This example was converted from a M3 combat knife. Proposals to convert M3 knives into M4 bayonets arose during 1951, due to the acute shortage of M4 bayonets following commitment of U.S. troops to the Korean War. In April 1952, Springfield Armory indicated that conversion was impractical, as new bayonets could be procured for the same cost. However, two conversion runs are documented.

The Ordnance Dept. consented to the conversion of 58,522 M3 knives by the U.S. Army, Japan Logistical Command (labor costs would have been lower in Japan). Japan Logistical Command received conversion drawings and specifications from Springfield Armory in October 1952. In February 1953, Japan Logistical Command indicated that the conversion had been initiated. The production schedule called for 3,000 in April; 4,000 in May; and, 5,000 per month thereafter, with completion in January 1954.

In January 1953, the Ordnance Dept. had Camillus perform a test run converting 250 unserviceable M3 knives into M4 bayonets before awarding Camillus a contract to manufacture new bayonets.

This example probably originated as one of the M3/M4 conversions done in Japan and sent to Korea, where it was subsequently reworked, as it is now comprised of mixed parts: M3 blade, wide guard, and rubber grip. It came in an early M8 scabbard (Vp1 mold) that had the wire belt hanger added to the original, short strap assembly.

In December 1952, the Ordnance Dept. had Camillus rebuild 30 unserviceable M4 bayonets to include the new guard for use as test samples in changing M4 bayonet specifications. This laid the groundwork for Camillus to incorporate the wide guard in their 1953 production.

Camillus manufactured and finished the blades in-house. Leather grip washers were supplied by Simplex Manufacturing Co. of Auburn, NY, who had supplied Camillus’ grip washers during the Second World War. Bayonets produced under this contract did not incorporate plastic grip spacers. Latch plates and guards are documented as being manufactured and finished by L. C. Smith. The L.C. Smith shotgun factory in Fulton, NY, had closed in 1950, so the annotation “L. C. Smith” likely refers to the L. C. Smith & Corona factory that was still operating in Syracuse, NY; and, where M1903A3 rifles had been manufactured during the Second World War.

During the 1990s, Camillus reproduced the 1953-contract M4 bayonet for commercial sale. However, subtle variations make identification of the reproductions relatively easy. The most obvious differences are the peen; and, the guard and latch plate markings. The reproduction has a flat peen, where the period piece has a starburst peen. The middle stem of the letter “M” in CAMILLUS on the reproduction guard goes all the way down to the base line, where the middle stem on a period piece only descends part way. The “X” on the latch plate of the reproduction is placed vertically, where it is placed horizontally on a period piece.

The grip is made of what appears to be an Asian hardwood, with diamond-pattern cross-hatching. The grip is one piece, requiring removal and re-peening of the latch plate for installation. Given that the M3 Knife to M4 bayonet conversions were done in Japan, these wood grip conversions were also likely done there as well. The process for installation of the wood grip is a subset of the M3 Knife to M4 bayonet conversion process.

While no documentation regarding this conversion has been found, Korean War images of M4 bayonets with this grip date the conversion to the Korean War period. M.H. Cole’s, U.S. Military Knives Book 4, page 115, includes an image of a U.S. soldier in Korea wearing one of these on his belt. A U.S. Army photograph of Turkish soldiers in Korea also shows the wood-grip M4 bayonet in combat service.

1) The guard was secured by only an interference fit on to the blade and pressure from the compressed leather grip;

2) There was simply no practical way to repair the leather grip.

During the Second World War, the decision was made to scrap any M3 knife that required disassembly of the leather grip in order to make it serviceable. With the M4 bayonet, years in storage, the M4 bayonet’s longer guard, and the M4’s use as a bayonet all likely exacerbated the tendency for the guard to work loose. While the reduction in interference fit included in the 1952 guard modifications served to eliminate breakages, it made the guard even less secure, increasing the stresses placed on the leather grip washers when the guard was struck. Inability to repair the leather grip made the original M4 bayonet unsustainable.

New evidence suggests that cost also likely played a role in redesign of the M4 bayonet. The M4 bayonet produced under the 1953 Camillus contract cost $2.88. By 1954, the cost for the M5 bayonet was on the order of $1.65 per bayonet. The M5 bayonet’s much lower cost helps explain the government moving rapidly to redesign the M4 bayonet. The cost for the redesigned M4 Second Production bayonet under Imperial's 1954 contract was $1.96, a savings of some 30 percent.

Designers solved the loose guard issue by securing it to the blade with a heavy steel bar. Once assembled to the blade, neither the guard nor the latch plate were intended to ever be removed. When undergoing depot repair, the whole assembly could be reparkerized as a unit, the blade reground, latches and grips replaced, and the refurbished bayonet packaged for long-term storage.

Securing the guard made it possible to utilize plastic grips, which contributed to both sustainability and reducing production cost. Unlike the leather grip, which must be laboriously-assembled by a skilled worker from individual leather “washers,” plastic grips can be mass-produced, then assembled using unskilled labor. In service, plastic grips are easily replaced.

Lack of government documentation around M4 Second Production design specifications leaves some uncertainty around another cost-saving innovation that evidence suggests also played a part: the sintered latch plate. M4 Bayonets produced in 1944–45 and 1953 had latch plates machined from bar stock or steel forgings. The intricate machining of the rectangular hole, T-slot, and elliptical outer shape was costly and time-consuming.

