1796 vs 1811: A Pictorial Comparison
Aug 15, 2018 17:04:36 GMT
Post by likehotbutter on Aug 15, 2018 17:04:36 GMT
The British 1796LC and Prussian 1811 are very commonly misidentified as each other, although more often as the former due to its higher popularity. Hopefully this will help in noting the very obvious differences.
Same same but different
My god, the 1811 is THICC. Note the typical German over-engineering...yes even in those bygone days
Also note the more pronounced "P" in the Knuckle bow of the 1811, a characteristic in its family/descendants
Big thick fittings on the 1811
More sculpted Quillon on the 1796
Note the simple rolled Q on the 1811 vs the elegant sculpted Q on the 1796
Distal taper: the 1811 starts off already thicker down its length
Distal taper: note the linear taper of the 1796 (left) vs the abrupt taper of the 1811
Markings: 1811M side of knucklebow. 1796LC, most commonly on top, front, langets (side is simply too thin)
The most obvious giveaway...Scabbard chapes. 1796 top (penile like lol), 1811 bottom (telltale hump)
Simple Summary;
Light, swift, elegant = 1796LC
Thick, crude, industrial, marked to hell and back = 1811M
Same same but different
My god, the 1811 is THICC. Note the typical German over-engineering...yes even in those bygone days
Also note the more pronounced "P" in the Knuckle bow of the 1811, a characteristic in its family/descendants
Big thick fittings on the 1811
More sculpted Quillon on the 1796
Note the simple rolled Q on the 1811 vs the elegant sculpted Q on the 1796
Distal taper: the 1811 starts off already thicker down its length
Distal taper: note the linear taper of the 1796 (left) vs the abrupt taper of the 1811
Markings: 1811M side of knucklebow. 1796LC, most commonly on top, front, langets (side is simply too thin)
The most obvious giveaway...Scabbard chapes. 1796 top (penile like lol), 1811 bottom (telltale hump)
Simple Summary;
Light, swift, elegant = 1796LC
Thick, crude, industrial, marked to hell and back = 1811M
