Any thoughts on the Sykes Fairbairn?

The British Squaddies who carried these would typically stick 'em in a tree or similar & snap the point off (so my Grandad told me!) they would then re-grind a broader but still slim enough point onto the blade. I believe they were designed for stabbing into the carotid artery or from behind into the kidneys, etc. Lovely!
 
If you like daggers that you can use, get an Ek..the only other knife allowed to use the commando monkier
 
Dude, it's a stilleto relegated to assassination/ sentry removal. It fits in the eye socket, brain stem, maybe into the ear, carotid artery, the kidneys, subclavian artery (maybe, assuming you don;t need to CUT that bit)

It's not really a keep-it-sharp-and-use-it knife, its a very purpose-specific tool. It's meant for use in killing people.

I've got an FS dagger issued at one time, the blade is not going to take an edge really ever. If I ever get it to stop corroding I will use it as a letter opener or something. I have no idea what that will require, since using scotch-brite on the blade and then cleaning with naptha did nothing but slow down the impending rust.

If you want a double edged knife as a user, buy a Cold Steel Peacekeeper - inexpensive, a decent carbon steel, will take and maintain an edge.

Or find a Gerber MKI or MKII. I've got a MKI which has seen extensive carry and use, still in good shape. Not my thing, really, but a great knife inside it's envelope.
 
I have two , one is marked "A Wright Sheffield " the other is a J.Nowill . The Wright version was bought in the UK back in the early 80's and given to me as gift, the Nowill was purchased as an import in the US.

IMO the Wright version is superior , no grind marks and a polished gun blued type finish. The Nowill is sloppier with a lot of grind marks and more of a military type black finish. The wright version has a solid brass top nut that was painted black but has since worn off.

Gun blue will touch them up , so they're not stainless and they must be stored outside the sheath with a heavy coat of oil or they will rust.

It keeps my SMLE from getting homesick

S3600002CC.jpg
 
I write from memory.

Fairbairn designed two knives, and he didn't really design the first one in a design vacuum, nor the second knife.

Fairbairn received the definitive knife of this type from two US Marine Corps officers who presented it to him as gift in Shanghai, where they served together.
The two Marine officers had the knife made by the Shanghai police department armorer, and the armorer had a good idea what Fairbairn would like.

The Pattern One corresponds to the knife Fairbairn and Sykes presented to Wilkinson for manufacture.
This knife differs dramatically from the Pattern Two and Pattern Three knives later made by Wilkinson, in that it has an unsharpened "tablet."
Wilkinson changed Fairbairn's design without permission in order to facilitate the manufacturing process.
I believe when Fairbairn saw how well the knife sold, even with the modification, he kept his mouth shut and took the royalty checks.

Later in the war, Fairbairn designed a second knife, the X Dagger.
This knife also has an unsharpened portion, although not a distinct "tablet" as on the Pattern One.
Nonetheless, I believe the unsharpened portions of both the Pattern One and the X Dagger represent Fairbairn's actual intent.

If one handles either the Pattern Two or the Pattern Three knives, one might consider the handle rather small.
I believe Fairbairn meant for the user to hold the Pattern One and the X Dagger with the index finger wrapped around the unsharpened portion of the blade, and with the hilt otherwise serving as a subhilt.

Make a fist.
Stick the thumb straight up and the index finger straight out, as if pointing a gun with the thumb serving as the hammer.
Take a pen or a pencil and lay it on top of the clenched middle finger and across the web of the thumb.
Wrap the index finger over the pen and the thumb over the index finger.
Think of the pen as the hilt of the knife.

I think Fairbairn intended this knife as a desperation knife that would fall instinctively to hand and which would not come out of the hand as long as the user remained conscious.

Early in his Shanghai career, Fairbairn received a terrible beating on the street, probably intended to kill him.
He had a six month hospital recovery.
When he got out of the hospital, he studied Judo and recieved his second degree Black Belt from Jigaro Kano himself.
He also started carrying a knife very much like the Pattern One, and had it on his person at all times.

A knife held in the manner I described above will counter a wrist grab and the hand will not slide up or down the knife, no matter what happens.
No matter what happens.

The FS Pattern Two received its reputation for a fragile tip because the American manufacturers who supplied this knife to the early American Marine Raiders did not use the steel Wilkinson specified nor did they follow Wilkinson's prescribed heat treatment.
The Marines broke the tips off of these knives so frequently the Marines eventually rejected them.
In contrast, the knives made by Wilkinson and Wilkinson subcontractors, and as issued in the European theater, did not break.

The Pattern One and the X Dagger, as presently made by Brent Sandow for NZ Knives, have no equal.
They will not break and they correspond to Fairbairn's intent.

The last I heard, NZ Knives would not ship these knives in a sharpened condition.
If that remains their policy, I would have mine sharpened by a professional knifemaker so as to not scratch the finish nor undo the heat treatment by overheating the steel on a wheel.
 
pmel018 said:
If you mean they know what they are doing flogging cheap rubbish to people who don't know any better, then you are right on the money. I have three Nowells and they are junk, the Rodgers ones are only slightly better. if you must have a factory knife hunt down the Wilkinson version, they pop up on Ebay regularly. Otherwise see the web site in my first post.
Click to expand...

You sound like you have some other motive. The version you have up is 7 times the price of the sheffield version. No shit its better quality.
 
slightly off topic but that is a nice smle. is it a savage or a longbranch?? I can't remember which one used the grooved handguard. now to stagger back to the topic, did you have to post a pic of your f/s knife? hadn't seen one in a while and forgot how nice they looked. now on top of all the other knives i'd like to get you had to fling a craving for a f/s on me. dang this knife addiction it hits you when you least expect it. later, ahgar
 
Huh??? my only motive is to ensure that people understand what they are getting for their money. I have 7 of the NZ made knives for which I have paid the full asking price. I have spent some time with the maker as he lives not far from me and I am proud to promote his efforts. Is there some sort of problem with that??
Phil
 
Hi all. Gee these FS forums get quite heated and opinionated. Ken when I began reproducing the X Dagger my research led me to believe they were also classed as pre-production versions. The original blades were ground from Lee Metford bayonet blades which is why they have the grind at the ricasso that they have. An original X dagger will have the Victorian proof marks as found on the bayonet blades as well as the proof inspection marks which is why originals are as rare as hens teeth.
All the patterns I do are shipped sharpened unless told otherwise. Only ever done 2 with an unsharpened edge. Apart for the odd collector most of my knives go to military personnel and are carried.
As for price, well you get what you pay for. The materials used are not much different from those used in the 40's but the fit and finish are poles apart. All things being relative a Pattern 1 was a weeks wage back in 1940 selling for about 3 quid but then Wilks have never been cheap.
 
Peter P: "....Wilks have never been cheap."
One very good reason why they are no longer in business.
Last time I looked, a standard mil. spec. 3rd pattern was being sold at 200 quid. Oh, BTW, sure would be nice if someone could start reproducing the OSS version, an Oz Gregsteel Z-Force dag, maybe even a V42 that's not made in China.
 
Girlyman: You can get Sheffield made P3's for 40 odd quid. Yes the Wilks one's were dearer but better finished and now you can't get them - they have shot up in value after all you are paying for the engraving on the blade - as crap as it is with grind lines that are polished to hell and no point to speak of.
The OSS knife differs only in the hande were the knurl goes all the way to the guard. The original handles were made from bronze and a rolling die was used to do the knurl which is why it is so perfect.
You can get a repro Gregsteel from The Austrailan Knife Collectors. Check them out at
http://www.knivesaustralia.com.au/gregsteel.html
I have Paul Chen V42. I don't have an original or even a modern Case version to compare it with. I guess they can churn them out by the hundreds for the price they sell at.
For me the FS is the quintessential fighting knife of the 20th century and everything else was a spin off from it with a vaiation on a theme
 
ahgar said:
slightly off topic but that is a nice smle. is it a savage or a longbranch?? I can't remember which one used the grooved handguard. now to stagger back to the topic, did you have to post a pic of your f/s knife? hadn't seen one in a while and forgot how nice they looked. now on top of all the other knives i'd like to get you had to fling a craving for a f/s on me. dang this knife addiction it hits you when you least expect it. later, ahgar
Click to expand...

I'm not an SMLE expert but a collector told me ( based on the serial #) it was made in the ROF at Fazakerley UK.

I acquired it in one of those "once in a lifetime" situations. I was walking through a local flea market about 8 years ago when I saw it on a table. I asked the elderly gentleman how much and he said $30.00.....
I tried to act calm and collective as I took out my wallet.

