MAS36 bayonet - FG42

This is probably already common knowledge, perhaps unconfirmed - it might even have been hinted at in "Death from Above." - my book has a dozen page markers and grease spills on it already, so I'll post anyway.

The FG kit I am currently working with was missing a bayonet (amongst other parts) so, I bought an Estes Adams reproduction FG42 (G-type) bayonet - it is very nice externally, but quite delicate and the internals actually feel like a child's toy.

I had a MAS36 bayonet in my office, in the dusty neglected items bin, the French bayonet was of course built to withstand war and is a hardy well made piece of kit, and guess what?
It dropped perfectly into the FG42 (G-type) actually a better fit than the Adams custom.
It has the correct aged patina, and wear, so, I'll be shortening this and using it instead of the Adams custom at "what would have been" a saving of $180 - lol.

Yes, it has the knurled grip (similar to the E-type Fg) instead of the smooth one, the G-type should have - but I can live with that.

Clearly the designers at Krieghoff had enough to deal with with the other specifics of the Luftwaffe contract and took something of a short-cut with the bayonet, borrowing it in almost 100% form from the French rifle.

Just more notes from the front, all hinted at, opined at previously, on line, but 100% confirmed here.

Thanks. I had wondered about that and remembered reading somewhere that cutdown MAS could have been used.

pit

little tidbits of info like this, help future fg-42 owners down the line

thanks for posting

jack

oh e-mail coming

It is a complete unnecessary item anyway, at barely six inches past the muzzle brake - and clearly only fulfilling the spec in wording, not spirit - it must have been a real pain for the designers who were struggling to make the specified weight, and then needed to add a bayonet that would never be used.

However as collectors we have to have our toys looking correct - and the FG looks naked without it in place below the barrel - marked 7,93 under the front hand-guard which will never be removed again - for anyone interested -

There was a punch stamp on the gas exhaust that shredded the barrel retaining nut thread when it was hammered off 70 years ago.
The thread has been restored and the gas exhaust bracket put back in place, but it's not coming off again.

I'll load some pics up to photo-bucket when I am settled.

Hi Pit,
Had to chime in so another man doesn't take the flack for our decisions. The "better fit" of the MAS bayonet as compared to the reproduction will depend to a large degree on "which one did you buy"? I say this as Estes made some to the same shank dia. dimensions as the originals and then for us that dia. was reduced .010 - at our request.

Why? Because we started with a Shoie replica and their bayonet, and mating front sight base hole, was modeled after the original in size which was great. But we knew there were no originals to be had and that the modified MAS would be the go to alternative. Problem was the average MAS bayonet dia.'s were on the minus side about .01 so when we made the front sight bases we made them minus .01 as well so the bayonet wouldn't flop around in the hole - yes .010 makes a HUGE difference there.

Really no big deal until we recently purchased from Estes a reproduction of both a type I and type II bayonet for our go to stash and since he made them like the originals guess what? It wouldn't mount to our rifle as we are at .545 mating hole dia. on our front sight base verses .555 on the Shoie. So....... If you purchased one from him that was made to fit our rifle and put it in an original or a Shoie it will feel sloppy as heck. But not because he screwed up but because it was probably made to fit our rifle and not the original. If you specified the "original dia. version" then I am off base here but I would bet that is the deal.

Will we now go to the "original size"? No, because we still have buyers who opt for the cut down MAS because it is "close enough" and we would have to then stock 2 sizes of front sight bases and make a new buyer commit to one or the other. Our circus is already big enough..... And every mans products have to stand on their own I just wanted to point out we may be the actual culprit here....... : )

Just sharing info..... A footnote might be that after fitting many a MAS bayonet there are probably 20% that we get to modify the shank dia. on because they are slightly bent, out of round, burred up, the catch still sticks above the dia. when depressed, etc. etc...... Here"s to selling you a type I!

Rick

Hi Rick,

Estes does great work - the post was in no way meant as a slug against his workmanship!
(As do you with your wonderful works of art!)