In 1944, a Boston firm, Isthmian Metals Inc., submitted experimental, lower-cost latch plates to the Army for evaluation. The latch plates were made by compressing powdered metal (sintering). The Army found them to be satisfactory, but the War ended before anything more became of it. Beginning in November 1954, just four months after Imperial was awarded the first M4 Second Production Bayonet contract, detailed technical articles authored by Isthmian Metals Co. Vice President, John W. Young, began appearing in metals industry trade publications describing their manufacture of M4 bayonet latch plates (which they called butt plates) from powdered metals.

The latch plate of the 1954 Imperial M4, pictured below, lacks tool marks and has a marking that appears molded-in, rather than stamped. Turner latch plates observed often exhibit tool marks, as does the example pictured below. However, the appearance of Conetta and Bren-Dan latch plates, pictured below, are also consistent with the sintering process. While some uncertainty remains, it appears that the sintered latch plate was likely included in the M4 Second Production bayonet design as a cost-saving feature, although it may not have been used exclusively.

Four M4 Second Production contracts appear to have been let. U.S. government prime contractors and approximate years of production include:

—Imperial Knife Co.: 1954
—Turner Manufacturing Co.: 1954–56
—Conetta Manufacturing Co.: 1966–69
—Bren-Dan Manufacturing Co.: 1971–72

An estimated quantity of approximately 660,000 M4 Second Production bayonets appear to have been produced under government contracts. Some M4 Second Production bayonets were marked with the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), while others were not or may have had the DAS obliterated during service. The presence or absence of a DAS should not be criteria for determining whether a bayonet is U.S. Government Issue (USGI).

More info is available in the Post-War M4 Bayonet Contracts Summary.

See M4 Bayonet-Knife for additional information on Second World War M4 bayonet production.

Imperial's M4 Second Production bayonets have a marking on the latch plate (Circle-I), similar to wartime M4 bayonet latch plates marked by subcontractors Standard Products and Hemphill. Careful examination of this mark shows that it has the appearance of being formed into the part, rather than stamped after-the-fact. While there is not hard documentation identifying the subcontractor represented by the Circle-I mark, there is circumstantial evidence of a likely candidate.

A Boston firm, Isthmian Metals Inc., was the developer of sintered latch plates that the Army evaluated 1944–45. In 1954 and 1955, a few months after Imperial was awarded this 1954 M4 contract, technical articles authored by Isthmian Metals Inc. appeared in metals industry trade publications describing their manufacture of M4 bayonet latch plates and M1 Carbine sears from powdered metals.

Guard (reverse): DAS

Latch Plate: Circle-I

While Turner's award was likely near-contemporaneous with Imperial's 1954 contract, the contract serial numbers substantiate that Imperial was actually the first M4 Second Production contractor.

It appears that Turner was primarily an assembler of M4 bayonets, with components provided by external suppliers. According to Frank Trzaska, Camillus Cutlery Co. supplied Turner with blades. Recent findings have identified American Insulator Corporation of New Freedom, PA, as the supplier of Turner’s plastic grips. I was able to locate some period images of M4 bayonet production at Turner.

The C. H. Turner company of Statesville, NC, began in 1916 as a manufacturer of agricultural equipment. In 1926, the company’s foundry and machining operations were merged into a single firm which, by the 1930s, was renamed Turner Manufacturing Co. Turner was then manufacturing tractors, sawmills, and agricultural equipment. By the 1940s, they began manufacturing woodworking machinery. Turner ventured into manufacture of consumer goods and government contracting during the 1950s to diversify their business. Textile manufacturer, Fletcher Industries of Philadelphia, PA, acquired Turner in 1960, taking over operation of the Statesville factory to manufacture yarn twisting and winding machinery; and narrow-fabric looms (used for making braid, ribbon, clothing labels, etc.). Fletcher is still in business today, playing a crucial role during the Covid-19 pandemic by manufacturing specialized braiding machinery used to weave the elastic bands for N95 masks.

Guard:  "U.S. M4", "TMN."

Conetta Tool and Die Co. was founded in 1946. In 1954, they began an expansion that came to include three additional wholly-owned subsidiaries. In 1959, Conetta Manufacturing Co., Inc. became a publicly-traded corporation. The initial stock offering occurred in August 1960. Conetta produced trigger and sear assemblies for the M1 and M14 rifles; M4 and M7 bayonets; and, Mk. 2 knives for the government. During the 1960s, Conetta Manufacturing Co. became increasingly indebted.

In September 1968, as the government was finalizing the M7 bayonet contract award that went to Bauer Ordnance Co., a Philadelphia-based venture capital firm purchased 90 percent of Conetta Manufacturing Co. In November 1968, Conetta Manufacturing Co. was merged into Dynetics Corp., legally terminating Conetta's existence. Dynetics Corp. was a privately-held corporation that had existed since at least 1961 and, in which Louis Conetta obtained shares in 1966.

In November 1969, Louis Conetta ceased being an officer or director at Dynetics. In May 1970, Dynetics Corp. filed to become a publicly-traded corporation. The filing listed Dynetics as “formerly Conetta Manufacturing Co.” One of the stated uses for the money raised from stock sales was repayment of what were obviously Conetta Manufacturing Co. debts. Louis Conetta’s Dynetics shares were to be sold in the public stock offering. This effectively ended the Conetta family’s involvement in the firm.

New Jersey surplus dealer SARCO (now in Pennsylvania) purchased many of the leftover bayonet and knife parts, using them to assemble items for commercial sale. The M7 Bowie bayonet is an example of a SARCO commercial product assembled from leftover Conetta parts.

Bren-Dan had two other small arms-related contracts 1971–72, totaling $40,000, that could have been for bayonets or spare parts, but no documentation to validate what these contracts were for has been found.

