1907 Bayonet markings help.

[shippingsteel]

All the P1913 production bayonets were never made with the clearance hole (except for the small number of Vickers examples that were made later during 1917)

I don't believe the British contract included the specifications for the hole, as the design was finalised much earlier than the commercial production process began.

However when the American manufacturing operations were taken over to supply their own army, the new M1917 bayonet design did specify the clearance hole.

This is where the complications arise. As there were quite a lot of late production P1913 bayonets in stock and many were overstamped to then become "M1917".

Now some of these P1913/M1917 examples were later drilled with the clearance hole in accordance with the American design specifications, and some were not.

So nothing is ever as straightforward as it seems (or should be.!) and there are enough twists and turns to keep anybody intrigued in bl***y bayonets for a lifetime.

EDIT. I think Skennerton has got it ar** about, as the P1913 trials bayonets (both Enfield & Vickers) never had the clearance hole either. But the later Vickers DID.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

It's a pretty rough looking clearance hole! I think most (all?) of the RAF marked bayonets are between the wars.

Sadly, I have no further data on that posted one (http://1914-1918.inv...howtopic=155461), but I have recorded an RAF-marked 12/15 JAC with a '22 're-issue' mark - http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?14563-P-1907-RAF-marked-bayonet

[trajan]

All the P1913 production bayonets were never made with the clearance hole (except for the small number of Vickers examples that were made later during 1917)

...However when the American manufacturing operations were taken over to supply their own army, the new M1917 bayonet design did specify the clearance hole. ... This is where the complications arise. As there were quite a lot of late production P1913 bayonets in stock and many were overstamped to then become "M1917".

Well, it is only natural that none of the original 1913 models were made with a clearance hole given that the desperate need for these was not recognised until 1916...

But I am more intrigued by your suggestion that there are some P.1913 bayonets that have been over-stamped to make them P.1917's. Do you have an example? If so, do share please!

Trajan

[shippingsteel]

As there were quite a lot of late production P1913 bayonets in stock and many were overstamped to then become "M1917".

[trajan]

Now I am with you (I think!). But you show the right ricasso only - my interest was whether the '1913' on the left ricasso was over-stamped to make it read 1917? That was the implication of my literal reading of your initial statement, that "were quite a lot of late production P1913 bayonets in stock and many were overstamped to then become "M1917"."

[msdt]

I haven't heard or seen any 1913's taken into US service that also had the model number overstamped, Trajan. S>S's pictures show the typical change - though some have US struck twice for some reason.

Re the M1917, the very first production also had NO clearance hole. Read somewhere that this represented October's production or thereabouts. Maybe they were 1913 bayonets already produced but not yet stamped at all, of just changing over the production processes. I have 2, so they cannot be particularly rare.

Cheers,

Tony

[shippingsteel]

Yes Tony, that month was in the transition period (see below) and the M1917's without holes would have been from when they were using up stocks of unfinished P1913 bayonets.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

Alles klar - sort off! Although we have digressed far and wide from Impact's OP!

Trajan

[Lancashire Fusilier]

EDIT. I think Skennerton has got it ar** about, as the P1913 trials bayonets (both Enfield & Vickers) never had the clearance hole either. But the later Vickers DID.

Cheers, S>S

Looks like page 192 of Skennerton & Richardson's book is in error, as it certainly says that Pattern 1913 Mk.I Sword Bayonets had no hooked quillon, had two vertical grooves across the grips, and the addition of a clearance hole in the pommel, and seeing several Pattern 1913s with no clearance hole confirms the book error.

Many thanks.

Regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

I now have a copy of the List of Changes 17692, which relates to the drilling of the clearance hole through the pommel of the Pattern 1907 Sword Bayonet.

The exact text should clear up any ambiguity :-

" 17692 - Sword Bayonet, Pattern 1907, Mark I. 5 Jan 1916

23 Feb 1916

Drilling of clearance hole through pommel

In future manufacture, sword-bayonets of the above mentioned pattern ( LoC 14170 ) will have a hole drilled through the pommel to facilitate the removal of mud, dirt, &c., that may accumulate in the bottom of the mortice for the sword bar of the rifle nose-cap, and so prevent the bolt of the sword-bayonet shooting and locking the sword-bayonet on the rifle.

