Interesting Sequence of Remington Bayonet Pat.'13 / Mod.'17 Markings

[Terrylee]

                1                           2                             3                             4

{1) Pat.1913 British Markings.  (2) Pat.1913 British Markings Cancelled. 

(3)  Pat.1913 American Markings. (4) Mod.1917 American Markings.

 

 

Edited 4 April by Terrylee
Date left out

[navydoc16]

Did you have a specific question regarding the sequence above? or just for show. 

Effectively, when the Pattern'14 rifle and bayonet contract were ended by the United Kingdom, the US absorbed existing stocks of bayonets and bayonet components into their own arsenal. There were huge stockpiles of bayonet blanks and foundry castings in various stages of completion and acceptance.

Hence you have a standard 1913 with a date that is one month past a bayonet that was marked to the US followed by a bayonet No.3 that has been scrubbed of its inspection markings and remarked US - you can see a remnant of the inspectors markings under the US- in a way it is similar to No.2. Then you have a standard M1917 

And just to you annoy you - you are missing the last variation of M1917 which is actually marked 1918 as the factory stuffed up and marked the blades 1918 for several months not realising it was a Pattern and not the year. 

Kind regards,
g

 

 

Edited 4 April by navydoc16

[Terrylee]

Hi Navydoc,

Just for interest, thanks for the input. Have yet to see a "1918" M 1917. Unfortunately, the M 17s are rather uncommon in South Africa.

Regards,                                                                                                                                                             

Terry

  

 

Edited 4 April by Terrylee

[shippingsteel]

Here is a shot of the 1918 marking on an M1917 bayonet just for reference.

Cheers,  SS 

[shippingsteel]

I am going to post these comparison shots up here just as an illustration of the difference between the Winchester and Remington manufacture of the British P1913 bayonet.

I like to study the various types of fuller and run-out shapes at the ricasso end of the P1907/P1913 family of blades. They can be very useful in identifying between the various makers, and also a handy aid to picking up fakes and other dodgy stuff.

So anyway, at top we have the Winchester production and below is the Remington. Note the original sandblasted finish on these blades as after years of service, regular maintenance/polishing, later refurbishment and storage many of the P1907/P1913 examples collected have lost their original finish.

Cheers,  SS

Edited 6 April by shippingsteel

[navydoc16]

3 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

I am going to post these comparison shots up here just as an illustration of the difference between the Winchester and Remington manufacture of the British P1913 bayonet.

I like to study the various types of fuller and run-out shapes at the ricasso end of the P1907/P1913 family of blades. They can be very useful in identifying between the various makers, and also a handy aid to picky up fakes and other dodgy stuff.

So anyway, at top we have the Winchester production and below is the Remington. Note the original sandblasted finish on these blades as after years of service, regular maintenance/polishing, later refurbishment and storage many of the P1907/P1913 examples collected have lost their original finish.

Cheers,  SS

 

Great for posterity, I have saved the photos as well. My understanding is that the earlier W bayonets are relatively polished on their own and not sandblasted? 
 

kind regards

g

[shippingsteel]

11 minutes ago, navydoc16 said:

My understanding is that the earlier W bayonets are relatively polished on their own and not sandblasted? 

I don't believe so, and certainly not that I know of. All were originally in the dull grey looking sandblasted finish with blued ricasso, as shown in my photos posted above.

This link below is my "go to" reference page for all things P1913/M1917 and such like. The photos show the main (but not all) variations and mostly all feature the same finish. The odd one shows some age and wear, and I think one has been later refurbished with the markings dulled somewhat.

http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/bayo_points_10.htm

Cheers, SS