hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Share #1 Posted March 7, 2018 Seeveral unusual features, No date, different run out, higher location of fuller, different tip shape.. A standard M1905 and M1 bayonet shown for comparision. What is it? Your opinions appreciated.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Author Share #2 Posted March 7, 2018 More.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Author Share #3 Posted March 7, 2018 More.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Author Share #4 Posted March 7, 2018 More... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Author Share #5 Posted March 7, 2018 More... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 7, 2018 Author Share #6 Posted March 7, 2018 More.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
268th C.A. Posted March 7, 2018 Share #7 Posted March 7, 2018 It is different that's for sure, Brown grips too, I like it. I had too really look at it. Everything about says I'm different. Very cool and unusual bayonet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tankerman Posted March 7, 2018 Share #8 Posted March 7, 2018 Very interesting piece. U.C. 's in my collection have some different run-outs. Some almost look like different manufacturers. Most unusual. Wish GARY C. were still here to comment on this.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remman Posted March 7, 2018 Share #9 Posted March 7, 2018 The bayonet in question appears to be a marriage between a demilled US M1 bayonet and a Mauser style blade. The blade profile and fuller are almost identical to the Argentinian M1891 and M1909 bayonets. Back in the 80's and 90's this type of alteration was quite commonly seen for sale at gun shows and similar bayonets occasionally show up on ebay. This certainly doesn't mean that UC wasn't playing around with different style blades. Since the blade is undated it would seem to date it to after the switch had been made to 10 inch blades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tankerman Posted March 8, 2018 Share #10 Posted March 8, 2018 Remman; one of my first thoughts was possibly a re-weld . But with it not in hand I did not want to play that card. AND, as I wrote my UC's have some different run-outs and fuller shapes to a degree. IF IT IS A RE-WELD...someone did a rather nice job from the pics. Intereresting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 8, 2018 Author Share #11 Posted March 8, 2018 Very interesting piece. U.C. 's in my collection have some different run-outs. Some almost look like different manufacturers. Most unusual. Wish GARY C. were still here to comment on this.. Yes, I wish Gary was here to comment to. He is sorely missed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 8, 2018 Author Share #12 Posted March 8, 2018 I too thought it was a possible weldment, but I cannot detect anything to support this. Probably some sort of transition piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyrax222 Posted March 11, 2018 Author Share #13 Posted March 11, 2018 The bayonet in question appears to be a marriage between a demilled US M1 bayonet and a Mauser style blade. The blade profile and fuller are almost identical to the Argentinian M1891 and M1909 bayonets. Back in the 80's and 90's this type of alteration was quite commonly seen for sale at gun shows and similar bayonets occasionally show up on ebay. This certainly doesn't mean that UC wasn't playing around with different style blades. Since the blade is undated it would seem to date it to after the switch had been made to 10 inch blades. I looked at the M1891 and M1909 Mauser style bayonet blade contours, and this odd one I posted looks the same. So kudos to you sirs! (remman and tankerman),I am ignorant of all but US long bayonets. " I measured the ricasso, top and bottom, to check for taper from blend sanding (as after a weld). Measures .220"-.230", on top and same on bottom. A 1942 dated UC measured .235"-.250", top and bottom. The ricasso area finish is consistant with the best US production runs. To me it looks almost too good. Blade grind is beautiful.Finish (Parkerizing) is consistant over all. I examined ricasso under magnification to look for evidence of tampering. No surface irregularities noted except the "flaming bomb" stamp is not complete. And "UC" looks a little shallow... Compared with other UC marked bayonets I have, it looks within "spec" to me. So now I think this thing could be a weldment, because I can think of few ways this thing came to be. I just cant see evidence of it, yet.... 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