Stegel

You're right in what you say Brian, however it appears that these smaller 'crew' mounts were more prevalent with tank/pilot and submarine crews as indicated by Ohmura's link given by Dave previously. http://ohmura-study.net/977.html (there are 4 pages in total here) My understanding is that you could get anything from katana size,to wakizashi and even tanto, all in the official IJA/IJN koshirae. I have seen wakizashi in katana size koshirae, and i think this is where the confusion may lie. I've also seen "pilot" swords which had not army, but air force fittings (propellors instead of cherry blossoms), so the premise may seem correct. These smaller 'crew' mounts are presumed to be used by personnel in confined areas, although i personally cannot see them being of much benefit in a plane,tank or submarine (bar the space saving concept), as in reality they would be in deep sh*t if it come to that stage. For Samurai, they may have been useful indoors, but they never contended with bullets or grenades as much. Open to further opinions... Ern

Hi Thomas, Very nice indeed! What are the overall dimensions of yours?? I just looked at the original post sword for comparison and mine is 20.5 inches cutting edge with 33.5 inches overall compared to 21 1/8" and overall 31 1/2". My scabbard is about 3 3/4" longer than the blade. Sorry i've gone to imperial measurements to keep in line with the original posting. Even though it looks scaled in proportion, it could actually be a few inches shorter i believe. Ern

Shamsy, i'm not sure what is meant by "cut off gunto in shortened scabbard".... and also, the width of handle in mine is relatively similar to the standard version, just it being shorter, and the tanto version shorter again. I think this makes sense, as with my line of thinking, the grip needs to be the same for all standard personnel, we are not talking about miniturization to the point of it being scaled down like a pocket knife.

Hamfish, i believe the photo you have shown, shows the even smaller Tanto version. My naval sword is 850cm in mounts overall. The handle is about 3cm shorter than the normal issue. The blade is mumei with no Arsenal stampings whatsoever.

I'm 100% with Hamfish on this, i have a naval sword which is approx 1/3 smaller than the normal Naval issue. the handle is slightly shorter. My understanding is that crew gunto's , either army or navy are miniturized versions of the standard issue. This does not include wakizashi mounted in full length standard fittings, whether they be gunto or civilian mounts.

Hi All, I find this stuff interesting, so thanks for your inputs guys. Is there any info regarding the mass produced blades from Showa period? I would imagine they were rolled on and not pressed, but i could be wrong. I couldn't see this craftmanship being used to churn out the type 32 or type 95 swords. Ern

Hamfish, perhaps you should refer to the second book by F&G......much more detail and info from the first 1986 edition which was about the only info you could get back then. Also on pg24, i think you have not read correctly the descriptions of the plates shown, as i did not interpret them the way you described. Ern The newer book is the 1996 editon, out of print and getting harder to find though. I have looked and cannot find the reference you make to mantetsu/gendai, in the first book....

Wow, you guys are quick!!! Thanks for the speedy replies! Not sure why someone would do this? What is the point, or rather what do they wish to achieve by this 'rework'? Ern

Hi All, I came across this whilst browsing the web, and have to admit i have never seen anything like it before. Has anyone else seen this shape of nakago before? It is obviously uncommon, but is there any reason for making it this way?? Cheers Ern

Hi All, just an update on the stamp appearing on the blade near the habiki. This came from a Japanese fellow on another forum by chance. Cisco san, is the tsuba on your one similar to the one on pg12 of this thread? Ern

Hi All, going by the information provided in the attachments, how can we determine what is cut Number 2 or 10 for that matter??? (perhaps a new pictorial diagram is needed for us newbies) Does not the inscription in gold (inlaid or laquered) indicate this??? /Ernst

