Disappointed at the changes to the USMC F/U Knife

H

h minus

Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
88
Hello everyone, I'm new in this forum but have been lurking around this great place for years. I will do a proper introduction later in the general threads, but I will let you know that what prompted me to become a member today was the need for immediate answers regarding my beloved Ka-Bar knives. So here is what happened 24 hours ago: The mailman delivered my much awaited model 1217 that I'd ordered for my 13 year old son"s rite of passage. Sure he owns a short Ka-bar and several other knives, but this was to be his very first full size legend. Just like dads U.S Army model 1220. After opening the box and removing the sleeve from the blade my heart sank.The grind started at the bottom edge of the fuller. and the point was so needle like that it gave the knife a goofy cheap look. My first reaction was that I've been swindled by the distributor with a Chinese copy. After checking all appropriate markings that designated it as genuine, I contacted Ka-Bar to ask if they've had complaints from my particular seller, and a very helpful sweet lady told me that they have modified the USMC models for a more accurate original WW2 look. I accepted the explanation and set to work with a file to try to make the delicate looking tip (and false edge) to resemble a F/U knife point, but couldn't stop wondering why there were no press release or a video on Ka-bars Youtube channel making the people aware of this changes. Maybe it would have looked better if the blade was parkerized like the original, but with the epoxy coat it gives it a "clonish" look. Trust me when I tell you I'm a USMC pattern knife junkie. throughout the years I have owned most of the Camillus, Ontario, and Case patterns but Ka-Bar has been my favorite. Better edge retention , touched up easy, and comfier handle. I bought my first genuine Ka-Bar At General Jackson's military store in Fayetteville, NC in !986 for $27.00 and that began my love affair with this pattern knife. I carried it during my 4 years as an Airborne infantryman with the 82nd, and into harms way during operation Just Cause. It was used like it was meant to be used. By a grunt! Since then I've bought a "few"more. Looking at the new one I couldn't help to think there is no way in hell this tip is strong enough to withstand serious field use without modification. I wonder if Ka-Bar executives ever heard the phrase "If it ain't broke don't fix it". I can already see many warranty returns due to broken tips as well as returns to the stores due to the new style being sold under the older "aesthetics" in catalogs or website using older pictures. It just doesn't look as good. I truly hope this decision doesn't come to bite Ka-Bar in the rear. that was their flagship knife!! If I'd seen the knife before I ordered it, I would have gotten him a Case XX Marine F/U instead. I hope he is not disappointed with the new look. Thanks for listening to my rant, I just loved those damned Ka-Bars so much I'm Kinda brokenhearted. Merry Christmas everybody!!!
 
Last edited:
The changes were made by Kabar to more accurately reflect the WW2 specs quite a while back. Don't remember how long ago, but I have 3 that I have acquired over the last year that are "high grind".

Here's a recent thread in the Camillus Collectors subforum--

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...-ID-this-Camillus-fighting-knife#post14258219

It features a late 1943/early 1944 dang near factory condition Camillus version of the WW2 USN MK2 / 1219C2 USMC F/U.
Any WW2 MK2/1219C2, whether by Kabar, Camillus, PAL or Robeson-Shuredge will match these specs.

In both the pictures and the copy of the WW2 vintage Camillus contract drawing in SacTroop's most recent post, the grind comes up just short of the fuller. The point on this one is rather pointy as well.
 
h minus, sorry the Ka-bar isn't to your liking.

zzyzzz, thanks for the link. It really helps show how close the WWII and current versions are. Had a 3/4 Kabar 10 years ago and a Serrated full sized one more recently. Didn't realize that those two were so different from the WWII. Very interesting reading, thanks!
 
Zzyzzogeton: thanks for the reply and the links. wildmahn, I guess over time the high grind could grow on me, but the way those tips are turning out remains my biggest concern. it looks like the higher grind makes a more aggressive turn at the sweet spot when the knife is being ground that results in a ponitier tip, and the only way to counteract this effect is by sharpening the false edge like in the originals but ka-bar don't do that anymore. That's the reason That I had to put a file to it. I've always done it to my ka-bars because I like the looks, but in the "older" models with the lower grind it was not necessary. How I wish for Ka-bar to come out with a parkerized version of the 1217. It would really complement the new version.
 
I believe the clip is no longer sharpened because so many jurisdictions ban double edged knives for public carry or in some states, even possession. By not sharpening the clip the knife is legal in those areas. Easy enough to sharpen if so desired.
 
Kbar01.gif


Kbar02.gif




GR
 
Thanks Garandimal. I haven't seen that blueprint since it was printed on the old Ka-Bar boxes. I wish they still shipped them with those! I'm glad I came to this site. I like being in contact with fellow 1219C2 junkies. I'll let my son put his new 1217 through it's paces when he gets it on Christmas morning (he doesn't know he is getting one) and I'll report back to you. Thanks to all that posted
 
Interesting the 12/9/42 drawing shows a pommel with a 3/4x5/16 rectangular slot for the tang. Seems if memory isn't failing me that the earliest 1219C2's regardless of who made them had round ends on the tangs that were either threaded to the pommel or staked. Am I misremembering?
 
h minus said:
You might be correct sac troop.
Click to expand...

