View Full Version : Chinese knockoffs: M7 bayonet
These are sold under Smith & Wesson's M&P brand and also under the "Marble Sports" brand. Externally they look quite well done, but I wouldn't expect milspec quality from them. But then again, who's going to want to bayonet the mailman or the neighbor's dog?
Stocking stuffer? :D
https://i.imgur.com/JhaCXG5l.jpg
I find it hard to believe there aren't enough genuine M7s out there for every person in the country.
Buy one, get a large piece of beef ribs and start poking, jabbing, twisting the knife in it. It the knife is still in one piece after a minute, then it's probably good to go. Don't stab yourself.
Averageman
11-27-21, 22:31
I find it hard to believe there aren't enough genuine M7s out there for every person in the country.
When I worked in the Arms room, we would inventory the Bayonets lock them in a foot locker put a railroad seal on the locker, never to be opened until a Change of Command.
A Bayonet is pretty useless.
When I worked in the Arms room, we would inventory the Bayonets lock them in a foot locker put a railroad seal on the locker, never to be opened until a Change of Command.
A Bayonet is pretty useless.
What I was attempting to say is, there are so many genuine M7 bayonets out there in circulation, for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would make more, let alone a S&W Chinese knock off of undetermined quality.
I think they are even still in production by Ontario Spec.
Averageman
11-28-21, 02:05
What I was attempting to say is, there are so many genuine M7 bayonets out there in circulation, for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would make more, let alone a S&W Chinese knock off of undetermined quality.
I think they are even still in production by Ontario Spec.
I'm just saying that,
A) We never issued them in a Tank Company, as a matter of fact when I first asked my 1Sg if I should issue Bayonets, he said " NO, do you know how many assholes will start stabbing each other?"
B) A Bayonet charge pretty much hasn't happened since the Korean War and then I think it happened once.
C) Bayonets make shitty knives.
D) For something that your supposed to slam in to the enemy, they break easily.
An Italian company makes a bayonet under the "Extrema Ratio" name. It's supposedly notable for it's strength. If true, the Italian troops have WAY more confidence in this thing than I would have:
"They were even able to determine side load strength that revealed this Fulcrum style bayonet could survive loads of over 150 kg without breaking. The cadre of the ‘Nibbio’ contingent use their bayonets aggressively, often driving them into rock crevasses in Afghanistan to employ them as makeshift steps so that they might successfully scale the mountain. Every facet of these knives have been tested far beyond the normal rigors, hence the firm’s name Extrema Ratio, meaning literally Extreme Measures. Founded in 1997, they are certified ISO 9001, as well as being part of the Armed Forces supplier’s listings: NATO CODE (N/Cage): A D 856."
http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=1257
Optics Planet sells them, if you have a few extra bucks lying around:
https://www.opticsplanet.com/extrema-ratio-fulcrum-bayonet-fixed-blade-knife.html
A question for the experts- How many stabs should you put your bayonet through before trusting it for EDC? Have any bayonets survived the Sage Dynamics 10,000 stab and drop tests?
A question for the experts- How many stabs should you put your bayonet through before trusting it for EDC? Have any bayonets survived the Sage Dynamics 10,000 stab and drop tests?
I don't know, but MIL-B-1309E has you covered :D
https://quicksearch.dla.mil/Transient/17CCE909D47348849CD1164757B60845.pdf
A question for the experts- How many stabs should you put your bayonet through before trusting it for EDC? Have any bayonets survived the Sage Dynamics 10,000 stab and drop tests?
The part where he speeds up the video would look and sound like a woodpecker.
Heck, if that Italian "Extrema Ratio" is as bombproof as claimed, I think it should be carried by Marvel super heroes.
I'm just saying that,
A) We never issued them in a Tank Company, as a matter of fact when I first asked my 1Sg if I should issue Bayonets, he said " NO, do you know how many assholes will start stabbing each other?"
B) A Bayonet charge pretty much hasn't happened since the Korean War and then I think it happened once.
C) Bayonets make shitty knives.
D) For something that your supposed to slam in to the enemy, they break easily.
I know all that and more, but probably a different discussion. I once heard an experienced person say "A bayonet is a fine weapon so long as you keep it off your damn rifle."
Averageman
11-28-21, 15:01
I know all that and more, but probably a different discussion. I once heard an experienced person say "A bayonet is a fine weapon so long as you keep it off your damn rifle."
You know, I would guess (I could probably, in a life saving moment), shove that barrel, flash suppressor and all in to someone.
I know all that and more, but probably a different discussion. I once heard an experienced person say "A bayonet is a fine weapon so long as you keep it off your damn rifle."
