably flatened. How long is the blade? As there is only 1 as weapon nr. is real it was woried by a NCO. Edited 16 May , 2021 by AndyBsk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 16 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 16 May , 2021 Andy, blade is original, not modified at all. I do not have a Gew88 to try on, should have tried to mount on a 71/84 when I was home. It should fit. Press stud/button still works, not modified.If a bayonet fit’s a 71/84, it should fit an 88, with or without a ring. Same mortise slot. Why would it not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 16 May , 2021 Share Posted 16 May , 2021 For combat by S1871,71/84 and on Gew88 all bayonets should have intact barell ring, as by upwards hit the enemy would be the bayonet hold not the position, this mentioned in 1889 already Mr. Paul Mauser, a short slot should have a barell ring fixation, since 4cm long Mauser rail didnt need barell ring, so Gew98 is wout bayonets with rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 17 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 17 May , 2021 I think saw removed was a war time thing on these 71/84mS. Yes I can see as side arm But also, rear area troops. You can not forgot about all those Ersatz Bayonets. I forgot I was trying on bayonets to rifles for group pics last February. Both of those 71/84mS. Ring removed still fit TIGHTLY to the gun. Even the 84/98 fit tightly to 71/84 rifles. The S71PFM and S71/84 also fit the Gew88. As you all know from period photos. Not front line troops, but rear area during the Ersatz time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 17 May , 2021 Share Posted 17 May , 2021 (edited) Even pictured S84/98 bayonet on old rifles S71/84 this is not correct, because is not destined for this rifle, secondly the bayonet would be movable on the stud, because there is long rail in pommel. To similar stud could be attached any usable Mauser rifle bayonet of period 1871-95 when remove the barell ring, anyway its not correct fixed for combat bayonet fight!! The removed barell rings on S71/84 bayonets means its a sidearm used not as a bayonet, that is written in many books ,Rudiger and as mentioned it was spoken by inventor Paul Mauser 120 years ago. Edited 17 May , 2021 by AndyBsk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 17 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 17 May , 2021 On know 84/98 not correct for official use, I mounted them on to show what they would look like mounted on rifles and was curious if they would fit AGAIN, I agree, 71/84 ring removed most likely would be as side arm, but in 1914, when rear area, ersatz units used all those OLD converted Ersatz bayonets, they could ALSO use them on rifles,since my bayonets were still tight, but that does not make sense, why cut the rings then re-mount them on rifle. Just say possible. Still nice pics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 17 May , 2021 Share Posted 17 May , 2021 As mentioned all Mauser rifle bayonets would fit, as Mauser produced a one modell of bayonet stud, which is replacable on majority of his rifles, differences are only barell ring inner diameter and height of barell ring position. Anyway nice collection of rifles presented there. When removed the barell ring, so the weapon was not to attach on rifle, that is the true story of similar changes. It was used as a sidearm only. Majority of them remained intact with barell ring, even not used on rifle, as in each units are soldier they were not equiped with rifle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 18 May , 2021 Share Posted 18 May , 2021 Andy's point is of course that with a muzzle-ring removed they might fit rifles, but not securely enough for stabbing, etc. Note that Prussian Sanitats-Uebungs-Kompagnie men were armed with a Pistol '08 and a S.71/84, but no rifle. Bavarian Sanitatsmannschaften and Signalhornisten also carried a S.71/84, but no firearm at all. Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 20 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 20 May , 2021 Thank’s Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 22 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 22 May , 2021 Bayonet #35 71/84mS Saw Back, Ring removed Soemmerda L. 91 My last 71/84 Saw Back and last Soemerda 😢 As others have said, and I agree, this was a Great War conversion for use as a side arm. My last bayonet and this one are the only ring removed. I actually found more regular 71/84mS ,both have different “Cut’s” for the ring removal. For good or bad,try to enjoy my collection if you can. The Spanish used the same scabbard as the 71/84, only difference was that the Spanish used an even thinner leather. It is common to find them so worn, they will “wilt”, flop down without a bayonet in it. This scabbard is unmarked, yet strong leather that you would expect, also seam and staples intact Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 22 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 22 May , 2021 Comparisons Saw Removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBsk Posted 22 May , 2021 Share Posted 22 May , 2021 The right grip has a scratched name on it, possible it was the name of owner as used or who captured it? hard to say, the scabbard could be a dress piece or spanish? ones when not inspector proofs on mouth and ball fittings, the mouth piece hole was for normal blade probably as there are not small recesses for teeth of saw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 28 May , 2021 Author Share Posted 28 May , 2021 Continuing the 71/84 family, the 84/98 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