Is the Scottish made Singer for the No4Mk1 rare?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...91336703-1.jpg
Printable View
Is the Scottish made Singer for the No4Mk1 rare?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...91336703-1.jpg
No,it's not rare but is less common than the other spike bayonets
And rather more pricey. (more than US$10-20, at any rate!)
Getting it for my Savage...I think...
Watch out though Andy, they are notious for being faked. There are ways to tell but I don't know what they are. Can anyone out there in forum bayonetland give us a lead on the fakes.
Peter, this ones good..I will post pics..its from Joe Salter..
Why an expensive Singer bayonet for a Savage? Is it just an excuse to get one anyway? ;)
I would have thought a nice Savage made mark II bayonet would have been the most appropriate for your Savage made rifle :D
Maybe it's an excuse for: "Dang, this early Singer Mfg. bayonet needs a nice early British made No.4 Mk.I to go behind it! Oh, dear!"
I will get a Savage made bayonet, but Im waiting for an early No4Mk1 to eventually fix the SM on..I had a B marked 1942..in my 1st British collection, I sold it..now starting again.
I think the SM is just as at home with the Savage for now! Pics to follow..
I bought one of these about 10-15 years ago and from memory I paid £65.
Not cheap, but one's I've seen on eBay recently seem to go for nearly double that so je ne regrette rien.
Mark
They are being faked by milling the grooves into a standard spike bayonet. This shortens the overall length by a few millimeters. That is the clue.
Can you elaborate on that for the masses Limpet? I ask because in the course of normal use, we, as Armourers would allow blades to be resharpened many times losing length each time. For example, at tha large training centres, we would accept re-sharpened/pointed L1A1 blades down to 7.5" length before they'd be scrapped.
On the basis that a faked cruciform bayonet could be a few mm's shorter than the real McCoy is a charter for fakers to get faking. Is there anything else that can be used to identify a cruciform fake anone out there in forum land?
Mr. Laidler, All I know is what I read, what other people tell me, and what I've discovered for myself. I have a picture somewhere (too many pictures!!!) of a milled fake next to a real cruciform bayonet.
The milling process, to get the grooves to the point, require the loss of a few MM of OAL. The picture I nicked from the web may be on my work computer, but I'll check it and post it when I find it. Without having it in hand, I don't know of another way to check its veracity.
Thanks for that info Limpet. That's what's good about this site. All this info is here - somewhere - just waiting to get out. Someone else PM'd me to the effect that a batch of fakes emerged a couple of years ago with G - arrow - R as the cypher instead of the CORRECT G - crown - R. Some other fakes have a step where the blades join the socket part too. There's some good pics a few threads back from this that illustrate a correct point and logo
See pages 293-296 of The Spirit of the Pike by Graham Priest for information on fake No.4 Mk1 bayonets + illustrations.
(an essential purchase if you collect 20th century British bayonets - more detailed than Skennerton)
Before I bought my real one, I got burned with a fake. It was partly my own fault for not doing my research beforehand and I later sold it to Old-Smithy. (of this parish)
Mark
Peter, The CORRECT MKI Should have either the small stylised crown & GR on the socket, OR, a larger finely impressed & detailed crown & GR. The fakes were usualy made from MKII's with flutes machined onto the spike. ANY spike made after a MKI will NOT officially have been stamped with this crown & Royal inistials.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
One good pointer is the tip, the fakes being made from MkII's etc often have a screw drive type point which the MkI dosn't.
It's really amazing to me (and yes, I might be a bit niave I suppose) that bayonets are faked! Whatever next. Who'd have thought a few years ago that they'd be faking No4 cruciforms and SMLE quillions..........
Are there any other 20th century bayonets that are being faked? You must know Old Smithy.
I remember when we used to be knee deep in old 1985 and 1986 serially numbered SA80 bayonets with bottle openers on the cast cross-piece. You just don't see them now - all the bottle openers were cut/ground off just prior to the acceptance. Even the serially numbered ones are rare birds now. Not that any squaddie would ever die of thirst for want of a bottle opener!
Peter, Fakes now abound! Jap Arisaka, German K98k's, M1 Carbine, Indian Khukri Bladed socket bayonets, Elcho, Brundswick, Just to name a few. I am aware also of some early US socket & trowel bladed examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I guess it's all about supply & demand. When the demand goes up, supply is limited, MORE cash is offered. The Upped price is then the accepted norm! I have mentioned this also with regards to Deacts in the UK.
I am waiting for fake No.5's to appear next! I wouldnt be suprised!
THe cruciform No4 is one of the earliest fakes, along with the Kukri sockets. THere were many copies sold inth e60's that werent made as fakes but for collecting, trouble is these now have 50 years of age and are harder to tell by th enew look.
Etched 84/98s were started in the UK in the late 60's by a guy in his garage for fun, now people sell them as grandads pick ups and people pay stupid money
German stuff has been copied for years as th eorigianl Dies for the medals and badges were "capture" and in some cases the german companies themselves made them for the "vet" market. Horster is supposedly to have made 84/98's for occupying GI's to send home. Now you could collect just fakes, I used to try to keep up and get everyone I could, that is no longer possible and some are complete fantasy.
Prepare to be unsurprised...Quote:
Originally Posted by tankhunter
Military Antiques, Military Collectibles and Militaria British Enfield No.5 Jungle Carbine Bayonet w/ Scabbard: New Collector Grade IMA-USA.COM
Thankfully I bought a real one in July 2000 at the first Beltring I attended and from memory it was £35-40.
Another addition to the ever-growing 'I'm glad I bought that when I did' list. ;)
Only these are NOT fakes! They are R.F.I (Rifle Factory ishapore) indian made variants for the SMG (Sterling) which they still make under licence. I tried to buy one from them when i ordered a bit of gear a year or so back. They wouldnt send an edged weapon to the UK then!Quote:
Originally Posted by peregrinvs
I want one for my own collection as well!......................
I know the Ichapore Rifle Factory made No.5 bayonets, but I would be very surprised if the IMA bayonets were made there. If nothing else, the blade marking looks nothing like the example illustrated in Skennerton. They are possibly made by this outfit:
Jungle Carbine Bayonet
My understanding is that genuine RFI made No.5 bayonets are very rare.
I have seen a few of these No.5 Indian types. When you examine them & hold them in your hand. They feel slightly undersize & slimmer. I also know Christian Cranmer the Chief Exec & Owner of I.M.A. When he was on a UK visit to this then established firm Firepower International in Godstone (Now Closed)Quote:
Originally Posted by peregrinvs
I enquired about this very topic. He assured me that they were geniune. He did agree that they do indeed have collector grade copies made of other Bayonets however. IE: Jap Arisaka, K98k, US Remington Trowel Etc Etc. It remains to be seen however, if he has had THEM copied as well! (The Indian No.5's)
Collectors grae, means copy, its like World Wide Arms int eh UK that sell "pattern" blades, these are copies made for the collectors market. At one thime they may have had real No5's by RFI but now.............. These copies have been around for a long time, and i have never seen any proof that they are anything but copies, why make blades for obsolete weapons - OK I know the Saudis made bayoents for their MAuser 98's but they were still issue weapons so old but not obsolete. I am jsut glad they didnt do them as MkI's
Hiya Smithy, Yep, I concur with your comments RE: 'Collector Grade' & also WWA term of 'Pattern' blade. It's a play on words to get a sale. If the customer is unhappy, it's a money back guarantee. If the customer dosent' complain. It's a sale! Not exactly a best practice as far as sales go. But hey, they are only interested in making money at the end of the day!......Quote:
Originally Posted by old-smithy
RE: 'Obsolete Weapons'. The R.F.I No.5 is not JUST for the Lee Enfiled No.5 Jungle carbine. It was THE bayonet also for the L2A3 Sterling SMG. This SMG is STILL current issue & Production in India. Hence the possibilty that I.M.A's Indian No.5's MAY still be genuine!.......Just my two pennies worth, & going on the Info that Christian Cranmer told me at the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tankhunter
Ah but there are No.4 MkII Singer made bayonets with the "G crown R" marking on the socket, I have one. It came out of a large box of otherwise unremarkable grease covered No.4 bayonets about 10 years ago. If I can talk my daughter into taking a picture I will post it. It is simply an early MkII. and was purchased with scabbard for $2.50, the same price as all the others in the box.
Is that the variant with the LARGE Crown & cypher gew? I have never seen the LARGE crown on a MKII.Quote:
Originally Posted by gew8805
I've JUST spoken to Graham Priest and he's certainly NEVER seen ne. And he's seen a few bayonets......... Awaiting photo with baited breath GEW
Sorry for the delay, guys, I am hoping to get the photographs soon, but my daughter is at work. I hadn't really looked at it years but it is marked:''
"G crown R"
No.4MkII
SM
The Crown is the same size as the letters G and R.
You've caught me just before I've got back to elaborate on that GEW. He's says that it's the larger/bigger G-CROWN-R that he's never seen on a Mk2. Apparently that, and the fact that the crown looked like a crown, was a feature on the very earliest Mk1's.