You know, I noticed my modest collection of Garand Bayonets weren't nearly sharp enough, so I put them to the stone............. :)
You know, I noticed my modest collection of Garand Bayonets weren't nearly sharp enough, so I put them to the stone............. :)
Maybe you didn't want to do that. The first problem with bayonets is they tend to get stuck a lot. Read a few first hand accounts from WWI and WWII and "sticks in the ribs" is a big problem as they blade often wedges and gets stuck. And a keen edge bayonet probably more so.
As fearsome as things like Arisaka bayonets look, those English and Russian spikes were actually a better answer if your out of ammo rifle needs to become a spear.
Also Garand bayos are now becoming pretty collectible. I'd try and leave them as original as possible.
You know, I would guess (I could probably, in a life saving moment), shove that barrel, flash suppressor and all in to someone.
Probably. Either way a sharp punch to the solar isn't gonna feel great regardless of penetration or no penetration.
Maybe you didn't want to do that. The first problem with bayonets is they tend to get stuck a lot. Read a few first hand accounts from WWI and WWII and "sticks in the ribs" is a big problem as they blade often wedges and gets stuck. And a keen edge bayonet probably more so.
As fearsome as things like Arisaka bayonets look, those English and Russian spikes were actually a better answer if your out of ammo rifle needs to become a spear.
Also Garand bayos are now becoming pretty collectible. I'd try and leave them as original as possible.
I thought the smiley face would convey my jest at ruining my bayonets.
They were definitely not molested in any way.
I have seen some idiots do just that however and it makes me want to slap them.
I tried to pick up an example of each maker back when CMP was blowing them out. I don’t think I got them all but a pretty nice selection.
I thought the smiley face would convey my jest at ruining my bayonets.
They were definitely not molested in any way.
I have seen some idiots do just that however and it makes me want to slap them.
I tried to pick up an example of each maker back when CMP was blowing them out. I don’t think I got them all but a pretty nice selection.
Ahhhh, I'm a little slow with the emoji things.
I think I have bayos for all of my WWII rifles, but I know better than to try and collect one of every manufacturer. There is always that "one" that is unobotanium. I only wish I grabbed a bunch of M1 carbines when they were cheap and easy back in the day, but I was too busy buying AKs for the same price.
You know, I noticed my modest collection of Garand Bayonets weren't nearly sharp enough, so I put them to the stone............. :)
I sharpened my first issued M9 bayonet. It took quite a bit of time to get it from butter knife to usefully sharp but I reasoned it was worth it since the M9s were intended to be utility knives as well as pig stickers and the bayonets were issued by rack number. Imagine my surprise when I found out the the knife in my numbered scabbard was dull as could be during the next field exercise.
Andy
I sharpened my first issued M9 bayonet. It took quite a bit of time to get it from butter knife to usefully sharp but I reasoned it was worth it since the M9s were intended to be utility knives as well as pig stickers and the bayonets were issued by rack number. Imagine my surprise when I found out the the knife in my numbered scabbard was dull as could be during the next field exercise.
Andy
What am I missing here?
How did it go from usefully sharp to dull if you were not using it? And why not just resharpen it???
What am I missing here?
How did it go from usefully sharp to dull if you were not using it? And why not just resharpen it???
It wasnt the same bayonet, just the same sheath. I figured why sharpen the second one, just to get another dull one the next time.
Andy
It wasnt the same bayonet, just the same sheath. I figured why sharpen the second one, just to get another dull one the next time.
Andy
Honestly, I could see whoever was in charge of inventory pulling it because it was no longer GI spec.
Averageman
11-29-21, 21:50
Altering a bayonet is never a good idea.
Germans filed their bayonets to make them more deadly. Tommy took great pleasure in killing those guys slowly.
Honestly, I could see whoever was in charge of inventory pulling it because it was no longer GI spec.
The M9's scabbard had a sharpening stone attached and stoning the edge was a normal, expected maintenance procedure. There is no inspection step that is failed by the bayonet being sharpened.
M6, M7, M9 bayonet Technical Manual: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TM-9-1005-237-23-and-P.pdf
Someone in my company got a bayonet that was sharper than most. I can assure you that no one was going to shave with it.
Andy
I have to say, almost every Army cutting instrument I ran into was pretty dull. Axes, survival knives, Kabars, and bayonets. Pocketknives were sharpish, my chainsaw was pretty sharp. I think dull blades and axes served two purposes - hard to damage a butterknife like edge and Joe was less likely to hurt themselves.
The M9's scabbard had a sharpening stone attached and stoning the edge was a normal, expected maintenance procedure. There is no inspection step that is failed by the bayonet being sharpened.
