JMB1943 Posted 20 August , 2018 Share Posted 20 August , 2018 This one caught my eye, and I thought that others here might also like to see it. . If I were to start a VERY specialized type of collection, this would be my first purchase. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 20 August , 2018 Share Posted 20 August , 2018 Very interesting to see JMB, I think I'll Give that Specialised collection a miss. Regards, Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 September , 2018 Share Posted 8 September , 2018 It would catch most people's eye! Nice serial mark, though - and isn't that NZ style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasemuseum Posted 11 September , 2018 Share Posted 11 September , 2018 Interesting variation on Lithgow markings. This link shows some of mine for comparison Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 11 September , 2018 Author Share Posted 11 September , 2018 My impression is that this is a true P.07 bayonet, just not made by Lithgow. Also, it is either dated 7 ‘19 OR the cypher is ER, but not both. As for the HQ, who knows? Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasemuseum Posted 12 September , 2018 Share Posted 12 September , 2018 Hi JMB, that bayonet is wrong on so many levels. It would be interesting to go over it with a micrometre and vernier, comparing it to a good example, and to try fitting it onto a rifle. It may have started life as a genuine bayonet, but it may also be an absolute work of fiction. Cheers Ross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 13 September , 2018 Share Posted 13 September , 2018 On 12/09/2018 at 16:00, Chasemuseum said: Hi JMB, that bayonet is wrong on so many levels. It would be interesting to go over it with a micrometre and vernier, comparing it to a good example, and to try fitting it onto a rifle. It may have started life as a genuine bayonet, but it may also be an absolute work of fiction. Cheers Ross It is so wrong on so many levels that I wondered who hoped to pass it off! JMB - was this an open auction or for sale job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muz303 Posted 18 September , 2018 Share Posted 18 September , 2018 I hope you haven't purchased this. It is a fake. Not worth 2 bob....just 2 observations that highlight the forgery...Lithgow stopped producing hooked quillon bayonets in 1915, this is dated 1919 and Lithgow bayonets did not contain the Royal cypher on the ricasso. King Edward (ER) was long gone by the time this bayonet was supposedly made. King George V (GR) was on the throne. An authentic Lithgow hooky looks like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 19 September , 2018 Author Share Posted 19 September , 2018 Yes, I’m very well aware that there is something rotten in the state of Denmark here. Thanks for the advice, I’ll save my shillings! Trajan, it was up on an online auction site, but I did not keep my eye on it. By the way, saw RAF/ I.C./ 8080 for sale today; JAC 12 ‘15; re-inspected ‘22; with clearance hole. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGJDEE Posted 19 September , 2018 Share Posted 19 September , 2018 Buyer beware !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 9 October , 2018 Share Posted 9 October , 2018 On 19/09/2018 at 05:16, JMB1943 said: Yes, I’m very well aware that there is something rotten in the state of Denmark here. ... By the way, saw RAF/ I.C./ 8080 for sale today; JAC 12 ‘15; re-inspected ‘22; with clearance hole. Thanks for the heads-up on the RAF piece the number sounds familiar and I'll try and find time to look through my short files on these one - all on GWF I think... Julian PS: Yes, usual hassle here, semester started, one completely new course to be prepared from ground-level up plus increasing amounts of homework for the boys that needs to be checked - never mind taxi and watching duty for the tennis and the football! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 9 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 9 October , 2018 Trajan, You are correct! Was posted by Garandy on Dec. 1, 2010; the photos look like exactly the self-same bayonet. Is nothing new under the Sun? Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 9 October , 2018 Share Posted 9 October , 2018 Thankee kindly - still catching up with things here on GWF so no time to search... Are you ok with H.Michael? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 9 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 9 October , 2018 Trajan, Happy to see you online again! Yes, we’ll be OK with the hurricane, in fact we offered our nephew and his family refuge from Panama City, but they are going west to her relatives to escape the eye of the storm. I’ll have to print out your table of RAF bayos to avoid any more duplications; you would think that somewhere the numbering system would have been recorded. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 10 October , 2018 Share Posted 10 October , 2018 8 hours ago, JMB1943 said: ... Happy to see you online again! Yes, we’ll be OK with the hurricane, in fact we offered our nephew and his family refuge from Panama City, but they are going west to her relatives to escape the eye of the storm. ... I’ll have to print out your table of RAF bayos to avoid any more duplications; you would think that somewhere the numbering system would have been recorded. Hi JMB, Good to be back after three weeks or so; and I owe you an e-mail and will do so as the pressure of the new term eases off - and keep clear of Michael! It is indeed very odd that nothing seems to be available on these RAF-marked bayonets, or, rather, the command structure that they might relate to. Please do whatever you want with the data assembled so far and add to it where necessary. It is one of several pot-boilers I have hanging around until I get free time (), like my article on Ersatz bayonets, the 1920 marking, weights and measures of Waffenfabrik 98/05's... Oh, and yes, I am supposed to be publishing things on the Roman army...!!! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 14 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 14 October , 2018 On 10/10/2018 at 02:09, trajan said: Hi JMB, It is indeed very odd that nothing seems to be available on these RAF-marked bayonets, or, rather, the command structure that they might relate to. Please do whatever you want with the data assembled so far and add to it where necessary. Julian Trajan, I won’t purloin your data, but will feed and water as necessary! Have already added two more entries, and will keep my eye out for more examples. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGJDEE Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 I would appreciate anyone’s thoughts on this P1907, perhaps another candidate for inclusion in this thread.? though the scabbard appears to be of the early internal chape pattern. Regards Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 Hmmm... Nickel-plated crossguard for parade use - or to conceal a made-up HQ? Hints of a joint there - and no date marks left, as scrubbed clean... Why no photograph of the pommel? Without personal inspection not possible to eb sure but I am not convinced it is entirely kosher, as it were... Just my opinion though! I am the well-known 'not a P.1907 expert'! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGJDEE Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 The item is offered with another bayonet which also shows signs of “plating”, which I have added to the thread. Just something not right about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 (edited) Absolutely, something not quite right. Scabbard looks fine - and a rare one at that - but off-hand, I have only ever seen scrubbed date-marks like that on RAF-issue bayonets, although these often have the maker's name scrubbed also. Perhaps not nickel-plated by silver-painted? Either way, my problem is the scrubbe date (odd) with that possible seam on the hook part, as inidcated by an apparent matching line on both sides... See below. NOT saying it isn't kosher, just would like to see it in hand before making any decision! JMB might be able to offer more from the inspection marks on 'tother side. Looking at the grips on the P.07 and the apparently nickel-plated or silver-painted crossguard on the Gras perhaps over-enthisiatic treatment for diisplay purposes? Edited 17 October , 2018 by trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasemuseum Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 I would have thought that the parts are painted silver. It used to be a practice to paint exposed steel with "silver frost" to protect it from corrosion. This would not have been done in military service. The other item that looks odd, the securing ring of the bayonet looks like it has been bent slightly to the rear Frankly I would not pass a judgement without being able to inspect it in the flesh, I suspect that it is OK, only abused. Ross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGJDEE Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 Thankyou both got your thoughts. In my quest to obtain a reasonably priced HQ I have been constantly. trawling the auction sites for the chance of a “bargain”, not sure if this one “sight and feel unseen “ is the one ! R Like the scabbard though and surely those are replacement grips ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 17 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 17 October , 2018 Richard, I have to say that I do not like the HQ. General dimensions seem OK, but the bevels on what is normally a slab-sided or rounded HQ are not right. The "BANBEREE" name suggests to me an Indian origin (jamboree/pugaree etc). The inspection stamps are not distinct enough to compare to my database, but seem OK in general layout and format. If it were me, and the price is not too high, I would buy it just for the scabbard (unless that too is suspect) and sell the bayonet as an acknowledged fake. Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGJDEE Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 6 minutes ago, JMB1943 said: Richard, I have to say that I do not like the HQ. General dimensions seem OK, but the bevels on what is normally a slab-sided or rounded HQ are not right. The "BANBEREE" name suggests to me an Indian origin (jamboree/pugaree etc). The inspection stamps are not distinct enough to compare to my database, but seem OK in general layout and format. If it were me, and the price is not too high, I would buy it just for the scabbard (unless that too is suspect) and sell the bayonet as an acknowledged fake. Regards, JMB Thanks JMB, sound advice. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave66 Posted 17 October , 2018 Share Posted 17 October , 2018 It certainly looks to me a little suspicious, but as stated needs careful close up viewing in person if possible. As JMB has stated, the scabbard, if correct, is the most desirable thing out of the whole lot so may be worth a small bid just for that....one has surfaced recently on its own with a price tag of 200. Dave. 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