- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 3,989
It's been said that the M9 borrowed some cues from both the AK-47 Bayonet and the Buckmaster 184.
The following is just my opinion, but I believe the M9 blade should have used the full length tang method of the previous M7 bayonet.
The Buckmaster 184 had the threaded stub tang design to allow a small storage space in it's hollow handle, but why did they go with a similar threaded stub tang for the M9 blade? The M9 handle doesn't have a hollow handle storage space, and it just didn't need to differ on tang assembly to that of the M7.
The M7 is easy enough to disassemble, having only a few screws to remove it's handle scales for the replacement of those scales, (if needed), or for any other required maintenance it may otherwise need.
If it had followed the M7's bayonet tang idea, I think it would have garnered more of a following. Even those that do battoning, would likely feel better about the knife's construction. It would have given it more of that "pry bar" toughness that a lot of bayonets are often known for.
I just collect all sorts of things, so I have one of the olive drab Ontario M9's in my collection, (just as a representative piece of this bayonet model). I am pretty confident that the testing performed on them during their military trials must have convinced some folks that they are indeed tough enough for their basic military job requirements.
And, it sure is a less plain Jane looking bayonet than the M7 is. It's also likely a better tool than the M7 when it's just being used as a general purpose knife. It's wire cutting ability might not be optimal, but it was tested to do that job in a pinch for soldiers, and so I find that to be a pretty cool feature, (of course inspired by the AK-47 bayonet).
New Ontario made M9's can be had new for maybe $100 to $150, but other than it being kinda cool as a collectible, (or as a cool display add on for one's Mossberg 500 A-1, AR-15, and such), there is probably going to be little interest in it outside of that.
As a collectable, if one wants one made by a US Military supplier, I guess the Ontario M9 is one's only choice if buying a new specimen from a vendor.
I know there are some Phrobis/Buck versions that are quite collectable, and some are quite pricey
This is my M9 made by the Ontario Knife Company. It's factory new, not a military surplus specimen.
I don't believe they make their commercially sold M9's any different than their military slated specimens.
Does anyone know if there are any differences, maybe in markings or materials?
I know there have been quite a few M9 offerings that are/have been made overseas by non US Military contractors, and that they can be had less expensively than, let's say, the Ontario M9's, but... I kind'a prefer such things being made by the actual companies that make them for the GI servicemen.
The following is just my opinion, but I believe the M9 blade should have used the full length tang method of the previous M7 bayonet.
The Buckmaster 184 had the threaded stub tang design to allow a small storage space in it's hollow handle, but why did they go with a similar threaded stub tang for the M9 blade? The M9 handle doesn't have a hollow handle storage space, and it just didn't need to differ on tang assembly to that of the M7.
The M7 is easy enough to disassemble, having only a few screws to remove it's handle scales for the replacement of those scales, (if needed), or for any other required maintenance it may otherwise need.
If it had followed the M7's bayonet tang idea, I think it would have garnered more of a following. Even those that do battoning, would likely feel better about the knife's construction. It would have given it more of that "pry bar" toughness that a lot of bayonets are often known for.
I just collect all sorts of things, so I have one of the olive drab Ontario M9's in my collection, (just as a representative piece of this bayonet model). I am pretty confident that the testing performed on them during their military trials must have convinced some folks that they are indeed tough enough for their basic military job requirements.
And, it sure is a less plain Jane looking bayonet than the M7 is. It's also likely a better tool than the M7 when it's just being used as a general purpose knife. It's wire cutting ability might not be optimal, but it was tested to do that job in a pinch for soldiers, and so I find that to be a pretty cool feature, (of course inspired by the AK-47 bayonet).
New Ontario made M9's can be had new for maybe $100 to $150, but other than it being kinda cool as a collectible, (or as a cool display add on for one's Mossberg 500 A-1, AR-15, and such), there is probably going to be little interest in it outside of that.
As a collectable, if one wants one made by a US Military supplier, I guess the Ontario M9 is one's only choice if buying a new specimen from a vendor.
I know there are some Phrobis/Buck versions that are quite collectable, and some are quite pricey
This is my M9 made by the Ontario Knife Company. It's factory new, not a military surplus specimen.
I don't believe they make their commercially sold M9's any different than their military slated specimens.
Does anyone know if there are any differences, maybe in markings or materials?
I know there have been quite a few M9 offerings that are/have been made overseas by non US Military contractors, and that they can be had less expensively than, let's say, the Ontario M9's, but... I kind'a prefer such things being made by the actual companies that make them for the GI servicemen.
Last edited:
