Mark58

Hello, There is no reliable evidence to support this claim and examination of type 95 blades suggests otherwise. Mark.

Hello Chris, I suspect we may never know for sure how these blades were made,but I would like all possibilities to be better considered hence my posts. You are,of course right as the war was drawing to a close, in desperation, inevitably the quality of not only swords,but other aspects of the Japanese military machine declined. Regards, Mark.

Hello Chris, When the text says "the simplest blades" if you read further it goes on to describe what we know as the aluminium handled type 95.The wording also suggests uncertainty and supposition as to how these blades were made and also describes an alternate possibility, in the forging from bar stock.Though there were a number of variations of the type 95 all the blades were essentially the same.The "terminal blade" variation to quote Ohmura was the cheapest and simplest variation of the type 95 and just looks in profile to be the same shape as the earlier blades with the exception that the bohi is omitted,obviously as a time and cost saving measure. As I said the text is ambiguous and the author comes across as far from certain on the subject.To me still the most likely production method of these blades was that they were forged from bar stock with power hammers and oil quenched.Grinding and polishing them would have been done by the cheapest and most efficient method as the volume being made would have dictated. My above thoughts are what lead me to believe that when it is stated these blades were 'machine' made the claim is made erroneously.They were probably no more machine made than the vast majority of Showa-to blades and I bet a good many Gendai-to were made using power hammers too as they often are today in Japan. Regards, Mark.

Hello Vajo, Thank you very much for your reply and taking the trouble to post a picture of the relevant text from the book.I have read similar before,but I suspect it is supposition and unsupported by research. I own four NCO shin gunto all with blades in very good condition and have just had a close look at them again.There are discernible differences between each of the three Tokyo Arsenal blades I have and these three are different in detail to the only Nagoya Arsenal example I possess. The blades will not fit interchangeably in to anothers scabbard and along the flat of each blade and in the length of the bohi forging undulations and 'ripples' can be felt.It is my feeling these blades were forged, probably using power hammers from bar stock and then heated and tempered in oil. The four I possess are good serviceable blades and would very well serve their purpose as an intended weapon.Who knows one day some indisputable evidence may surface putting my current conjecture to rest! Regards, Mark.

The idea that type 95 blades were "pressed out" is not based on any historical evidence I have ever seen.That type 95 blades were 'machine made' is repeated by the uninformed and just proliferates the general ignorance that surrounds the manufacturing of these blades. Please guide me to any source material you are aware of that unequivocally supports these claims......

This is an excerpt from Fuller and Gregory's book that was kindly posted in response to the same question from me on another forum. http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/attachments/Japanese-militaria/904503d1447665834t-nco-type-95-blade-question-image.jpg A little sketchy and one has to take them at their word... If someone could scan the relevant pages from the Dawson book I would be very appreciative.

Thanks for your reply.No confusion just comparison, it seems to me that if the type 95 with bohi was stamped out etc then there would have been no need to cheapen it towards the end of the war.The stamping process being cheap and efficient enough? Ohmura states that these blades differ enough on the type 95 with bohi to require that each scabbard was made specifically to fit each blade.He also says these blades were "machine forged" and "oil quenched"? Kind of vague I think! Personally I don't have ten blades to line up to compare,but I do have four,though presently only one is with me where I am,but there is sufficient lack of precision and symmetry in the manufacture of the blade to make me question that it was made by precision machinery. I have asked this same question on other forums out of a real interest to know exactly how they were made and so far to no avail.

The fact that on the last iteration at the end of the war of the type 95 blade on which the bohi is omitted to me suggests these blades were not drop forged,but more likely 'hand' forged with power hammers from 'mill' steel bar. The omission of the bohi on the last blades was obviously a time and cost saving measure and would have not taken place had the blades been simply "stamped" out... It seems to me the constant repeating of "machine made" is claimed in place of genuine knowledge,hence my question. I don't yet have Jim Dawson's book,by the way, possibly you could quote the relevant paragraph if you have a copy?

Yes I have, and there is nothing in the English worded text that describes the manufacturing of the type 95 blade.Possibly in the Japanese text there is something?

Every time anyone refers to the type 95 blade it is always said to be "machine" made? I would very much like to know what is really known from source material about the manufacture of these blades. Is there any real info out there?