M6, M7, M9 bayonet Technical Manual: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TM-9-1005-237-23-and-P.pdf
Someone in my company got a bayonet that was sharper than most. I can assure you that no one was going to shave with it.
Andy
I have to say, almost every Army cutting instrument I ran into was pretty dull. Axes, survival knives, Kabars, and bayonets. Pocketknives were sharpish, my chainsaw was pretty sharp. I think dull blades and axes served two purposes - hard to damage a butterknife like edge and Joe was less likely themselves.
It was just another possible alternative that came to mind. I know the M9 has all those features. I was just picturing some army supply guy thinking "Geeze those guys will kill each other if they have a sharp bayo" and pulling it.
Probably the most important thing a bayonet does these days is teach those who survive to bring more ammo next time. I can't imagine the absolute shit show things have to devolve into in order for somebody to think "I need a bayonet and I need it RFN." It's right up there with trading helmet hits with another guy.
And I always thought the military should adapt the soviet spring loaded ballistic knife into something like a 6 pack of cheapo tube knives that are fired from a grenade launching ring with a blank. That's the way to shiv the bad guys in a modern military environment.
Altering a bayonet is never a good idea.
Germans filed their bayonets to make them more deadly. Tommy took great pleasure in killing those guys slowly.
Germany issued saw back bayonets for cutting wood, clearing fields of fire, etc. In 1917, Germany removed the saw teeth from those bayonets. Ironically, the British pioneered the concept. Pics here: http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/artiklar/98bayonets/98bayonets2.htm
Andy
Germany issued saw back bayonets for cutting wood, clearing fields of fire, etc. In 1917, Germany removed the saw teeth from those bayonets. Ironically, the British pioneered the concept. Pics here: http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/artiklar/98bayonets/98bayonets2.htm
Andy
It's funny how guys can fight trench wars with mustard gas but they get upset about shit like modified bayonets, shotguns and the like. We were issuing knuckle knives including trident blade models (1917 I think) and full on brass knuckles with points and a dagger blade (1918). The idea that we are going to have "civilized rules" was a damn joke.
Of course same Germans during the 80s had most cops carrying handguns in .32 acp (7.65mm) because they didn't want to shoot citizens with 9mm but they could roll MP5s at the airport. Shotguns were verbotten but a G3SG1 was an option if shit got wild.
Odd that the army that brought you flamethrowers and poison gas got so worked up about shotguns.
Altering a bayonet is never a good idea.
Germans filed their bayonets to make them more deadly. Tommy took great pleasure in killing those guys slowly.
No, the issue was issue saw backs and other bayonets soldiers of both sides considered inhumane, not sharpened ones. Soldiers would actually file their sawtooth bayonets down to avoid being executed, and that in turn lead to an organized program to remove the teeth from all such bayonets by the German army. Even with that in mind, most such stories are more legend than fact, and I have yet to run across a single documented reference to a Kraut (or anyone else for that matter) being executed for carrying the wrong type of bayonet.
Odd that the army that brought you flamethrowers and poison gas got so worked up about shotguns.
Because shotguns were a clear and direct violation of the Hague Convention that banned the use of exposed lead projectiles. Earlier in the war, the Germans had made a great deal of noise over the British use of some hunting rifles (with matching ammo) as sniping weapons and even invented the idea that the magazine cut-off of the SMLE was being used to snip the tip off of Mk VII .303 ball rounds to make them deadlier. It's goofy to get worked up over such things, but it does fit with the German mindset of everything having to follow clear-cut categories and rules.
Because shotguns were a clear and direct violation of the Hague Convention that banned the use of exposed lead projectiles.
The resolution addresses expanding bullets and states "The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."
Lead round balls were not within the scope of the resolution. The US was also not a signatory, unless I am mistaken.
Vaguely interesting link: http://www.weaponslaw.org/instruments/1899-hague-declaration
Andy
Regarding the World War I German shotgun protest and the US Army's legal interpretation of it, starts about page 17 of this document:
https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/10-1997.pdf
The resolution addresses expanding bullets and states "The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."
Lead round balls were not within the scope of the resolution. The US was also not a signatory, unless I am mistaken.
Vaguely interesting link: http://www.weaponslaw.org/instruments/1899-hague-declaration
Andy
Thanks for that clarification. I was just gonna point out that most of the WWII vintage ammo I've seen both US .45 and German 9mm is lead ball.
The resolution addresses expanding bullets and states "The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."
Lead round balls were not within the scope of the resolution. The US was also not a signatory, unless I am mistaken.
