Unusual markings to “MOLE” bayonet

[JMB1943]

Steve,

 

The MOLE production was 60,000 compared to VICKERS and "Smiling Tiger" bayos to Siam by BSA in 1920 at 10,000 each (Skennerton).

However, the MOLE is much harder to find but usually sells for less than the VICK or SIAM bayos.

 

Regards,

JMB

[trajan]

On 20/07/2018 at 03:25, shippingsteel said:

As the topic name suggests, this bayonet exhibits very unusual markings for a "Mole" bayonet ... So as I suggested above, I believe this bayonet (or blade only) was only partially completed at Enfield with further work and finishing being undertaken by R.Mole in Birmingham, and hence Maker marked by Mole. Exactly why this would have happened I cannot fully explain, but I think the real story lies somewhere in the winding up of bayonet production at RSAF Enfield. The date on this example of Jan. 1916 is also very telling as it ties in perfectly with the above scenario.

 

The background story is covered slightly in B&CB (Skennerton) pg.190 but basically Enfield ceased making bayonets to allow them to concentrate on rifles, and asked the contractors to take up the slack. I can imagine that stocks of unfinished bayonets may have been farmed out for further work and completion by the contractors (including Mole) and that is why this particular bayonet looks to all intents to be an EFD but is actually marked with an MOLE.  

 

Certainly a reasonable explanation - and as all who venture into dedicated bayonet collecting the more we learn of how the 'exception that proves the rule' is more common than might be thought! 

[RGJDEE]

Thanks for your thoughts

R

[RGJDEE]

Whilst trawling previous threads on Mole P1907 s I found this example with similar date stamps to mine.Perhaps another EFD/MOLE cross ??

[navydoc16]

On 20/07/2018 at 10:25, shippingsteel said:

As the topic name suggests, this bayonet exhibits very unusual markings for a "Mole" bayonet ... and certainly not your 'regular' Mole wartime production. There are a number of discrepancies that just do not add up ... but I would like to say I do believe this is a perfectly legit P1907.

(See regular Mole markings below with Birmingham inspections)

 

And it's not just the inspection, pattern and date stampings which don't make sense for a 'regular' Mole, but also the way the blade was made. The fuller shape and blade runout, in my experience, all scream Enfield production. And the style of the Pattern number and date stampings would also support Enfield production, NOT Mole.

(See regular Mole 1916 production below)

 

Then we have that 'odd' inspection marking with the plain block letter E. Again this style stamping is very unusual but not unheard of. As Chris mentioned previously it is reminiscent of those seen on the early Remington P1913's which were inspected by the Enfield inspectors in America. The plain E inspectors mark is unusual but did exist, and importantly, AT Enfield.

So to all intents and purposes this is an Enfield produced blade that has been Maker stamped by Mole.

(See a Remington P1913 ricasso with E letter below)

 

So as I suggested above, I believe this bayonet (or blade only) was only partially completed at Enfield with further work and finishing being undertaken by R.Mole in Birmingham, and hence Maker marked by Mole. Exactly why this would have happened I cannot fully explain, but I think the real story lies somewhere in the winding up of bayonet production at RSAF Enfield. The date on this example of Jan. 1916 is also very telling as it ties in perfectly with the above scenario.

 

The background story is covered slightly in B&CB (Skennerton) pg.190 but basically Enfield ceased making bayonets to allow them to concentrate on rifles, and asked the contractors to take up the slack. I can imagine that stocks of unfinished bayonets may have been farmed out for further work and completion by the contractors (including Mole) and that is why this particular bayonet looks to all intents to be an EFD but is actually marked with an MOLE.  

is there a EFD marking on the spine of the bayonet blade, I have seen several finished by contractors, marked EFD on the spine underside the handle to denote blade blanks sent out of the factory but not finished there (supposedly) 

I have none on hand right now but I posted these photos before of my 1956 refurb. 

kind regards,

g

Edited 10 April by navydoc16

[navydoc16]

There is another thread on gun boards that discuss the slightly odd marking that early MOLE in particular used for inspectors markings

they posted these photos showing some very 1913 looking markings

 

kishowing