Japanese NCO Sword verification

**Stu W** · 07-06-2017, 03:18 PM

Hello Nick,

FYI, there are a couple of us who have been tracking dates, serial numbers, tsuba thickness to try and determine their relationships to one another and to individual manufacturers. To us the thickness is meaningful.

Regards,
Stu

**Rakkasan187** · 07-06-2017, 03:19 PM

Thank you so very much everyone..

I am so glad that I have found this forum and have been able to correspond with some of the wonderful members here. I look forward to many years of contributions and developing friendships..

Smitty

**Nick Komiya** · 07-06-2017, 04:04 PM

by Stu W

Hello Nick,

FYI, there are a couple of us who have been tracking dates, serial numbers, tsuba thickness to try and determine their relationships to one another and to individual manufacturers. To us the thickness is meaningful.

Regards,
Stu

Of course thickness matters. I was responding to post 7 to say that there was no need to worry about measuring accurately, because 9 and 11 mm is an unmistakable difference however you measure it. But Mr. Parachute got the idea already while I was still writing.

If you want to go into more detail to see how each manufacturer went through a transition period in implementing all the 1938 July changes, I have put up the spreadsheet of all 15 changes made to the drawings for Type 95 Sword as of 5th July 1938. Short Development History of Type 95 Gunto

**Shamsy** · 07-17-2017, 11:16 AM

Hi all,

I think I cautiously agree with the consensus that the menuki are repainted, since it appears that there is some paint spilled on the Kashira. However, there were a few different paints used on menuki, and different thickness of application, shades and qualities of workmanship, so it's not possible to be certain. They do not look too far from the swords overall condition to me. Either way, it's good to have a matched sword and it's another for my database, so thanks for posting it up.