M43 really Mk II?

Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
20,044
I had posted earlier about an "M43" I bagged that was marked "J.N. B43."

I now notice that there is a line of brass showing in the angle where the bolster meetsm the ricasso of the blade. I take it this means that the bolster was brazed in place and is not integral with the blade/tang. From an older thread that seems to have disappeared, I think I recall that this means the piece is a Mark II, not a M43.

Comments anyone? John? :confused:


Tom
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
20,044
Rod,

I'll send you an e-mail with attached pictures.

OA 17 3/8"
Blade 13 1/4"
Handle 4 1/4" (from bottom of butt to end of scale)
Blade max thickness 5/16"
Blade width - at bolster 1 5/16
- at belly 2 3/8

"drop" 3 5/8"

Weight 25.4 oz (721 g)

cartouche in handle scale SA
50
 
Joined
Mar 9, 1999
Messages
1,440
Tom
Pix would help, but I agree that it's one of the many types of M43s. They had both integrated and welded bolsters. Confusion reigns with WW II military pieces with using everything from 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45 in combinations with M, BN, C, J or K. I have yet to see any official paper except for the famous Wilkinson kukri and the later Indian MK IIIs.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
20,044
John,

What distinguishes the M43 from the Mark II?

I should have added that the piece in question has no raised ring on the handle. Instead, there are are two groups of shallow groves between the rivets that were added after the scales were riveted in place (marks appear faintly on the exposed full tang): one group of four groves on the bolster side; one group of six groves on the butt side.

Tom
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2002
Messages
3,229
Hi Tal,

As requested by are mutual freind for you have a email of my thoughts coming your way.

But heres my opinion on you kuk.

Okydoke, Well first off, This is my conjecture & deduction , as no true contempary evidence is so far available.

So others may disagree, with my conclusians.

I would say the M43 is a sub catogary of mk11s. Almost a high quality M.43 with particular features.

With your kuk I would surmise that as the bolster is brazed that pretty much, takes it out of the M.43 catogary, which, I see as always having integral or solid welded bolsters. {Not brazed.}

The Other feature some regard as m.43 are the lack of a projecting finger ring on the handle, Although persnoaly I have seen many 1941 & 42 kukris without the ring that are still clearly marked as the mark11.

I have also seen a photo of a ww1 kukri without them, {the projecting ring}& a different ww1 kukri is in my possesian that a solid welded bolster.

The stamp I would read as JNB43 not JN B43

I belive J.N.B. is an Indian military manufacter & 43 is the year of production.

They certainly were making kukri from 1941 to 1944.{Samples collected or handled by other kukri collectors.}

If you search for a post by Alfred Tan , He got a JNB kukri from Atlanta cutlery. That was discussed at the time.

Overall I would say its a risky speculation to identify a kukri as an M.43 unlsee it was clearly hot stamped M.43 when it was made, as , all the recognising features can be found on mk.2s of earlier dates.{Although I sure some were unstamped, in fact}

The Indian Army also used this method of construction & a similar design on later kukris, slighty smaller in grip size & overal weight.{freuqantly with horn grips.}

Personaly untill proof was found I would class them as Indian officers m.43 varients, rather than true m.43s.{They are ooften stamped. Made in India tempered steel.}

The SA50 mark is the individual British Indian Army munitions inspectors stamp, of the inspector who passed it as of standard. It is often found on both blade & handle.

I guess one could differentiate, a mk2 kukri with "smooth grip" as a mk2 with a "later" "m43 style grip" or a "transitional" model, but that seems to be an imprescise play on words.

Perhaps Mk.2 with precurser features of the M.43 would be most accurate.

{or Just MK.2 for simplicity.}

Spiral
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
20,044
Thank you for the information and opinions. I was fooled on the stamp since it is, literally, "J.P.B 43" (no period after the "B"). I'll search for the Alfred Tan post.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2002
Messages
3,229
Tom, I guess the stamps took a lot of use & the periods probably wear first?

Prior knowedge of the kukris & stamps tends to make it easier.

If you check"British & commonwealth military knives" by Ron Flook Top of page 213 photo 517, Theres a clear example of a JNB stamp over a 45 .

Spiral
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
20,044
That's the typeface used on my khukuri. Unfortunately, Flook does not identify "J.N.B." in his directory of manufacturers.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2002
Messages
3,229
Yes indeed Tom, Unfortuanatly Flook only offers an incomplete list of English manufactures & doesnt even mention that some of those manufacturers had workshops or retail stores in India.
 
Top