XM9 test results
Carlo: Thanks for posting the article on the trials result. I had not seen this before & find it really informative; the test results from the bayonets submitted being particularly interesting. I think Cunningham mentioned there were dozens of competitors whom were interested in the M9 trials and produced at least one prototype. Of those, 14 were selected & only seven were accepted for the trials competition. I wonder what all those other bayonets looked like? It is unfortunate someone (maybe they did) did not take a photo of every bayonet that was presented as a potential competitor. I bet there were some highly unusual variants!
I also noted how well Imperial fared compared to all other competitors (except Phrobis). The Eickhorn KCB77 should have provided stronger competition, as the design is basically a sound one. One of their main handicaps, (this goes all the way back to WWII & their pioneering "tool bayonet" concept, the Seitengewehr 42) was the thinness of the blade & it's point.
Surprisingly they seem not to have suffered any blade breakages. Perhaps the lightness of the bayonet helped it to rebound off the floor during the five foot drop tests. I was surprised the majority of failures were of the wirecutter. I wonder just what went wrong here...
Last edited by pwcosol; 06-25-2008 at 11:11 PM.
|