Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Bayonet experts??

Spartacus
OK, I know absolutely nothing about bayonets.
i just bought this one for $74 because i think it's the proper one for my 1943 garand. it looks unmolested.
what do you think?
thanks
tom


EDIT: appreciate the info! you guys are great! about "unmolested", i meant un modified, but i wasn't even sure of that. as far as "proper", i should have said period correct, i guess.
anyway, I'm happy to have learned more ww2 history!


EDIT #2; hey jim, thanks for the production numbers. who would have thought that two farm impliment companies produced the most bayonets! i guess it makes sense though. the scabbard has the flaming bomb and the latch mechanism is solid on this one. but now i have to look for a dated bayo. don't know whether to thank you or curse you for telling me some were dated![;)]Oh, and about the parkerizing, i just thought it was dirty.[:0][:I] i would like to see more pics if anyone would consider it.
thanks again!
tom

dscf0328l.jpg
0

Comments

9 comments

Date Votes
  • Ambrose
    Looks right to me. Made by American Fork and Hoe if I'm reading the stamp right.
    0
  • Blairweescot
    Seems to be an M1 bayonet, as opposed to a cut down model of 1905 or a cut down of the so called "M1942", which would be a 10" M1905E1

    As far as "unmolested" goes, that depends on your definition. It seems used but not damaged. Grips seem original

    74 bucks for that and the scabbard? Money well spent in my opinion

    As far as "the proper one" for a 1943 Garand, a lot of people exert energy for "the correct date" WWII gear. What is sometimes overlooked is that no quartermaster would have hesitated to issue anything on hand regardless of date. That bayonet is just one of many that could be the "proper" bayonet as was originally issued for use on your rifle. An M1905E1, a second issue Model of 1905 or an original Model of 1905 could all be "proper" for your M1 Garand. Any date prior to your M1's manufacture could be "proper" for original issue, as well as some past that date, and during WWII, if a bayonet was damaged or lost, they would not bother to find a 1943 or prior dated bayonet for a 1943 dated rifle- they'd issue a bayonet, date stamp be damned. Nobody cared; if it was available they issued it. You bayonet certainly doesn't seem "wrong", and it's my opinion that most WWII collectors should ask themselves less questions about "is this the right gear", and more questions about "why can't this be right the right gear"
    0
  • dcs shooters
    Looks good to me. The blood groove is right, and the AFH is right.
    Is there a year stamped on it [?]
    0
  • givette
    WWII troops carried the bayonet depicted in the photo.
    0
  • Hunter Mag
    tplum looks like you got a nice bayo. It's the 10" uncut because the blood groove doesn't go all the way to the end. Nice origional it looks like. The parkerizing looks nice also. Most are about mostly worn off. DON'T sharpen it. They are common though. The scabbard looks worn. Is that the flaming bomb on it? If so that's correct for an army issue. The scabbards marked MK are navy issue if I'm not mistaken.

    If you want there's bayos out there that are dated 1942 and 1943. So your lucky you have a 43 M1 if your inclined to get a 1943 stamped bayo to match your rifle. It will cost a little more though. If you remember my M1 is a 1942 and I recently aquired a 1942 16" uncut bayo but it costs considerably more.

    For $74 you did good! In the condition yours is in they usually run +/-$125 Does the clip latch fit snug?

    Here's some estimated production figures.

    American Fork and Hoe 350,000 23%

    Oneida, Limited 235,000 16%

    Pal Blade and Tool 250,000 17%

    Utica Cutlery 225,000 15%

    Union Fork and Hoe 385,000 26%

    Wilde Drop Forge and Tool 60,000 4%

    LINK
    http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/bayo_points_22.htm

    Here's a pic of the date stamping on my 16" bayo.

    PICT0083.jpg
    0
  • gruntled
    I wouldn't have even recognized it as an M1 bayonet. Both of mine have a stud on the handguard that goes into the gas piston & neither has a blood groove. The scabbards are also different.

    That brings up a different question. The scabbards for my Garands & my M1 carbine look identical. The carbine bayonet will go in all three but neither of the Garand bayonets will go in the carbine sheath. Why would they go out of their way to make them different?

    Trap55: Bingo.
    0
  • Blairweescot
    quote:Originally posted by gruntled
    I wouldn't have even recognized it as an M1 bayonet. Both of mine have a stud on the handguard that goes into the gas piston & neither has a blood groove. The scabbards are also different.



    It seems that you wouldn't have recognized that as an M1 for a good reason. If you don't mind me saying- due to your description of the blade and scabbard, I believe that you do not have a USGI M1 bayonet or scabbard. I would be interested in photos of your bayonets and scabbards; I am curious to see who made them

    EDIT:

    Trap, I think you're right. I think that the confusion is "For the M1 bayonet" versus "M1 bayonet". The bayonet you show is for the M1 rifle, while the bayonet originally in question's name is "M1 bayonet"...and Gruntled had an M5 bayonet for use with an M1 rifle, not an M1 bayonet for use with an M1 rifle


    kimi- the M5 was adopted in '53. I can find the original patent drawing online but not dimensions.
    0
  • TRAP55
    Gruntled probably has a post WWII M5 Garand bayonet like this:
    B1147-1.jpg

    WWII 10" Garand bayo
    B1001-1.jpg

    WWII 16" M1905 cut down to 10" M1905E1
    B1139-1.jpg
    0
  • kimi
    It looks like the type I carried with the M1 in the Marines. What's the length of the blade?
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity