militariaone Posted November 11, 2013 Share #1 Posted November 11, 2013 Greetings all, I have just seen this on eBay item #331063025369. I thought I’d post pictures of it so the forum’s members would be aware of it as well. Seller’s text from the auction’s page (From Czech Republic) reads, “SUPERB NEW MADE REPLICA US WWI / WWII ERA M1918 TRENCH KNIFE MADE BY PROFFESIONAL CUTTLERY, 1480 STEEL BLADE, BRASS KNUCKLE DUSTER HANDLE ALL PARTS COPIED FROM ORIGINAL WWI TRENCH KNIFE HANDLE PARTIALLY AGED COMES WITHOUT SHEATH !!! NOT MIL-TEC / STURM COPY !!! I CAN GUARANTEE THIS IS A REAL KNIFE, COMPARABLE WITH WWI ORIGINAL KNIFE IN EVERY DETAIL PLEASE SEE PICS IN THIS AUCTION I CAN OFFER "REDUCED PRICE $235" PROTOTYPE SAMPLE, UNFORTUNATELLY THE BLADE IS LITTLE OFFSET (SEE PIC 3) IF U ARE INTERESTED IN PERFECT FITTED KNIFE WITH ALL WARRANTIES, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME !!! BIDDERS, PLEASE CHECK THE LEGALITY OF OWNING THIS KNIFE IN YOUR COUNTRY SHIPPING WITHIN EU BY GROUND POST (BASICALLY APPROX. $35) SHIPPING OVERSEAS BY SHIP ONLY - NO AIRMAIL !!! (BASICALLY APPROX. $55) PLEASE ASK FOR EXACT SHIPPING QUOTE TO YOUR COUNTRY, PRICES ABOVE JUST TENTATIVE.” While it’s by no means a perfect copy it’s better than the average ones you will encounter (Though it’s a tad too thick at the guard) and if the skull crusher was switched (with the more accurate replacements now available on eBay) you’d have one that would fool many. The seller is not attempting to pass it off as “Original”, but will the next owner(s) be so forthright? The auction's three photos follow. The third photo shows the off center defect on this "prototype" I assume the following batches won't have this defect. Regards, Lance P.S. I hope to see this new example on Mr. Frank Tzaska's Reproduction Recognition page soon http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/m1918mk1.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
militariaone Posted November 11, 2013 Author Share #2 Posted November 11, 2013 PIC #2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
militariaone Posted November 11, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted November 11, 2013 PIC #3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still-A-Marine Posted November 11, 2013 Share #4 Posted November 11, 2013 There are a few more differences but they are subtle. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cromwell Posted November 11, 2013 Share #5 Posted November 11, 2013 I see lots of issues but if a person was not real familiar with mk1 lf&c knives it could fool a newbie. The employees who sand cast the original lf&c were masters just look at a au lion to see how good the lf&c sand Casters were. I have yet to see a repro lf&c that would fool a long time collector but heck even the 1960s japan 1918 knives fool The unfamiliar to this day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
militariaone Posted November 11, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted November 11, 2013 I see lots of issues but if a person was not real familiar with mk1 lf&c knives it could fool a newbie. The employees who sand cast the original lf&c were masters just look at a au lion to see how good the lf&c sand Casters were. I have yet to see a repro lf&c that would fool a long time collector but heck even the 1960s japan 1918 knives fool The unfamiliar to this day. I completely agree, anyone who has owned/held an original would not likely be taken in by the pictured repro. However, it will be just a matter of time before some collector gets fooled by this one. Especially so for our friends in Europe who may not be as familiar with these knives. I suspect (in time) these new blades (alone) will be appearing mated with original handles and offered as original sets. Translation: it will take some additional scrutiny to ensure one is not getting duped into thinking they have found an original with this new version available. Regards, Lance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcranch Posted November 14, 2013 Share #7 Posted November 14, 2013 I wonder if this repro has a hollow grip? I have always been told that the originals are hollow but the repros are not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted November 14, 2013 Share #8 Posted November 14, 2013 What do you mean by hollow grip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcranch Posted November 14, 2013 Share #9 Posted November 14, 2013 Big Al, I am by no means an expert on these but I was told that if you remove the blade from an original LF&C 1918 and I believe this may also be true for a French made knuckle knife, look inside the grip, you will see an unfilled cavity or hollow space. This apparently was a result of the way they were cast. Most repro grips are cast solid and then a hole drilled through the grip for the tang? Some of the knuckle knife collectors out there can chime in on this if I am mistaken. Thanks Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cromwell Posted November 15, 2013 Share #10 Posted November 15, 2013 Some repros are solid and some are hollow. Originals are all hollow. Lf&c are very high end sand casing quality. Au lions can be very poor , the 1960s japan 1918 knives can be better quality than some original au lions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now