AN marked M6 bayonet?

[M1Garandy]

Found an AN marked M6 bayonet over the weekend.

 

Other than what is contained in Garry Cunningham's Bayonet Points #9 from 2003, what other information is out there about these?

 

 

I did a bit of searching on the web and came up pretty much empty handed.

 

Was the maker "AN" ever positively identified?

 

Thanks.

 

 

[tankerman]

GREAT find> Mine is the one in Cole's book. Gary is probably best source of info on these.

[M1Garandy]

I had never seen one until I found it. It has been sharpened and the false edge is a little chewed up but for something that seems to be rare, I can't complain.

 

Does rarity give these any value?

[SKIPH]

Nice to know these actually exist, was starting to believe they were some kind of myth. Congrats, on your very lucky find! If you can we'd all like to see some detailed pictures. Have only seen drawings. SKIP

[bayonetman]

Need good photos of the markings and pommel plate. There are a number of fakes of these out there.

[M1Garandy]

It came with a pile of other USGI parts and stuff but I don't believe the seller got all of what was sold from the same source or at the same time.

 

I'll post some pics this weekend or next depending on when I get a chance to pick it up.

[M1Garandy]

I think the scabbard is a repro and I have no idea when it was mated to this bayonet.

 

Does the bayonet itself look like a real AN M6?

[M1Garandy]

More pictures.

[M1Garandy]

More pictures.

[M1Garandy]

Last one.

[sactroop]

Can you post a close-up of the top of the pommel/tang area, like the picture below?

 

 

I like the looks of the stamp on the guard and the way it's oriented to the barrel ring. I believe the grips shouldn't have mold numbers on the inside of them this early, so those may have been replaced.

I'm no expert on these, still looking for one with my name on it.

Most anything I think I know about these I got from Bayonetman, so he will likely know.

[tankerman]

My AN M-6 is the one shown in Cole's book. I have had this piece about 30 years. Got it from a pile of bayonets at an Atlanta gun show.

 

The pommel is very similar.

Blade run-outs are basically the same

the "US " marks on mine are SLIGHTLY smaller than the AN & M6

 

the grips on mine are NOT MARKED in any way

 

"striations"on metal face where stampings are is similar

 

Gary might have some photos I sent him a few years ago.

 

Hope this is of assistance

 

Al

[tankerman]

Sactroop..

My AN pommel/tang are is similar to those on the RIGHT in your photo

the markings on mine are as M1garandy's M6

 

AL

[tankerman]

Further notes;

 

My grips are slightly different on the inner surfaces.

 

Again, mine are not marked on the inner side of the grips

 

Al

[SKIPH]

Just checking my books. According to Cole, and Gary, the markings on the guard are different.The pics in the books have the barrel ring facing left, with the "U.S. M6" on top, and the "AN" below the blade. Another question I have, is when did the M6 bayonets change the back cut from a 90 degree to the long curved backcut? With out digging out all my M6s, I checked a Milpar, w/ 90 degree back cut, the also had a contract in 64-67. Not claiming anything other than we need to study the "AN" more. Could the M6 have been made by Eichorn, and someone stamped "AN" to enhance the value? I sure don't know, but must be considered. Just things for consideration. SKIP

[M1Garandy]

Can you post a close-up of the top of the pommel/tang area, like the picture below?

 

IMG_0301.JPG

 

I like the looks of the stamp on the guard and the way it's oriented to the barrel ring. I believe the grips shouldn't have mold numbers on the inside of them this early, so those may have been replaced.

I'm no expert on these, still looking for one with my name on it.

Most anything I think I know about these I got from Bayonetman, so he will likely know.

 

As requested, here you go.

[tankerman]

Skiph---Mr. Cole made an error when he drew my M6. I sent Gary a note about this some years back. IMO, Mr. Cole drew one M6 and then just drew the makers marks the same way oriented. I brought this up to him at a B'ham show many years past but it was already in print. Note in Cole's that it states collection of Ál Mark" that is me. I have several bayonets and knives in his books.

 

Just one of those things that makes the claims for ëxceptions" to every rule.

 

AL

[SKIPH]

Al-Cool info! For what it's worth checked out about 5-6 books w/ pics of M6 bayonets with round out back cuts. Only FM 23-8, dtd 1965, US Army's Field Manual for the M14 rifle had a round out blade. That theory is out. LOL! SKIP

[bayonetman]

I have photos of 4 that I believe are correct. I believe the marks are hand stamped, as all show some variation in location. As Al stated, Mr. Cole drew his backwards in error.

 

 

My grips, and the others that I have photos of the inside of the grips (only two) are all unmarked. They are the early style M5 grips without the "rollover" at the top. The top one in the photo is what I believe to be correct, lower is the later M5 and standard M6 grip. Of course they are interchangeable and could have been changed at any time, but I believe the upper one is correct for the AN,

 

 

The curved runout (backcut) is correct. The blade was almost certainly made by J&D Tool as it is identical to their M5 series production, but does have the "stop" on the tang which was not used on the M5 and M5A1 as it was not necessary. Photo above is M5A1, below is the AN M6.

 

 

 

Most of the fakes that I have seen are actually Eickhorn made versions which were originally only marked US M6 and the AN was added later. Easy to tell of course.

 

It is my THEORY that these are actually the prototype versions which were made in 1954 or 55 before the decision was made not to equip the M14 with a bayonet. That decision was not reversed until 1959 and production did not start until 1960-61. The theory is partly based on the fact that J&D Tool did not deliver any M6 bayonets, but the blades are quite likely made by them and have the correct stop. This is only a theory and not yet proven. The theory includes the likelyhood of the AN mark standing for Anniston Army Depot as this mark was used by them in other work. Again, only theory at this time.

[SKIPH]

Gary-Thanks for the pics, and info. SKIP

[M1Garandy]

I have photos of 4 that I believe are correct. I believe the marks are hand stamped, as all show some variation in location. As Al stated, Mr. Cole drew his backwards in error.

 

Markngs 2.JPG

 

My grips, and the others that I have photos of the inside of the grips (only two) are all unmarked. They are the early style M5 grips without the "rollover" at the top. The top one in the photo is what I believe to be correct, lower is the later M5 and standard M6 grip. Of course they are interchangeable and could have been changed at any time, but I believe the upper one is correct for the AN,

 

GripPair 2.jpg

 

The curved runout (backcut) is correct. The blade was almost certainly made by J&D Tool as it is identical to their M5 series production, but does have the "stop" on the tang which was not used on the M5 and M5A1 as it was not necessary. Photo above is M5A1, below is the AN M6.

 

M5M6Runouts 2.jpg

 

Stop 2.jpg

 

Most of the fakes that I have seen are actually Eickhorn made versions which were originally only marked US M6 and the AN was added later. Easy to tell of course.

 

It is my THEORY that these are actually the prototype versions which were made in 1954 or 55 before the decision was made not to equip the M14 with a bayonet. That decision was not reversed until 1959 and production did not start until 1960-61. The theory is partly based on the fact that J&D Tool did not deliver any M6 bayonets, but the blades are quite likely made by them and have the correct stop. This is only a theory and not yet proven. The theory includes the likelyhood of the AN mark standing for Anniston Army Depot as this mark was used by them in other work. Again, only theory at this time.

 

That said, do you feel that mine is an original or a fake? It sounds like the grips are wrong but what about the rest?

 

Thanks for the information.

[sactroop]

IMHO, I think you should feel pretty good about this one, but that's just me. If I was looking for a better match for the sheath I'd try and find either a very good condition M8A1 from B.M. Co., or an early V.P. Co./without the metal tip protecter.

[bayonetman]

That said, do you feel that mine is an original or a fake? It sounds like the grips are wrong but what about the rest?

 

Thanks for the information.

I believe the bayonet is correct, except that I do feel it should have the earlier grips. Although the scabbard markings look right, the rivets look kind of off, but would not want to say unless I had it in hand. I agree with sactroop that the correct scabbard would probably be the BMCo or early VPCo without the metal tip - IF my theory of these being made in 1954 or 55 is correct.

[M1Garandy]

Thanks all.

 

I think the current scabard is either a reproduction/fake or a genuine throat that has been reassembled with non-USGI parts. The scabbard body feels like plastic and the webbing feels cheap compared to the other known USGI M8 and M8A1 scabbards I have handy and I'm not keen on the hardware either, especially the rivets.

 

I have a number of spare M8A1 scabbards around without the metal tip and I can pair one up with this bayonet.

 

How hard would a set of early un-numbered M5 grips be to find and what might one expect to pay for them?

 

Thanks again.

[sactroop]

I think the grips by themselves could be a little hard to come across. Although I think this would be the place to ask. In the recent past I've seen more than a few that were made overseas and wouldn't even fit a government contract bayonet. Considering the value of a genuine AN M6 bayonet it might be justified to buy a good M5 bayonet just for the grips. Only a thought.