You're remembering correctly, sac troop.

The first 1219c2/mk2s were delivered in February 1943 by Camillus. They had the 3/8" thick pommels that screwed on. The change from screw-on to rounded, peened-on pommels was the first change made to the knives. Camillus was the only company that shipped screw-ons. I'm think all 4 WW2 companies made the round-tang peened.
I KNOW Camillus, Kabar and PAL did. I can't remember if I have a Robeson-Shuredge version.

Mr. Trzaska has an article some where on the internet that documents the changes and what order they occurred. I can't find it right now, but here are the changes I can remember in the order I remember:

1 - Screw-on Round Tang Thick (3/8") Pommel to Peened Round Tang Thick Pommel
2 - Round Tang Peened Thick Pommel to Rectangular Tang Thick Peened Pommel
3 - Stamp moved from ricasso to guard
4 - Rectangular Peened Thick Pommel to Thin (1/4") Pinned Pommel

Somewhere between 2 and 4, the guard was changed from completely flat to slightly bent (per picture in post 6 above).

The changes occurred fairly quickly as issues and requirements changed. Some of the changes were due to structural integrity (round tang vs rectangular - the pommels would break off when used as a hammer), speed of production (elimination of threading the pommel and tang came in 2 stages - 1st to peened then to pinned), thinning of pommel to save steel (simultaneous w/ pinning), pre-bending the guard to reduce hanging up on vines,etc in jungle environments (feedback from field use), leather to plastic sheaths because of rotting in high humidity/muddy environments - again feedback from the field.

The first sheaths were leather.

I have the stamp moving to the guard before the pinned pommel change as I a couple of thick pommel guard stamped versions (Camillus and Kabar).
 
Zz you are a wealth of information. Thanks for sharing it with us. Check out this video from Iwo Jima. At 1:44 you can see the Marines opening artillery shell tubes with a 1219c2 pattern knife. Looks like a Pal to me but will like your opinion. Sorry if it doesn't link. I've never linked anything since I'm technologically challenged. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMTmsJybgmk
 
Last edited:
It certainly has the look of the standard USMC knife. But it looks like the blade is significantly bigger compared to the guy's hand.
 
The guy probably had hands like me, rather small. It's definitely a 1219C2/MK2 but I can't make out the tang stamp at all. Too small and too much movement of the knife.
 
The reason I thought it might be a Pal is because for a split second it looked a bit bulky around the hand guard area leading me to believe it could have been due to the thick red spacer used in the Pals and early Robesons.
 
Good thought, but I know Kabar, Robeson and PAL all made red spacer versions, so probably Camillus did as well.

I went back and watched put it in full screen mode. Was fuzzy, but when I froze the video on a full side view, the spacer area is dark (black or a dirty, dark brown), not red, (can tell since it's in color).

Based on shear numbers produced the odds are that it's a Camillus (2 mill+) or a Kabar (1 mill+). I believe PAL and Robeson were both below 100K produced. PAL was really heavy into the smaller knives, the RH-35 and the RH-36. R-S didn't make nearly as many of anything as most of the companies did.

I have a chart somewhere with production totals for the MK2, lost in the bowels of my hard drive. Also, based on timing (Iwo Jima), the odds are really good that it was a later production knife. I could never get a view of the pommel. A couple of times the video ALMOST showed it, but then the film got edited and pommel was cut out.
 
Good assessment Zz, and thank you for trying. Based on your production numbers information I can agree with you that it's probably a Ka Bar or a Camillus.
 
I believe that the PAL's always had red spacers. Red spacer's too for the early KA-BARs and Robeson's. No red spacer Camillus 1219C2's that I've ever heard of or seen. Also for the Camillus 1219C2's the earliest pommels were assembled with a threaded round tang and a nut reset into a shoulder cut into the pommel. After that Camillus switched to the thin pommel,(1/4") attached with a cross pin. Eventually both KA-BAR and Robeson adapted the thin pommel attached with a cross pin. This type pommel and attachment method eventually became part of the Government spec MIL-K20277 for the Knife Fighting.
 
Gee! I'm glad to be part of this forum. The combined knowledge of all here makes for much enlightenment.
 
Code: 
Interesting the 12/9/42 drawing shows a pommel with a 3/4x5/16 rectangular slot for the tang. Seems if memory isn't failing me that the earliest 1219C2's regardless of who made them had round ends on the tangs that were either threaded to the pommel or staked. Am I misremembering?

sac troop,
your USMC F/U force is strong; same as zzy.
You are not mis-remembering, you are mis-reading the drawing.
The original drawing submission date is 9, Dec, 1942.
Look at the top of the drawing title block and you will see the revision block.
The drawing is rev C. Dated 4-3-43
There is no disturbance in the Force.
That drawing is still at KA-BAR. Camillus had an original set of F/U drawings but with the sale, closure and fire....who knows where it is now. Hope it is in good hands.
Hope this helps.

Best Regards,

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