Vaguely interesting link: http://www.weaponslaw.org/instruments/1899-hague-declaration
Andy
Lead buckshot does expand or flatten in the body. Recovered enough musket balls and lead pellets from hunting over the years to say that much. It also does have an exposed core since it doesn't have any form of a jacket. And no, the US wasn't a signatory but has agreed to abide by the convention. Otherwise, we would have seen soft point or hollow point .30-40 Krag rounds become common (they were in the works at the time), and likely the same developed for .30-06 military rounds. The same ban still impacts military ammunition development.
Thanks for that clarification. I was just gonna point out that most of the WWII vintage ammo I've seen both US .45 and German 9mm is lead ball.
Lead core perhaps, but I haven't seen anything from either nation of that vintage that isn't jacketed. Even the British had abandoned the Mk II .455 Webley and Mk I .38-200 loading in favor of FMJ versions of the cartridges due to fear of them being a Hauge Convention violation.
The XM1153 9mm round that is being bought for the M17/M18 program is a 147 grain jacketed hollow point bullet, so the US seems to be expanding it's boundaries.
Lead buckshot does expand or flatten in the body. Recovered enough musket balls and lead pellets from hunting over the years to say that much. It also does have an exposed core since it doesn't have any form of a jacket. And no, the US wasn't a signatory but has agreed to abide by the convention. Otherwise, we would have seen soft point or hollow point .30-40 Krag rounds become common (they were in the works at the time), and likely the same developed for .30-06 military rounds. The same ban still impacts military ammunition development.
Lead core perhaps, but I haven't seen anything from either nation of that vintage that isn't jacketed. Even the British had abandoned the Mk II .455 Webley and Mk I .38-200 loading in favor of FMJ versions of the cartridges due to fear of them being a Hauge Convention violation.
Lead ball and solid lead projectiles had been used for centuries before the resolution was signed. The driving factor behind the resolution was high velocity jacketed soft point ammunition, as used by the British army. That is why I said (and it is purely my opinion and speculation) that lead round balls were outside the scope of the resolution. I agree that the US abides by the agreement.
Andy
P.S. You are absolutely correct that round balls, buckshot, and a lot of lead projectiles flatten or expand, no argument here.
The XM1153 9mm round that is being bought for the M17/M18 program is a 147 grain jacketed hollow point bullet, so the US seems to be expanding it's boundaries.
Definitely, though even the original Hague Convention allowed for "dum dum" bullets to be used in colonial wars, or internal security. Since the US has largely been fighting colonial wars since 2001, we've seen a variety of OTM and JHP rounds find their way into service. The real question will be when the new hotness is allowed or issued, and if we see any international complaints about them. Other than mild diplomatic protests, I doubt we will, because people are getting used to the sheer horror of modern war on TV, and the idea of a slightly more deadly handgun round doesn't really compare to everything we've seen in recent years.
Kind of an interesting take on the OTM history and legality: http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/open-tip-match-when-a-hollow-point-is-not-a-hollow-point/
Andy
Lead ball and solid lead projectiles had been used for centuries before the resolution was signed. The driving factor behind the resolution was high velocity jacketed soft point ammunition, as used by the British army. That is why I said (and it is purely my opinion and speculation) that lead round balls were outside the scope of the resolution. I agree that the US abides by the agreement.
Andy
P.S. You are absolutely correct that round balls, buckshot, and a lot of lead projectiles flatten or expand, no argument here.
I could be wrong in this, but the actual basis for the German complaint was the exposed lead projectile, which in turn made it inhumane and caused "unnecessary suffering." The US response, however, focused solely on the "unnecessary suffering" part and completely ignored the exposed lead, since, well, one issue is debatable and the other is pretty cut and dry. Since we won the war, and shotguns were not nearly as widely used as most people think, the issue was largely ignored afterward.
Again, I could be entirely wrong on that, and there might be an original copy of the formal German complaint given to the Swiss to pass to us somewhere, but most in-depth secondary sources tend to talk quite a bit about the ammunition used/captured by the Huns. Since shrapnel and multiple projectile weapons weren't exactly exclusive to shotguns during the Great War, I tend to think the legal issue was the type of projectile(s).
Side note, the shotgun was not only unpopular with the Germans, there are more than a few reports of our Associated Powers not being pleased with their use. A French cartoon from the war suggested that along with "frontier" weapons like shotguns, Americans would introduce the habit of scalping, furthering the barbarity of the war.
The link provided by Slater states the German protest against shotguns was "The German Government protests against the use of shotguns by the American Army and calls attention to the fact that according to the law of war (Kriegsrecht) every [U.S.] prisoner [of war] found to have in his possession such guns or ammunition belonging thereto forfeits his life. This protest is based upon article 23(e) of the Hague convention [sic] respecting the laws and customs of war on land. Reply by cable is required before October 1, 1918."
Andy
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.