I have always been interested in the mk2, but have been hesitant to buy one because I was afraid to get stuck with a reproduction. I have been doing my research and when I saw a few nice ones at the gun show today I decided to just buy them, hoping they were indeed from the WW II period. I think I got one of the earlier Camillus knives with the screw on pommel - and I'm hoping some of you can confirm that for me. I attached two photos, that's all I could attach based on the 150k limit, the blade is stamped "Camillus, N.Y." on the other side. I think it has the wrong scabbard, but the kinfe is in good shape (I believe it should have a leather scabbard, but came with the plastic gray USN mark 2).

 

I'm looking forward to learning and collecting more mk2's - even if I have to learn the hard way on this purchase.

 

Thanks for any feedback you may have.

 

Mike

Adding the other pics of the knife above.

McKeon:

 

First, welcome to the Forum. You will like it here.

 

Next, ya done good with the Mark 2. That is a very handsome example of the screw on pommel. My recommendation would be that you invest in a couple of the good US blade books to help you in learning more about the topic, and to avoid the inevitable land mines out there.

 

Good luck.

 

Regards,

Charlie

Thanks, Charlie.

 

I have a few blade books and I am ordering a few more today.

 

Can you weigh in on whether the scabbard in my picture is correct for the knife? Page 86 in Cole III implies to me that the correct scabbard is leather, am I taking the picture too literally?

 

Mike

Thanks, Charlie.

 

I have a few blade books and I am ordering a few more today.

 

Can you weigh in on whether the scabbard in my picture is correct for the knife? Page 86 in Cole III implies to me that the correct scabbard is leather, am I taking the picture too literally?

 

Mike

 

this is correct......the original scabbard was leather.

 

greg

Yes, I agree with Greg. The original sheath was brown leather. Sheaths got swapped around a lot with the only consideration being "Does it fit?" Still a very nice blade.

 

Regards,

Charlie

I've got an identical USN mk2, screw base, plastic sheath. I dont think I've ever seen a minty leather sheath, only beat-up stretched out falling apart ones...

Nice score

 

Here is what I believe to be an early sheath w/ screw pommel MKII...

 

Unfortunately someone thought they needed to "clean" the blade.... :crying:

 

Here is an example of a Navy Mark 2 fighting knife in my collection.

 

 

 

 

 

It does not have the early screw-on pommel, however, it does have a 1943-dated USN leather scabbard made by Boyt.

 

 

 

 

What is current thinking on when the transition was made from leather scabbards to the grey plastic style? Did the transition in use for the Navy coincide with the Army's change away from the M6 leather scabbard for the M3 fighting knife?

 

Also, why was there a transition from the screw-on pommel to a pinned version? Was it a matter of stability, the pommel becoming unscrewed with hard use?

 

Thanks for the education.

 

Tim

The screw-on pommel failed the first field tests and the thin pinned-pommel replaced it.

The screw-on pommel failed the first field tests and the thin pinned-pommel replaced it.

 

 

Yep, they were supposedly "recalled" or whatever passed for that back then. I am not sure that "Mark 2" or "MK 2" was a term in use when mine was made or if it was the offical designation of the knife design that actually "passed inspection" so to speak.

Yep, they were supposedly "recalled" or whatever passed for that back then. I am not sure that "Mark 2" or "MK 2" was a term in use when mine was made or if it was the offical designation of the knife design that actually "passed inspection" so to speak.

 

I have no idea whether the version with the screwed-on pommel was "officially" designated the Mark 2, but, its design definitely differs from that of the Mark 1 so I would be surprised if it were not given a "2" designation. Also, I would be surprised if a knife were submitted for field testing with no designation, even an unofficial one.

 

Would like to see what others think/know about the process of field testing and acceptance.

 

Tim

Here is a link that I found to support the "recall" but I'd like to read it somewhere more reliable.

 

http://www.grunt.com/scuttlebutt/corps-sto.../wwIIknives.asp

but I'd like to read it somewhere more reliable.

 

 

Cole's Book III pg. 86 has some info on the subject....... he uses the term "returned to factory" granted the info is 30+ yrs old and new revalations may have come to light.

The problem with the first Camillus design was that the heavy pommel was held by the spanner nut shown in the photos. This nut did not hold the pommel tightly and if the pommel was turned, it could unscrew the nut. However, this was not the only problem, or actually the most important one. The threaded section of the tang is of small diameter and any stress on the pommel (such as using it as a hammer, or dropping it on a hard surface) broke the small threaded section of the tang.

Most of the information that I mention here is from Frank Trzaska in his outstanding article on these knives (The USN Mark 2, Knife World, August 2006). For further information you may wish to obtain this issue from Knife World.

The change is shown on some Camillus working drawings dated 11/23/43 although it is almost certain that it actually occurred well before that date.

Some quantity of this model did get into service, so I am not sure that they were "tested" or if the problem simply developed quickly and orders were given to return the unissued ones to Camillus. Whatever happened, Camillus replaced the pommel plate with a new thinner one which was pinned to the full width rectangular tang. I have gotten two of the screw pommel versions from veterans that they were issued to, so at least some were actually issued and used.

Whatever happened, a fair amount were never issued and were sold by a surplus company in the 1960s as I recall. These were in unused, unissued condition.



As far as the nomenclature went, opinions vary. The War Contracts listings are no help whatsoever as they use all sorts of names for the knives that were ordered. However Frank states in the article mentioned above that the original specifications called the knife Fighting Knife Mark 2, drawing number 394831, dated April 13, 1943.

Keep in mind that early Mark 1 and Mark 2 knives were not marked as such - that is, the Navy marking is simply U.S.N. on both. Some early production KaBar, Robeson and Camillus Mark 2 knives are marked simply U.S.N. However, both Mark 1 and Mark 2 production changed over fairly early to incorporate the Mk1 or Mk 2 marks.

As for the changeover to the plastic scabbard, the first contract was issued to Beckwith / Victory Plastics in November, 1943. So the changeover from leather scabbards to the Plastic Mark 2 scabbard began to occur about the beginning of 1944, although leather scabbards were used for some time after that. Since the changeover to the guard markings did not occur until June of 1944, some of the blade marked versions were issued in the plastic scabbard and at least in theory all of the guard marked used the Mark 2 scabbard.

Just as a side note, the early leather scabbards were marked U.S.N. at the front near the throat, although Boyt marked theirs on the frog along with the 1943 date. This marking disappeared fairly early, apparently so that the same scabbard could be used for either the Navy or Marine knife.