Printable View
I recently purchased this No5 bayonet at a good price because it has a good blade but unfortunately it is also missing it's catch button and has a broken muzzle ring. It was sold to me as a knife "converted" from a No5 bayonet and I thought that a good No5 bayonet could be made from it.
I don't think that there is any great historical interest value in keeping this knife/bayonet "conversion" in it's present state but I thought that I'd better just check before doing anything to it first???
There are some new cross pieces on eBay!!UK
Looks at an attempt to make up a trench fighting knife isn't there a book on trench knives might be worth finding out a bit more F10 prior to re modeling it it may just be worth something besides you won't get a good price for a repaired No.5 knife as an unmodified one
I'm selling a complete No5 missing grips on ebay (oldsmithytwo) combine the two and you have a very nice No5
There was a story about a knuckle bow available for the #5 bayonet to turn it into a "Trench knife" but I'm pretty sure that tiddly wire isn't it...the story was a piece of heavy wire though... I think that was just a fantasy piece. I share the idea of repair if possible...if you can do it correctly. Then you'll eventually get your money back. After all, Peter would have repaired them and they would still be correct...?
Another bast of the sensible from BAR. It's just a figment of someones vivid imagination. Not an easy fix as such and we'd just scrap it but it is a good doable and definately economic fix. X-pieces are available and a step by step lesson has been given by our pal, Big Duke. The catch and nut are simplicity itself to make on your little Myford - as are the BA grip nuts and bolts. New set of grips will take an hour at the most. Take it to a local steel finishers and have it bead blasted and chemically blackened and it'll be like new.
Why not make 10 sets of grip screws, nuts, catch bolts and nut and sell on the extras
Or sell it to me cheap.......
Cant find yours Old Smithy. item number please! I think it has blocked the US bayonets bit of the US Ebay. We're not allowed to see dangerous stuff like sharp knives and scissors, felt pens and crayons in case we do some harm.
Thanks for your thoughts Jim, I've seen the new cross pieces on eBay priced at £8 but these are no better than I could make myself and they don't appear to be NOS items. It's not too much of a problem for me to repair/refurbish but I didn't wan't to inadvertently destroy a historical artefact in the process of putting it back into a bayonet. I do have another example with a much poorer blade which I may use as a donor for parts. I will then use the blade from this 2nd No5 bayonet to help put together a display of the various No5 style of blades from the No5 until the last L1A4 blade. I thought that it would be interesting to see just the bare blades for comparison purposes.
Here are some pictures of the other No5 bayo which I mentioned in my last Post. As can be seen it has a blade in much poorer condition but it is a less common maker of N187 than Wilkinson.
Are you sure that the X-pieces on Ebay didn't come from Hopkinson? MUST be worth that as opposed to making a new one from scratch surely.......!
I had a No5 bayonet salvaged from the Sir Galahad that'd been in sea water for a couple of years and recovered before it was towed out to sea and scuttled. It was in better condition that the one you show in thread 8! Is that a bent or loose X-piece or just the camera angle? I would just make new parts for the thread 1 example and be done with it!
The cross piece is slightly distorted on the example in Post 8, as is the blade slightly. I am planning to strip this example down in order to recover the blade blank, in any case and I think that some parts can be salvaged for the example in Post 1. I will clean up the blade blank and phosphate it to remove the corrosion.
I found it ok on U.S. eBay, but because it is priced at over $100 I think that I am correct in saying that anyone outside of the U.S. wishing to purchase it would mean Old Smithy having to obtain an export licence? This is probably why his listing states only U.S. buyers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I forgot about that...Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Well let us all in on the item number then....... Thread 11!
I did send the ebay page to Peter this morning by email.
Got it and looked. Thanks all.
While we're on the subject of bayonets in dire straits, missing parts and generally tatty......... Anyone got a No7 that's been stripped for spares, in dire straits etc etc they want to sell as I have all the parts to complete one - plus some.........
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
No it is Ebay and its stupid PC policies that prevents saying it can be sold abroad. If you can bid I can send it or I will sell privately as long as contact is not through Ebay there is no problem. Don't need an export license just a customs form saying military collectable and it goes with no problem.
In my quest to obtain an example set of the various No5 style blades fitted to the various British and Commonwealth bayonets, I decided to strip the blade out of this No9. I have a couple of similar Poole duplicates and so I chose the worst example out of the 3 to strip. The blade was attached to the socket by brazing in addition to 2X steel rivets. There is also an additional 3rd slightly larger hole which I have highlighted in the picture by the pen tip. There was no rivet through this hole and it appeared to serve no purpose. I did wonder if this bayonet made use of a "recycled" No5 or No7 blade but when compared to both the fuller is significantly shorter. Also this 3rd hole does seem to match any hole position on either the No5 or No7 bayonets. :confused: Any ideas for the reason for this "spare" 3rd hole, please?
