1894 Bayonet Production

[MooseNugget]

I don't have a Krag but what I do have is an Lee-Enfield No. 1 SMLE MK III potato peeling bayonet used by the Irish Republican Army.

I mounted it to my Krag using the Bubba Brother's bayonet adapter mounting system that I purchased online.

I think potato peeling bayonets are very a-peeling and are an interesting note in bayonet history.

BTW: I always keep my eyes-peeled for potato peeling bayonets whenever I'm at a military surplus story or gun show.

[Culpeper]

Yes, if you want "reach", the 1898 x 1943 is almost a pike!

No way! The M1915 bayonet leads the way when you have to go that extra inch.

[Knute1]

Some info from the fiscal year 6/30/94 Ordnance Report. Shows 2,950 rifles having been built by 9/28/94. Some info on bayonet/scabbard manufacturing.

1894RifleReport.jpg (106.57 KiB) Viewed 2825 times

1894Bayonet.Scabbard.Report.jpg (101.42 KiB) Viewed 2825 times

Here is the report link.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Re ... frontcover

[butlersrangers]

For collectors interested in U.S. Military Krags, "The U.S. Krag Bayonets - History, Variations, Modifications", by Donald J. Hartman, is a wonderful resource.

IMO - It is in the top five reference books covering Krag material. It is highly readable, loaded with research material and high quality photographs.

Hartman covers a lot more than just blades. His books are available for a reasonable price, (possibly directly from the author).

[Knute1]

6/30/95 Report showing 14,491 rifles having been built.

1895RifleReport.jpg (109.21 KiB) Viewed 2817 times

Link:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/An ... frontcover

[butlersrangers]

Thanks Knute!
Yesterday, I missed that number of 14,491 rifles, on page 15 of the 1895 Report.

[MooseNugget]

Below is a photo of the "Number of Krag Rifles (and Bayonets) Produced" from Hartman's book.

I should've included it earlier in the discussion.

[butlersrangers]

'Reading between the lines' ... it appears bayonet scabbards were an early 'bottle neck' in issuing Krags.

The Ordnance Department 'toyed' with 'Aluminium Scabbards' for weight reduction. A workable & practical solution eluded Springfield and Rock Island.
The Ordnance Department returned to using steel scabbards, with which they were familiar and successful in manufacturing.

Springfield Armory made the rifles and bayonets. I believe, Rock Island Arsenal produced the scabbards.

The bayonet was regarded as a component part of the Krag magazine rifle. (It is likely that bayonet production kept pace with rifle manufacture).
The Ordnance Dept. 'shipping-crates', depending on size, contained either 10 or 20 rifles, with accompanying bayonets, in 'slotted' wood holders.
The shipping crates did not carry the scabbards or rifle slings.
(I don't know at what point of operations the Rock Island made scabbards were mated with the Springfield made bayonets)?

Niter Bluing of bayonets was abandoned in early 1895, because it compromised metallurgy, was extra & unnecessary work, and the 'bluing' soon wore and looked bad.
'Left in the white', was practical, less work, and saved money.

By June 30, 1895, with the exception of the U.S. Cavalry, the entire Regular Army was equipped with the new magazine rifle, (this probably, also, included bayonets).
In the 1890's, prior to the SAW, the U.S. Army was rather small.
14,491 Krag rifles and bayonets likely equipped all of the soldiers issued a rifle in mid-1895.

FWIW - In April 1898, the U.S. Army had 13,000 enlisted men in the Infantry, 4,500 in the Artillery, and 6,000 in the Cavalry.
This adds up to an approximate 17,500 enlisted men requiring rifles.

In June of 1898, (adding up the figures supplied by 'Moose Nuggets'), a potential 84,241 Krag rifles and bayonets were available.

The Ordnance Department struggled during "The Krag Era" to get many bugs out of the system.

This one is documented!

[Culpeper]

The difference of opinion rests entirely on "made" vs. "marked". The latter is what counts in the pricing arena because there is NO way to tell an 1894/1894 from an 1895/1894. Now, there ARE nuances to the scabbards, and a keyhole will boost the price, just as a re-scaling will lower it. The bluing is another bone of contention, and, I would probably assume that a blued 1894 found today has an excellent chance of being a refinish.

I see what you were saying. I wonder if one of the Ordnance reports spells out if Springfield changed stamps at the end of the fiscal year or the calendar year. My money would be on the calendar year given the era and the times. So if the armoury made blades at a constant rate (not likely) would show 7,246 bayonets for the first half of the 1895 fiscal year or rather the second half of the 1894 calendar year. So a total wild ass guess with no evidence whatsoever means a total of 7,996 bayonets "could" have been marked 1894. That would put prices right where they should be, not way expensive but just expensive enough to hurt.

Thank the Lord we will never know for certain so bayonet collectors can argue another day. What fun!

[Knute1]

Comparing the Krag count I put together a few years ago (based on Ordnance Reports for each fiscal year) to Hartman's posted by MooseNuggent, there are some numbers that match in the rifle column. Not saying that he is wrong and I'm right (8 out of 11 entries match). His rifle total is 410,840 and I got 409,548. Difference of 1,292. I'll have to see if I can find where the discrepancy might be and do a little more research.

KragCountRifles.jpg (99.09 KiB) Viewed 2747 times

KragCountMN.jpg (84.28 KiB) Viewed 2747 times