Ross Bayonet acquistion and question

Hello all...I've been lurking the forum for a while and I'm hoping some members can help me out understanding a recent piece I acquired.

I "think" it is an uncut mkII Ross bayonet which appears to have been made in 04/16. It has a scabbard marked MKII and dated 1941. Both bayonet and scabbard have the Canadian acceptance marks. The grip is marked 231.

Couple of questions I have...
1) is it a mk11?
2) is the 231 a unit marking?
3) why would it have a 1941 scabbard? I thought Ross rifles were no longer in service?

Thanks for any assistance.
Rucker

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_143811-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_143827-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_145037-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_145007-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_145001-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_144126-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9_144856-1.jpg

I stand to be corrected on this but I think that you have a MK1 which is uncut. It is the MK2 which is cut at an angle at the end of the blade. I have recently acquired an example of each, one very similar to yours. Your example looks in marginally better condition then mine. I will post pictures in due course.

Looks like you have a MK2 scabbard which may have caused the confusion and I don't know how the scabbards differed.

I think that some were used as fighting knives in WW2 but I don't know the details.

---------- Post added 08-20-2016 at 12:04 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-19-2016 at 11:57 PM ----------

Does your scabbard have a metal/steel end which some may call a chape?

These rifles and bayonets saw limited service in WW2 but rest assured they saw service. Yes, the scabbard has the internal chape. Besides them all having it, this one can be seen in the first pic. 231 should be the unit mark and the scabbards saw hard use so there were replacements made for WW2.

Here are pictures of my Ross bayonets a cut and uncut version. Both scabbards look the same but I can only make out a MK2 on one of the scabbards but would assume both of my scabbards are MK2 versions. I would think that there must be some slight design difference in the MK1 scabbard but unless some-one can produce a scabbard marked as such it is difficult to know what exactly. I don't think that the MK of the scabbard has anything to do with which MK of bayonet it contains?


More pictures to follow because I will have to reduce file size to get them to upload.

Here are 3 more pictures.

Obviously the cut version is the blade which is angled off at the end of the blade.

Thanks for your replies and pics. I've been online researching the Ross bayonets pretty heavily since yesterday and I've found a lot of information...still with no definitive answer (to myself) on what distinguishes a MkI and MKII or other variations of the Ross bayos. Some state the MKI has the dimple at the pummel and the stepped ring which distinguish it from the MKII, where those characteristics were removed in the manufacturing process.

Fying10uk...If I follow that logic, you have an uncut MkI bayonet and a cut MkII bayonet...both sharp looking bayonets I should add.

I also read that the MKII is indicated next to the C^ with 11 (or should be Roman numerals II?). Contradicting that, I also read the characters beside the C^ indicate date of manufacture...in my case...11 being 1911. The four digit date below that...indicating date put into service...04/16...April 1916.

And lastly, Ross bayonets manufactured after 1910 are MKIIs?

After all said, I'm still not convinced I have a MKI or MKII? Obviously, I would like it to be an uncut MKII but, I'm not enthusiastic about stating such until I can have it proven to be so.

Why don't you go onto the bayonet.knives forum. Then Marysdad, Aragorn, Porterkids et al can look. They have yet to be proved wrong in my experience of this forum!

As far as I'm aware there are only uncut and cut Ross bayonets of which I have both types and are photographed in my posts. I'm not aware of a 3rd type of Ross bayonet but stand to be corrected. Looking at my 2 examples it's fairly obvious to see which is the cut example and which is the uncut example. As you only have a single Ross bayonet and by looking at my examples it should be easy to figure out that you have a uncut Ross bayonet. It's my understanding that the cut version is the MK2 but as I'm not an expert on Ross bayonets I stand to be corrected. I think that the digits next to the Canadian acceptance marking is a number 11 and this could refer to a regiment or unit. 4/16 could be the manufacture or perhaps even the issue date but I would go for manufacture.

There are 1905 and 1910 bayonets, easy to tell by the muzzle ring size.

I've just looked on Old Smithy's bayonet website which seems to confirm your bayonet as an uncut Mk1 example as I've already stated.

A "2" in Roman numerals would be marked thus "II" and not like what is seen on your pommel (11) which, in my opinion, reads eleven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

in my opinion, reads eleven.

---

Perhaps you should read this then.

http://arms2armor.com/Bayonets/ross1910.htm

Here's another site for consumption.

Ross Bayonet markings - Arms - Great War Forum

Just to add that as far as I can work out, the first Ross bayonet was introduced in 1908 and so was Pattern 1908, and so marked '08'.
EG, as in having the stepped, small hole muzzle ring. The second pattern was (as far as I can determine) introduced in November 1911, and so became the Pattern 1911, and was marked '11'. From December 1911, the two versions were referred to as the Mark I and Mark II types...

The 11 is pattern date 1911 for the Ross MkII bt which was for the Ross MkII** and III rifles which were used in Canada and by the British home guard during WWII. The scabbard is a MkII which differs from the MkI by having a wider belt loop. The scbd was made by Hugh Carson Co.

green, are you able to explain more about the uncut and cut Ross bayonets, please, and what MKs are assigned to them if any? So the "11" on the pommel is an eleven, as I previously mentioned, indicating Pattern 1911 but is it a MK1 because it's uncut? Or were the bayonets themselves not given MKs but just cut or uncut?

