Phrobis Product Improved M9

[pwcosol]

Thought this might be of interest to the Forum members. My understanding is just as the US Army XM9 trials concluded, it was realized the Phrobis submission lacked a blade stop. Without some form of stop, when the wire cutting feature was used, the cutting edge of the blade could come in contact with the user's hand, with painful results.
Phrobis then fabricated a very small number of 'product improved" M9s which incorporated the now familiar "button" stop found on the Buck 188 models. I think this is when the change in angle of the lug on the cutterplate also occurred. In addition a warning sticker was also to be applied on all subsequent bayonets. The length of the rear cutting edge on the bayonet was also reduced so the sharpened blade would never make contact with the user's fingers.
It is assumed the Army was unwilling to incorporate such design changes in the finalized M9 version they accepted (recall how they complained merely about the ">" date code added to the first M9s delivered!). Buck then utilized the modified cutter plate & sticker on their commercial product, which if for not any other reason, might protect them from any potential product liability claims. This seems evident from the letter provided by Buck with the first M9 bayonets they offered to their Buck Collector Club members (the withdrawn Phrobis "three-line chevron" M9s). The letter states "It is not safe for civilian use without changing the enclosed cutter plate (with safety stop) and installing the enclosed safety warning decal.". Why they never elected to go with the reduced sharpened edge is only known to them. Note this bayonet has the number "3" stamped on the unfinished cutter plate, and button stop has been added by hand. Of those few "P.I." Phrobis M9s, some were evaluated to destruction & only a few survive.

[Carlo]

Hello!
THANKS!!! A really nice and accurate description and pictures.

Originally Posted by pwcosol

Phrobis then fabricated a very small number of 'product improved" M9s which incorporated the now familiar "button" stop found on the Buck 188 models. I think this is when the change in angle of the lug on the cutterplate also occurred.

This makes very sense, as the different change in the angle of the lug is for sure related to the new "button", so that the blade could now engage easly the cutter plate.

Originally Posted by pwcosol

The length of the rear cutting edge on the bayonet was also reduced so the sharpened blade would never make contact with the user's fingers.

I can't understand this ....may you show me this difference using a comparison picture?

[pwcosol]

Carlo, you can see in the first photograph the sharpened edge. Look closely @ the rear edge and compare this with any Phrobis/Buck M9. You will readily see the sharpened edge stops further from the crossguard than all others. If one were holding the scabbard in the proper wire-cutting mode, the (shorter) sharpened edge would avoid any danger of slicing the user's fingers. One other feature I failed to mention is the scabbard is of the first pattern like that made for the XM9 trials. It does not have the step & screw-advance to adjust the cutterplate like the production models do.

[Carlo]

Originally Posted by pwcosol

Carlo, you can see in the first photograph the sharpened edge. Look closely @ the rear edge and compare this with any Phrobis/Buck M9. You will readily see the sharpened edge stops further from the crossguard than all others. If one were holding the scabbard in the proper wire-cutting mode, the (shorter) sharpened edge would avoid any danger of slicing the user's fingers. One other feature I failed to mention is the scabbard is of the first pattern like that made for the XM9 trials. It does not have the step & screw-advance to adjust the cutterplate like the production models do.

Hi,
yes, now I can see the reduced sharpened edge clearly on the first picture...didn't notice it when I first read your message.
But now I have a second question
What do you mean with "It does not have the step & screw-advance to adjust the cutterplate like the production models do"?
As far as I know, the XM9 trial scabbard had two screws of the very same lenght, while on the production model the screw's lenght was different (one shorter).
Looking at the second picture you posted, I can see a longer screw too
P.S. Sorry for these too many questions, but my english is not that good

[pwcosol]

Carlo: Yes, perhaps my description was unclear. The screw hole on the cutterplate (the one on the right as you look at the rear of the cutterplate) is drilled straight through. On the production model scabbard the hole is stepped on the inside to provide additional tightening of the screw. This helps to compensate for wear if the plate is subjected to heavy usage.

[Carlo]

Originally Posted by pwcosol

The screw hole on the cutterplate (the one on the right as you look at the rear of the cutterplate) is drilled straight through. On the production model scabbard the hole is stepped on the inside to provide additional tightening of the screw. This helps to compensate for wear if the plate is subjected to heavy usage.

Looking back at the Finn patent, I found a clear description of what we were talking about

[pwcosol]

Carlo: Well, Mr. Finn's patent description & drawing describe it better than I ever could have done. Thanks for posting this to the Forum!