The Mystery of the Rubber Handled M4 Bayonets

[bayonetman]

Having just picked up another of the molded rubber handled M4 bayonets, I thought I would start a thread where we might discuss and exchange information about these.

 

Let me start by saying that I have never found any evidence of who made these. Although there has been a general assumption that they were done to replace leather handles which were deteriorating due to the dampness of the tropical environment, I have never seen anything that would indicate that this was done by any US organization. Admittedly it could have been done on a small scale by some local Ordnance facility, but that does not seem likely, especially on the scale indicated by the large numbers of them on the market today.

 

There seems to be a variety of small variations which would make it likely that these were done by different facilities and probably at different times. Some of these variations involve US marked parts, while others are totally unmarked. Most of them appear to have been done somewhere in Asia, with South Korea being named as a source by two large importers.

 

Beginning with the one that I just acquired, I would like to discuss these and invite comments by anyone that has specimens, especially if they are different from the ones that I will show.

 

 

This specimen used a Utica M3 marked blade, with a new guard and latch plate to convert it to an M4. Whether the black rubber handle was added at the same time is still up for discussion. All metal parts are fairly heavily Parkerized, most of which remains and the bayonet shows little if any use.

 

 

The guard and latch plate are unmarked, and the latch plate is held by a typical US style starburst peen. The catch pins are staked in place in the standard post February 1945 style. The latch plate has the small dimple at 6 o'clock which is commonly found on the TMN, Conetta and Bren-Dan plastic handled M4s. I have been told that this dimple is likely the mark left by a Rockwell C hardness test.

 

It is at least possible that this is one of the approximately 58,000 M3 knives that were converted to M4 bayonets under the direction of the 229th Ordnance Battalion in Japan in 1953. I have not found if the necessary parts (guard and latch plate) were manufactured in Japan, which seems likely, or were contracted for in the US. By the time these were delivered, the fighting in Korea was over, and it is likely that the bulk of these bayonets were given to the South Korean Army as part of their military reconstruction aid. Although I do not have figures for the immediate post-Korean war period, records show that from 1963 to 1972, the US supplied 24,322 M4 bayonets to South Korea.

 

Now the question arises - were these bayonets fitted with leather handles or with rubber handles? General wisdom is that either the leather handles from the M3s were used when possible or that new leather ones were made. Unfortunately, if the conversion was done with guard marked M3s, there would be no markings on the new M4s, which should result in a fair number of unmarked or blade marked M4 leather handled bayonets. Both blade marked and unmarked leather handled M4s are quite uncommon, so is it possible that most were either fitted with rubber handles during the conversion process or were retrofitted later.

 

Comments invited - I will post more later.

[thorin6]

I've gone through this discussion several times, so here is the rubber handled Camillus M4 bayonet and M8A1 Scabbard my father brought back from Korea, where he was stationed with the 40th Inf Div 1952-53. The lockplate was made by Hemphill; I'll see if I can find a picture of it.

 

[thorin6]

Here's the lockplate:

 

[thorin6]

And the Ordnance Bomb:

 

[Misfit 45]

Hi,

Here are two different "styles" of rubber handled M4s. The one on the top is a Camillus M3 blade with an unmarked post war cross guard. The peen on the latch plate is re-done as the latch plate was likely replaced. The M4 on the bottom has, what I believe, a much later rubber handle. You can seen the results of a much improved mold technique. It has a well marked WWII CASE cross guard. and an intact original latch plate with the CASE style peen.. I sold both of these a few years ago. Sorry I can't add any real information.

Marv

[SKIPH]

I have both a Camillus, and an RCC M3 blade marked, rubber handled M4s. There are, from what I've seen, two different quality of rubber handles on these conversions. One is like what Gary, Thorin6, and Marv posted, and the other type is a cheaper, lower grade of rubber, on which the grooves don't align. Both of mine have the better grade handles. SKIP

[SKIPH]

Here's my Camillus! SKIP

[jw517]

I have never seen a Camillus m-4 with a HempHills latch plate. Makes me think these are parts knives for sure. The finish on the Camillus blades does not look right. (Normally real black park) without evidence on paper from some place I think we will keep wondering.

[bayonetman]

I think it is plain that there are all kinds of variations of these, with no consensus as to when and by whom they were made.

 

I have inquired of several of the importers who have advertised these in the past. Only two responded at the time with good information, Northridge International and Liberty Tree Collectors. Both indicated at the time (some years ago) that the bayonets had been acquired from the Republic of Korea (South Korea). That is in line with what I have been told elsewhere.

 

I have one with a Camillus marked guard, but the latch plate is the dimple type shown in my first post. No blade markings. This type, with a marked guard but not on the latch place is fairly common. It has been assumed that these were leather handled M4s that had the grip replaced, but again there is no real evidence of when it was done and by whom.

 

 

 

 

Note the latch plate is still attached by a US style starburst peen. The side and top view of the grip shows how thin it is, and this varies considerably on observed specimens.

 

[thorin6]

I have never seen a Camillus m-4 with a HempHills latch plate. Makes me think these are parts knives for sure. The finish on the Camillus blades does not look right. (Normally real black park) without evidence on paper from some place I think we will keep wondering.

 

My rubber handled M4 dates from 1952-53 from when my father carried an M1 Carbine in Korea with the 40th Infantry Division. I don't think there was any commercial entity making these in Korea during the Korean War. As to why the Hemphill lockplate was used; I don't think Camillus used Hemphill lockplates on their factory M4s, but we are looking at the question of rebuilding M4 bayonets, not factory issued ones.

 

As to where the bayonet came from, it is my speculation (and only a speculation) that these were done in Japan along with the wooden handle M4s by Japanese workers under the control of the Ordnance Corps. The Japanese had the skill and equipment to make small pieces of equipment, to include replacement stocks for rifles (in two pieces). It may have been cheaper and faster to refurbish bayonets there than to have them made and shipped from the US but I have no evidence to support that supposition. One thing to consider; right after WWII quite a few crates of weapons and other gear were disposed of instead of being stored, and the US troops in Japan were short many items of equipment. It was a scramble in 1950-51 to get equipment to the forces in Korea.

 

So another question; can anyone provide dates as to the earliest they acquired a rubber handled M4?

 

[bayonetman]

Last major variation - this one probably converted/refurbished in Korea and is rather commonly found.

 

 

 

These are totally unmarked, and do not usually show the dimple in the latchplate. The peen of the tang to the latchplate is crude, and the latch retaining pins are not usually staked or well seated. The grip is larger and more roughly molded - this specimen is like new and the flash was never trimmed.

 

IF we are willing to make some assumptions (which must be done CAREFULLY) we might think along these lines:

 

Some work was probably being done in Japan prior to the modification of the 58,000+ M3s to M4, as it appears that there had to be some reason for the idea to allow the conversions to be made there. They may have been repairing or refurbishing standard M4s. The QUESTION is, were the ones being worked on in Japan being refitted with leather grips or is it possible that the use of molded rubber began there? If that was being done as early as 1952, that could explain the ones like that shown by Bill (thorin6) that his father brought back in 1953.

 

It would make sense that rubber was used as it is in some ways superior to leather in durability in humid/tropical conditions, and was likely cheaper than leather in Japan. Also, if indeed there were a large number of M3s converted to M4 in Japan, as is known as fact, where are they if they were leather handled? All the ones with blade marked M3s shown in this thread, and in my experience, have rubber handles. I am not ready to declare it as a fact, but I do think it is possible that these were rubber not leather, which would help to account for the large number of the rubber handled variants around.

 

By the time the bulk order had been completed in late 1953, the US Army was rearming the South Korean Army and the M1 / M2 carbines were quite popular in Korea due to their size. So it makes some sense that the 58.000 bayonets made in Japan would have simply been given to the ROK military. That would help explain the large numbers being imported from the Korea area in the last 20 or so years.

 

As of yet, no PROOF that the rubber handled M4s were made in Japan and given to the Koreans, but it is a possibility that bears further investigation in my opinion.

 

 

[SKIPH]

I can remember back in the late 60s, a surplus company called "P & S Sales" out of Oklahoma were offering rubber handled M4 bayonets. Less than $5. So they were being surplused about 14 years or so, after production. Not sure if the Koreans were surplusing them out at that time though. They were still carrying M1 carbines. Which kind of makes me think they could possibly be coming out of US surplus supplies. Sure wish I still had those catalogs. SKIP

[thorin6]

While this topic is about the rubber handle M4s, I mentioned the wood handle M4s in my post #10 above as possibly being part of the work refurbishing M4s. Here is a picture of a late war Japanese NCO sword handle; does this pattern and wood look familiar?