It is my belief that all Ross bayonets started in the uncut form. And from the links browningautorifle provided, mkI is the 08 marked bayonets and mkII are the 11 marked.

I appreciate all the replies/comments gents. I do believe more so now, that my bayonet is a mkII.

The MkI Ross bt had a smaller muzzle ring diameter to fit the Ross MkI and II rifles except the MkII**. The MkII bt had a larger muzzle ring to fit the heavier barrel on the MkII** and III rifles. The so called sharpening, actually reprofiling of the point , was done only on the MkII bts and did not result in a mark change.

As far as blade profiles are concerned for bayonets for Mk. III rifles, there is the original, the Canadian altered as shown above, and the RN altered blade, which was more of a conventional Bowie knife profile. The frog was also altered for use with RN gear, and leather was stained black.

the Mk I has as said a smaller muzzle ring, but it also has a spring clip in this ring to prevent rattling when mounted, these are not common and one with a spring in place is even more so. The MkII has a larger ring without the spring. The reshaped blade was ordered due to the poor penetration of the original tip profile. The MkIII which I have never seen had a stepped back muzzle ring.

I am unaware of any Ross bayonet designated MkIII. There is a Ross bt illustrated in the "Ross Rifle Story" with a step back ring but it is a US conversion of A MKI to fit a MkII rifle which had the barrel set back to correct head space.
re: blade profiles
1) MkIoriginal blunt point not reprofiled
2) MkII original blunt point June 1912
3) MkII new production with sharper point Oct 1915
4) alteration of 2 above to sharper point approved 1915

A Canadian alteration of the scabbard was done by removing the integral frog and inserting the the scbd into a P1908 frog to fit the P1908 web issued to the CEF.

It's fairly rare to see any type of Ross bayonet offered for sale here in the U.K., only ever noticed a handful for sale, and so when offered a pair recently I snapped them up. Does anyone know if anything was done to the Ross bayonets that were supposed to have been used as fighting knives such as cutting off the muzzle rings for example? When a dealer offers me a bayonet that's incomplete/damaged and the explanation is that it's been used as a fighting knife it makes me automatically sceptical.

Is anyone able to confirm that all Ross bayonets started off as uncut as suggested by Rucker which would seem perfectly logical, please?

Those were much after the fact. Things were done during wartime but the knives were made far after the war because of the availability of the bayonets. Don't buy the story...

As noted above the point profile change to the sharp style was started on factory production in Oct 1915.
Another point profile was the British which strongly resembled the P1907 bt profile.
"The Ross Rifle Story" has a good chapter on Ross bayonets.

There is an early Mk. I bayonet pictured on my site, showing the odd muzzle ring that Carl referred to. Mine is missing the internal spring that fit inside the muzzle ring.

The 1941 scabbards were made in Canada as replacement stock by the Hugh Carson Co. Ltd., an Ottawa firm that, in peacetime, produced harnesses, trunks, and luggage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marysdad

There is an early Mk. I bayonet pictured on my site, showing the odd muzzle ring that Carl referred to. Mine is missing the internal spring that fit inside the muzzle ring.

The 1941 scabbards were made in Canada as replacement stock by the Hugh Carson Co. Ltd., an Ottawa firm that, in peacetime, produced harnesses, trunks, and luggage.

---

All MkI Ross bts had the ring extension.

The HCCo. is probably Hugh Carson of Ottawa who made a lot of service leather in both wars, including things like the cases for the Canadian issue Warner & Swasey Mod. 1913 scopes. The date could be when the scabbard was made, or just when Carson inspected and/or refurbished it.

IIRC the bayonets began with the rounded tip and the pointed tip was a modification originating in France when the original shape was found inefficient at penetrating Prussian great coats. ;-)

The bayonets converted to knives are easy to spot because very little bayonet was left when they were finished. The steel was said to be of particularly good quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

The HCCo. is probably Hugh Carson of Ottawa

---

That would be correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

The bayonets converted to knives are easy to spot because very little bayonet was left when they were finished. The steel was said to be of particularly good quality.

---

The shortage of hunting knives was protracted and they were professionally converted. Many had a leather scabbard as well. PAL Tool did them... Ross Rifle Bayonet PAL fighting knife - Daggers/knives - Collector's Source, Military Collectibles Online

Just to add to the thread:- my example is a Patt 11 and dated 11/16. Underneath the pommel is stamped 25MX over 477. Any ideas?
The grips have only the acceptance mark of a crown over 4.
The blade tip seems to have been lightly re-profiled - the curve is flatter than the "uncut" examples posted but nothing like the almost straight line of the "cut" versions.
The scabbard is stamped Mk 1, nothing else is legible.
One thing missing is the frog. As the likelyhood of finding an original is virtually nil, does anyone know of a source of reproductions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RossM10

One thing missing is the frog.

---

In many cases you'll find a canvass frog slipped over the leather scabbard...try that?

I wouldn't have thought that it would cost the earth to get a saddler to make you a replacement leather frog. The problem would be knowing the size of the belt loop of a MK1 which we've now established is smaller than that of the MK2.