In workshops where the necessary machinery and tools are available the hole may be drilled, as occasion offers, through the pommel to the size and in the position shown in the accompanying drawing, the position first being marked off. "

There are certain key words in LoC 17692 which explain why so many Pattern 1907 Sword-Bayonets exist today with no hole drilled in their pommel.

1. " in workshops where necessary machinery and tools are available ". Such a location may not have been available.

2. " the hole may be drilled ", for future manufacture the word " will " is used, whereas for existing sword-bayonets, the word " may " is used rather than must, shall or will, meaning it was optional.

3. " as occasion offers ", again leaving the implementation of the LoC to individual circumstances, rather than it being mandatory.

LF

[trajan]

That's a great find! Clears up things nicely!

For my own part (although I say it myself) I am finding that going through the German documents relevant to GW bayonets is also serving to put our mutual interests and studies on a firmer basis... E.G., http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=208575&page=5#entry2170187

I know that some bayonet collectors and enthusiasts are wary of "bookish learnin", but oftentimes the documentation IS there, and it is the only way to get facts straight and so improve and enhance general knowledge. As you will know, LF. there is a tad too much 'received opinion' when it comes to bayonet 'facts'...

Now all I need is a document - an A[ir]CI? - to confirm that the RAF-marking on P.1907 (and, apparently, on P.1913) bayonets is indeed to be dated 1940 or later (see: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=218466#entry2170061). Or, if necessary, completely turn that idea upside down!

TTFN,

Julian

[shippingsteel]

The wording of LoC para 17692 applies both to the future manufacture, as well as bayonets already in service.

Under the headline "Drilling of clearance hole through pommel"

It reads, "In future manufacture, sword-bayonets of the above mentioned pattern will have a hole drilled through the pommel to facilitate the removal of mud, dirt, ... etc., that may accumulate in the bottom of the mortice for the sword bar of the rifle nose-cap, and so prevent the bolt of the sword-bayonet shooting and locking the sword-bayonet on the rifle."

And also, "In workshops where the necessary machinery and tools are available the hole may be drilled, as occasion offers, through the pommel to the size and in the position shown in the accompanying drawing, the position first being marked off."

It also illustrates by way of the drawing and measurements, the exact position on the pommel for this hole to be drilled by the armourers. Many were so drilled.

Cheers, S>S

EDIT. Full text from LoC now added (extra detail in italics)

Source "List of Changes in British War Material in relation to Edged Weapons, Firearms and Associated Ammunition and Accoutrements" Vol.IV I.D.Skennerton

[Impact93]

*original post author*

Holy crap you guys! I come back 1 month later and have 55 notifications. ALL for this thread.

Yeesh!

[trajan]

... EDIT. Full text from LoC now added (extra detail in italics)

Source "List of Changes in British War Material in relation to Edged Weapons, Firearms and Associated Ammunition and Accoutrements" Vol.IV I.D.Skennerton

And the point of your post is?

*original post author*

Holy crap you guys! I come back 1 month later and have 55 notifications. ALL for this thread.

Yeesh!

That'll larn ye! But well done on posting a simple query that had raised a lot of other issues! The joy of GWF!

Trajan

[Lancashire Fusilier]

That's a great find! Clears up things nicely!

Julian

Julian,

Thanks, it was interesting to see the complete text.

I am sure something will turn up on the RAF P1907's, I did look through the LoC s for 1918-1926 and could not find any mention of them.

Regards,

LF

[trajan]

Julian,

Thanks, it was interesting to see the complete text.

I am sure something will turn up on the RAF P1907's, I did look through the LoC s for 1918-1926 and could not find any mention of them.

Regards,

LF

Those RAF-marked ones... I think we need to see the A(ir)CI instructions for 1942... The markings are so internally consistent that it seems like a single series of dies were used and at that when the RAF Regiment was formed, and so a major job for some jobsworth and his slaves stationed somewhere in 1942.

[trajan]

The wording of LoC para 17692 applies both to the future manufacture, as well as bayonets already in service.

