Jump to content

UFH Bayonet Question


Darktide
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hope someone can help with this one... This is a UFH 1943 dated bayonet which is being sold in the Philippines. I am thinking of getting it but a friend said that it was no good as it has been shortened. The seller states that it has a 10" blade and has not been sharpened.

 

My question is, has this been shortened after it left the factory? Based on what I have read here in the forum 10" seems to be the "normal blade length for a M-1 bayonet. I read that UFH used left-over blanks and cut them down, but that this was a factory job.

 

Does this make the bayonet in question "no good"?

 

I tried to copy the pics to post them here but am unable to do so. Please see the link.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, I can't open your picture but look at the bayonet, if the fuller or blood grove extend all of the way to the point it has been shortened. That is ok because the shortened ones are very collectible when the government came pout with the M bayonet they also had the existing 16 inch one in use cut down to 10 inches and reissued. hope this helps Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like a good WW2 cut down too me. But I think before I shipped it from the Philippines, I'd find one here....My 2 cents worth. I don't know what the shipping cost would be, but there high enough here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look on top of the tang behind the guard for the initials AFH or UFH. That would indicate this was factory shortened. If nothing there look on the opposite side of the markings on the blade; sometimes they are stamped there and possibly a PAL MOD indicating the PAL Blade company did the shortening.

Also note that the scabbard has been shortened from 16-inches to 10-inches. Should see a "REP" on the underside of the throat plate, as well as the B-N (with a number above the dash and one below the dash) which is the heat lot number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like a good WW2 cut down too me. But I think before I shipped it from the Philippines, I'd find one here....My 2 cents worth. I don't know what the shipping cost would be, but there high enough here...

he's in the Philippines....

 

and it looks good to me, just worn finish.

-Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of the "transitional" blades that Union Fork and Hoe used in April-May 1943. When the order came to convert to the 10 inch blade M1 bayonet, UFH had large numbers of forged blanks on hand with the fullers not yet finished to full depth. These were shortened to 10 inches prior to finishing the fullers to depth, which left a thinner "runout" at the tip.

 

Top: Transitional, no date, high location markings

 

2nd: Normal 16 inch M1905 shortened to 10 inch blade

 

3rd: Transitional, dated

 

4th: Normal 16 inch M1905 shortened to 10 inch, no date, low location markings

 

post-66-0-14592200-1467328866.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say it's good but the condition is a little rough. You can find nicer examples but if the price is right, grab it! I think the cutdowns are a little more collectable.

 

Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of the "transitional" blades that Union Fork and Hoe used in April-May 1943. When the order came to convert to the 10 inch blade M1 bayonet, UFH had large numbers of forged blanks on hand with the fullers not yet finished to full depth. These were shortened to 10 inches prior to finishing the fullers to depth, which left a thinner "runout" at the tip.

 

Top: Transitional, no date, high location markings

 

2nd: Normal 16 inch M1905 shortened to 10 inch blade

 

3rd: Transitional, dated

 

4th: Normal 16 inch M1905 shortened to 10 inch, no date, low location markings

 

attachicon.gifSet small.JPG

So Gary, are you saying this is a true M1905E1 used in the Infantry evaluation ... or no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bayonetman

So Gary, are you saying this is a true M1905E1 used in the Infantry evaluation ... or no?

No, not at all. The process of forging the blade blanks by UFH had a shallow fuller, which then needed to be brought to full depth by a later operation.

 

When the change was ordered to the M1 bayonet, UFH had a large number of blanks forged but not finished. These blanks were shortened in house and used for making M1 bayonets. They can be detected by the thinner fuller that runs past the full depth fuller, and by the lack of any marks showing who did the shortening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not at all. The process of forging the blade blanks by UFH had a shallow fuller, which then needed to be brought to full depth by a later operation.

 

When the change was ordered to the M1 bayonet, UFH had a large number of blanks forged but not finished. These blanks were shortened in house and used for making M1 bayonets. They can be detected by the thinner fuller that runs past the full depth fuller, and by the lack of any marks showing who did the shortening.

 

Thank you for the clarification

 

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...