? regarding the steel basket handguard on the Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass...

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

I know that Cold Steel labels their sword as a pretty close rendition of the US 1917 Navel Cutlass, but... It seems like where it looks way off is at the basket. The photos of every US 1917 Cutlass shows a solid basket (no perforations). The CS Cutlass basket not only has perforations, but seemingly styled very much like the Klewang Cutlass' used by the Dutch (which seems to be where the US 1917 Cutlass has it's overall design come from). It does seem odd that the one thing that truly seperates the appearance between the Dutch issued Klewang and the US 1917 (the 1917's solid basket guard), was not used on the Cold Steel rendition. As is, calling it a 1917 rendition seems incorrect... Where as if it had been labled as a rendition of the US made 'Milsco Klewang' (which were slated for Dutch use), it would have been almost spot on.

My question is, why did CS label this sword as a 1917 Naval Cutlass, but not follow through with a more proper basket guard? Was it an honest mistake, or purposely thought out this way (but if so, why?). Anyhow, things that make ya go hmmm? lol! ☺

 

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

Btw, as I still wonder whether or not the Cold Steel 1917 Frontier Bowie blade is hand hammer forged or done by the stock removal method, I too wonder about this Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass. Neither are promoted as such on Cold Steel's website or literature, but being made for them by Windlass Steelcrafts in India, one wonders (especially since Windlass seems to use the hand forged method greatly, if not exclusively) for their swords branded 'Windlass'. Anyhow, I have noticed that Cold Steel does promote some of their other model swords as being "hand forged"... So it gets harder to be sure on the 1917 series of swords and knives. Maybe someday we will get the definitive answer to that question ☺

In either case, I am looking forward to receiving my Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass, and my fingers are crossed that it will be a good specimen overall. I have mentioned it before, if it's as well made as my 1917 Frontier Bowie... I will be very pleased, indeed! ☺

 

[jeffright]

Near as I can tell, and I am just speculating, Cold Steel patterned their "1917" cutlass after the US M1940 or M1942 cutlass which was in one way a re-issue of the M1917 and in another way a copy of the Dutch Klewang. The actual US M1917 cutlass was obscure as far as I can tell, but itself was also a copy of the Klewang, but with a solid basket as you mentioned. However, since the 1917 was so obscure, it was likely Cold Steel patterned theirs after a 1940's version of it.

I read there are no records of the M1917 with respect to how many were made, and even if it was ever issued. But we know that the M1860 saw actual service up until about the time the likes of the M1942 was issued and used.

 

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

Near as I can tell, and I am just speculating, Cold Steel patterned their "1917" cutlass after the US M1940 or M1942 cutlass which was in one way a re-issue of the M1917 and in another way a copy of the Dutch Klewang. The actual US M1917 cutlass was obscure as far as I can tell, but itself was also a copy of the Klewang, but with a solid basket as you mentioned. However, since the 1917 was so obscure, it was likely Cold Steel patterned theirs after a 1940's version of it.

I read there are no records of the M1917 with respect to how many were made, and even if it was ever issued. But we know that the M1860 saw actual service up until about the time the likes of the M1942 was issued and used.

Good stuff... And thank you for taking the time to share ☺

Based on your shared info, (again, thank you), I was able to google up some more information. Here is what I found (copied and pasted here)...

Now, for a bit of discussion. I don't recall seeing being referred to as a M1942, but as a M1941 and here is what Frank Trzaska had to say about that on a post about six years ago:

The M1941 designation is not a US designation, it is Dutch. Most of the confusion comes from this tiny fact. The M1941 is not a variation of the M1917 used by the US, it is a variation of the M1911 Dutch model klewang. This model, the M1941 was made by MILSCO in the US and also by Vince. Not the Vince Forge that made the deep diving Navy MkV but the Vince Fencing Company. Models can be found of both which are M1941 Dutch standard models, not US M1917 variations. These items were supplied to the Netherlands well after the war as well. It was redesigned in 1947 slightly and made up until 1960 when the M1941 Dutch Klewang was obsoleted and replaced with a new Dutch model.

 

[jeffright]

Cold Steel's "Hybrid" 1917 cutlass is similar to the Klewang but has a longer handle, steel bolts on the handle instead of brass, and the hand guard shell from their "Austrian" saber. In an example I have examined, the distal taper on the clip point was slightly asymmetrical, and the fillet onto the ricasso on one side has a small notch, but the blade was otherwise flawless. The finish was flawless. The handle was flawless. Because it is built like a "Messer" with wooden scales on the sides of a full tang, it will never be loose or rattle at all. The handguard is sheet metal so I wouldn't describe it as flawless, but there are no problems with it. As far as the hardening and tempering, Cold Steel, people on You Tube, and the manufacturer with their "Proof Test" have tested this better than I am willing to. The scabbard and frog also leave little to be desired. The hybrid version in particular is certainly not an antique or reproduction, but it is a fantastic "user."

 

[PocketKnifeJimmy]

If the above info I googled is correct, it would still mean that the configuration of the Cold Steel 1917 Cutlass, with it's perforated basket handguard styling, is more closely a Dutch Klewang rendition than a 1917 US Naval Cutlass rendition.

In other words, the CS 1917 Cutlass is basically like what Milsco was contracted to make for the Netherlands (the M1941 Klewang) shown below...