No. 8, Sterling or anything else?

[Melanie_Daniels]

I bought this bayonet in a British auction in the 80th:

It was sold as Bayonet No. 8, but it is totally unmarked. My main problem wtih this was that blade and pommel came from an early Sterling bayonet - I think that is the reason I got it cheap. Since then I found another in a private collection. And now two further:
War Department Militaria | Rare No 8 Bayonet
https://www.ima-usa.com/products/ori...39491880255557
The first of the bayonets has a Sterling-marked blade.

In Skennerton`s "British an Commonwealth Bayonets" ist a simillar bayonet with plastic grips (B313 on page 252-253 and 254). But he merely states that it does not fit either the No. 5 rifle or the Sterling SMG.

The Canadian C1 SMG has another bayonet holder then the Sterling, so the C1 rifle bayonet also fits on this Canadian Sterling. Is it possible that Britain made trials with another bayonet (holder) for the Sterling in the 50th?
Or:
I read, that Canada bought 11 British made Sterlings for trials in the 50th with a modified bayonet holder. Is it possible, that these bayonets are made for Canadian trials.
Or:
Any other ideas?

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

I think it's just a #8 bayonet unmarked. There aren't many in Canada but I have one floating around here local. Don't recall it having any markings. Sometimes everyone misses the deal and you get it.

[Simon P]

I thought these unmarked bayonets were supplied by Sterling with their Commercial Contracts for their MIV (L2A3) SMG

[Lee Enfield]

I bought this bayonet in a British auction in the 80th:
Attachment 133834Attachment 133835Attachment 133836Attachment 133837
It was sold as Bayonet No. 8, but it is totally unmarked. My main problem wtih this was that blade and pommel came from an early Sterling bayonet - I think that is the reason I got it cheap. Since then I found another in a private collection. And now two further:
War Department Militaria | Rare No 8 Bayonet
https://www.ima-usa.com/products/ori...39491880255557
The first of the bayonets has a Sterling-marked blade.

In Skennerton`s "British an Commonwealth Bayonets" ist a simillar bayonet with plastic grips (B313 on page 252-253 and 254). But he merely states that it does not fit either the No. 5 rifle or the Sterling SMG.

The Canadian C1 SMG has another bayonet holder then the Sterling, so the C1 rifle bayonet also fits on this Canadian Sterling. Is it possible that Britain made trials with another bayonet (holder) for the Sterling in the 50th?
Or:
I read, that Canada bought 11 British made Sterlings for trials in the 50th with a modified bayonet holder. Is it possible, that these bayonets are made for Canadian trials.
Or:
Any other ideas?

Edited to add: I guess this can't be right as the L1A1 latch is different - unless unscrupulous people have been converting No5 bayos into No8 bayos for example or profitable fraud:

I would suspect that rather than a No8 bayonet it is actually an L1A1 bayonet built with a No5 blade. There was reference to this variant here on the board in the past.

In my Junque I have a Sterling etch marked No5 bayonet, X1E1, Ex1 and T48 bayonets.

The differences between the X1E1 and Ex1 bayonets are subtle, but noticeable if the 2 types are side by side.

[Melanie_Daniels]

The main problem with the bayonet: Like the War Department Militaria bayonet it has a 50th Sterling blade, most made by Hopkinson since 1953. So it is impossible, that both were made in 1946.

And yesterday I got photos from another sold in an auction in 2021:

A Hopkinson L1A4 blade, a 70th Hopkinson Sterling Pommel, one No. 5 Mk. II grip and one early Sterling grip. Sounds like a puzzle, looks like a puzzle - but if it is possible that all of were made in the 70th, there could be another theory: In the 70th Sterling worked on a assault rifle and there is no much information about them - and their bayonet.

[Peter Laidler]

Maybe this thread ought to be moved to the BAYONET section where it will receive a much wider audience. Moderators..........

I would say that the first bayonet Mel notes/makes ref to is a late Sterling retailed bayonet, stripped down and a small diia crosspiece fitted, rivetted and then assembled again. What an effort to go to. The blade is definitelly from the L1A1 stable with the screw holes bored through to suit the wood grips. Just my opinion and prepared to reconsider.
2nd one referred to looks sort of genuine but I can't understand the step on the rear curvature of the rear pommel.

Simon is right about the bayonets supplied by Sterling. They bought a whole lot of scrapped SMG's and bayonets and...... Anyway, the story has been told and re-told. Sterling did a deal with Hopkinson in exchange for blades. Sterling supplied Hopkinson with other No5 bits. So there was a few hybrids, including No5 bayonets with L1A1 blades - identified by the spacing of the grip rivets. The wood grips were made for Sterling by the wood working company that machined the Mk5 silenced gun hand protector and made to the original drawings that Sterling possessed

I'm certainly no bayonet fiend but in my limited experience, the pommels were marked by the manufacturer of the pommel and not the assembler of the bayonets. And while we're on the subject............,

There as been comment fairly recently about the diameter of the hole for the bayonet standard in the No6 pommel. Some, including me, say that the diameter of the hole in the No6 pommel is slightly smaller than the No5 hole to ensure that you could not try to fit a No6 bayonet - with a small diameted crosspiece, to a Sterling or a No5 rifle. (If uou did fit a No5 bayonet to a SLEM rifle, it'd make no difference - except to be so loose as to be useless.