WKC Commercial bayonet
- Thread starter runner
- Start date
In my experience, the majority of WKC behoerden examples are devoid of any markings other than that of the manufacturer. The first photo is a later example with the number "7724" on the crossguard only (as it would be unusual in this instance for the scabbard to be numbered). Whether this is a contract or issuance serial number is unknown, but I would lean towards the latter. While looking for the WKC piece mentioned on page 2, submission #11, picked up another example I forgot to include in this post (photos 2/3). It has serial # 1037 stamped both on the bayonet's ricasso and scabbard and may be the only one I ever had my hands, on where both components were numbered. Note slight reddish cast to the bayonet's finish...
Attachments
Last edited:
63cagedfalcon
Member
Mine with no scabbard
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
runner
Senior Member
Is there known information as to what groups specifically these bayonets were intended for?
thanks.
Since so few WKC behoerden bear any additional markings, identifying the end users is difficult. However, one small lot (c.a. 1936) was contracted for by the SS. All examples have the early serifs on the letters and wooden grips. They made their way into the U.S. in the 1980s along with thousands of S84/98, Polish Mauser, Vz24, and others imported from the Balkans. These bayonets were almost uniformly in poor condition, and slathered in viscous grease. I saw the first example at the Great Western show in California, which came in a shipment of several hundred bayonets a collector/dealer had purchased from a distributor. The second turned up a few years later (found in a "bucket 'O bayonets") at a Florida gun show, for $20.00. I have the rubbing taken from the totenkopf found on the cross guard of that one. The example pictured is in Europe, so likely came from there and is the third (and best) one I know of. It is typical of nearly all the bayonets I saw, and IMHO a totally legitimate example based on the one I physically examined.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=728279
Now, there has been conjecture (with some strong evidence to support the possibility) WKC had a satellite factory at the Dachau KZL. Swords and other edged weapons for the SS were also made at this location. If one compares the later military contract bayonets "cvl" with their WKC behoerden counterparts, it is readily evident they were not made on the same production line. The machine markings, finish, grips, etc. are not the same at all. Had these been made in the same factory, on the same tooling, they ought to share similar characteristics.
One other bit of corroborating evidence is from personal experience. At a O.G.C.A. show in the mid 1980s, I acquired five nearly new, late WKC behoerden, along with 4 very late, new but of "ratty" construction frogs, from one seller. He had these and a number of other items, on his table. When I inquired how he came to have the five similar bayonets and four frogs, he stated those items (and several others pointed out to me) came from the estate of a U.S. Army doctor whom had repatriated them from the Dachau KZL, during a three week stay in the camp to help alleviate the suffering of the remaining inmates. All the items were taken from storage areas within the confines of the camp. Based on the earlier SS accepted bayonets, and the Dachau KZL association, there appears to be some connection between WKC & the SS (not unlike the relationship between Steyrwerke and the SS). I once believed WKC behoerden may have gone to the Police as well. They did make stag-handle Police bayonets during the Wiemar era. However, I have yet to see a Police accepted WKC behoerden S84/98, but cannot say with certainty they do not exist. BTW, I still have one bayonet & one frog from the lot I purchased back in the day...
Last edited:
- There are also later period (1943- '44) WKC Behoerden pieces with the serif WKC trademark and red phenolic grip plates. One is pictured in Kriegsmodell and I have examples in my collection.
- Personally, I do not see this. The late war WKC Behoerden pieces that I have examined in detail are virtually identical in construction, machining, tool marks, and finishing to their 43 or 44cvl counterparts. This includes the scabbards as well as the bayonets. One exception is that the late Behoerden are fitted with red phenolic grip scales while the cvl coded military contract pieces have wood scales. Have not been able to examine an example of the rare late WKC Behoerden with riveted phenolic grips to make any assessments.
- Would you be willing to post photos of your remaining bayonet and frog? Thanks!
