History of the M9 Part I: Phrobis and Buck M9 Bayonets

[Quarterbore]

Following was some info I had compiled with the help of Bill Porter, Frank Trzaska, and others that was on my website. I have pulled the information to this location so that it is easier for me to format, correct, and update. If you watch this thread you will notice new additions and links to other threads as I build this review over time. When I am done, it will return to the website as a webpage... IN AS MUCH, if you see any errors, please let me know!

Overview of the Buck and Phrobis III History

The M9 Bayonet traces it's history to a small R&D company called Qual-A-Tec. You can see a full history here. In brief, the company was created to support Special Forces and the Rambo movies were just out so they developed a knife which would later become the Buck-184 Buckmaster. In order to deal with the licensing of this knife to Buck Qual-A-Tec created the company Phrobis, Ltd. A few laters, there was a request for Propoasl from the US Military for prototype bayonets and the Qual-A-Tec folks took the Buckmaster and modified it to become what we know as the M9 Bayonet today. Qual-A-Tec went on to establish a new company to handle this knife and they named this company Phrobis III, Ltd.



Buck manufactured the first M9 bayonets for Phrobis in 1987. The first contract was for 315,600 pieces with a couple of 60,000 unit options at military discretion. In total, Buck made about 325,000 bayonets between 1987 and 1989 for the US Army. Buck, without the knowledge of Phrobis III, added their date code to the first 1200 bayonets. This was not in keeping with the Technical Data Package and Phrobis instructed Buck to immediately remove the mark from any subsequently manufactured bayonets for the military.


Chevron Marked Phrobis M9 Bayonet. Photo courtesy of Bill Porter

The majority of the “chevron” marked M9s had been shipped before the mark was discovered. One hundred sixty-six pieces of the 1200 piece run had not been shipped and these were held back. The bayonets were sequentially numbered on the right ricasso with the odd numbered bayonets going to Buck and the even numbered going to Phrobis. Buck sold their bayonets to members of the Buck Collectors Club. Phrobis manufactured an oak presentation plaque with the front end of an M16 rifle attached to it and sold the plaques to collectors as well as presenting them to dignitaries. These bayonets, like all the Phrobis military contract bayonets, had the Phrobis markings on the left blade ricasso and the right ricasso was unmarked.


Second Generation Phrobis M9


Third Generation Phrobis III M9 Bayonet

Buck continued to manufacture the M9 bayonet under subcontract for Phrobis until 1989 when the contract was terminated for mutual convenience between Buck and the Phrobis. At the end of the contract there was a falling out between the two companies and as part of the settlement Buck ended up with the rights to the M9 bayonet in the United States. Buck did not buy out or take control of Phrobis III, instead Mickey Finn, the designer of the M9 bayonet and the owner of Phrobis III, still holds the Phrobis trademark.


Fourth Generation "Patent Pending" Phrobis III M9 Bayonet

Around the time of the Buck/Phrobis falling out, Mickey Finn incorporated under the name Phrobis Int'l. He had been working on some inproved designs for the M9 bayonets but no longer had Buck to manufacture the blades and component parts. He then turned to the well known firm of Marto in Spain. Marto manufactured the blades for Phrobis Int'l and due to the import laws the blades had to be marked with the country of origin. The patent information was also added to the right ricasso. Marto was permitted to manufacture the M9 bayonet with their name on the blade strictly for commercial sales in Europe.


Phrobis Int'l M9 Bayonet

Concurently to the manufacture of the Military Contract M9 Bayonets as described above, Buck was also manufacturing M9 bayonets for the commercial market. The commercial bayonets were almost identical to the military bayonet in that the left ricasso of the commercial bayonet had the same markings as the military model but in addition it had Buck’s name and model number on the right ricasso. This carried through the length of the military contract that ended in 1989. In 1990, having completed the military contract and having broken ties with Phrobis, Buck moved their company name and model designation to the left ricasso and the right ricasso was left blank.


Commercial Buck - Phrobis III marked M9 Bayonet


In 1991, Buck made 5000 units for the US Marines when a contract was put on an open bid and Buck Knives won the contract for a division level field testing order. These bayonets were used by the 2nd Marine Division. By this time, Buck had parted company with Phrobis (early 1991) and were actually bidding against Phrobis for these contracts. This is the only group of bayonets made by Buck that are solely produced and supplied by Buck without Phrobis connection. All the bayonets are of the Phrobis first generation style but have the Buck cutter plate on the scabbard. All of the blades are marked with M9-USMC and a plus (+) mark as this is the Buck date code for 1991. All 5000 of the (+) marked M9s have the short threaded tang that projects through the crossguard and a standard tang rod.


1991 USMC M9 Bayonet

In 1993 Buck made what some consider the best version of the M9. In this contract, Buck made 350 prototype bayonets for the USMC. these are referred to as the "riveted Pommel" bayonets although only half of these were riveted while the other half had the tang drilled and threaded. They actually were made in three separate and distinctly different styles, two of which were submitted to the USMC for testing and of these knives most were destroyed during the testing. These were made of all stainless steel instead of a mix of carbon steel for the parts and 425 mod for the blade. The marines liked this version, but the military wanted to buy the same bayonets for all services and the Marine version was discontinued.


CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THE 1993 Full Tang BUCK USMC M9 Bayonet

Buck’s contract to manufacture the M9 lasted for 3 years, the options were not used and the contract was opened to lowest bidder. Buck cut margin to the bone, hoping to make up margin on civilian units but were underbid by LanCay . Buck continued to manufacture commercial bayonets until 1997 when their tooling wore out and production volumes did not justify replacing it.

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

I am Kurtis Dwight Davis, owner/inventor of U.S. Patent 4,458,420, which is referrenced on this website. You cannot possibly know the full truth of the M-9 history, without hearing from me. I am offering to tell my side of the story, in a written, dated, signed format, complete with full documentation. For starters, I have personal correspondence signed by Charles Buck, dated 1985, wherein he refuses to license my patented design especially because "it is designed for the purpose of fighting, and Buck Knives does not do that". I guarantee you that is what he said, and I'm willing to provide copy. This is not an effort to claim infringement, or anything else besides telling you a truth unlike any you have ever heard, as relates to the M-9 Multipurpose Bayonet System. I invite the management of "Quaterbore" to send the name and mailing address of a responsible person who can receive what I have to say, no strings attached. I don't care if I am believed or not---I'll let my documentation speak for itself. This limited format does not allow a full, complete discussion, as required to express the truth; so send a name and address---I've been waiting over twenty years.

[Mister Moon]

From M. Brett :

All I can tell you is that at one time the Buck company was disinclined to make blades that might be used for "killing" humans on religious grounds. They are a very religious family and support good works around the globe. Any non standard (grade II) Buck knives are sent to missionaries to give out as working tools, a long time company policy.

That attitude changed as the small company became a larger and more international company. In fact historical research has established that Chuck Buck's father and grand father made knives for US troops going overseas in WWII.

The Curtis/Kurtis guy turns up every now and then claiming the scissors design is his. In fact the scissors design was a Soviet Russian design, and I personally provided the (then very rare) Russian bayonet (Captured in Vietnam, which I then paid $350.00 in 1972) to Eickhorn in the late 1970's when he was doing legal battle about his wire cutter bayonet(way before Lan-Cay and the Army M9).

That's all I've got.


Homer

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

Not once have I ever claimed anything concerning scissors, wirecutters or anything of the type. I invented the impact resistant/modular hilt as fully incorporated by the M-9 Multipurpose Bayonet System. Furthermore, I have never claimed responsibility for the entire M-9. In this regard, electric insulation, wire cutter, scabbard, blade shape and dimensions, and exact alloy used, have nothing whatever to do with my invention, and are properly credited to someone else. Destructive scientific testing proves beyond any reasonable doubt that claim #1 of U.S. Patent 4,458,420 fully applys to the M-9 hilt.

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

Please be advised personal correspondence from the original M-9 manufacturer is available on this website. Go to photoserver, scroll to the bottom of the page, and look under new photos. Here is evidence of a unique, untold part of the M-9 history, available only on "Quarterbore". Within aprox. 90 days of this correspondence, the Army established plans for an impact resistant, modular bayonet hilt, precisely as described in U.S. Patent 4,458,420. Personal correspondence was received by Davis in response to solicitation to license '420.
This correspondence is not to be confused with a second letter, received from the U.S. Army, about the same time. Both these letters taken together prove beyond any doubt that Davis was the first person to approach the original M-9 manufacturer, and the U.S. Army, with a "state-of-the-art", impact resistant, modular hilt.

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

Please be advised that personal correspondence, as received from the United States Army regarding U.S. Patent 4,458,420, is now available on this website. This documentation is offered in support of previous statements made concerning the United States Army M-9 Multipurpose Bayonet System, and may be viewed in the "photoserver" section.

Official Administrative hearing, by the Army, with regards to a just claim of infringement, amounted to a sham/farce. A day at the Federal Courthouse, with regards to infringement, was stolen through abridgement of 1st amendment right to petition for redress of grievance.

Thank you for an opportunity to "tell my side of the story".

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

Please be advised that a FIXED bayonet is now displayed at this website, as per U.S. Patent 4,458,420.

Photographs are to be seen under the "photoserver" category.

[Kurtis Dwight Davis]

Please be advised that rare information concerning the M-9 bayonet is now available under "photoserver". The Letter Requirement was generated in late 1985, about 90 days after Davis offered '420 to the U.S. Army, via West Point. This information supports claims made by myself concerning U.S. Patent 4,458,420. Please be advised that although all the information posted to date may be considered as lawful evidence of patent infringement, not once ever did the United States Army duly evaluate one bit of it. Please see explanations below each page of the Letter Requirement.
This particular document provides unusual insight to Army process, regarding initial planning/strategy.
Thank you for an opportunity to "tell my side of the story".

More information concerning U.S. Patent 4,458,420 is available at www.kurtisddavis.com