Bren-Dan, Inc. was incorporated in August 1959. In 2022, Louis Conetta’s niece confirmed that the company was named after Louis Conetta's two children (at that time), Brenda and Daniel. The Conetta family continued bayonet production via Bren-Dan, Inc. following loss of Conetta Manufacturing Co. The Bren-Dan factory was across the street from the former Conetta factory.

In the 1990s, author/researcher Frank Trzaska visited the Bren-Dan factory and spoke with the owners, Peter S. Conetta and Michael Sabia. Peter began work at Conetta Tool & Die Co. in 1950. During the 1990s, Peter Conetta was president and treasurer; Sabia was vice-president and secretary. A third owner, J. Michael Cantore, Jr., assumed the role of vice-president in 2003. These three sold the company to local real estate investors in 2008, ending the Conetta family’s involvement in the firm.

This example was found in its original packaging bearing the Bren-Dan contract number with a 12/71 packing date. However, the bayonet inside is marked “Conetta” on the guard.

1005-716-0944
Bayonet-Knife, M4
1 EA.
DAAF01-71-C-0851
A 12/71

Guard: "U.S. M4" and "Conetta"

Common characteristics of 1960s commercial M4 bayonets are that they were patterned on the wartime leather-grip M4, were manufactured in Japan, and imported to the U.S. for commercial sale. The identity of the Japanese manufacturer or manufacturers is not known. Similarities observed in both bayonets and scabbards suggest that the same manufacturer likely supplied multiple U.S. importers. However, variances observed suggest that, over time, there may also have been more than one manufacturer. There is a lot that we just don't know regarding 1960s commercial M4 bayonets.

The 1960s commercial M4 bayonets most familiar to bayonet collectors include those from: 

—Kiffe Sales Co., a New York sporting goods retailer.
—Service Armament Co. (SAC), forerunner to today’s Navy Arms Co.
—ROSCO, the house brand of Los Angeles businessman, George W. Rose.
—Sportsworld, a firm we, essentially, know nothing about.

Some 1960s commercial M4 bayonets are completely unmarked or are only marked “Japan.”

The ca. 1967 exhaustion of NRA M1 carbine sales and the Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibiting private mail-order firearm sales effectively ended the heyday of the commercial M4 bayonet. Surplus USGI M4 bayonets became more available during the 1970s, making commercial M4 bayonets increasingly difficult to sell.

My working paper on the George Rose & Co. and the ROSCO M4 Bayonet provides additional history on 1960s importation of commercial M4 bayonets.

Author/researcher, Gary Cunningham, compiled the history we know today of the Kiffe firm.

Kiffe was founded in 1875 by Herman H. Kiffe as a New York City manufacturer and retailer of sporting goods, especially baseball equipment. The company was renamed several times over their nearly 100 year existence. Examples include:

Herman H. Kiffe Sporting Goods—1875
H. H. Kiffe Company—ca.1900
Lucke-Kiffe Company, Inc.—1930s–1950s
Kiffe Sales Company—1960s

Over the years, Kiffe sold all manner of camping, hunting, and fishing gear; and, military surplus as well. Both M4 and M5 bayonets have been observed with the Kiffe private label. Initially, the new-made bayonets were paired up with military surplus M8A1 scabbards or commercial copies of the M8A1 scabbard (both web and leather hangers are encountered).

The scabbard with this example is a Second World War U.S. M8A1, made by the Beckwith Manufacturing Co. of Dover, New Hampshire.

The glove fastener was made by the United-Carr Fastener Corporation of Cambridge, Massachusetts. United-Carr was famous for developing the “DOT” fastener (aka Lift-the-Dot) still widely used today. United-Carr was absorbed into TRW Corporation in 1969.

Scabbard (throatpiece): "U.S. M8A1" over "B. M. Co."

Scabbard (body): superimposed "vp" over "6"

Scabbard (Glove Fastener): "United" over "Carr"

This December 1962 S.A.C. advertisement in Guns Magazine was the earliest of their advertisements that I was able to locate listing "Carbine & Garand Bayonets" for sale. The bayonet and scabbard were sold separately.

These are sometimes found with commercial copies of the M8A1 scabbard (both web and leather hangers are encountered).

The M8A1 scabbard with this example was assembled at the Pennsylvania Working Home for the Blind 1965–68.

Ricasso (right): "Japan"

Scabbard:  "U.S. M8A1" over "P W H"

Rose wholesaled these bayonets nationwide using his wholesale distribution firm, George Rose & Co., Inc. well into the 1970s. He also would have retailed them by mail-order using his retail sales firm, Seaport Traders, Inc., until it ceased operation in 1964; and at his Los Angeles store until it closed ca. 1968.

It is unclear exactly when these bayonets were imported, however, it was most likely ca. 1961–62. During 1963, Rose began distancing himself from the ROSCO brand and soon after ceased using it. Had Rose imported these bayonets during or after 1963, it is doubtful that they would have been marked ROSCO.

Seaport Traders and the ROSCO brand were ruined by national publicity regarding Rose’s mail-order firearms sales practices and revelation that Seaport Traders had sold Lee Harvey Oswald the revolver used to murder a Dallas policeman 40 minutes after the assassination of President Kennedy.

The matte, flexible, black vinyl scabbard shown with this example is the original scabbard supplied with ROSCO M4 bayonets. This pair were purchased together in the late 1960s by noted collector/researcher, Bill Porter. As shown below, a similar scabbard is also found on Japan-import M4 bayonets marked “Sportsworld.” The cheesy scabbard supplied helps explain why so few of these bayonets are found in them today. Many were simply thrown away or replaced with M8A1 scabbards or commercial M8A1 copies.