Near the top of the 3rd picture is a small "P" electro-pencilled onto the blade.
You don't suppose it's for indexing during machining do you? You can see the small indent forward above the edge and behind the fuller too, wonder what that was...hardness test? A Rockwell test?
Makes sense. (As I'm sure you know) Rockwell testing uses a diamond shaped striker.
I did have a look in Graham Priest's book after posting the pictures and it does mention the 3rd hole. It goes on to suggest that the purpose of this hole is to "lighten" the blade which doesn't seem likely to me because it's such a tiny amount of metal that is removed by the presence of the hole. I did wonder, myself, if it was something similar to what Jim suggests in Post 19, an indexing hole, although I was thinking more of a hole to fix the blade to a jig during machining. There are several little indents in the blade which could be hardness test indents or simply areas of corrosion/defects in the surface of the metal.
Yes, my Platoon Commander had an FN back in about 1982 that had Rockwell marks on it so I'm familiar...like they'd chosen his to test for quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by henry r
Yes, but if you look at the amount of metal gathered over the protracted amount of 5000 or 10,000 blades it's not just lightening but metal reclamation. You can take that metal and put it towards the project and save so many pence over the period and enhance profits... It's an old theory really, seen many times before. They would need a standardizing hole though, indexing for the accuracy of the machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
The REAL question here, now that we have seen the photos in thread 18 is this. Has anyone got a stripped or semi stripped No7 bayonet. And if so, could the short remains of the No9 tang end make it useable to repair a No7 with a knackered blade. From memory I am minded to suggest that it COULD. Simply un-rivet the broken blade bit on defective No7, , take off the No5 crosspiece (probably broken anyway....?), shape No9 blade to suit, drill and re-rivet.
Just thinking on my feet........
I do have a stripped No7 bayonet but won't have time to take pictures until next week. Just having a quick look the No9 blade, it looks slightly too short by about 1/4" to do what you say, Peter, unless a shortened No7 bayonet is acceptable. Will post pictures next week.
By probably not much? You'd move the tang forward a quarter inch? An eighth?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Flying10,
Regarding post 1, To get it back to a No5 doesn't take too much, here is a link of one I did some time back may give others a few pointers.
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=40522
About 2/3 years ago I picked up No.5 that was missing it's catch and managed to find some new make No 5 parts in stock with Jeremy Tenniswood in Colchester at a decent price. Might be worth dropping him a line to see if he still has some available if your don't fancy making your own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
a Diamond indentor is a Vickers test, the typical Rockwell is a Ball indentor, Rockwell scale - WikipediaQuote:
Originally Posted by henry r
So...the FN C1A1 I observed, CDN issue, would be the Vickers test? Would that make sense? A sharp point like a prick punch...Quote:
Originally Posted by old-smithy
A ball was an old 50's IZOD test too.
Sorry Peter, the Izod test is an impact test that breaks the material the Brineell test is the other hardness test but it uses a 3000lb load on a 3/8" ball so not really good for bayonet parts LOL. they do use a lower weight and smaller ball but this is not used as much, Europe went to the Vickers tests for smaller items. I quoted to test the SA80 breach block and it had more indents that my AK47 had parts :-(
Thanks old-smithy. I guess i didn't listen as well as i thought in my engineering science classes in the early 90's. :)
Here are some pictures of a stripped No7 bayonet, on it's own, and in comparison to a No9 blade. The pen tip indicates the extent of the No7 tang end which is longer than that of the No 9 tang by about 5/16" or so. To use a No 9 blade as a replacement blade on a No7 bayonet would have meant a short tang unless extra metal was welded on. An alternative may have been to extend the tang by grinding into the blade but this would obviously shorten the blade. I don't know it either of these courses of action would have been acceptable???
From F/10's comparison photo's (thanks F-10) it looks like you COULD repair a broken/knackered bladed and valuable No7 bayonet by using a decent and readily available No9 blade. BUT only if you grafted/welded on an extension piece to the hilt, drilled and re-rivetted it to the No7 grip area and rear end and then made good. Worth it.....? probably not! Bit of a winter project........? Could be. Old stock No5 cross pieces seem to be available so resurrecting a No7 could be interesting but only if the donor was otherwise complete.
If a "new" unused spare No9 blade was available that still had a long tang, the repair which you describe, Peter, suddenly becomes much more viable. I have never seen spare No9 blade blanks for sale on the surplus market but presumably the blades were available as spares at on time, years ago?
Like Peter suggests though, they look like two different blades actually. I don't think it's really viable...
Thread 35. The actual blade part of any bayonet was never available as a spare part in the military. The only option would be to weld/extend a used No9 blade