Jump to content

OSS Smatchet


beerdragon54
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just bought this super right and it appears to be the type 2 smatchet. Am I correct that these were US made by Case?Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Case did make the original Smatchet with the walnut handles. Case did not make your Smatchet. Textbook example of the need for reference books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Case did make the original Smatchet with the walnut handles.  Case did not make your Smatchet.  Textbook example of the need for reference books.

Mind sharing who did make it?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta Cutlery did make some Smatchets in the 70's-80's time frame. I would agree that it is likely Atlanta Cutlery, probably made in India.

 

Don't feel too bad. A fake Taylor Huff was sold 3-4 years ago for about $5,000. I had purchased it, but as soon as I received it, I knew that it was a fake. Had a hell of a time getting the seller to take it back. He said that he had sold it for a long-time collector and that it was real, which was total BS. I told him that it could have also been an Atlanta Cutlery repro. The seller still has me blocked as a buyer on Ebay. Some collector has an expensive Taylor Huff fake in his collection and probably doesn't realize it.

 

Best policy, especially for more expensive knives is to make sure that the knife can be returned.

 

As a note to other forum members, there are a lot of fake M3's and some M4's on Ebay that have been made with parts. Sometimes they have brought a lot of money. I recall a blade dated Kinfolks 5-6 years ago that was mostly made up parts. Someone paid a big price for it.

 

I repeat. Even if you are on a limited budget, reference books should be your first investment. Good reference books are a minor investment for collectors when compared to the benefits. The books can keep you from buying bad knives and at the same time prevent you from passing over a rare knife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, well this is the rather expensive knife book I own and nothing jumped out to tell me it was a repro. Posted Image

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cole's books are astoundingly good, considering that they were line drawings. He was able to catch all the nuances of the knives, actually better than a lot of photos, but some of his drawings go back to the late 60's. Nothing takes the place of an actual photo, especially with the accompanying text.

 

How much did you pay for the fake?

 

Take Mikedon's advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have any knowledge on the knife in question. But I’m would like to add my two cents, concerning collecting expensive knives and to equip yourself with knowledge through reference books.



As Bill Walters point out, a good reference book is always good to have.


Or the use of a forum like this one, it can help you avoid many expensive “fall pits”.



However, having said this, it’s not always good to use reference books. Some are just plain and simple out to “date”, having old incorrect information. Information that could have been or was correct at the time they were printed.



I collect original Vietnam era CISO SOG knives, and have a small but humble collection. I have over the years handled somewhat 200+ SOGs and with that equip myself with a decent amount of knowledge on the subject. But I’m far from an expert.



Ones in a while I see Fake SOG knives sell on ebay and other well known trusted sites. These fakes are so well made that they can fool even the most experienced collector, and they sell for some serious money. I have seen some made from scratch and others put together using real parts combined with newly made fake parts. Some of these fake SOG knives are so good that they actually been in books, described as original Vietnam era SOG knives.



Point is you can not always trust the reference books. The books pictured in this thread has nothing to do with my reply.



I hope I didn’t steep on any toes.


All the best.


M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I came into possession of what is reported to be an OSS smatchet. I have reviewed phots of confirmed originals and repos but cannot reconcile some features of this knife. Any info would be greatly appreciated, just getting into WWII collecting and  as recommended have many reference books, but hoping the wisdom of the group might have some answers. The areas I am concerned about are the pommel and scabbard. The pommel has what appear to be correct rivets, however it also has a third indentation (larger then the rivets) and only on one side of the pommel. Second, along the center is a line, almost like a mold line, running the length of the pommel. Third is the scabbard. It does not appear to have ever had a thumb latch, no remnants of a strap or even a hole from a former snap. Please review and let me know your thoughts. Thank you all in advance.

