VZ-24 Bayonets - Nearly No Markings

[Cameo57]

Hello.
I Need some help with two VZ-24 Bayonets that have nearly no markings.
The two bayonets have some similarities, and some significant differences. Only one of them has a scabbard and I have no way of knowing if the scabbard was originally paired with the bayonet or not, the scabbard has no marking of any kind (photos will follow).
For purposes of discussion, I will call these Bayonet #1 and Bayonet #2.

• Bayonet #1 is the one with the scabbard and has a generally smaller blade. That is, it has a thinner blade (thickness of blade spine) and a narrower blade (from blade spine to edge near the ricasso). The blade of #1 is about 2mm longer than Bayonet #2.

• Bayonet #2 has a much thicker blade and a wider blade, primarily at the ricasso.

The photos below identify the two bayonets.

The similarities and differences between these bayonets are the following:


1. Both bayonets have the blade facing down (on opposite side of the muzzle ring).
2. The overall lengths are near 17 inches and the blade lengths are near 11.75 inches. The actual lengths of each bayonet are outlined below:

a. Bayonet #1 – Overall length = 16 29/32” (429.5 mm). Blade length = 11 3/4” (298.5 mm). Hilt length, including crossguard – 5 5/32” (131 mm).

b. Bayonet #2 – Overall length = 16 25/32” (426.3 mm). Blade length = 11 21/32” (296.1 mm). Hilt length, including crossguard – 5 1/8” (130.2 mm).

3. The blades are significantly different. As stated above, the blade of Bayonet #1 is thinner and narrower compared to Bayonet #2. Also, the ricasso area on Bayonet #2 is much larger than on Bayonet #1. Bayonet #2 is so much wider, that it will not fit into the scabbard for Bayonet #1. The thickness and width (near crossguard) of each bayonet is outlined below:

a. Bayonet #1 – Thickness at crossguard = 3/16” (5 mm). Width at crossguard = 7/8” (23 mm).

b. Bayonet #2 – Thickness at crossguard = 1/4” (6.5 mm). Width at crossguard = 1” (26 mm).

4. The fuller on Bayonet #1 is longer (about 8 3/4”) and closer to the crossguard than the one on Bayonet #2. The fuller on Bayonet #2 is about 8 3/8” long. There are no markings of any kind on either of the blades ricassos or crossguards.
5. Both muzzle rings are about 5/8” inside diameter (about 16 mm).
6. They both have nearly identical hilts. The wood grips are the same. The grip screws are the same (smooth rounded head, no slot for screwdriver). The press stud catch on Bayonet #1 protrudes slightly. The catch on Bayonet #2 is flush with the pommel. The only markings on the hilt are serial numbers at the base of the pommel. Bayonet #1 is 4 digits (8930), and Bayonet #2 is 5 digits (03332). No other markings on the tang, grips, or pommel. I did not take the grips off to see if there are marks on the sides of the tangs. There is a small mark on the side of the press stud catch on Bayonet #1. It looks like maybe and “A” with a dot next to it inside of a square? Hard to see, looks like a partial stamp (see photo below).
7. The crossguards are identical size and shape, but the crossguard on Bayonet #1 does not have any pins and Bayonet #2 has two pins. The pins on Bayonet #2 are flush with the side of the crossguard (most that I see protrude a little). There are no markings anywhere on either of the crossguards.
8. Both of the bayonets have pins in the pommels that appear to go through the tangs. There are two pins, near the grip, at the top and bottom of the pommel. I do not see pins like this in most VZ-24 bayonets that I look at.
9. Both of the bayonets are in similar condition (very good). The blades on both do not appear to be treated (blued or phosphate). The crossguards and pommels appear to be phosphate treated (gray). The scabbard with Bayonet #1 also appears to be phosphate treated (dull gray color).

A few photos showing both of the bayonets are attached to this post. I will post additional photos of each individual bayonet and the scabbard in some following posts.

From the limited information I have found, it seems that VZ-24 bayonets without the two pins in the crossguard are pretty rare and may have been made early (1920s?). Also, the pins in the pommels seem unusual. The other odd thing is that there are no marks on the blades, crossguards, or tangs. Just the serial numbers on the pommel. There is a lot of information out there about the various marks you find on these bayonets, but little to no information about when marks are missing (that I have found anyway). I know that many of these bayonets were exported all over the world. I suspect that these two bayonets were for export. Maybe some contract called for no markings?

Sorry for the long post, but I know lots of info and photos helps. I would greatly appreciate any information about these bayonets that any of you may have.

Thank you. Happy holidays to everyone. Craig

[Cameo57]

Here are more photos of Bayonet #1.

[Cameo57]

Here are more photos of Bayonet #2.

[Kilian]

Have you considered the possibility that these are M1924 bayonets, made by FN in Belgium? The scabbard, and particularly the frog stud is not typical FN though. Possibly two different contracts/customers.

[Cameo57]

Thanks Killian. I had thought about that, but was thinking that the M1924 bayonets were different lengths. But, now that I have taken another look at the short version, they were very close to the 17" total length and it looks like they were thicker with large ricassos. So, I think you may be correct about #2. But I'm still not sure about #1 with the thinner and narrower blade.
#2 does not have a scabbard with it. The scabbard with #1 may not be original.
Were the FN M1924 bayonets typically not marked on the blade or crossguard?

[Frogprince]

Not in hand for comparison, from what seems to be here neither bayonet appears to be a Czech Vz. 24 although the No. 1 scabbard might be?? The Nr. 1 appearing to be more likely an FN copy/knockoff while the other an unknown or possibly a Yugoslavian copy/knockoff?? The Chinese making a consisdable number of Vz.24 rifle copies that varied is another possibility. Best Regards, Fred

[AndyB]

These both piece has no link with Czechoslovakia, so no Vz24 bayonets at all, it could FN M1924 bayonets which they are the short version with 30cm blade,i believe the nr1 is a Peru M1935 (as protruding locking lug, anyway someone flashed the rivet heads on crossguard) and nr.2 a colombian or other South American contracts, the scabbard should be for Peru M1935 too made by FN, A in box is clearly a FN production. Both bayonets are made in period 1933-40. Nr.1 a M1935 for Peru made in FN Liege Belgium. Width of blade is certainly smaller as the other normal FN M24 short.

[Cameo57]

Thanks very much Fred and Andy. Being M1924s explains why I was having so much trouble trying to identify them as VZ-24.
I learned a lot. I'm pretty new to collecting bayonets, have been collecting knives primarily, until recently.
Thanks again.

[Sleepwalker]

Hello.

#1 and #2 are both export bayonets from FN Herstal/Belgium.

#1 with short ricasso was called export model 24/30/34 by Janson. Peru introduced it as a 1935 model.

#2 with long ricasso is a M24/30 short.

Regards.

[AndyB]

By older literature is allways problematic, the designation of 24/30/34 is unreal of Jansen