My working paper on George Rose & Co. and the ROSCO M4 Bayonet provides additional history on ROSCO M4 bayonets and the business that imported and sold them.

Scabbard (reverse): "Japan"

Construction and finish of this example is very similar to the Kiffe, ROSCO, and SAC bayonets, leaving open the possibility that they were produced by the same Japanese manufacturer.

The scabbard with this example is identical to the ROSCO scabbard shown above, except that it is made of shiny, stiff, black vinyl.

Scabbard (reverse): "Japan"

The scabbard is a commercial copy of the US M8A1, with an unreinforced molded plastic body and leather belt hanger. This type of scabbard was also sold by Kiffe and SAC with some of their commercial M4 bayonets.

In the early 1960s, it was common to sell the commercial M4 bayonet and scabbard separately. This likely accounts for why similar commercial M8A1 scabbard copies are found on Japanese-import commercial M4 bayonets from different retailers.

As surplus USGI M4 bayonets began to be offered, mid-1963, retailers began selling commercial M4 bayonets together with a scabbard.

These were once thought to have been undocumented experimental pieces. However, in his book, Collecting Bayonets, Dr. Jim Maddox confirms that these were a mid-1960s commercial product of a surplus dealer near Warner Robbins, GA.

Although not an official variation, the aluminum grips are an interesting curiosity.

Pommel: "Sp" and "43B"

The M5 bayonet is noteworthy in that the parts are almost all stampings (including the blade). This substantially reduced production cost. Under Utica's 1953 M1 bayonet contract, the cost was $6.08 per bayonet. Under J & D Tool Co's. 1954 M5 contract, the cost was approximately $1.65 per bayonet.

As discussed below, wartime pressures and supply shortages resulted in a chaotic changeover from procurement of the M1 bayonet to the M5, resulting in:

—Concurrent procurement of M1 bayonets from Utica and M5 bayonets from Imperial;
—Award of a M1 contract to Imperial (who had never made M1 bayonets), which was changed to the M5 one month later;
—Award of a M5 contract to Aerial that the government sought to terminate just one week later, only to backtrack following congressional scrutiny; and,
—M5 production from Utica Cutlery Co. absent evidence of a prime contract.

Field problems with the M5 bayonet cropped up quickly. In October 1954, the Chief of Army Field Forces, Gen. John E. Dahlquist, requested that the Ordnance Dept. suspend M5 bayonet production. This request was denied by Army Deputy Chief of Staff G-4 (Logistics), Gen. Williston B. Palmer (Gen. Palmer and his brother Charles, were the first pair of brothers to both achieve Army 4-star rank).

Contrary to popular belief, the latch modification represented in the M5A1 bayonet was not developed in response to the M5 bayonet’s field issues. The latch modification was developed during design of the M6 bayonet for reasons solely applicable to the M14 rifle.

The Army studied adapting the M6 latch to the M5 bayonet during 1955 at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, designating the test bayonet M5E1. The modified latch purposely allowed the bayonet to move forward slightly during recoil, which caused partial withdrawal of the M5 mounting stud from the M1 rifle’s gas cylinder lock screw. There were concerns that the latch may bind and the bayonet fail to return home, leaving the M5 bayonet loose on its mount. A 25-page technical report entitled, A Test of the M5E1 Bayonet, was issued April 22, 1955. This did not result in adoption and further testing was done. In early 1956, another report, Technical Report SA-TR20-5000, Evaluation of Effect on Accuracy Performance of the caliber .30 M1 Rifle with the Bayonet, Knife, M5E1 Attached, is described as including the caveat that, “… the results are questionable because of the binding condition preventing the return of the bayonet to the original position following each shot.” While there may have still been some lingering concerns, the M5E1 test bayonet was officially adopted in April 1956.

The improved latch was implemented immediately, mid-contract at J & D Tool Co. and in a new contract at Aerial Cutlery Co. The M5A1 designation had apparently not yet been finalized, resulting in the bayonets from these two contracts being marked M5-1. M5E1 was the Springfield Armory designation used during the development project, so the makers simply deleted the “E” as an expedient way to distinguish production bayonets with the improved latch from earlier M5 production.

At least 11 M5/M5A1 prime contracts appear to have been let. U.S. government contractors and approximate years of production include:

—Imperial Knife Co.: M5 1953–54; M5A1 1967–68, 1972–73, and 1976
—Aerial Cutlery Co.: M5 1954; M5A1 ca. 1957–59
—Columbus Milpar & Manufacturing Co.: M5A1 1962–69
—J & D Tool Co.: M5 1954–56; M5A1 1957
—Utica Cutlery Co.: M5 1954 (contractual relationship unclear)

At least 1.5 million M5/M5A1 bayonets appear to have been produced. Some M5 and M5A1 bayonets were marked with the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), while many were not or may have had the DAS obliterated during service. The presence or absence of a DAS should not be criteria for determining whether a bayonet is U.S. Government Issue (USGI).

More info on M5 bayonet production is available in the M5 and M5A1 Bayonet Contracts Summary.

I’m indebted to Frank Trzaska for sharing his research material which helped further clarify the history of the M5/M5A1 bayonet.

Despite not previously having made them, Imperial was awarded contract DA-19-058-ORD-7598 on June 11, 1953, for production of M1 bayonets. The contract was reported to have been in the amount $1,858,758. The M5 bayonet was adopted just one month later, so the government changed the contract’s design specifications to reflect production of the M5 bayonet and renegotiated the contract price. Initially, the renegotiated price was $4.80 per bayonet, but this was subsequently reduced to $4.00. The total quantity produced has not been documented, but must have been significant given the large number of examples encountered today.

Imperial was also awarded three contracts for the M5A1 bayonet, in fiscal years 1967, 1973, and 1976. In addition to being the the first producer of the M5 bayonet, these contracts also made Imperial the last producer of the M5A1 bayonet.

A prolific producer of bayonets and scabbards, Imperial Knife Co. changed its corporate name to Imperial Schrade Corp. in 1984. Imperial’s losing out in the M9 bayonet competition resulted in closure of the Providence, RI, plant in 1987. Imperial Schrade continued operations in Ellenville, NY, until its closure in 2004 after 100 years of operation.

Contract DAAF-03-67-C-0067 was awarded in April 1967. This contract was not identified in Cunningham. This example was packaged in October 1968 and remains sealed in its original packaging.

Contract DAAF-03-73-C-1071 was awarded in August 1972. The contract amount was $131,000, which suggests that the quantity produced was in the neighborhood of 40,000.

This example was taken from sealed packaging. As shown in the images at left, the runout on the 1973 contract M5A1 bayonets is similar to the 90-degree runout found on Imperial 1973 contract M7 bayonets.

Label:

"1005-336-8568
Bayonet Knife - M5A1
1 ea.
DAAF 03-73-C-1071"

Contract DAAF-03-76-C-6658 was awarded in June 1976 for $88,000. Cunningham’s book lists this as a M7 contract, however, it was actually for the M5A1. (Imperial was awarded another contract in June 1976 for the M7, DAAF-03-76-C-6646.) Cunningham indicates a quantity of 63,270, however, this is applicable to the M7 contract. Documentation of the true M5A1 quantity has not been found. Based on the contract amount, the quantity produced was probably in the neighborhood of 16,000.

1976 was the year when the federal government converted from a June 30–July 1 fiscal year to the present October 1–September 30 fiscal year. The available contract data from this transitional year is difficult to navigate, no doubt contributing to this confusion.

The Ordnance Dept. revised their blade specifications in July 1974 to permit a curved or sloped runout (which had previously been accepted on a non-standard basis from J & D Tool Co. and Milpar). Imperial adopted a curved runout on their 1976 M5A1 contract. Imperial’s 1976-contract M5A1 bayonets also have a rounded blade spine, similar to what Milpar used on their late production.

Most of the 1973 and 1976 contract M5A1 bayonets appear to have gone to foreign users of the M1 rifle. Examples from both of these contracts, still sealed in their packaging, were returned by Greece in 2010 and sold to collectors by the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP).

The Chicago Ordnance District strangely requested termination of Aerial’s contract just one week after awarding it. This became controversial, because Aerial’s M5 contract was for $2.25 per bayonet, while Imperial’s M5 contract was for $4.00 per bayonet. (Then) Congressman Gerald R. Ford questioned the propriety of the Army’s handling of the two contracts. The Chief of Ordnance, Maj. Gen. Emerson L. Cummings, rescinded termination on June 17, 1954, the same day he and Army G-4, Gen. Palmer, were scheduled to explain the situation to Wisconsin Congressman John W. Byrnes (in whose district Aerial was located). The assigned contract number corresponds to June 1954, although the original contract award likely occurred some months earlier.

Aerial was subsequently awarded a contract for the M5A1 bayonet ca.1957. These bayonets are marked M5-1. The quantity produced under this contract is not known. Camillus Cutlery Co. supplied all of the blades used on Aerial’s Post-War bayonet production.

Aerial’s business lines also included barbering and beauty supplies. As imported products made the cutlery business less profitable, Aerial successfully adapted by expanding their lines of barbering and beauty supplies, ceasing cutlery and bayonet production entirely by the early 1960s. Their corporate name was truncated to The Aerial Co., Inc. in 1982. Aerial continued operating independently until 2010, when it was acquired by Sally Beauty Supply for $70 million.

Milpar’s 1962 contract was for 190,000 M5A1 bayonets plus spare parts in the amount $369,508. The contracting board recommended rejecting Milpar’s bid due to their late M6 bayonet deliveries, and out of concern that Milpar lacked production capacity to produce expected quantities of M6 and M5A1 bayonets concurrently. Another bidder, Camillus Cutlery Co., also protested the proposed contract award to the General Accounting Office (GAO), citing Milpar’s late M6 deliveries. However, the GAO ruled against Camillus and the contracting board, ordering the M5A1 contract be awarded to Milpar.

Milpar’s 1965 contract, DA-11-199-AMC-642, was in the amount $66,000. It is the only bayonet prime contract found that is documented as being placed for Foreign Military Sales. Available records do not explicitly state type, but has to be M5A1, as U.S. Government M14 and M16 rifles were not available to foreign users in 1965.

Milpar’s 1966 M5A1 contract, DA-11-199-AMC-726, was in the amount $561,000. This contract became mired in Milpar’s post-1966 production woes and was not completed until late-1968 or early-1969.

From the outset, Milpar's bayonet production appears to have used a unique patented cold-stamping process to produce blades. Many Milpar M5A1 blades exhibit cold-stamping characteristics (see Milpar M6 bayonet below). By 1967, Milpar's blade production appears to have changed to a conventional surface-ground blade forming process similar to other contractors; and also began to exhibit a rounded spine. Ca. 1968, Milpar blades began to exhibit what was, in 1968–69, a non-standard curved (or sloped) runout. These features are found on Milpar M5A1, M6, and M7 bayonets. However, M5A1 bayonets are most common. These features have been erroneously thought to indicate commercial assembly by surplus dealers. However, the example pictured at left was taken from a sealed U.S. government package with an October 1968 packing date, substantiating that the curved (or sloped) runout was used on government contract production.

Milpar had production output and quality issues from mid-1966 onwards that culminated in a government-ordered shutdown of bayonet production in January or February 1968. Whittaker Corporation's acquisition of Milpar was finalized almost concurrent to the government shutdown. Significant reworking of the production line appears to have occurred under Whittaker Corp. oversight, followed by Whittaker's replacement of Milpar's bayonet plant supervisors. It is likely that the curved runout was introduced at this point, although the specific production line changes have not been documented.

Milpar's manufacturing variations were largely a consequence of their incoherent management of the bayonet production process. While some commercial assembly of bayonets using rejected and surplus Milpar parts did occur, manufacturing variations are not necessarily definitive evidence of commercial assembly or fakery. No Milpar M5A1 bayonet has been observed or reported as being marked with the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS). See my working paper on Columbus Milpar and Manufacturing Co. for a detailed history of Milpar and its bayonet production.

The 1954 contract amount was reported as $94,863. According to Cunningham, the 1954 contract was for 57,540 bayonets. The 1956 contract began as M5 bayonets, but production changed to the M5A1 mid-contract. These bayonets were marked M5-1.

J & D Tool Co. appears to have encountered challenges in producing blades. Early J & D Tool M5 bayonets used blades supplied by Camillus Cutlery Co. J & D Tool Co's. own blades exhibit uneven workmanship, with some being quite crude. Camillus blades have the traditional 90-degree runout. J & D Tool Co. blades have a non-standard curved runout. Why the government accepted the curved runout is unknown. However, a curved runout again appeared on Milpar bayonets ca. 1968 after they had difficulty producing acceptable bayonets.

The example pictured at left is an early J & D Tool Co. M5. It was made using a Camillus blade, which retains the original factory edge. It also has the “fat” grips that were only used in early M5 production. As is typical with J & D Tool Co. bayonets, the DAS is lightly struck.

J & D Tool Co. was a family business that manufactured tools, dies, letter opener machines, and rifle components for the U.S. Government. The company was formed in 1947 and operated until 1963. At their peak, J & D Tool Co. reportedly employed 90 workers. The initials J & D were once thought to represent Jones and Dickinson. J & D were the initials of two of the company’s three founders, siblings: John, Dominick, and Theresa Spera (married name, Pittaro). However, the longer form was not used in the company name, which was simply J & D Tool Co.

Utica was awarded contract DA-19-058-ORD-7440 in March 1953 for 75,000 M1 bayonets. Ordnance Dept records show that the contract was completed in December 1953 without overrun or underrun; and, a subsequent overrun of 2,549 M1 bayonets was accepted in April 1954 (without any mention of Utica producing M5 bayonets under the contract). However, an April 1954 Ordnance Dept. memorandum references a shipping order that includes 10,000 M5 bayonets from Utica, showing that Utica was actively engaged in producing M5 bayonets at this time.

No evidence of a separate Utica M5 prime contract has been found. An additional possibility is that Imperial could have subcontracted assembly of some M5 bayonets to Utica, as a way of increasing deliveries. As it stands, we still don’t know by what means Utica came to manufacture M5 bayonets.

This example has the early “fat” grips. However, some Utica M5s are found with a unique grip whose checkering extends all the way to the mortise. This grip seems unique only to some portion of Utica’s M5 production.

Utica M5 bayonets are also unique in being marked with the Ordnance Dept. Shell-and-Flame. The deadline for replacement of the shell-and flame with the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS) was July 1, 1953. This oddity just adds to the mystery around procurement of Utica’s M5 bayonets.

The quantity produced by Utica is also not known with certainty. In 2012, Surplus dealer, Bill Ricca, indicated that he had seen a publication that covered Utica's production and it indicated that 28,000 Utica M5's were produced. In any case, Utica M5 bayonets are scarce.

Although Utica remains in business today, the M5 bayonets produced in 1954 were the last bayonets they produced.

Carrier measures 10.50 in. (267 mm.) long by 7.375 in. (187 mm.) wide.

This example was made in 1967 and is shown here with the US M6 bayonet.

"Carrier Intrenching Tool
M-1956 Contract No.
DSA-100-67C-0103
FSN-8465-542-5842     16"

The search for a replacement for the M1 rifle was already underway when the Second World War ended. In December 1951, when Chief of Ordnance, Maj. Gen. Elbert L. Ford, assigned Springfield Armory responsibility for developing what would become the M5 bayonet, he noted that the military characteristics specified “are equally applicable to bayonets for use with developmental caliber .30 lightweight rifles” (what would become the M14).

This explains the similarities between the M5A1 and M6 bayonets. Prototypes designated T12 were developed. The T12 bayonet used a conventional muzzle ring, instead of the M5’s gas plug stud, which required a recoil stop in the mortise.

In June 1954, the U.S. Army Infantry Board overseeing development of the .30 lightweight rifle decided that the T12 bayonet would include a “floating bayonet catch.” They were testing the T44 rifle (developmental M14) against the T48 (FAL), whose bayonet also had a floating ‘free-recoil’ catch. This was intended to “avoid changes in center of impact” (reduce shot dispersion during full-auto fire with bayonet fixed). To implement this principle in the T12 bayonet, the existing M5 latch lever pivot hole was made ovoid and the spring reoriented from the vertical to angle back toward the pommel. This enabled the bayonet to move forward approximately 1/10-in. during recoil before the spring returned it to its original position. Finalized drawings of the M6 bayonet dated January 24, 1955, include the floating catch. The M6 catch was subsequently adapted to the M5 bayonet, resulting in the M5A1.

