Misfit 45 Posted January 4, 2013 Share #1 Posted January 4, 2013 The auction is over. I did not want to disclose the auction in case anyone here was trying to bid. It is a Colt marked M7 just like the controversial Imperial/Colt M7 with a couple on differences. 1. The blade has 90 degree back cut! 2. The pommel peen is similar to the WWII M4 bayonet peen. 3. The "ears" on the pommel do not seem to stick out as far as common M7s. They are more straight up instead of being more to the side. I asked the seller to take off the grips to see if there is the "U" shaped metal piece that secures the cross guard and he said that it does. The fact of the 90 degree back cut seems to have attracted a lot of attention since it went for $252. Does anyone have information or speculation about this unchronicald M7?? Ebay item number: 121044811428 Thanks Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still-A-Marine Posted January 4, 2013 Share #2 Posted January 4, 2013 I think it is the version shown in Gary Cunningham's American Military Batonets of The 20th Century page 94. Here is the text. "Approximately 30,000 of this version is said to have been made for Colt by the Imperial Knife Company of provenance, Rhode Island. The blade and crossguard are stamped as shown. The scabbard is a M8A! marked as shown, with the body made of fiberglass filled nylon and given a crinkle type olive drab finish. It is not known how many were used for U.S. contracts." The picture shows a 90 degree cutback. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted January 4, 2013 Share #3 Posted January 4, 2013 I've only seen those, (Imperial/Colts), if that's what they are with a radius back cut. In the case of the drawing in Gary’s book I believe that detail was over looked. I’m wondering if it was bought on the chance that it might prove to be one of the Milpar/Colts. Not much in the way of facts that I’ve heard regarding them. I believe the guards were also, (or usually) marked U.S. M7/Milpar. I’ll look for a milpar M7 with a sharp back cut and see what the peen looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted January 4, 2013 Author Share #4 Posted January 4, 2013 I've only seen those, (Imperial/Colts), if that's what they are with a radius back cut. In the case of the drawing in Gary’s book I believe that detail was over looked. I’m wondering if it was bought on the chance that it might prove to be one of the Milpar/Colts. Not much in the way of facts that I’ve heard regarding them. I believe the guards were also, (or usually) marked U.S. M7/Milpar. I’ll look for a milpar M7 with a sharp back cut and see what the peen looks like. I agree that the Imperial/Colts were/are radius back cut. William Humes site http://www.usmilitar...7_03.htm shows the Milpar and Imperial colts side by side. Besides, the seller stated that the cross guard said US M7 with no mention of Milpar. I also agree that the drawing in the book had the back cut wrong. Going back to the ebay listing, I noticed that the price was $282. not $252. Quite a price. As far as I can tell, this particular M7 is not cataloged anywhere. It makes me suspicious. The other thing I noticed is that the pins in the pommel looked a little odd. Too black, gloss black. and not buried enough into the pommel. The star burst stake job is not limited to this M7 only. I have a "last contract" m7 by General Cutlery which has a star burst pommel. Thanks for commenting. Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted January 4, 2013 Share #5 Posted January 4, 2013 Looked over my M7’s and I’ll say I can’t get any better sense of it from the peening on the pommel. What you see does vary from manufacturer to manufacturer but they are also individually unique. I agree that this looks closest to the Gen Cut starburst but I don’t think that helps. When I look closer at my own Milpars and the pictures I have of others. The blade finish on the auction knife doesn’t look typical for the Milpars. Milpars tend to have a rougher look to the blade. I think some of it must have something to do with the process they used to remove stock from the blank. (?). Are the pictures on the Bay public domain? I’m wondering if we can capture them before they become lost to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted January 5, 2013 Public domain or not, here they come. If Milpar was used to assemble some of the Colt M7 bayonets, then they may have only installed their own cross guard using Imperial's blade (or whoever made the blade, Eickhorn?) The real question with this bayonet is whether the 90 degree back cut and the U shaped cross guard retainer is enough to determine that this bayonet is a US military contract or not. As you know, most if not all of the commercial colt M7s have welded cross guards and most have rounded back cuts. Very interesting Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted January 8, 2013 Share #7 Posted January 8, 2013 Marv, Sorry to take so long to get back to your last post. I’ve been trying to see if I couldn’t collect some more pictures to help me with representing my response. Regarding M7 bayonets with the Colt Pony and the part # 62316 on the blade. I’ve only seen what appears to be bayonets from three different sources with these marks. 