DeBob: Thanks for the info on Warner Robbins. As you stated, being a "main hub" most government surplus, DX'd material in the geographic area likely ends up there for final disposition. What I find unusual is some bases will offer bayonets like the M7 & M9 for sale, yet others send the stuff to the scrapper. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but little does when The Government is involved. However, when it was decided to "privatize" the sale of government surplus about 10 years ago, the result has been a net increase in recovered revenue and reductions in manpower used to administer the DRMOs. BTW, to help w/Carlo's question, learn more here: http://www.drms.dla.mil/ In addition, if you go to "events" link on the left margin, it will lead you to sales and a search feature: http://www.govliquidation.com/auctio...et&cmd=keyword Use FSC (category) 1095 or "bayonet".
On another note, I was looking @ the bayonet listings and there appear to be used black Ontario M9s in one lot. Did not think these were ever contracted for by the military, but the M9s may not have been utilized by them, but another government branch, and purchased with a P-Card. Guess maybe I am going to have to buy a black Ontario now...

"the DRMO had a box of about 75"

Don't you wish you knew then what you know now? I wonder how many more of the FTs were in there. Great story, thanks for sharing. You made a great score!

Well I get sick thinking of what was in that box because I was just grabbing and counting. So there is no telling what could have been?

Btw about 3 months ago my dept got 30 something of the OKC black blade M9's in both handle variations that were still wrapped in plastic. Just think all these bayonets we have obtained have been given out to officers,placed in the trunks of cars and so on. I've checked all my officers who had been given an M9 and so far they are the OKC and gen 3,4 phrobis with a couple bucks tossed in.

go check out WTS. i thought maybe i should share,lol.

Pwcosol,
since, as far as I understood reading the Brett's notes, the die used for the M9-FT marking had already been destroyed, could you tell us the differences you noted between the reproduction and legitimate issues?
I think this would be helpful for many collectors.

Carlo: The "reproduction" M9-FTs were stamped using the same die as the original 125 trials pieces with the "3-line" marking: M9-FT USMC Lan-Cay. According to HB's report, about two years later the "reproduction" pieces were fabbed up, utilizing the same die (hence they have the identical marking). Subsequently the "3-line" die was modified by grinding off the "M9-FT", leaving only USMC & Lan-Cay. This is the die used in the fifth submission to the USMC, with the addition of the Corps EGA stamped on the opposite side of the ricasso. I had heard one of the reasons the "M9-FT" was removed was because the USMC was no longer interested in the "M9", so the designation was eliminated. Jim Maddox did an excellent write-up on them for Frank Trzaska's U.S. Military Knives & Bayonets Forum: http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/jim_maddox.htm
From looking @ the three M9-FTs I have, the discernible differences observed on the "Historical Reproductions" are:
1. Grey finish to blade
2. Off-green color to both scabbards (a somewhat grayish, mottled effect).
3. Original M9-FT has a Fastex clip dated in 1998. Repops are dated a year later or more.
4. Referring to #3, a change was incorporated in the web strap attached to the male part
of the Fastex clip, and the backing hangs down to the bottom of the Bianchi
metal belt hook. This seems to still be in effect.
BTW, the "1348" which DeBob mentioned is the form/tag which accompanies items turned in for re-utilization or destruction. Sometimes on sites like Ebay you will see surplus M9s, etc. with the tag still attached.

Thanks Fred!