Found a pic with both types of knot work on both handle and scabbard Ernst

Hi, I have seen this on both handles and scabbards before, here's a link to ebay which is active at the moment, http://www.ebay.com/itm/VERY-NICE-CUSTO ... 5d40d06cbd The seller refers to it as a: "Sword that was customized by U.S. Seaman with cord weaving and knot work during World War II, also known in the Navy as "Whiteline" and "Belfast"." i hope this helps. perhaps some other members who know for sure can help out more Here's a photo of a type 95 NCO with what was claimed to be in an 'as found' condition, indicating the Japanese soldier did the binding, it's not as elaborate as the other binding, but still interesting. Regards Ernst

Just bumping this along to see if there's any news on this logo yet. Ernst

Many thanks Koichi San! Also thanks for bringing the other thread to my attention, as i haven't seen it before. Ernst

Hi, I obtained this bare blade with only habiki and saya last year. It caught my attention and was within my budget. The blade is out of polish, but is attributed to Muramasa and is apparently named? I'm a novice with normal Kanji and it takes me ages to get anywhere with translations, these are a bit more fancy in style and i'd be grateful for any help. I have adjusted the contrast to better see the faint writing on the saya, the reverse side is extremely faint. Thanks Ernst

Is it possible to submit a blade to shinsa and not have the mei considered? that is, covered up so as not to be visible and influence the appraisal? From what i've read so far, (and i have no experience of submitting blades) it appears that the shinsa team are to some degree money grabbers.... as Dire Straights put it... Money for nothing! as on their monopolised pedestal, they just say: Sorry it's a gimei..... bad luck, thanks for coming and by the way, thanks for coming, see you next time! No other info is offered as to 'who' they think made the blade??? Hmmm, perhaps they don't want to be embarrased ? but then again they are the experts and authorities in their field right??? so who would doubt or question them? This would tend me to agree with all the people who are of the opinion that papering is a waste of time and money. just a thought on their origins: Was the Shinsa team/organisation originally set up to try and recover 'valued' swords of national importance and they just progressed to todays organisation for milking collectors and making an economy by pushing up prices of blades with their paperwork?? Alex, i feel both Chris and Keith both gave honest opinions and views on the matter, reading this thread i didn't think it came across as demeaning, eliteist or arrogant, although i think the friend/foe option as suggested is a farce and should be removed...not promoted! After all we, all of us, always learn something, even if we disagree, so being an 'Adult' site((excuse the insinuation, but it's true), i think we should be civil enough to conduct ourselves appropriately. If i marked eveyone who made a shitty comment (in my opinion at the time), as a foe, well, what would be the use of visiting this site? what would i learn in the long run?? Ernst BTW- i had a few beers prior to making this post....no offence was intended to anyone...Lol

Denis is correct in stating the common text book knowledge, i know that NLF used the Navy 'dark' brown tassel as i have 2 such swords, both Army koshirae with naval tassels, the rest of the field gear such as Naval Land Garrison pattern service belts, and black leather scabbard covers identified them as NLF. I should add, i'm assuming so as i havn't seen them anywhere else, as they differ from the common Naval belts. One came directly from the returned serviceman in 1974, who shot the Japanese soldier himself. There were also other tassels of different colours used for civil/diplomatic purposes, see this link on Ohmura's web pages: http://www.k3.dion.ne.jp/~j-gunto/gunto_050.htm The page where he shows tassel's linked from the contents, shows the two different 'qualities' of tassel, the better having the opposing colour along the edge of the strap. Notice that the company grade is shown with blue and another with purplish blue, perhaps fading over the years or just a different manufacturers dye shade. I believe i read somewhere, but cannot recall the source, that late in the war (after or about the same time as the introducion of the type3 koshirae), ALL army tassels were newly issued as brown, a 'medium' brown which did not differentiate rank, as per Navy issue. I will try and find the reference if i can, and attach for you. Agree to disagree if you like, but i feel the 'Sniper' story still has credence. Sniper sees sword bearing soldier, sniper shoots, when there are groups of sword bearing soldiers, sniper gets picky... and starts to choose for a more valued target? If i was in the IJA, i wouldn't make my enemies job any easier, the sniper needs to look at other markings to confirm higher ranks, perhaps this could buy time? Stranger things have happened during the war, and i believe there is some method in their madness. I'm of the school of thought that once the medium brown tassels were introduced, they were supplied to both navy and army alike, hence explaining their presence on both type of gunto. Also Roy has a 'green' tassel on one of his swords, where are we to place that one? Naval suicide submarines? or are they just faded anomalies? Perhaps it is another classification as per Ohmura's web link above, but not yet documented. Perhaps he could put a pic of it on here for us to see? (please do Roy..) The floor is your's to comment as you see fit. Cheers Ernst BTW- In answer to the original question, i have seen both types of tassel on Type 3 guntos, i cannot vouch for their originality (as in being untampered with -post war), but it would explain why you find both types of tassel. Once the change came in, they were automatically issued the plain brown type instead of the blue/brown or red/brown.

