Jump to content

Uncut UC dated M1 bayonet?


Recommended Posts

Hello all. I just picked this up on ebay and am a bit unsure if I'm correct about it being an uncut M1. Mainly because of the fuller. These do exist for UFH, OL, PAL, and UC and since I've been looking the UC seems to be the rarest one to find. I don't know if the fullers were done by hand or if this one could have been done early when machinery was being adjusted for the M!. Partway down the blade on both sides is the same odd pitting, including on the spine making wonder if this was a broken blade at one point and later on welded to make a full one? That doesn't seem to account for all of its uniqueness though. Wondering what the bayonet experts on here think. Can't ask Mr. Cole or Cunningham unfortunately. I'm not sure who the bayonet expert on here is now. Long winded post, I know. Thanks in advance.

post-107405-0-16016700-1581230680_thumb.jpg

post-107405-0-69690500-1581230742_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okie96,

I share your concern that there are problems with this bayonet. The first thing to address is whether or not this is a cut down. If you have a caliper, measure the depth of the fuller in the middle of the blade. Then measure the thickness of the blade just after the fuller stops (toward the tip of the blade). If the last inch and a half is thicker than the depth of the main part of the fuller, then it is not a cut down.

This measurement would normally be conclusive, but we have that "welded" area. Again, measure the fuller depth about an inch on each side of the suspicious weld area. Is there a noticeable difference? Even if it is welded, the bayonet appears to have been worked on a lot so as to make the two sides even, so you had better do the same measurement of the fuller in several places on each side of the suspected weld.

I have two pictures. One is a UC 1943 and the other is a UFH 1943. The UFH was made as a new M1, but was made with a 16 in. blank. When the fuller was finished to its final depth, it left the tip with an unfinished fuller.

It has not been found that UC had ever done this, but there is a similarity. Your bayonet has been so worked over, that any conclusions cannot be conclusive. (at least from my perspective)

Thanks for showing us this bayonet.

Marv

post-26996-0-94920300-1581261890_thumb.jpg

post-26996-0-09452100-1581261920_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marv brought up a good point about how "UFH" converted existing 16" blades to 10". Whose to say Utica didn't use the same procedure, just not documented. Measured a couple of my M1s, just to check the length, both just a tad under 10". My big concern would be that welded looking spot on the blade, Hard to tell if might just be a flaw in the steel, or a weld (I know nothing about welding). SKIP

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm messing with the caliper as you suggested Misfit 45 and the fuller seems to be between 25 and 35 thousandths until it begins to taper. The side opposite the markings can still be measured 1.5" from the tip however the end of the blade is definitely thicker than the thickness in the fuller checking both across and along. There doesn't seem to be any more variation around the "weld" then any other part of the blade. I haven't checked the variation on the regular UC M1 though. Not sure it's necessary.

It just seems odd that the mark is on both sides and the spine. I have some other bayonets with such odd marks over an area so perhaps it from corroding a certain way at one point in that area or manufacturing?

I know what you mean about the UFH M1s SKIP. Mine is like that as are all the others I have seen. Seems there quite a few of those around lately. I think it was a source from Mr. Cunningham detailed that as well, but only on the UFH bayonets. Though again, my thinking perhaps it was messed up setting up the machine but good enough to allow through.

I showed it to my Dad who has had a career in maintenance and is a very good welder and he's iffy on it. His thought are that it's odd the marks being all the way around and he pointed out a shade difference around that area. He said if it were welded the person did a very good job with it.

The thing is, unless it was repaired in service, why would someone bother to do such a good job with it or why bother even during the war? As far as it being done after being surplussed the only way it garners more value is if someone knows what this particular variation is. A regular M1 is only worth 75-125.

I don't know if it adds anything but I just noticed that the spotty appearance of the darkness, maybe finish?, still in the fuller only seems to begin after that area. Adds to the simple corrosion theory. However that might have happened with the amount of preservative, position, and moisture. The secluded deeper "pitting" seems similar to marks on other items that have been in cosmoline for a long time.

Another long post but I want to get across as much information as possible to try and reach a conclusion. I also thinks it is making a very interesting case study.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say for sure what the excepted practices for refurbishment and/or repair where during the time in service for the 1905/M1 bayonets. Looking over the technical data for the last 50 years or so, welding is not in the repair protocol. The written procedures would have considered the piece unsalvageable.

donation2014.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a look at the spine between the handles. "Most" cut downs I have run across have the modifying company initials stamped into the spine there. The most recent version I acquired is a 1942 UC version that has AFH (American Fork & Hoe) stamped into the handle spine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No initials. Yeah I don’t think the welding theory has much potential. It makes no sense here from a service or collectors point of view. I think it’s more likely an oddball at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, with over 40 years of welding experience, blade has been welded. Voids/ loss of material is clearly seen. Discoloration from heat also seen. An experienced TIG welder might weld a blade with no voids/ material loss. Discoloration from heat is hard hide unless it was blued or parkerized. Still a nice piece .

"The true Soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him" G.K. Chesterton

"A people that values it's privileges above its principles will soon lose both" D.D. Eisenhower


donation2009.gifdonation2011.gifdonation2012.gif

donation2017.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a teen-ager some 40 years ago, I knew a very advanced fighting knife and bayonet collector who told me that he would pay the whopping price of ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS if I could find him an uncut UC 1943 bayonet. I must have looked at hundreds of them over the years. He had a cutdown in his collection, but never came up with the long version. I've always wondered if an uncut example even existed. $1,000 would have been a hell of a find for a 15 year old.

 

Allan

Never under-estimate the power of prayer.

 

donation2007.gif

Link to post
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.