Estes knew I was using the bayonet for an original rifle - we had quite a few discussions backwards and forwards about exchange-parts - my parts kit came with no almost none of the original internal small parts. Have spent the last year or so, sourcing original and US made custom parts.
His work is outstanding - but he is also not building parts for wartime service, he is making beautifully executed reproduction parts.
The MAS 36 bayonet is a brutish piece of industrial engineering and in all likelihood a lot more like the original Fg bayonet, but again this to take nothing away from Estes' wonderful workmanship.

Hope this makes more sense.

The MAs36 bayonet I have appears to be NOS - so I got lucky. The Estes bayonet is very tight in the socket, a shove and wiggle sets it, the Mas is more military fit, loose, but firm enough in position for skewering two-legged-baddies.

Here is a picture of them below the FG's fore-end, Mas36 on top, Estes Reproduction below.
The muzzle brake is off in a "Kroil" soak - it was red-rust and gunk on it - so it's getting a gentle clean for a few days.


This is the Estes Adams bayonet in socket - fits but tight, the issue for me is that the levers are spongy, they twice locked inside the bayonet's internal mechanism, and just don't feel made for action - as if I am ever go into action with this item, lol - but we like to pretend.
I stripped off the super dark chemical blue, to choose a more suitable finish - potentially a gray chemical park.


This is the French Mas36 rifle bayonet dropped into the socket, it really felt like it was made for the rifle - we all know the feeling. The mechanism is rock solid, the finish is just what I'd expect and the age matches better for me.
(Yes the checkering is wrong for the G-type configuration, but there you go.)


Here is the muzzle brake in it's Kroil bath - in case you don't believe me, lol.


A quick shot of some of the other parts, there is still a long road ahead - shredded threads that need fixing, fit and forming sections of the receiver around the bolt, everything seems to rub and bite at the moment, and semi-only "denial-inserts" (because parts are so easily obtainable!) so that only my semi-only lower can be fitted - and then some very careful welding (the rear sections of the receiver have of course been sliced through in more than one place) - it will all be done slowly and carefully by my 07.

Absolutely stunning. Quoting Wayne and Garth...

Wow, that is a really nice kit! Will make a one of a kind semi I would think! : )

Rereading The FG42, Fallschirmjagergewehr by Dr. Guus De Vries.

PP. 48, 49 Detailed views of the muzzle and brake of the "Second production Model" G-Type FG42 clearly show it with a MAS36 style checkered bayonet fixed - (Legermuseum Delft, The Netherlands.)
Other pictures show three without bayonets attached -
The Sturgess FG has the un-checkered bayonet.

Perhaps someone at the museum slipped the first model bayonet into the second model rifle by accident, or for the photographs.

Anyway, it was in a museum, and is also in print - so, my freshly shortened MAS36 bayonet is saying in the FG until an original German factory marked "pig-sticker" turns up!

Reading backwards in the same book - PP 32-33 show the same museum's "first production model" E-Type with a smooth hilted bayonet, so clearly someone got them exchanged and neither the photographer, or the author cared to mention it. More interesting is the fact that perhaps the two rifles did at least share one item that could be exchanged - mags, slings and internal parts do not inter-change

Pit, let me list the reasons I hate you:

1. You have an original Fg42 and I don't



















HAH! In all seriousness, this is a badass project and you are the right guy for the job. Congrats brother man keep us updated, have you considered starting a build thread? I think there would be interest!

Mostpeople -

We live in strange times - showing images of our most prized possessions on line is a minefield, sadly.

Neither I, or my 07 FFL, will be creating a thread that details this rifle, Claus has the serial numbers in his data base, and I will send him a detailed series of photos - the mag especially is marked in a way that I haven't encountered in any on-line photos, there are markings on the muzzle brake and receiver which are different to the four or five other second production series FG's I have photographed, that I think other gun nerds may find interesting, when I do this, I will of course post the link here (for a while, lol.)

I was one of the ones who used to love to show my entire collection on line, I took pleasure in discussing and sharing, but, the world seems to have gotten smaller and more vindictive than in the innocent days of the inter web ten years ago, lol.

You would hate me when you saw what wonderful items I had to sell and trade to obtain this non-functioning collection of parts, lol.

Curious, you mention the knurling on the MAS bayo is incorrect for your build....

I am sure you thought of this, but what about chucking it in a lathe, and removing the knurling?

pzjgr said:

Curious, you mention the knurling on the MAS bayo is incorrect for your build....

I am sure you thought of this, but what about chucking it in a lathe, and removing the knurling?

Click to expand...

I may well do that - it would be easy - we'll see when it's back from shortening - the park is so nicely aged on it at the moment.

In the meantime look at this weird one - http://www.egun.de/market/item.php?id=5870676
The end cap is not as it should be, at least according to the exploded wartime diagrams in "Death from Above." - or the examples I have seen - also, the description is incorrect in that they should be completely unmarked, contrary all of the bayonets I have seen are marked with at least a three letter factory code.
Also the rust and aging looks inconsistent for old degradation, IMO.

I did the MAS bayonet for the SMG Fg42, and unless you are super hard up for that 101% authenticity, you wont really notice the knurling. In fact, it makes it easier to take in and out I think - not that I really touch the bayonet at all except to remove it for cleaning.

That being said, comparatively speaking MAS bayonets are a dime a dozen, so modifying one wouldn't be that big a deal - in my humble opinion anyways.

Sorry to hear you won't be posting about the rifle, but I totally understand and respect the choice. Was this rifle in the registry at all? Or is it destined to only be semi auto? I would like to know the story one day if you are willing to tell

pitfighter said:

In the meantime look at this weird one - http://www.egun.de/market/item.php?id=5870676...Also the rust and aging looks inconsistent for old degradation, IMO.

Click to expand...

Don't like the looks of it. A 70 year un-blued part is expected to have nice, consistent patina like you see on old receivers that were issued in the white. This bayonet has the typical Eastern European "hurry up and rust" patina, often created by sprinkling with vinegar or battery acid. Not that this couldn't be an original WW2 part, it just looks odd to me.

mostpeople said:

I did the MAS bayonet for the SMG Fg42, and unless you are super hard up for that 101% authenticity, you wont really notice the knurling. In fact, it makes it easier to take in and out I think - not that I really touch the bayonet at all except to remove it for cleaning.

That being said, comparatively speaking MAS bayonets are a dime a dozen, so modifying one wouldn't be that big a deal - in my humble opinion anyways.

Sorry to hear you won't be posting about the rifle, but I totally understand and respect the choice. Was this rifle in the registry at all? Or is it destined to only be semi auto? I would like to know the story one day if you are willing to tell

Click to expand...

It was a bring-back that was demilled by cutting the receiver in several places many years ago, it was never in the registry.
It was missing ALL of the internal parts - literally an empty shell top and bottom -
It will be a USC 922r compliant, closed bolt semi-auto-only.

Ref. Posting pictures: it is not the good guys I worry about, I have a stack of (expensive) state and federal permits to do what I do. Sadly, posting is now an invitation to the bad guys. Even using photo bucket, one should be cautious.

Man what a find though, and you have been able to source everything but the bayonet?

mas 36 bayonet length

what is the overall length that a mas 36 bayonet is cut down to,to fit on a smg fg42 second model. thanks

henrybucki said:

what is the overall length that a mas 36 bayonet is cut down to,to fit on a smg fg42 second model. thanks

Click to expand...

The one in the photo is a scratch built reproduction by Estes Adams, who builds extraordinarily fine reproduction Fg42 parts - it is the exact size and dimension and construction.
Although I personally believe the springs he uses are a little weak compared to any wartime German springs and certainly compared to the MAS36 bayonet which was the basis for the Fg42, the springs are pretty rigid for obvious reasons.

He could give you all the details you need https://www.gunbroker.com/item/745434533
- I can also measure mine for you, when I am back at the "compound" I am in Hollywood on business currently - I have a cut-down MAS36 bayonet, which looks a little better IMO as it is parkerized and not blued - but it is not in the picture above.