1.Imperial/Colts (?). All of mine and others that I’ve viewed or handled. Have a radiused back cut. the tangs are minus the slots that show up in most of the earlier verified M7’s. The guards are held on by the swaged metal keeper passed thru a round edged square hole in the tang. 2. M7 bayonets with the a guard that is marked; US M7/ MILPAR. These are the only ones I’ve seen that have the Sharper style of back cut. 3. German/West German made M7’s. All of those that I’ve seen also have a radiused back cut. Also they are the only ones I’ve examined that will have a guard and pommel welded to the tang. I’m not assuming they all are I just have only seen ones that where. I'm not sure about the auction knife in the OP. Just thru out the speculation of a Milpar based on the part # 62316 and the sharp back cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted January 8, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted January 8, 2013 The few Milpar/Colts I've seen have had the radiused back cut. Are you saying that you have seen the Milpar version with a near 90 degree back cut? I just now asked the seller if the bayonet had the name Milpar on the cross guard even though he had said in the listing that the cross guard said US M7 with no mention of any other markings. I'll let you know the response. This picture is from William Humes site. The upper M7 is the Imperial and the lower is the Milpar. THanks Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted January 8, 2013 Share #9 Posted January 8, 2013 Yes, the Milpar/Colt I’ve handled was a blade with the type of back cut I’m used to seeing on early 60’s vintage Milpars. Below is a link to a site that is in the business of selling images. But this particular page has a very good history of bayonets for the M16 rifle and IMHO the author represents the subject pretty well. In it is a good picture of a Milpar/Colt like the one I examined in the past. http://imageevent.co...yitems/bayonets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted January 9, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted January 9, 2013 That's pretty cool. I have been on that site before, but never noticed the Milpar/Colt. By Golly, there it was, that near 90 degree run out. As far as information goes, you've probably seen this site: http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/humes_m7.htm I must admit, I'm inclined to agree with his placement of the Imperial/Colt which is early to mid sixties. The run out problem argument is compelling, but just because a radius was used on one contract run of M7s, does not automatically mean that it must be placed in the post 1978 era where Gary Cunningham says the "new rules" of run outs occurred. Mr. Humes quotes Robert Roy (Colt executive) as saying the 62316 blade was furnished by Colt since the early sixties. These early Colt M7s were supplied as a part of the rifles. If anybody is going to say that the radiused back cut would not havbe been accepted by the Army, then what about those bright green handles!! At least the Imperial/Colt M7s conformed in appearance with the plastic handled M4s of the same time period. When the Army issued its own contract for M7 bayonets, it then required the standard 90 degree back cut. That's what makes this ebay M7 so interesting. In the full quote from Mr. Roy, he says that there may have been several manufacturers, but in many cases there were no marks on the cross guard indicating who made the bayonet. Could that mean there were more manufacturers than Imperial and Milpar who used the 62316 blade? Of course, it could mean that he simply was unsure of how many manufacturers of the 62316 there were. It's a mystery. I hope someone with far more experience and expertise than us weighs in. Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted January 9, 2013 Share #11 Posted January 9, 2013 I think at this point all we can really say today is that the auction bayonet in the OP is an interesting curiosity. In regards to the Imperial/Colts they are a bayonet that looks to have been produced in the approximate quantity of 30,000 sometime before 1979. I too would like to think that they would have appeared around 63-64. At this point I don’t see anything being determined until some provenance shows up that has been eluding us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still-A-Marine Posted January 10, 2013 Share #12 Posted January 10, 2013 I think at this point all we can really say today is that the auction bayonet in the OP is an interesting curiosity. In regards to the Imperial/Colts they are a bayonet that looks to have been produced in the approximate quantity of 30,000 sometime before 1979. I too would like to think that they would have appeared around 63-64. At this point I don’t see anything being determined until some provenance shows up that has been eluding us. Yes. I have found this interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPFFA1 Posted March 2, 2014 Share #13 Posted March 2, 2014 Hello to all my first post, found this post while researching a m7 I was looking at on Gunbroker. Well I bought the colt M7 and it's exactly the same as the one described in this post. So it would appear there are now at least two M7s made this way. One point I'd like to add is the tang is solid and the swaged keeper passes through a round edged round hole. And thanks to all that we're involved in the original post their input influenced my purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted March 2, 2014 Author Share #14 Posted March 2, 2014 Welcome to the forum. Could you post some pictures? I usually go through Photobucket then post the pictures from there. No resizing required. Congrats on your find! Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPFFA1 Posted March 2, 2014 Share #15 Posted March 2, 2014 I'm on duty today I'll work on posting some pic's on Monday. I've got a Colt SP1 made in 1968 so I was looking for an M7 that was most likely made in the 60's to go with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayonetman Posted March 2, 2014 Share #16 Posted March 2, 2014 Just to clear up a point, when I wrote my book the chapter on the M7 was written in 1996 and at that time I had little information on them. Most of my information was based in very limited sources (mostly M.H. Cole's books) and some of the purchase records from Rock Island. The bayonet that I had at that time that I used for the illustration did have the near 90 degree runout. I wish I had kept it, but medical problems and the need for some quick cash led me to sell a lot of the newer bayonets several years ago, thinking that I could replace them easily when finances improved. Unfortunately that was before I got into digital photography and photographing all the specimens in my collection so I don't have a good picture of it. I THINK it was just like the one in the auction being discussed, but my memory is not so clear that I could swear to it. Obviously it is not one of the IMPERIAL made versions, so don't know what it is. To new member WCPFFA1, welcome to the forum. You will find