 

 

 

[jw517]

I've seen that pattern some place before. It's a m4 handle!

[SKIPH]

My M1928 Japanese NCO Sword has the same exact handle. Great connection! Lots of "out of work" Japanese weapons makers in that time frame. SKIP

[Windraider]

Hello,

This discussion has been going on for a long time, but I would also like to introduce a rubber grip M4.

It remained in an almost unused condition. This allows conclusions about the quality of workmanship, etc.

The quality of the rubber grip is very good. It is probably made of natural rubber and not of synthetic material that decomposes over the years and is not UV-resistant.

The handle was probably glued. At the bottom you can still see glue residues.

The metal parts are well phosphated. The latch plate is from standard products. At the Peen one recognizes that the latch plate was removed. She was well secured again.

The Peen was sealed in black paint, as known from US repairs or production from the 1950's.

Among all the variants shown, this is the highest quality and differs significantly.

 

Best Regards

[Windraider]

Last major variation - this one probably converted/refurbished in Korea and is rather commonly found.

 

Overall handle.jpg

 

Guard Latchplate.jpg

 

These are totally unmarked, and do not usually show the dimple in the latchplate. The peen of the tang to the latchplate is crude, and the latch retaining pins are not usually staked or well seated. The grip is larger and more roughly molded - this specimen is like new and the flash was never trimmed.

 

IF we are willing to make some assumptions (which must be done CAREFULLY) we might think along these lines:

 

Some work was probably being done in Japan prior to the modification of the 58,000+ M3s to M4, as it appears that there had to be some reason for the idea to allow the conversions to be made there. They may have been repairing or refurbishing standard M4s. The QUESTION is, were the ones being worked on in Japan being refitted with leather grips or is it possible that the use of molded rubber began there? If that was being done as early as 1952, that could explain the ones like that shown by Bill (thorin6) that his father brought back in 1953.

 

It would make sense that rubber was used as it is in some ways superior to leather in durability in humid/tropical conditions, and was likely cheaper than leather in Japan. Also, if indeed there were a large number of M3s converted to M4 in Japan, as is known as fact, where are they if they were leather handled? All the ones with blade marked M3s shown in this thread, and in my experience, have rubber handles. I am not ready to declare it as a fact, but I do think it is possible that these were rubber not leather, which would help to account for the large number of the rubber handled variants around.

 

By the time the bulk order had been completed in late 1953, the US Army was rearming the South Korean Army and the M1 / M2 carbines were quite popular in Korea due to their size. So it makes some sense that the 58.000 bayonets made in Japan would have simply been given to the ROK military. That would help explain the large numbers being imported from the Korea area in the last 20 or so years.

 

As of yet, no PROOF that the rubber handled M4s were made in Japan and given to the Koreans, but it is a possibility that bears further investigation in my opinion.

 

 

 

 

Hello,

 

At the moment, a late M4 bayonet made by Conetta with such a rubber handel is offered on ebay (Nr. 312271084339). If the Conetta / Bren-Dan bayonets were manufactured from 1968 to 1971, the overhaul must be done later.

 

Regards

[SKIPH]

Windraider- Checked out the rubber handled Conetta on ebay. Interesting observation! The M4 is being sold by Northridge International, which is the same import company Gary Cunningham stated gave him the info about getting their bayonets from S.Korea. The South Koreans used M1 rifles, & M1 carbines at least into the 70s, or 80s. To me it's conceivable that even as late as the Conettas were manufactured, that a broken handled one, could have been repaired using the rough version rubber handle. This indicates that since the S. Koreans were using M1 carbines, why not repair the bayonets til use of the rifles was discontinued. Makes sense to me, well past the 1950s, but still a viable solution. Just a guess! SKIP

[MW76]

Figured I would bump an old thread with some new pics. Purchased this in the wild over the weekend. 

 

Rubber handled M4 with an M8 sheath. Guard marked "U.S. M4 Imperial" 

 

No other markings.

 

[Boone]

Here's my Case with a Korean K-M8A1 scabbard