But he also mentioned that it was only the very earlest Mk2's that had the smaller (Mk1 type) G-stylised crown-R. So if you've got one of them, they're rare too. In fact almost as rare as the Mk1's but more readily available because they're harder to identify!
Please post pics GEW as I'm going to look for one now. I'm becoming a bayonet nerd.................
Thanks for the information Peter, it is a good marking and when I got it this one just about completed my No.4 bayonet collection so I was happy with it. I have been meaning to buy Mr. Priest's book but it keeps getting set on the back burner. *sigh* Being a bayonet nerd is not such a bad thing now, is it? :)
No. 4, Mk. 1 sell here in New Zealand for between NZ$250 - NZ$450 !!!!
There are plenty Fakes around NZ and there was a roaring trade in making them at one stage.
These would have to be the most overpriced bayonet around.
I'm trying not to get toooo nerdy about Bayonets...... but were the NZ fake Mk1's done locally? Were they similar to the UK/Indian fakes shown/described earlier in this thread?
They must have been a bit of a pig to do because the blades are pretty damn tough stuff to cut unless you anneal it first
Yes, they were done locally and it wouldn't surprise me is they filtered out overseas to the UK and USA collectors before internet forums became mainstream.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Okay gentlemen, here are the pictures of my Singer made No4. MkII with the "G crown R" marking. I didn't do to well because it is not the best camera in the world but hopefully you will get the idea:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../SMMkII6-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../SMMkII4-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../SMMkII2-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../SMMkII3-1.jpg
Sorry about the focus, the camera just wouldn't allow me to get that close..... *sigh*
the markings on a singer mkI are distinctive in that the 'early' marking is "SMC" as opposed to the SM seen on this mkII
Here are a few shots of mine. It has seen some honest use, as the markings are very faint. On the opposite side is 77 Z. From A Square 10's comments, mine is a Mk II. The "II" is so faint as to not be visible (just barely), but it does have the SM. I got mine in St. Mere Eglise in 2004 before the glut of these hit the market just a year or two later.
A square 10, that is very interesting. I no longer have either of my No.4 MkI bayonets, but I seem to remember, perhaps incorrectly, that they were marked "SM", I don't recall an "SMC" marking and would love to see an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by A square 10
sorry to take so long getting back - had to look up the source of my comment - didnt want to be making it without backup , and i didnt want ya-all thinking i made it up , while not ever saying 'always or never' when it comes to anything enfield or commonwealth in general im comfortable with this ,
im siting data from a reference book - "british and commonwealth bayonets" by skennerton and richardson , p215 ,
singer manufacturing co , produced the no4 mkI , clydebank , scotland , marked SMC , SM then N67 on their mkII bayonets ,
my mkI is a singer marked 'SMC' , my mkII is a savage
What about the "77 Z" on the back of mine? I'm curious.
Any one have any thoughts on the scabbards? My scabbard has No4 Mk1 5,286 (Serial No.?) WD arrow and a small V marked on the alloy throat piece.
I have 2 different WW2 editions of WHB Smiths small-arms books, My earlier edition, describing the original No4Mk1 bayonet, stated it was designed after US civil war bayonets, and was adopted to lighten the weight of the rifle.
The old leatherbbound records at Warminster (and a little later Textbook of Small Arms?) don't actually say exactly, but during the 30's trials, they say it's based (loosley) on the features of the French bayonet. Presumably this means a French cruciform bayonet of the era. Any ideas
That is correct Peter, the quadrangular blade was copied from the French M1886 bayonet, nick-named "Rosalie" by the French infantrymen, and was considered as strong as a full round blade but lighter. Also, it had the advantage of less reflected light due to the faceted surface. The No.4 MkI bayonet did not have "Rosalie's" tendency to snap in use due to it's short blade. The American spike bayonets from that for the M1795 musket through that used on the M1873 Trapdoor rifle, were direct copies of French bayonets, including their faceted triangular blades.
Limpetmine, sorry I missed this one. The 77 Z is a viewers mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by limpetmine
They are already here...made in India.Quote:
Originally Posted by tankhunter
Hi P.14, Already been over this on another thread! Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pattern14
Not exactly No4 cruciform but the spike variety again.
I saw recently an original drop forging of a No4 Mk2 one-piece bayonet, as drop forged, still in the white (but tarnished now.....), awaiting the machining. I understand from the cast shape that it was a Savage forging. The steel quality was as tough as old boots and was clearly an original. It was interesting from the engineering point of view because there was still a LOT of finishing to do and it's tough old stuff!
Has anyone out there in forum land seen or got one of these unfinished Mk2's?