Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. One can only imagine! Finding just exactly the right person seems to be the secret,
  2. Much like this enamel canteen cup which recently sold for $510. http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/298822-510-enamel-canteen-cup/ It is not my concern what someone pays for their dream item but, as SKIPH says above, many new and uneducated collectors get burned on overpriced and/or fake items: this sours them on collecting and makes us all look bad. If it is the last piece you need to complete your collection, and you will pay whatever is asked, then have at it but do so with an educated mind as to the real market worth of that item. The cup mentioned in the auction
  3. I find it difficult to believe how little interest this event has generated ...
  4. Besides someone just needing one of these badly, can anyone tell me why this specific enamel cup went for twice the usual going rate? I see nothing unusual about it. What am I missing? http://www.ebay.com/itm/WW2-US-ENAMELED-COATED-CANTEEN-CUP-RARE-USMC-MARINE-CORPS-PORCELAIN-1942-BOTTLE-/372090049944?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&nma=true&si=rYgREoSKMIU%252BVg0kxPWCVB1%252F2ZY%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
  5. Vollrath was stuck with some 150,000 canteens when the enamel canteens were deemed unsuitable for field use. As a result, Vollrath attempted to sell them to the Navy, sending a letter to the OIC Navy Purchasing Office. IIRC, these were noted as being unmarked. It is possible that GP&F were unable to complete their obligation and sub-contracted said obligation to someone else who agreed to not mark them. I have no evidence of this at the moment and such is mere speculation on my part. Stranger things have happened in the military contract world: ask anyone who collects Mosin or Enfiel
  6. You will notice that, at the end of paragraph 1 above, mention is made of "U.S. Stamping and Enameling Co.", bringing the total of vending manufacturers to 7. At the time of the issuance of the document, Sept. 23, 1942, only U.S.S. Co. had delivered their required 10 canteen samples to the National Bureau of Standards. Perhaps of only trivial mention is the fact that the above document lists "Volrath" as one of the manufacturers: to date, I have only ever seen canteens stamped as "Vollrath". Apparently, simply a typographical error.
  7. I have read that the "CT" stamp designated "cut tang".
  8. Repair of dents in these canteens was accomplished with the use of a 2-piece full-length form which fully enclosed the canteen but through which the mouth and neck protruded. 120 lbs of air pressure was applied internally, thereby removing all dents.
  9. Tankerman is correct! I got my book yesterday and spent part of the night familiarizing myself with the Table of Contents. It is the product of some EXCELLENT research and study and I was reminded of Brophy's definitive tome on the 1903 Springfield. The book seems to be exhaustive and scholarly and it will be in a place of quick access in my library. As for the author, I must say that he was an excellent person with whom to do business. While there was a delay in communication due to him being out-of-pocket for some time, once he was home the volume was shipped quickly. He did overcharge
  10. Just ordered my book and am awaiting it's arrival with great anticipation. I never expected there to be so much information on these bayonets!
  11. Glad to hear it! I am currently waiting to hear back from him on shipping cost & cannot wait to see it.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.