Jump to content
Changes to Inboxes coming on September 1, 2025 - Please Read . . . ×

Recommended Posts

Posted

Picked this up recently for cheap. Has me confused as the hole indicates a trainer but the color and stencil appeared ok. A reproduction or a trainer made to look like a real one?Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kaptainssurplus
Posted

Looks like it was orginally a real M69 trainer. Doesn't look like one of those chinese fakes. Yours is pretty rough condition and the paint job was done by someone.

Posted

Has the number 7 stamped in top and bottom. Compare to my M69 trainer the body is thicker and so is the neck that the fuze screws in.Posted Image

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

M69 weighs 10.5 ounces without fuze and this one is 13.8 ounces.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

Not sure what to think. Looks cast, maybe for weight? M67 weighs 14 ounces w fuze. Lettering added, not right, painted, not inked. Stamped " 7" looks puzzling, not a cheap repro. My guess, a very early training grenade example or EOD training example. Lots of work in casting it to get the weight correct. My vote, original, early practice grenade....I have a few unissued, pristine practice grenades with both Vietnam era (FSN number inked- Pre1973) and later modern NSN numbers inked. I will weigh them out.

Kaptainssurplus
Posted

It sure is a cast fake, now with the new pics I can tell 100%. I have had 2 or 3 examples of these with the same cast number. It is an older fake, one of the better ones. I also have examples of every M69 variant made, I think there is 3 or 4 variants.

Posted

Thanks for the help gentleman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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
×
×
  • Create New...