Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

dba

Bayonet Identification - Help plz

Recommended Posts

dba

Hi, I am trying to identify this bayonet. It is marked "C" "X" on one side of the blade and "04" on the other. The Blade is 12 inches in length. The overall length is 16.5 inches. The top has the number "40241" engraved. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you, DBA.

IMG_0001 2.JPG

IMG_0002 2.JPG

IMG_0003 2.JPG

IMG_0004.JPG

IMG_0005.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JMB1943

Hello DBA,

 

Welcome to the forum.

This looks like a British Pattern 1903 bayonet.

40241 on the pommel is an inventory number; there seems to be a letter, F or P, above the number.

X on the ricasso is the proof of the bending test.

04 may be the year of manufacture (19)04.

The bayonet lacks the crown and royal cypher, and the broad arrow (govt ownership) so was not made for the British Army.

This lack of official markings shows that this bayonet was probably made for private purchase, i.e. for a volunteer unit.

 

Regards,

JMB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OLD ROBIN HOOD

Greetings from Sherwood Forest

 

I agree with  JMB  , a very nice example of a private purchase Patt 1903 bayonet and in such good condition , does it have a scabbard ?,if so

could you post a picture of it please ?.

 

                                                 Old Robin Hood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shippingsteel
16 hours ago, JMB1943 said:

This looks like a British Pattern 1903 bayonet.

 

This may "look" like a P1903 in its overall shape, but it certainly IS NOT a British Pattern 1903 bayonet ... it looks like a foreign copy to me. There are noticeable differences in the blade, ricasso, grinding and spine together with the crossguard, timber grips, pommel and clearance hole.

 

Too say nothing of the markings which are unlike anything seen on British bayonets. It could possibly have been made in Afghanistan who were once known to make their own very rough copies of the British issue bayonet, plus some examples that were of better quality and standard.

 

Cheers, SS

Edited by shippingsteel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trajan
On 06/02/2020 at 09:26, shippingsteel said:

 

This may "look" like a P1903 in its overall shape, but it certainly IS NOT a British Pattern 1903 bayonet ... it looks like a foreign copy to me. There are noticeable differences in the blade, ricasso, grinding and spine together with the crossguard, timber grips, pommel and clearance hole.

 

Good points SS. But note that the 'C' is very similar in size and font to the 'CCC' mark and the 'C[star]C' marks used by an unknown maker of commercial P.1888's for volunteer units. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OLD ROBIN HOOD

Greetings from a very windswept Sherwood Forest.

 

I would like to make a few comments on SS's observations about the illustrated 1903 Pattern bayonet.

Whilst this bayonet is not made for issue to the British Forces it is none the less of the 1903 Pattern.  It is a

Volunteer / Commercial bayonet which I believe was made in Britain.

I have for some years included in my collection commercial bayonets, regrettably I do not have a

1903 but I do have several 1888's which utilise the same pattern of blade.  Some of these do not have the finish

of ordinance types and a poorer finish including grind marks is not unusual.  This however does not mean

that they have been produced abroad.  The markings on the blade coincide with those found on ordinance examples

as JMB points out. 04 for the year in which it was made (1904)  and X on the ricasso is  proof of the bending test. 

The quality of manufacture of the hilt from the photograph appears to be very good with an excellent metal to metal fit

where the catch fits into the pommel.  Looking at the wooden grips I would say that they may have at some time been replaced.

So I repeat that this is a nice example of a PRIVATE PURCHACE Pattern 1903 bayonet which I would be proud to have in my own collection.

  

                                                                     Old Robin Hood (militaria collector since 1958)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shippingsteel

Well where I come from, cobbling a P1907 pommel and a P1907 crosspiece to a P1888 style blade does not maketh a British Pattern 1903.! Anyone familiar with British bayonets should be able to identify these individual components.

 

No one has yet commented on the pommel stamping. Well it is an F series 5 digit serial number which is usually encountered on a specific type of P1907 bayonet. And the pommel shape very closely resembles that same specific type of P1907 bayonet. You can even date a particular bayonet to when it was manufactured from this very serial number.!

 

Without holding this example in my hands for closer inspection I won't say definitely what this is ... but it is these kinds of little details that REALLY set my alarm bells ringing.!

 

Cheers, SS

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JMB1943

Having set the ball rolling with my initial "looks like a P.1903", it looks like it is now my turn.

Inspection of the grips on my own P.1903 shows that the wood is very similar to that shown here.

I do also have an authentic P.'88 three-rivet type that has been severely ground down and bears the marks of it; so poor finish alone is not an adequate definition of copy.

Also, regarding poor workmanship, Skennerton (BCB, p. 173) discusses some P.88's as "apparently for the export market, are of poorer quality, and were hand made."

However, as S>S points out the cross-guard and pommel are both of the P.07 model, so it does appear more likely than not to be an Afghan copy.

 

Well it is an F series 5 digit serial number which is usually encountered on a specific type of P1907 bayonet. And the pommel shape very closely resembles that same specific type of P1907 bayonet. You can even date a particular bayonet to when it was manufactured from this very serial number.!

 

Can you elaborate on these three claims? 

We would all like to see the chapter and verse where this info is spelled out.

 

Regards,

JMB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trajan

Yes, I would like to see the evidence for this 'F series of 5 digit serial number' - and what specific type of 1907 bayonet it comes on would be of interest and how you can date it from the number! I don't expect to see anything though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shippingsteel

Untitled9.png.71c4eff9ed91ca97fadc38c052185771.png.Untitled8.png.3426f95570a8c7fc10bc9b1da366c5f0.png

Edited by shippingsteel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trajan

 

 

22 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

 

Many thanks SS! But now the mystery deepens...

 

According to that first web-link "F00001 to F39580 (1944 – 1945) Manufactured Orange SAF-3 F39581 to F40580 (1953) Manufactured Lithgow SAF (machinery trials)"

 

So, a WW2 period P.1907 pommel on a P1888-type blade. How very odd! What an antique dealer might call a marriage, but these usually combines parts of the same type. Certainly not a marriage made in heaven! BUT, as it is, with that number it is one of these 'machinery trials ones - wonder what they were doing? Trying to convert old stocksfor re-use? Whatever, a bit of a rarity, methinks!

 

Trajan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JMB1943

S>S,

Thanks for posting that info!

 

Trajan,

Skennerton (Austrln. Serv. Bayos, p. 33) says that the run of 1953-6 was more of a test to prove the original Pratt & Whitney machinery from 1912.

 

Regards,

JMB

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
calibre792x57.y

re Picture 10.  Take that mans name!  -- Rust in the muzzle.  Cheers,  SW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...