4th Gen Phrobis with misaligned roll-mark...fake??
 

Gent's,

I recently purchased what was advertised as a new/unissued Phrobis Gen 4 M9 bayonet on the bay. There were only two photos and from what I could tell the bayonet looked just as advertised. It came in the mail on Friday and looking it over it just looks odd to me. The front pouch seems way to small for the Beretta M9 magazine to fit (I don't have one to try it out). The second thing that really stands out are the roll marks on the ricasso. The U from U.S.A. sits well to the right above the T of PAT. PEND. and not centered above it as I've seen in other photo's here.

Was I sold a fake?

Write the ebay link :

Link to auction is below.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/300630078772...84.m1438.l2649

Real. Not a fake.
But, price seem high.

Try to make a deal with him : numberonegi@bellsouth.net

Thank you for the reply.

So is it normal to have roll marks that are not perfectly aligned?

Is there no such thing as a fake Phrobis M9?

I'm Just curious how you came to your conclusion as I would like keep it in mind for future purchases.

The same marking here :

http://www.ebay.com/itm/PHROBIS-III-...#ht_500wt_1357

Fake M9
 

Sounds like the pouch is questionable. However, there are at least four variations to the Gen 4. Sounds like you know of only one gen 4 marking. I have mint examples of at least five variations of gen 4. If you would like pics contact me at NumberOneGi@bellsouth.net

Respectfully, the mag pouch was not normally used for 9MM mags by our soldiers. It was used for small items of choice...most often pocket utility knives. numberonegi@bellsouth.net

In Faith & High Regard,
SignalSoldier
COL, SC, ARNG (R)

Thanks for the response. I'll snap a few pics of the bayonet and send them over to you tomorrow.

Looks fine to me. As stated above, there are a few different stampings of the 4-line bayonets. The die used to mark the blades has all four lines of text and the blade is only stamped once. The difference is in the dies themselves.

Adding to what Howard said, although the pouch certainly looks similar to a single pocket magazine pouch for the Beretta M9, from what others have stated, it was never intended to be one. I have found two used Phrobis M9s which had a fire-starter stone & strike stick in the pouch (kept the one which was still sealed in plastic). A small multi-tool is also a possibility, too.

Hello!
I think the pouch was originally intended to be used (also) as a pistol magazine pouch, but actually never used in the field to store the Beretta magazine.
Here is a piece of paper I found inside the pouch of my XM9 (already posted in the forum).
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/5462/53515101.jpg

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6...smcbuck033.jpg

http://img859.imageshack.us/img859/3...smcbuck031.jpg

Maybe its just a matter of semantics, but the pouch was designed and intended to be for a Beretta pistol magazine. It appears that it was never actually used for this purpose, but that was its intended use. That's straight from Mickey Finn's mouth to my ears.

Thanks Bill for setting the record straight. Perhaps what I was thinking is the "magazine pouch" was seldom utilized for this purpose. Since the vast majority of M9 bayonets were issued to soldiers whom did not carry a pistol in the field, this would seem to be the case. The importance and/or usefulness of this feature must have been considered minimal. I cannot recall whom stated this fact, but the pouch was never an "inventoried" item having a NSN assigned to it, so once supplies ran out, that was it. The addition of the pouch also terminated with the Phrobis contract as well.