Seven M6 bayonet contracts appear to have been let. Producers and approximate years of production include:

—Aerial Cutlery Co.: 1960–62
—Columbus Milpar & Manufacturing Co.: 1961–68
—Imperial Knife Co.: 1962–63; 1967–68
—Unknown producer: just a few marked "AN"

According to the Department of Defense, a total of 1,633,000 M6 bayonets were manufactured. Some M6 bayonets were marked with the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), while many were not or may have had the DAS obliterated during service. The presence or absence of a DAS should not be criteria for determining whether a bayonet is U.S. Government Issue (USGI).

Although the M14 rifle is no longer a U.S. Army or Marine Corps standard service rifle, it still remains in service as a designated marksman rifle. In 2000, the bombing of USS Cole (DDG-67) caused the U.S. Navy to increase use of the M14 on ships to provide security in port and repel small boat attacks. The Army increased issue of the M14 to combat units during the war in Afghanistan to supplement the M16, which lacked effectiveness in longer range engagements. From 2000–2008, the Department of Defense appears to have re-procured approximately 1,400 M6 bayonets in their original sealed packaging from surplus dealers.

More info is available in the M6 Bayonet Contracts Summary.

Milpar was awarded its very first bayonet contract, DA-11-199-ORD-601, on February 15, 1961. 407,000 M6 bayonets were procured under this contract at a cost of approx. $1.96 each. Initial deliveries were to begin by July 15, 1961, followed by 31,000 bayonets per month until completion. However, by January 2, 1962, only 32,500 bayonets had been delivered. These findings documented by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) show that Milpar's bayonet delivery problems existed from the very beginning.

This example was taken from sealed packaging with a December 1961 packing date, so is among the first 32,500 bayonets that Milpar produced.

Milpar used a unique cold-stamping process to manufacture blades. While Milpar patented this process in 1962, this example shows that it was used from the outset of Milpar's bayonet production. This process eliminated much of the surface grinding typically required to shape the blade. Only the edge was applied by grinding. Cold-stamped Milpar blades have a distinct “hammered” appearance, where the lines that make up the blade’s profile typically lack the crispness of other contractors' surface-ground blades. The blade spine is chamfered, however, the chamfer's appearance can vary from crisp to almost indistinct.

By 1967, Milpar's blade production appears to have changed to a conventional surface-ground blade forming process similar to other contractors; and also began to exhibit a rounded spine. Ca. 1968, Milpar blades began to exhibit what was, in 1968–69, a non-standard curved (or sloped) runout. Some Milpar M6 blades exhibit these characteristics (see Milpar M5A1 bayonet above). These features have been erroneously thought to indicate commercial assembly by surplus dealers. However, the M5A1 example referenced above substantiates that the curved (or sloped) runout was used on U.S. government contract production.

Milpar's manufacturing variations were largely a consequence of their incoherent management of the bayonet production process. While some commercial assembly of bayonets using rejected and surplus Milpar parts did occur, manufacturing variations are not necessarily definitive evidence of commercial assembly or fakery. See my working paper on Columbus Milpar and Manufacturing Co. for a history of Milpar and its bayonet production.

This example has the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), showing that the DAS was still in use at Milpar in May 1962.

According to Cunningham, Milpar delivered 182,804 M6 bayonets during fiscal year 1964 (7/1/63 to 6/30/64) under contract DA-11-199-AMC-270. A calendar year 1963 Small Business Administration (SBA) report indicates that Milpar was awarded a contract for $365,458. The SBA report is not explicit regarding bayonets, however, amount is spot-on for the bayonet quantity that Cunningham reported.

This example was taken from sealed packaging with an October 1963 packing date. This example does not have the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), showing that use of the DAS had likely been discontinued at Milpar prior to October 1963.

This example was produced after bayonets began to be assembled and packaged at Milpar’s New Lexington, OH, plant from parts manufactured at the Columbus, OH, headquarters plant.

It is unclear whether this is one of the earliest examples (e.g., an initial production sample), made when Milpar may have been trying to impress government contract managers; or simply benefitted coincidentally from fresh stamping dies and/or more careful operation of the stamping press. This example has the Defense Acceptance Stamp (DAS), so was likely made early in Milpar's M6 production.

The blade is untouched, as evidenced by the presence of the factory edge (white line). Milpar’s cold-stamped blade edge was a two-step, a steep coarsely-ground edge that was finished off with a very fine second edge. Milpar blades had the “white line,” however, it is so thin as to be almost invisible. Milpar’s unique grind produced an edge that was not very sharp to begin with and required significantly more stoning to sharpen than blades from other contractors. These characteristics may give the erroneous impression that Milpar blades left the factory with no white line. However, all of the Milpar M6 examples pictured here exhibit a white line on both the true and false edge.

Imperial Knife Co. was awarded contract DAAF-03-67-C-0069 in April 1967. Cunningham indicates that 265,951 bayonets were reportedly delivered under this contract. This quantity is consistent with the amount paid under the contract. This example has an October 1968 packing date.

As shown in the images at left, the bayonets were sealed in a foil preservative wrapper inside a cardboard box. The cardboard box is sealed inside a heavy plastic wrapper with a printed label. The wrapped bayonets were packed 50 to a carton.

A prolific producer of bayonets and scabbards, Imperial Knife Co. changed its corporate name to Imperial Schrade Corp. in 1984. Imperial’s losing out in the M9 bayonet competition resulted in closure of the Providence, RI, plant in 1987. Imperial Schrade continued operations in Ellenville, NY, until its closure in 2004 after 100 years of operation.