This is interesting. I have compared a number of later cvl & WKC commercials over the years. The nuances are somewhat subtle between the two (with the choice of grip panels being the most apparent). Regarding finish, some of the later WKCs tend towards the reddish, which is something I cannot ever recall seeing on a cvl. The WKC marking w/serifs may be due to an older stamping die being reutilized or a new one recovered from storage. Will also go through my volumes of Johnson's Collecting the Edged Weapons of the Third Reich and find that article about the WKC satellite facility as well.
13:30: OK, bayonet pictured in this & frog on post #13. A cursory review of the Johnson series indexes did not prove helpful, so will have ferret out the article when time permits. Note reddish cast to the bayonet finish, and machining marks on both bayonet & scabbard in particular. All five examples looked the same with one exception. Due to storage since they were acquired, the other four had a number of small spots on the scabbards...some better than others. Looked almost like something had been sprayed (like cat urine), leaving a scattering of flecks here & there.
Attachments
Last edited:
I agree completely. Regarding submission #11, attached are the promised photos of the late, "ratty" frog I spoke of. I bought three (out of four) because one had a dry-rotted cross strap ready to fall off. Note the haphazard stitching and thin leather body. The contract number(s) on the reverse may be hard to distinguish from the photo. However, it reads: "Nr. 0/0485/0002". But, there is a weak, secondary number which begins just above the second zero and goes upward at a very slight angle "/0009". Nothing is over-stamped, so maybe the second number was a over-write or correction for "0485".
Attachments
Last edited:
AndyB
Senior Member
Looks like never used frog, possible the last series of digits are 0002,Slash is the expert about frogs.b.r.Andy
Nice pieces presented here 1037 is a well matched and the serif font WKC is too late 43/44 with similar mashining spures like the other WKC Behoerden. I have 2 with worser not depot condition like here, the obverse ricasso looks like a something was there removed.
Nice pieces presented here 1037 is a well matched and the serif font WKC is too late 43/44 with similar mashining spures like the other WKC Behoerden. I have 2 with worser not depot condition like here, the obverse ricasso looks like a something was there removed.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting the pics. I read the frog marking as -Nr. 0/0485/0002. I have more than one frog with this marking and they are all of similar construction. Those in my collection are marked RB-Nr. 0/0485/0002. I suspect that the RB portion of the marking on pwcosol's example is missing due to the uncentered stamp.
Looks like never used frog, possible the last series of digits are 0002,Slash is the expert about frogs.b.r.Andy
Thanks guys for catching my typo. Yes, the last number is a "2" (verified from my written inventory record). Also concur that the "RB" prefix to the contract number might have been cut short when it was stamped.
Hard to tell about the ricasso. It doesn't look dished out like often seen on the Eickhorn late "blanko" behoerden examples. Also, glare & reflection when taking the photos are almost always a problem, and often the result is it makes the image appear different from what it actually looks like...
I was referencing a group of behoerden pattern bayonets produced in the 1943-44 timeframe. Eickhorn (cof) and Horster (asw) are associated with their production (there may also be some by another manufacturer). The Eickhorn "blanko" has wooden grips, and a dull, matte blue to almost gray dusky finish to bayonet & scabbard. They are unmarked, but often on the ricasso one will see a slightly dished out area where the "cof" code was removed. This specific variant was proven to have been made by Eickhorn because a few examples have been found with the code only partially removed. The Horster bayonets have reddish-orange phenolic resin grips and a dull, matte-blue finish to the scabbard. No examples of a manufacturer marking have turned up on this variant. However, sometimes they are found with a WaA519 acceptance stamped just forward of the T/O slot (often hidden by the rear end of the flashguard), which is unique to later Horster production. In addition, the machine markings & finish also are comparable to attributed Horster bayonets produced during that time.
Thanks. I have one like the one you posted in post 11 except mine has no markings that I've found. It looks to be in the same condition as yours. When I purchased it, it was in a canvas frog that's in really good shape but not mint. No idea if they were picked up together or later put together. I'll take some photos and start another thread unless it would be beneficial to this thread?
