Various markings on s84/98 bayonets

[HansHans]

Hi. Does anyone know why the elements of some bayonets like the one in the picture are not numbered the same?

 

[pwcosol]

With over a dozen manufacturers of the S84/98 T3 and changes during it's production life (1934-1945), the numbering of bayonet components typically followed two patterns. Earlier military contract bayonets often had components numbered to a internal serial number on the tang. Serial numbers on the exterior of both bayonet and scabbard were applied to track the number produced for each year. However, some manufacturers either began numbering the bayonet components to the external serial number or transitioned to this. Eventually most of the components were not numbered at all, with exception of bayonet and scabbard. Behoerden production (those destined for users like the Reich Post, Police, or for export) typically were assembled using the internal serial number. From what I see on your bayonet, the catch bar is numbered to the internal number but flashguard to the external one. This is not uncommon. In all likelihood, the catch bar button would also have matched the internal number as well. I suspect the catch bar & button had tolerances which were mated to each bayonet. One can see how perfectly most catch bars are flush-ground to conform to the pommel and fit of button as well. Anyone whom has had to replace a catch bar will note they typically do not fit anything like the original one. Perhaps for this reason, they were numbered to the internal number... with the flashguard and grips often using the external serial number instead. I have also seen a armorer replacement blade which came with the mated catch assembly. Seems odd that such a nearly complete bayonet would be used as a replacement for a damaged one, but that is classic Teutonic modus opperandi...

 

[HansHans]

Thanks for info

 

[AndyB]

Should be presented the bayonet marking here, the one grip was mostly reserialed as there it looks like 00 on edge of grip. As correctly mentioned by PWCo there would be various type of serialing but the locking lug assembly was used by various maker to really late in war.

 

[HansHans]

Here is an example of an early bayonet where the components are marked with an internal number. I just don't remember how the catch is numbered.

 

[AndyB]

Possible locking lug was 235 serialed, by similar pieces is for comparation important present the maker and year. As You could compare only same maker inside of identical bunch.

 

[HansHans]

This one arrived today. This is the first time I've seen a bayonet without internal markings. How do you explain this?

 

[pwcosol]

Some firms did not apply assembly numbers and only used the external serial number or last two digits thereof (sans alpha letter if present). The larger, more established manufacturing firms tended to reflect more inspection and attention to detail in assembly. The remaining firms were smaller and/or sub-contracted by larger ones to make bayonets for the Heer. Durkopp is one and their S84/98 T3s are typically devoid of internal markings on the bayonet tang and even some of the components as well.

 

[AndyB]

By Elite Diamant as middle or low producer could be used different type of serialing even none, we dont known here the time /date stamp, as normally on tang by earlier production should be E/218. Wout adding proper details is hard anything to say, as i wrote in previous, You should compare same maker from near or identical serial range!