Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Opinions on No.4 Mk.I Cruciform Bayonet

Article about: Hello everyone I'm thinking about purchasing this moderately priced Singer No.4 Mk.I Cruciform Bayonet but I know they are heavily faked. I've done a bit of homework and to me it looks alrig

  1. #1
    ?

    Default Opinions on No.4 Mk.I Cruciform Bayonet

    Hello everyone

    I'm thinking about purchasing this moderately priced Singer No.4 Mk.I Cruciform Bayonet but I know they are heavily faked. I've done a bit of homework and to me it looks alright but I've never held one in hand so I'm not sure. The I in Mk.I looks a little funny but it does look similar to other "original" items online. The photos are from the seller. All comments welcome.

    Thanks
    Alex
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2.JPG 
Views:	112 
Size:	30.1 KB 
ID:	721012Name:  1.JPG
Views: 301
Size:  24.7 KBName:  3.JPG
Views: 298
Size:  19.3 KBName:  4.JPG
Views: 257
Size:  16.5 KBName:  5.JPG
Views: 296
Size:  17.9 KBClick image for larger version. 

Name:	6.JPG 
Views:	144 
Size:	24.8 KB 
ID:	721016Click image for larger version. 

Name:	7.JPG 
Views:	108 
Size:	26.6 KB 
ID:	721017

  2. #2
    ?

    Default

    Looks good to me. The markings always seem to be uneven and sloppy on these, but it is the right maker and date.

    Jim

  3. #3
    ?

    Default

    Thanks Jim. Makes me feel a lot more confident knowing you think it's good. Much appreciated.

    Alex

  4. #4

    Default

    I am not keen on the "I" .

    I would pass on it.

    Cheers, Ade.
    Had good advice? Saved money? Why not become a Gold Club Member, just hit the green "Join WRF Club" tab at the top of the page and help support the forum!

  5. #5
    ?

    Default

    Thanks for the reply Ade. It looks like all the letters on the right of the stamp seem to have been hit harder. The base and top of the "I" seem to be the right length. The MkII "II" joined together ones seem to look a lot longer.

    I would feel more comfortable seeing it in hand although The seller does have a money back guarantee.

  6. #6
    ?

    Default

    The "I" being deeper, is I believe, a result of the bayo not being set in the press perfectly, or a dirty jig, causing it to stamp unevenly. If you study the stamping, every thing high left is barely stamped, while everything low right is excessively stamped. There seems to be a lot of variance on the singer stampings, so I wouldn't be worried. I would worry more if it were a perfectly clean stamping.

    Jim

  7. #7
    ?

    Default

    Jim, I've looked at as many photos online that I could find of the Mk. I and Singer Mk.II and I've got to agree with you it seems as though at least half have dodgy stampings with one side struck harder than the other.

  8. #8
    ?

    Default

    What is the blade length?

  9. #9
    ?

    Default

    Sorry for the late reply USNV5. I don't have the blade length. Given the sellers money back guarantee I decided to take a shot with this one and its on its way to me. Once I have it in hand I'll compare it's length to a Mk. II.

  10. #10
    ?

    Default

    Like USNV5 points out, length is a good indicator of originality. you also want to make sure that the "flutes" or high points of the cruciform blade stay uniform all the way to the tip. Since you have an MK II you know how much different the grind is on the tip. There is nothing obvious in the photo's though and I have yet to see an MK II converted to an MK I so perfectly. But, better safe than sorry!

    Jim

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 03-11-2014, 04:09 AM
  2. 08-23-2013, 09:21 PM
  3. 12-03-2012, 07:07 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •