Lancay M9 PT 3/98 Experimental Bayonet for USMC 1998

[Carlo]

What do you think about this auction?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Lancay-M9-PT-3-9...item25589f2e82
I did check all my books and notes and I'm quite sure I never heard or saw this bayonet before!
Quite interesting to see all the modifications they made to the scabbard and handle.

[porterkids]

Yes, this is a legitimate piece. They were made up in green and also a small number in black. The black ones have a different date on them but I don't remember off the top of my head what it is. They were looking for a way to lighten the bayonet and the modifying of the grip allowed for the user to be able to orient the blade in his hand without seeing it.

[pwcosol]

I think it is interesting that the Ontario M-10 scabbard has emulated the Lan-Cay modified M9 pattern, with the elimination of the lower leg strap lugs...

[O3SKILL]

Their answer to the USMC's request was to take a bench grinder to the original blade handle and scabbard?

WOW!!...Pure genius

[pwcosol]

As crude as the PT 3-98 appears, I believe it was more of a "concept piece". Had the modifications been considered worthy improvements, and lead towards the potential adoption of the M9 by the USMC, undoubtedly a more refined pattern would have been issued. On the other hand, "one can never make another first impression". If the bayonet by it's appearance looks poorly constructed or crude, it may send the wrong signal to those in a position to evaluate it's merits, and likely never receive serious consideration.

By 1998, (if not years earlier) it was apparent The Corps was no longer interested in the MPBS M9... period! The later ergonomic grip, which from all indications is an improvement over the original pattern, was produced with slightly flattened sides. I understand the idea was to assist the user, by feel, to orient the bayonet properly while in the dark. This was introduced on the PT 3-98. In holding the M9 with "PI" grip, one notices the slight difference in feel, with the blade oriented either perpendicular or parallel to the ground. However, the difference is marginal, and not as evident as is the case with the grip on the PT 3-98.

[Carlo]

Originally Posted by pwcosol

In holding the M9 with "PI" grip, one notices the slight difference in feel, with the blade oriented either perpendicular or parallel to the ground. However, the difference is marginal, and not as evident as is the case with the grip on the PT 3-98.

Thanks for your message, Fred.
Still, I'm thinking about the concept of the "PI" grip.
As you and previously Bill said, from holding the grip you'll be able (without looking) to tell if the blade is oriented perpendicular or parallel to the ground.
But, you will not be able to tell if the blade true edge (hope the word is correct---I mean the part of the blade opposite to the saw) is pointing down to the ground or towards you.




For example, the Camillus CAM1A1 has, in my opinion, a superior design of the handle (only on this topic, I'm not considering ergonomics).

Without looking at it, you will know not only if the blade was oriented perpendicular or parallel to the ground, but also if the blade edge was pointing up or down.

[pwcosol]

Carlo, you bring up a good point. The Camillus (XM8?) appears to be a fine bayonet. I even bought one NIB (1A3). I wonder how it would have fared during the XM9 competition, or during the USMC trials resulting in adoption of the Ontario OKC 3S? Perhaps the thing I find unusual is how the bayonet is retained in the scabbard. The blade is not secured by anything other than the retaining strap, as there do not seem to be tension springs on the ones I have seen.
In any event, I suspect sliding the thumb forwards to the rear of the M9's crossguard would be the best way of determining blade orientation while held. If one feels or slides the thumb slightly into the muzzlering, you have a good idea where the blade is. The ergonomic grip may assist to marginally improve this as well.