But back to the knife, the A Wright version I have is a quality piece, if they can be bought in the US.
 
JPD1998 said:
I have two , one is marked "A Wright Sheffield " the other is a J.Nowill . The Wright version was bought in the UK back in the early 80's and given to me as gift, the Nowill was purchased as an import in the US.
Click to expand...
I'd say the Awright FS knives are about on par with the basic FS knives by Reg Cooper while I wouldn't bother with the Nowill one. It's not (I think) a normal knife for Awright to make. Both the Cooper ones and the Wright ones are made from parts produced by the same company (Reg is having difficulty getting the blades).
I'm not convinced that WS were making their own FS knives later on anyway. I was told that one cutler was making them in sheffield but nobody saw them for sale
 
Andy_L said:
I'd say the Awright FS knives are about on par with the basic FS knives by Reg Cooper while I wouldn't bother with the Nowill one. It's not (I think) a normal knife for Awright to make. Both the Cooper ones and the Wright ones are made from parts produced by the same company (Reg is having difficulty getting the blades).
I'm not convinced that WS were making their own FS knives later on anyway. I was told that one cutler was making them in sheffield but nobody saw them for sale
Click to expand...

My interest in F/S knives is purely historical....

But on appearance alone , the quality of the AWright knife isn't bad.

It's hard to describe but the blade appears to have been made with a high level of fit & finish. Also the blade "rings" if you flick it with your finger nail.

But then again it was made about 23 years ago so I'm sure thing have changed.
 
Nobody seems to have the images! The Cassidy Fairbairn manual is not for the FS knife but a later design, of which there is apparently no extant example.
Phil
 
Has Peter P tried holding a Pattern I as I have speculated, with the index finger around the tablet and the hilt acting as a sub-hilt?
If he hasn't, would he try it now and report his experience to me, here on this forum?

I have never held a Pattern 1.
I have held a Pattern 2 and the handle just seems way to small for me.
Yes, I have large hands, but well within the range of normal.
It has always puzzled me, as to why Fairbairn, starting from scratch, would design a combat dagger with such a small handle.

I know/assume/understand that he intended these daggers for discreet carry, as a gentleman's or a police officer's backup self-defense weapon, as well as a soldier's combat weapon.
I refer to the discreet carry aspect of the Pattern 1 and the X Dagger because Fairbairn designed sheaths for them that made it possible to carry them concealed.
Therefore, one would not expect the knives to have any excess, in terms of proportions, that would detract from discreet carry.
In the same vein, though, as a last-ditch, desperation weapon, I would also expect these knives to have enough handle to give them both power and retainability.
I base this on the writing of Cassidy, from which I infer, although Cassidy does not address it directly, that the almost-fatal beating Fairbairn suffered in Shanghai had something to do with the design of the Pattern I and the X Dagger.
In other words, the tablet made the handle large enough to wield the knife with power and without concern for losing the knife in a life or death struggle.

Yes, I understand the point Peter P made regarding the making of some of these knives from bayonets, but I do not see that as necessarily causal but rather as incidental.
After all, Cassidy says that the factory hands who ground the original Pattern I's went to Wilkinson management and asked if they could grind the edges all the way to the hilt, without stopping to create a tablet (thus creating the Pattern 2).
The men grinding the Pattern I's said the tablet made any inexactness, or lack of symmetry in the flats, more apparent, and that grinding the flats and edges all the way to the hilt tended to conceal the inevitable dissymmetries that a hand-ground four-faceted double-edge dagger would tend to have.
If Peter P will look carefully at the Pattern I on his web site, he will notice that the tablet magnifies a tiny lack of perfect symmetry.
We don't live in a perfect world, and I have never held a perfect knife (other than one I made myself), and so I can relate to the frustrations of the Wilkinson factory hands who ground the Pattern I's.
By grinding the flats all the way to the hilt, they could easily create the appearance of symmetrical perfection; whereas, with a tablet, they would rarely, if ever, produce a knife that appeared perfectly symmetrical.

Please don't read the above discussion as a challenge to Peter P's understanding of the history of these designs.
I only mean to learn more by asking questions.

So, Peter P, please try using the hilt as a sub-hilt and tell me what you think.
I may have it all wrong, but I'd like to know either way.

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top