a lot of great people here and I am sure they will make you welcome. If you want a M7 made in the 1968 time period and don't want to spend a premium, get a BOC made one, all of their deliveries were in that time period, they are pretty much guaranteed to be US issue, and they are common enough to be able to get one inexpensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPFFA1 Posted March 2, 2014 Share #17 Posted March 2, 2014 Thanks for your response Mr. Cunningham, I referred to your bayonet points article " the plastic gripped M4 Bayonet - part one. In the section on the Bren - Dan bayonet many of the details are the same as my Colt marked bayo. Use of roll-pins Tang peened with a flat star-burst Center line is slightly wavy A round hole that the swaged keeper running through it( the edges of the hole are sharp not rounded as my above description notes) The grip markings are identical. They have the same part numbers, there are small molded circles to the left of both screw holes with the molded circle closet to the pommel having a number in it. On mine one circle has a 1 and the other has a 2 inside. There is also a hand scribed circle with cross inside on both grips between the molded circle with the number and the pommel identical to the grip on the top in your picture of the Bren-Dan. I've also noted there are no gaps or cut-outs visible where the blade passes through and meets up with the cross guard, (the Imperial has two notches cut out on either side of the cross guard where it meets the blade). Could Bren-Dan have been another manufacturer that produced M7 bayonets with the Colt trademark besides for Milpar, Imperial, and Eickhorn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted March 3, 2014 Share #18 Posted March 3, 2014 Search Bren-Dan, in this link: http://usmilitaryknives.com/knife_knotes_3.htm I’m not aware of any connection with Conetta or Bren-Dan and Colt blade marked bayonets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted March 3, 2014 Share #19 Posted March 3, 2014 Here's a picture of the tangs of a few different M7's. IMHO the second Columbus Milpar is most likely a parts piece assembled after Col. Milpar got out of the blade business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayonetman Posted March 3, 2014 Share #20 Posted March 3, 2014 1. Bren-Dan would have had no connection with the Colt marked blades. 2. I have found no reference to MilPar and Colt having any real connection. From what I have found (and my sources are by no means complete) MilPar had the first regular contract with the Ordnance Department for the M7 bayonet. The Colt marked versions were APPARENTLY supplied by Colt with the rifles they were selling, and MilPar got the first separate contract. It is by no means impossible that some Colt marked blades were purchased from Colt or Imperial by Columbus Milpar and Manufacturing and were used in their first production. The first MilPar contract was dated 05/07/1964 for 93,498 bayonets. 3. The Colt / Imperial grips are not marked in my limited experience (I have only handled / disassembled a very few of these). Let me make it quite clear that my knowledge and understanding of the M7 bayonet and its variants is not at the level that I would like. My personal interest is on the older bayonets, and I have not found the resources that would allow me to be fully comfortable in discussing the variants of the M7. Also, what I have found is contradictory, especially when it deals with the earlier production for Colt. I stand ready to be corrected on any comments that I have made, as long as some reasonable level of proof or provenance can be shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit 45 Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share #21 Posted March 3, 2014 I have three of the Colt/Imperial M7s. Each pair of grips are marked as shown in the pictures, except one pair will have "F4" and "F3" another will have "F4" and "F11" with a combination of 0069 and 0068. In addition, unlike other M7s and in fact all the other similar two piece plastic grips (as used on some M4 bayonets), the holes in the grips have hex recesses to secure a screw and nut. The common plastic grips have a knurled nut imbedded in the grip rather than using a separate loose nut and screw as in the Colt/Imperial M7. It might be important to note that these seem to be the exact grips on the Eickhorn/Colt,62316 "Made in W. Germany" M7s, but I have not disassembled one of them to see if they have mold numbers inside. If these grips can be dated in any way, it would go a long way to discover the time period of manufacture of the Colt /Imperial M7s. Hope this helps. Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPFFA1 Posted March 3, 2014 Share #22 Posted March 3, 2014 I've attached pictures of the Colt marked bayonet. Note that the runout on the right side is different than the left side. Mr. Cunningham it looks the same as the runout on the Bren-Dan bayonet in your Bayonet Points article. Is the left side runout on the Bren-Dan bayonet in your article similar to the runout on the left side of the colt marked bayonet. http://s194.photobucket.com/user/wcpffa1/library/COLT%20BAYONET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCPFFA1 Posted March 3, 2014 Share #23 Posted March 3, 2014 I don't think the above link works trying another http://s194.photobucket.com/user/wcpffa1/library/COLT%20BAYONET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactroop Posted March 3, 2014 Share #24 Posted March 3, 2014 Thanks for the photo's. In my experience it's not that unusual to see differences in the various relief cuts from side to side in the manufacturing of blades. Like Marv pointed out earlier, I wish I knew more about the history of the molding of the plastic grips from the M4's thru the various M7's from where they could have been sourced and when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKIPH Posted March 3, 2014 Share #25 Posted March 3, 2014 Marv- Disassembled my Eickhorn Colt/M7. Grips on mine are marked on both, 3, inside a circle. Nothing else. It also has a 90 degree back cut. SKIP 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