|
Post by Sampeter on Nov 4, 2018 17:24:43 GMT
Hi All and thank you in advance for your help! I have a few very nice swords, but the first one I got several years ago has no markings whatsoever. I did a lot of research and found that they over produced the 1885 cavalry sword and so sold them off after removing the wd markings. Has anyone else heard of this? I guess at the end of the day I'm trying to determine the authenticity of my one, and find out any information you may know on the subject. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Sampeter on Nov 4, 2018 19:54:13 GMT
I forgot to add it does have 9/85 on the blade near the hilt bit that is it.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 4, 2018 20:05:03 GMT
Got any photos? Hard to tell much of anything without seeing it.
|
|
|
Post by Sampeter on Nov 4, 2018 20:34:49 GMT
I have but can't work out how to upload on here!
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 4, 2018 21:58:59 GMT
I have but can't work out how to upload on here! You can email me them and I'll post them up when I'm back home if you like. Otherwise you can use the attachment feature.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian Jordan on Nov 4, 2018 22:59:33 GMT
I have but can't work out how to upload on here!
Hello. Only registered members can upload o the best of my knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 5, 2018 18:58:49 GMT
Just been approved so here are the pics. Let me know if you need any others Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Nov 5, 2018 20:31:48 GMT
That's a pretty mutant looking marking. Just based on that alone, I'd say "replica". Also, condition like that is much more common for replicas than originals.
The other questions that can help diagnose replica vs original: How thick is the blade? How does the thickness vary along the blade? Where is the point of balance? How heavy is it?
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 6, 2018 17:40:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Nov 6, 2018 21:10:36 GMT
Don't usually see replicas that thick. Since replicas usually have less taper than the originals, they start with thinner stock to keep the weight down.
My P1885 starts at 9mm, and has linear taper down to 6mm where the spine begins to thin for the diamond-section part of the blade. German-made blade.
The specs for the weight of the P1885 are 2lb 6oz, 1.08kg. These is some variation in actual swords. If the weight of yours is close, it's either a genuine blade in superb condition with a mutant stamping, or a replica with an amazingly authentic blade (assuming it does actually taper before that 11" from the hilt).
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 6, 2018 22:55:48 GMT
It does taper before yes. I unfortunately cannot weigh it accurately (not sure how or what to do) are there any hints on the scabbard I could look at at all? Would a replica still have the wooden bits down the scabbard (on the inside) I also read somewhere about the rivets on the leather pressed handle being a give away sometimes. Do mine look right in the picture? Other replicas I have looked at seem to have a much more uniform order with the rivets and placement along the handle has varied, or is that just something you see on these?
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Nov 6, 2018 23:13:06 GMT
The blobbly polish and as timo says, mutant marking makes me suspicious. But I've never seen a British sword repro that started out that thick. I think the USI is like 7 to 3 mm in taper. Perhaps a remarked and buffed up original?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2018 23:22:07 GMT
Weren't there some Canadian parade swords that were plated blades? Also that there is an 1882 virtually identical? There is another niggle bouncing around in my head but from threads from ancient times on SFI. The swords with this style of hilt widely exported and a variant/proto? from 1880 with knot slots.
I don't think it is a replica but I cannot explain it.
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 6, 2018 23:30:48 GMT
I was questioning if it had been refurbished. Like I said before though, I had read years ago that this sword was over produced and that they were sold on (outside of the military) and had all markings removed. Could the marking possibly be one put on after it was stripped down and sold on?
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on Nov 7, 2018 1:05:44 GMT
One way to check if its a British production is look at the rivets in the grip. On British versions, the rivets lie ~10mm from the pommel (rear set), and ~17mm from the guard (front set). I think yours are spaced further than that.
Also, the guard should be 3.5 inches across. Whats it like for yours?
That said, the thickness suggests against a repro. Maybe its an India pattern? I am not sure if they made India Pattern 1885's.
|
|
|
Post by Pino on Nov 7, 2018 17:12:11 GMT
Is it possible to have more pics of the fuller ends, the welded bloc where the pommel meets with the kunckle-bow and the ricasso shape under that white (replica looking) buffer? Does the scabbard have markings? Looking at the pics it is hard to determine if its a real or repro but not until I have better view of the parts asked above I doubt its authenticity. There is an obscure repro of a Household trooper sword and the quality of the markings look definitely like this one but my main issue is the junction bloc at the end of the grip, the welding looks extremely bad, even for a repair. I've heard that those who ended their service with Yeomanry/Reserve units and Canadian Militia were marked till the end and those sold to the market/surplus had only their ordinnance marks removed yet should have kept the maker and proof marks; why then erase these and only keep an unnecessary date? Afoo: so far Indian patterns of this model never existed.
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 7, 2018 17:34:25 GMT
So the rivets sit at 34mm and 13mm. The hilt at its widest point is 3 3/4 inch. I'll upload some more pictures and see if they help! Thanks again
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 7, 2018 18:01:43 GMT
Also just found a wd mark but it's very small Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Pino on Nov 7, 2018 18:54:46 GMT
Many thanks for the pics, however I’ll have to go with reproduction for this one. Maybe the pics are not clear but the Maltese cross cut-outs and the sword knot hole do not look symmetrical, even crooked, which is not normal for a British sword; same thing for the blade fuller that is not aligned with the center.
The WD mark triggers a whole lot of questionning: if there is a WD mark on the guard why was it removed from the blade and scabbard; if this sword was sold to surplus then it should have had a big X mark to say it was formally removed of Army service; maybe it was stolen from a regimental inventory and made its way to private collections but then again why no ordinance marks…even an unissued factory sword would have kept basic markings.
I smell an Indian copy. They always make these kind of mistakes that don’t follow Army and makers' protocols.
Luckily I have both a 1885 and 1890 at home so as soon as I can have some time I will be able confirm my guess or not.
|
|
|
Post by sampeter on Nov 8, 2018 16:51:00 GMT
Okay, it's a shame... But thanks for your help!
|
|