 

IMG_4557.JPG

IMG_4559.JPG

IMG_4560.JPG

IMG_4561.JPG

IMG_4562.JPG

IMG_4563.JPG

IMG_4564.JPG

IMG_4565.JPG

IMG_4566.JPG

IMG_4567.JPG

IMG_4568.JPG

IMG_4569.JPG

IMG_4570.JPG

IMG_4572.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The OP's one looks like an Indian reproduction.

The second one posted is good. 

 

I really enjoy them as a collectable, and the illustrations in "Get Tough" by William Fairbairn on how to take down a German Soldier are awesome.

That said, they're heavy and awkward and I would never have chosen to carry one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are two less than satisfying images of my US case Smatchet.

These are pictures from my laptop store, as I don't have anything of the Smatchet by itself.

 

But the manner in which the rivets/pins are fitted to the hilt is very neat, the metal to metal and wood to metal finishing is Case quality, and quite different to the Indian or Chinese copies. 

 

106200346_1224914221178830_6626863218160481995_n.jpg.6fe4d0edf8388a51d17505c08253d3ab.jpg90157186_10216996438762755_5728171666194825216_n.jpg.f6d30b311b3cbe798f03cedace4ff074.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jesse, just want to jump on the "welcome aboard train" here.  As far as the editing goes, most of us can only edit our own post for just a few minutes after they are first posted to try and correct any obvious errors we missed before pushing "submit reply".

Your collection is first rate, and I'm looking forward to more in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I've never run across a Smatchet before! Now I need one of those repros! 

 

For a newbie . . . what exactly struck you from the OP's pictures as it being a repro? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stratasfan said:

I've never run across a Smatchet before! Now I need one of those repros! 

 

For a newbie . . . what exactly struck you from the OP's pictures as it being a repro? 

 

 

Look closely at two specific details on the OP's smatchet:

1. The rivets. (they're a mess)

2.The fit and finish and the poorly colored nature of the wood. (It looks like it was made by a novice.)

 

After that, consider the quality of the hilt, and the fit and finish between tang and pommel.

 

Then the scabbard - which of course could be a replacement, but you weigh as many factors as possible.

 

Case quality control was pretty high, they would never have signed off on those rivets, and definitely not on that wood fit.

(I own a V42 and several Case M3's and they are all of a superior quality, a smatchet intended for special use should be finished carefully.)

 

However the wood could have been replaced and home rivets applied post war, so then you look at other details - when those other details are also wrong, you move to the next knife.

(I once bought an original Ek with a crap-handle someone had home fitted many moons ago, I thought I might reproduce the lead poured rivets with my own more original looking handle, I couldn't and passed along that project to another collector.)

 

It is no different to M3 collecting, look at blade quality, but the "show" is in the leather, the pins, the finish, the small details.

(Look at all the "restored" M3's on fleabay right now, many don't announce their restored status and have been aged and battle damaged to con - they never get the M6 sheaths quite right, so you might spot the fake sheath before the knife, WW1 German trench knives are so realistic sometimes the "incorrect" fastener (popper) on the sheath is the only giveaway.)

 

In Fairbairn Sykes daggers, the blade is the easiest part to reproduce, the handles, pommels and guards are where the reproductions fall apart.

Some Indian reproductions try so hard they even fake the Wilkinson wrench marks on the pommel and falsify the ENGLAND stamps. But they always seem to screw up on the sheaths, and put the fasteners too close or the wrong shaped chape, etc.,

Indian leather scabbards are giveaways, Indian leather goods when "aged" all have a similar "look" to them, meaning they don't look like 75 year old leather that has aged with time. The Indian leather scabbard in the OP's pictures isn't 75 years old.

 

That's my 06 cents, and only my personal opinion and experience - this is a collector site with a LOT of very experienced and knowledgeable folks, so I choose my words carefully.

 

Thanks for the info on editing posts - I'll have to be quicker, lol.

 

I love the Case quality on this dagger.

122855448_265162414894883_6340822506362979703_n.jpg.51cf54c8bef8e5d2bba4351cb83daa3f.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...