The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 29, 2019, 11:02 AM   #1
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
1891 Argentine Bayonet Doesn't Fit

Wasn't sure where to post this but figured this would be close. Title pretty well sums it up, I bought a beautiful 1891 "Army" contract (aluminum grips) bayonet to go with my 1891 Argentine Mauser because why not?

However, I can't get the bayonet on the rifle. It's like the barrel is about 1 or 2mm too large to fit through the barrel ring on the bayonet. It fits perfect near the T-latch groove. I feel that if I really mashed it down I could probably force it but I'm not willing to try that. To much bluing?

What am I missing here?

Thanks!
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 12:03 PM   #2
tangolima
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2013
Posts: 2,180
I don't think you can, nor you should try to, force fit a difference of 1mm or 2. The bayonet doesn't fit your rifle.

It happened to me. Bought a bayonet off a forum for my gew 88. The seller swore it would fit. $80 later it didn't. The seller was nowhere to be found.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
tangolima is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 12:12 PM   #3
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,052
Is it genuine or a knock off?
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 12:15 PM   #4
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
So far as I can tell its genuine. I'm by no means an expert but it has all the correct proof Mark's and the the Crest has been scrubbed. Seems like if it was a knockoff then whoever did it would have left the Crest intact.
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 12:22 PM   #5
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
After taking a second look it might not even be off by the 1 or 2 mm I said earlier. It's THIS close.
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 06:02 PM   #6
mapsjanhere
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 2,821
Get a micrometer and find out which part is out of spec. Bayonet might be fine but the barrel might be local replacement. Those things were in use for a long time.
__________________
I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.
mapsjanhere is offline  
Old January 29, 2019, 06:51 PM   #7
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
Like someone in the US replaced the barrel? How would I be able to tell?
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old January 30, 2019, 10:08 AM   #8
mapsjanhere
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 2,821
I wasn't thinking US, the 1891 were modified several times in Argentine. Check if the barrel still shows the serial number matching the receiver, if not the barrel got changed at some point.
__________________
I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.
mapsjanhere is offline  
Old January 30, 2019, 10:43 AM   #9
tangolima
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2013
Posts: 2,180
Still, how much difference in diameters is there?

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
tangolima is offline  
Old January 30, 2019, 01:47 PM   #10
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,127
"...replaced the barrel?..." It chambered in 7.65 Argentine? How long is the barrel?
This'll help.
https://www.militaryfactory.com/smal...allarms_id=920
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old January 30, 2019, 02:15 PM   #11
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
Tomorrow when I get a chance to get out the mics I'll see what the dimensions are. Currently traveling for work. And yes it is chambered in 7.65x53, it's a great gun! Took me a little while to get used to the sights but now I can ring steel with it at 300 yes pretty consistently.
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old January 30, 2019, 07:44 PM   #12
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,052
I am not in the know on how rare or collectable, for what its worth

http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Ide...rgentina2.html
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 1, 2019, 06:08 PM   #13
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
I busted out the micrometer yesterday and did some measuring. The measurements varied by a few thousandths of an inch here or there but the average came to:

Barrel = 0.614

Bayonet = 0.607

As you can see the barrel ring in the bayonet seems to be just a hair smaller than the barrel.

Thoughts on what (if anything) to be done about this?
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old February 1, 2019, 10:26 PM   #14
tangolima
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2013
Posts: 2,180
The barrel is 0.007" larger than the ring. You need to enlarge the ID of the ring more than that. I would suggest at least 0.017", which is more than 0.5mm. That's quite a bit of work on steel.

I wouldn't want to alter the barrel.

The ring can be enlarged by removing metal, assuming there is enough metal left. There are different ways to do that. The other option is to remove the ring altogether. It is easier to do, but probably not as desirable.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
tangolima is offline  
Old February 2, 2019, 10:02 AM   #15
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
I'll figure something out. Just wish I knew why it was an issue to begin with.
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old February 3, 2019, 11:25 AM   #16
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,136
Quote:
I'll figure something out. Just wish I knew why it was an issue to begin with.
1 or 2 millimeters; the up side? You now have it down to where you can handle it if there is .040" (+/- a few) in a millimeter.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old February 5, 2019, 04:12 PM   #17
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,623
Plan A: Ream the bayonet til it fits the barrel. A 5/8" .625" might do for cheap.
Plan B: Sell the bayonet.

Do NOT mess with the barrel.
Jim Watson is online now  
Old February 8, 2019, 02:15 PM   #18
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 9,970
Go to Harbor freight and buy a tapered reamer.
Use it equally on both sides of the part that doesn't fit.
__________________
Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old February 10, 2019, 01:16 PM   #19
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,816
Quote:
Just wish I knew why it was an issue to begin with.
The most likely reason is that the bayonet is slightly out of spec. If the bayonet came from stocks that had never been issued (put on a rifle) the problem slipping past initial QC would go undetected.

If its a reproduction, essentially the same thing, except we know it wasn't issued to the troops.

Early Moisin-Nagant bayonets were deliberately made to be a very tight fit. Virtually a hammer on/off tight fit. The bayonets were meant to be fixed at all times, not meant to be removed and reattached often. Russians were big on bayonets..

I don't think Argentina followed that school of thought, I think what you have is simple production error that no one discovered, until you did.

If you want to attach it, hone it until it fits, and call it a day. Don't modify the rifle, do all needed work on the bayonet.
Good Luck!
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old March 3, 2019, 10:11 PM   #20
zzyzzogeton
Junior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2019
Posts: 2
I remember reading somewhere (more than once) that during the 1800s, bayonets frequently had to be modified by the armorer to fit a rifle.

Something about less precise quality control back then, so bayonet rings were made slightly tighter than barrel specs to allow the rings to be reamed to fit.
zzyzzogeton is offline  
Old March 23, 2019, 05:35 PM   #21
R.FORTE
Junior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2019
Location: WA
Posts: 11
so much of this was hand fit during assembly, I have also seen this issue with other guns from the era
R.FORTE is offline  
Old March 25, 2019, 09:53 PM   #22
johnm1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 618
I wish I could remember where I read this, but I was looking for a bayonet for a 1909 carbine an I thought they were slightly different for the carbine compared to the rifle. I stopped looking for one a while ago. I'll try to find that research but it was probably 10 years ago. Not much help I know.
__________________
John M.
Mesa, AZ
johnm1 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09363 seconds with 10 queries