"1005-722-3097
Bayonet-Knife, M-6
1 Ea.
DAAF 03-67-C-0069
A-
10/68"

Older M1, M5A1, and M6 bayonets are still used by the military services for ceremonial purposes. U.S. military honor guards present the colors (U.S. and service branch flags) at special events and perform various roles at military funerals. U.S. military honor guards are typically equipped with either the M1 or M14 rifle.

Honor guard bayonets have a hard life. Weapons are dropped in practice resulting in bent and broken blades. I once witnessed an honor guard Marine slam a car’s trunk lid on the muzzle of a M14 rifle held by a fellow Marine.

Since these bayonets are no longer available from military stocks, military honor guards have resorted to commercial suppliers. The following provides some examples of how these bayonets have been procured in recent years.

General Cutlery, Inc. appears to have been one of the largest suppliers of honor guard bayonets (see below).

From at least 2006-present, the U.S. Marine Corps Honor Guard Headquarters at Quantico, VA, has sent bayonets to a Kensington, MD, metals firm for plating.

In 2010, the Navy procured “M1 Garand bayonets without scabbard” for the U.S. Naval Academy from Mc Kee, Inc. of Savage MD, (an obvious reference to the late Clint McKee, founder of Fulton Armory). In 2010 and 2011, the Air Force also made procurements of “M-1 Bayonet-Chrome Finish” from Mc Kee, Inc.

General Cutlery, Inc. is reported to have supplied upwards of 5,000 bayonets used by military honor guards, beginning with the inauguration of President Clinton in 1993 through the inauguration of President Obama in 2009. These procurements were reported to have been facilitated by a “historian.” Historian, Homer Brett, confirmed that he facilitated procurement of honor guard bayonets from General Cutlery for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard through 2009. The Air Force Honor Guard Manual also listed General Cutlery as the source from which base honor guards can procure plated bayonets from 2006 (likely even earlier) through at least 2018.

General Cutlery obtained surplus or scrap bayonets from importers, including the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP). For example, when CMP received bayonets returned by foreign countries, they were randomly dumped into pallet-size wooden shipping crates by the thousands. CMP sorted out the saleable bayonets, then sold bulk crates of the unsalable beaters at scrap prices. General Cutlery obtained beaters from CMP and others; then refurbished and supplied them for honor guard use. Foreign-made equivalents were sometimes mixed in with U.S. bayonets; and, were also refurbished and supplied.

To refurbish bayonets with damaged or broken blades, General Cutlery manufactured “facsimile” blades using their old M7 tooling. Reiter Welding, a local, Fremont, OH, welding shop performed the welding and fabrication work. The plated M6 bayonet pictured at left appears to be one of the weld-ups. The bayonet clearly exhibits a crudely-finished facsimile blade welded on to the original blade stub at the ricasso.

I want to thank Frank Trzaska and Homer Brett for their assistance in my research on procurement of honor guard bayonets.

Much of the conventional wisdom regarding the M1917 bayonet was clarified by Dan Morrison in his 2017 book, The U.S. Enfield Bayonet. My own research has filled in some additional details regarding 1960s production of M1917 bayonets and scabbards.

A second production of M1917 bayonets came about as the Vietnam War depleted the remaining stocks of First World War M1917 bayonets. The continued use of First World War combat shotguns (trench guns) gave the M1917 bayonet an unusually long service life.

As shown in this comparison image, the second production represented a redesign that was easier to manufacture and maintain. The most visible characteristics are the use of rolled pins to secure the guard, black plastic grips, and parkerized finish overall. M1917 second production manufacturers were:

—General Cutlery, Inc.: 1966-67; 1969-70
—Canadian Arsenals Ltd.: 1968-69

Canadian Arsenals Ltd. is identified as "Canadian Commercial Corp." in U.S. Government contracts.

Documentation of the exact number produced has not been found. In 1991, General Cutlery owner, Carleton Reitz, indicated that they produced approximately 30,000. This computes to $4.97 per bayonet. Based on that unit cost, Canadian Arsenals is estimated to have produced approximately 38,000.

Approximately 179,000 plastic M1917 scabbards were made in 1945. Additional scabbard production occurred during the 1950s and 1960s as follows:

—Beckwith Manufacturing Co.: early 1950s
—Victory Plastics Co.: 1962–63
—Beckwith-Arden, Inc.: 1966–67
—Viz Manufacturing Co.: 1969–70

Beckwith Manufacturing Co., Victory Plastics Co., and Beckwith-Arden Inc. were a series of companies operated by Harry H. Beckwith and his son Edwin L. Beckwith. Harry Beckwith passed away in 1964, followed by Edwin in 1968.

This example was made by General Cutlery, Inc. of Fremont, OH. The scabbard with this example was made by Viz Manufacturing Co. of Philadelphia, PA. The Manufacturer Symbol VZM was officially-assigned to Viz Manufacturing Co. by the Department of Defense ca. 1968.

Additional information is found in the Post-War M1917 Bayonet and Scabbard Contracts Summary.

Scabbard: (throatpiece): "U. S.-M1917" and "VZM"

This example was made in 1970 by the Camillus Cutlery Co., Camillus, NY.

Overall length shown at right is of the folded knife and does not include the lanyard loop.  Overall length with knife blade extended is 6.50 in. (165 mm.).

Macrame tassel attached to lanyard loop was a later addition. Macrame was very popular in the USA from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s.

The Daisy Sport Trainer rifles were made 1966–69 by the Daisy Manufacturing Co. The bayonet was closely patterned after the bayonets used on similar trainer rifles made in the 1950s by the Parris Manufacturing Co. Although not documented, the bayonets and mounting system are so similar, it seems likely that they were made by the same unknown contractor that had produced the Parris bayonets.

No scabbard was produced.