I believe the sword is late war made in Manchuria, as it was considered a seperate country by the Japanese, (even after they occupied and 'colonised' it) they used a 15 and a 20 Stamen Plum Blossom instead of the traditional 5 Petal Cherry Blossom. I'm not sure if they were used on the tsuba's as i haven't come across any of these. My concern is with the quality of the fitting primarily. Does it appear genuine?? Ernst

Thanks John, Any ideas on the tang stamp or opinions on the Plum blossom? Ernst

Any one come across these before? I think it is a Manchurian made sword, late war. The 20 stamen Plum Blossom is supposed to be used instead of the 5 petal Cherry, from what i know, but it appears to be of low quality. Any comments?? Also, i have never seen a stamping on the blade itself, usually on the nakago. The stamp on the nakago has got me stumped as well. Thanks in advance Ernst

No need to be eating hats Thomas, as NOBODY said it was fake! There is a big difference between 'Genuine' parts in this case, and '100% Original' in the sword as a whole. I'll eat my hat if you can show me where it was claimed to be a fake... :lol: The pictures from Stu, were simply showing the correct tsuka/tsuba combinations for a 100% ORIGINAL Type 95 NCO sword. I hope you can nut it out from there. Ernst

I think it would be more appropriate, for the benefit of Toryu, to say that the sword consists of Genuine parts.(that is... not reproductions). However, it is not 100 % Original NCO in its current form. From the pics i cannot see any scabbard at all, but the correct type required,has been mentioned before. The tsuka is incorrect type for this sword, it is not type 95 NCO issue, so obviously has been added to the other parts. The blade, tsuba, fuchi (with locking spring broken off), and habiki may have been a set once upon a time. As mentioned by Stu, the stampings and numbers are correct and in correct orientation, suggesting again that they may have been the original pairing from factory. In my opinion, the number range puts it in the early 'mid' war range and it is possible that the tsuba is also part of the original factory set as the plain black steel one came into use (by this Manufacturer) in the 100,000 range. Regards Ernst BTW- just saw this on ebay, very similar.... http://www.ebay.com/itm/WWII-WW2-JAPANE ... 5899125d96

Yes you're right about 'late war'....... very late..... like in the last few yrs! I agree with the others, what you have is at worst a 'slapped together' NCO using original parts except for possibly a stripped naval (Kai Gunto Tsuka) instead of the correct metal one. A patient search on ebay will find you one of those.... then at least you will have a Post war assembled Type 95 NCO gunto. You should also be able to find a metal scabbard from the Kokura Arsenal which may not be matching numbers, but at least will be the correct type. Everything being so 'clean' isn't very desirable with militaria collectors, however you should be able to off load it on ebay to someone. Good Luck Cheers Ernst added- The fuchi and markings are fine, appear to be highly polished but original with the Arsenal inspection stamp matching the one on the blade after the numbers. ( they are visible in the photos you posted.... just ZOOM in!) The tsuka appears to be naval, you should be able to determine with an 'in hand' inspection if it is Army white and painted black...

If it helps, i believe some parade sabres and dress swords were made of Aluminium, you can find them in the reference books such as Dawsons or Fullers. Recently the type 95 NCO prototype posting showed and Aluminium blade. Cheers Ernst