Tr / crs41 marked bayonet (ser. 16,773)

[Slash]

I dont think that Paul Weyersberg was the only producer of bayonets marked with "Tr", i believe that the bayonets without the "crs" marking were made by another manufacturer.

All of the Tr series bayonets are made by Paul Weyersberg. Examination of the bayonet and scabbard construction traits are all consistent with Weyersberg manufacture regardless of a missing 41crs marking. This holds true for careful examination of bayonets that have been disassembled. The internal marking of small parts as well as the stampings encountered on the blade blanks are textbook Weyersberg not associated with a different producer. Again, the markings remain consistent if the bayonet is marked 41crs or not. The serial numbering is in a unique style and shows steady uninterrupted progression indicative of manufacture by a single firm. The numbering is also similar to 41crs marked pieces outside the Tr series. Lastly, the lack of a 41crs marking on bayonet or scabbard is not unique to the Tr series; it is also noted on Weyersberg made pieces in several other letter blocks during 1941 production.

 

[bert.f]

Hello Slash,
I might be wrong...
photos of disassembled bayonets produced by "PW" from 36-43, for comparison with the bayonet marked Tr,
visible differences in the quality of workmanship.
pozdrawiam . Bert

 

[AndyB]

The Tr is certainly not a untouched condition its rusted and cleaned.You couldnt compare it with the 42 or 43crs, unfortunally we dont see the serial of Tr, same as no proofs are visible.
From similar comparation couldbe not made any conclusions. I would preffer comparation only with 41 crs or crs 40.

 

[bert.f]

The number on the Tr bayonets is identical to the numbers on the PW bayonets marked 41 crs, but the worker stamps and traces of processing are completely different. It is possible that PW has outsourced part of the contract to a subcontractor?

 

[Slash]

The number on the Tr bayonets is identical to the numbers on the PW bayonets marked 41 crs, but the worker stamps and traces of processing are completely different. It is possible that PW has outsourced part of the contract to a subcontractor?

Thanks bert.f for the photographs. In answer to your question, I suppose anything is possible but I see no evidence for your assertion here. First of all it is very important to compare apples to apples. Not apples to lawn furniture ..... Weyersberg did use some of the E blanks in 1941 but not in the majority. The E blanks and later H blanks start showing up predominatley in 1942 production and after. H blanks are not encountered on Weyersberg bayonets in 1941. My point is that showing 1942 and '43 examples with different markings does not prove anything as far as production on 1941. The large thick square or diamond stamp is seen on earlier Weyersberg pieces to include 1941 production. The blank on your 16400Tr is too heavily pitted for me to make out any other identifiers. From what I can see however it is textbook Weyersberg. One also needs to compare and examine as many pieces as possible. Sample size is important and one example proves little (if anything). Stand by my previous comments .....

 

[AndyB]

This is 16400 Tr also not the earlier presented piece here. Someone filled on the cleaning rod area in tang, same as there is too much rust to see the assembly numbers which are typical for PW. Should be looked to locking nut, for assembly numbers as it dont looks like surface identical with pommel. unfortunally the tang out of flashguard was heavily cleaned from rust, so this is certainly not good piece for any comparation.

 

[bert.f]

Hello'
Thank you Slash for your opinion, do you have a photo of square stamp on bayonets by "PW" ?
pozdr. Bert

 

[AlexMG]

Hello Slash,
I might be wrong...
photos of disassembled bayonets produced by "PW" from 36-43, for comparison with the bayonet marked Tr,
visible differences in the quality of workmanship.
pozdrawiam . Bert

I carefully examined your photos and I clearly see part of the calligraphic letter E on the Tr photo, the same as on the bayonet from my post Tr 14287.

​

 

[bert.f]

Thanks AlexMG for the opinion and photo.