British No.5 MkII - Radcliffe

[ivanjoaquin]

Thanks for your imputs, I agree, something doesn’t feel quite right but I don’t see any Poole markings either, IMO the crossguards are correct and what’s the reason of trying to turn a Poole bayonet into a Radcliffe one? , The Radcliffe bayonets are scarce, but the price I paid many years ago was very cheap

[Reibert]

Sorry to say guys but Im not happy at all with this one , It's an Original #5 No Doubt , but Modified to look like a Radcliffe made one.
All I can see is Poole Post WW2 markings .
Cheers Rick

Attachment 1592611

Rick, I don't really think Ivan's No.5 is an "upgraded" Poole...

Rick, can you please show us pictures of your bayonet in full lenght and both sides of the bayonet?

[Rick W]

Double sided stamped WW2 Radcliffe bayonets do not exist . ( Real Ones anyway )

[Alex W]

I'd like to know what that circular mark under the maker mark is. I don't suppose you have a no5 rifle to see if it attaches properly? What are its measurements? They should be: Blade length 200mm, overall length 298mm and muzzle ring diameter 22.7mm.

[ivanjoaquin]

Double sided stamped WW2 Radcliffe bayonets do not exist . ( Real Ones anyway )

Could it be, but is there any document to support it?
How many of the 75,000 bayonets made by Radcliff have you checked?

[ivanjoaquin]

Another Radcliffe with circular mark





The measures match

[ivanjoaquin]

[Alex W]

What a difference lighting makes, the bayonet in your first and last post don’t look the same. I like to photograph my items outside on a sunny day but not in direct sunlight.

Without having it in hand I’m still leaning towards it being ok - that stamp on the rear of the ricasso could have been put there later.