trajan Posted 15 October , 2022 Share Posted 15 October , 2022 I came across this on the web - might be of some interest? http://ycgg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/kar98_long_version.pdf I cannot vouch for its accuracy, but the author uses Storz as his main reference, so s/he is presumably well-read. Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 16 October , 2022 Share Posted 16 October , 2022 Trajan, It IS a good intro to the carbine, especially the foot of flames shooting out of the very short barrel! Time for the Antika Pazari tomorrow? Regards, JMB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 16 October , 2022 Author Share Posted 16 October , 2022 Yes, those flames... Hence the all-metal 'Ersatz' jobs! No luck at the Antika Pazari today, but in any case, what with 84% annual inflation, and being paid in Turkish Lira, which has lost 20% of its value against the USD so far this year (never mind last year!), well, I don't really have the cash if somethine does turn up! Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Mortimer Posted 16 October , 2022 Share Posted 16 October , 2022 (edited) I've made a photo (that says more than a 1000 words!) for clarification regarding the power of muzzle blast: A bavarian Gottscho "SM" S14 bayonet (according to Jackson's S14 book with observed stamped examples these were used by bavarian cavalry) had one grip blown away very clean on one side. It was re-attached by simply nailing it back in place; the heat of continuos prolonged fire bent the tang slightly upwards. A similar, clean blast damage is depicted in one of Sebastian Thiem's books. For comparison, a 84/98 with flashguard attached, preventing such damages. Edited 16 October , 2022 by Sir Mortimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 16 October , 2022 Author Share Posted 16 October , 2022 1 hour ago, Sir Mortimer said: I've made a photo (that says more than a 1000 words!) for clarification regarding the power of muzzle blast: A bavarian Gottscho "SM" S14 bayonet (according to Jackson's S14 book with observed stamped examples these were used by bavarian cavalry) had one grip blown away very clean on one side. It was re-attached by simply nailing it back in place; the heat of continuos prolonged fire bent the tang slightly upwards. A similar, clean blast damage is depicted in one of Sebastian Thiem's books. For comparison, a 84/98 with flashguard attached, preventing such damages. Those are really good to see! I have seen some pre-1914 reports of the flash damage to bayonet grips when used with a Kar 98, and often wondered what it might look like. The official German pre-WW1 reponse to these flash burns on bayonets when mounted on the K98 was pretty much army - 'Hmm, we'll note that - and take no action...' - at first! My own humble opinion is that after the decision was made late 1914 to arm the cavalry with Kar98 AV and supply them with short bayonets (e.g., the S.14), then once it was realied how easily these could be damaged by flash burn the decision was made to make all-metal 'Ersatz', until mid 1915, when the flashguard was introduced... Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Mortimer Posted 16 October , 2022 Share Posted 16 October , 2022 From what I remember off the top of my head from my literature, the all metal-Ersatz bayonets were primarily produced to give regular bayonet producers some breathing room due to the sudden overwhelming demand of regular pattern bayonets during the first year of the war. They were a very good "bridge" when bayonets were in dire need due to mobilisation, founding of reserve/2nd line units and compensating early battlefield losses: Easy, fast and cheap to produce due to the stamped and/or riveted (all-)metal grips that were simply "slapped onto" the tang, yet were a very durable and sturdy construction. Converting older or captured blades also filled the "bayonet hole" very well, since it was easier and (again) cheaper to produce than brand new regular pattern bayonets with wooden grips, which had to be still all hand-fitted and -sanded! Everything was "outsourced" to smaller, local blade shops to get the weight off shoulders of the main bayonet producers (such as Erfurt, the Suhl consortium, etc.) until they were able to expand their capacities in order to meet demands. The most common Ersatz bayonet types are the ones that are able to be mounted on both the Gewehr 88 and 98, with the typical "double muzzle ring" (e.g. EB9, EB47, etc). If the metal variants were to be produced solely because of the Kar 98, then we'd have way more EB's without those muzzle rings. The main bulk of the army (regular infantry!) was equipped with Gewehr 88 and 98 in the beginning of the war, the Kar 98 was more of a cavalry/specialist weapon. Those specialised units made up ony a small fraction of the army when compared with the numbers of infantry, Reserve, Landwehr and Landsturm units. In Jackson's S14 book ,the main bulk of observed unit-marked S14 and S14 II bayonets goes to infantry regiments, followed by cavalry. Counting in that only a fraction of the total amount of produced bayonets are marked and survived to this day, the infantry having way more material losses than cavalry units, the unofficial statistics might shift it even more towards the infantry side. It's a pure numbers game at this point due to the aforementioned reasons: Urgent need for blades, bottlenecks in production of the big producers and being able to have a cheap "one fits all" mounting system for a vast amount of infantry soldiers with various rifles eases the distribution logistics immensely. The all-metal construction being unable to char or get damaged from a muzzle blast of a Kar 98 is more of a "nice-to-have" side effect during the transitional period, until a solution was found for the regular pattern bayonets in form of the flashguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 16 October , 2022 Author Share Posted 16 October , 2022 Very good point there 23 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said: From what I remember off the top of my head from my literature, the all metal-Ersatz bayonets were primarily produced to give regular bayonet producers some breathing room due to the sudden overwhelming demand of regular pattern bayonets during the first year of the war.... Very good points there, which I'll come back to later - bed time here! Broadly speaking though, you are right, yes, the quick need is involved, and also those muzzle ring diameters is a relevant point. There is so much we don't know about these bayonets and I wish I could get the time and money to look at what else might survive in the archives that might help here. Julian 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