Under the headline "Drilling of clearance hole through pommel"

It reads, "In future manufacture, sword-bayonets of the above mentioned pattern will have a hole drilled through the pommel to facilitate the removal of mud, dirt, ... etc., that may accumulate in the bottom of the mortice for the sword bar of the rifle nose-cap, and so prevent the bolt of the sword-bayonet shooting and locking the sword-bayonet on the rifle."

And also, "In workshops where the necessary machinery and tools are available the hole may be drilled, as occasion offers, through the pommel to the size and in the position shown in the accompanying drawing, the position first being marked off."

It also illustrates by way of the drawing and measurements, the exact position on the pommel for this hole to be drilled by the armourers [stress added]. Many were so drilled.

Cheers, S>S

EDIT. Full text from LoC now added (extra detail in italics)

Source "List of Changes in British War Material in relation to Edged Weapons, Firearms and Associated Ammunition and Accoutrements" Vol.IV I.D.Skennerton

JFI for all readers, and to complete this discussion, as SS didn't post a copy of the drawing he mentioned above, here is one that I found.

[trajan]

And here is a nice 10/1915 Sanderson with a clearance hole that has just popped over here... Interesting, isn't it? What does the team think - 'period' condition???

[Andrew Upton]

And here is a nice 10/1915 Sanderson with a clearance hole that has just popped over here... Interesting, isn't it? What does the team think - 'period' condition???

Apart from the P-1913/M-1917 grips of course...

[trajan]

Apart from the P-1913/M-1917 grips of course...

Quite! When this first came up I though, "Best check if it is an odd P.13 or M.17", and then - "Hello, hello, hello, wot's all this here then, eh?" The scabbard is nice, though, so I might just go for it and get some reproduction grips... Bearing in mind, that I am not really a GB etc. P.1907 bayonet and clones collector!

[Andrew Upton]

...I might just go for it and get some reproduction grips...

Just tried to send you a PM, empty your mail...

[trajan]

Just tried to send you a PM, empty your mail...

Done!

JB

[Andrew Upton]

Done!

JB

And done

[trajan]

And here is a nice 10/1915 Sanderson with a clearance hole that has just popped over here... Interesting, isn't it? What does the team think - 'period' condition???

134663966_tn70_0.jpg 134663966_tn70_3.jpg 134663966_tn70_5.jpg

Well, I did buy this one and I finally managed to get the grips off - the Bu**er who fixed the WW2 grips bent the screws in doing so and so it took a wee bit of thinking (not being mechanically or technologically minded) to get everything off and tomorrow I pack them and send them to their new home (you know who you are! ).

Fortunately I have some good 'period' grips to go on this bayonet (recycled from a spare post WW1 P.1907 that now has 'modern' replacement WD-marked grips), as I'll keep it as a nice clean example of a 1915 with a clearance hole - but before I put those on I thought I put up the tang markings here for the cognoscenti! I do love the little WD arrow on the obverse side! Anyway, if they are not clear enough, then let me know and I'll list the markings...

Trajan

[JMB1943]

Now, who is going to take up the challenge to compile a series of photographs of what is on GWF and the web re: pre-1916 bayonets with/without clearance holes and give us some idea of relative numbers of these as posted? Yes, sources will be required when publishing the analysis, and yes, sample-bias will apply - but only to some extent.

Trajan-----OK, I'll give it a go, since I seem to spend a fair amount of time on GWF anyway and have learned a lot from the aficionados here.

1. Just to be clear, I'll be looking for P.1907 Bayonets (Chapman, Enfield, Mole, Sanderson) manufactured up to & including 12 '15---correct ?***

2. Was Lithgow making them at this time ? If so, include ?

3. Are the Remington M/P 1913's to be included ?

4. Documentation will be via Excel spreadsheet, with bayonets identified by number (1, 2, 3 etc); photos (saved as Word docs.) will be identified by the bayonet number.

5. Headers--- Mfr. Month Year CH (Y/N) Inspection Dates Source

6. Any advice/comments/changes etc. before I commit pen to paper ?????

***In reality, I'm sure that I'll look at every P.1907 I can find, regardless of date.

Regards,

JMB