Kaigunto230 Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 Longterm, I’ve wanted to add a Type 95 to my collection, but I haven’t wanted to pay the price for one. I like the shape and fittings of 94s, 97s, and 98s better. But on a local gun trader forum, an older gentleman was selling his for $500, and I shot him an offer for $425, and he accepted it. When we met up, he said he was just looking to help out a younger collector, had originally paid $450 15 years ago from Steward’s Antiques, and we chatted for a long time sitting out on his porch. Before I left, he popped back inside and came back with a silk flag and said “Take this too. It’s yours.” Very, very kind. I have a Tokyo First sword (Dawson pattern 2A). There’s a little corrosion on the blade but not much, and the sarute is broken. I don’t see any stamps on the iron fuchi. The only stamp is the final acceptance mark by the serial. I was very surprised by the sugata on this pattern once I held it in hand. The kissaki is almost a chu-kissaki, and the blade seems flimsy overall. My 97 and Zoheito are much more robust. My understanding is that at this time based on the serial below 130,000-ish, Kokura was still supervising the program? Anyone have a guesstimate for when it was produced? The books don’t seem to get into that specificity. But for paying something like 30% of the market price (with a free flag!) I can’t complain at all. 2 2 Quote
Bruce Pennington Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 That's a great story and a nice 95, thanks for sharing! Sam or Thomas will help you with the date estimate. The Tokyo 1st arsenal didn't make any efforts to stamp the steel fuchi, only Nagoya did that. 2 1 Quote
Scogg Posted June 29 Report Posted June 29 Great looking 95, and nice flag too! Nice condition of the blade, a lot of times you see these with big scuffs and scratches, whereas yours looks relatively pretty clean. Bruce is correct about the fuchi stamps. I would estimate the date of your Type 95 to be between March 1942 and September 1942 Can't beat that price these days! Well done. All the best, -Sam 2 1 Quote
Kaigunto230 Posted June 29 Author Report Posted June 29 5 hours ago, Scogg said: I would estimate the date of your Type 95 to be between March 1942 and September 1942 Thank you! That’s surprisingly early. Given the fittings, I would’ve taken a guess at 43 or 44. Do you know what hat the Kokura supervision entailed? Did the weapons travel down to Kokura for inspection after completion, or were there Kokura employees on site at Tokyo and Nagoya etc to finalize them after completion (my assumption)? 1 Quote
Kaigunto230 Posted June 29 Author Report Posted June 29 6 hours ago, Bruce Pennington said: The Tokyo 1st arsenal didn't make any efforts to stamp the steel fuchi, only Nagoya did that. Thanks Bruce! Just another reason to hunt down a copper fuchi one to get the cool stampings Quote
Scogg Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 5 hours ago, Kaigunto230 said: Thank you! That’s surprisingly early. Given the fittings, I would’ve taken a guess at 43 or 44. Do you know what hat the Kokura supervision entailed? Did the weapons travel down to Kokura for inspection after completion, or were there Kokura employees on site at Tokyo and Nagoya etc to finalize them after completion (my assumption)? It's a good question. @Kiipu would be the one who might have a good detailed answer; as my focus has been mostly on cataloging and dating. (But I am getting there! ) It's my understanding that Kokura administered the 95 program, but did not directly make or even supervise the making of the swords. Therefore your sword was presumably made and stamped at the Tokyo First Arsenal rather than traveling to Kokura to be stamped. Cool sword, and thank you for sharing! -Sam 2 1 Quote
Bruce Pennington Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 17 hours ago, Kaigunto230 said: Given the fittings, I would’ve taken a guess at 43 or 4 It is an old myth that the steel fuchi and tsuba were late war. Richard Fuller has a brief chart showing them seemingly randomly scattered throughout the serial numbers. On that, though, @Kiipu might have a more specific answer. 2 Quote
Scogg Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 Bruce is correct, it's definitely an old myth. Iijima in particular seems to have produced "pattern 2" swords until near the end of the war, while other arsenals transitioned to "pattern 3" earlier. It's easy to assume "pattern 2 is earlier than pattern 3", but it really depends on the specific arsenal and company. All the best, -Sam 2 Quote
Kaigunto230 Posted June 30 Author Report Posted June 30 @Scogg That’s wild! I’m always interested to learn about the variances between different manufacturers. You see that with firearms during the war too. Really intriguing. I probably will pick up a copper fuchi’d one at some point, as I enjoy getting Kokura-marked things. 1 Quote
Scogg Posted June 30 Report Posted June 30 Careful, before you know it you'll want an example of all the different patterns (that's what has happened to me) For a deep dive into some of the nuance of these swords, Nick Komiya's contributions to the warrelics threads below taught me a lot; along with some very generous forum members here on NMB: https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/short-development-history-type-95-gunto-676112/ This is a good one too: https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/Japanese-militaria/ija-type-95-nco-sword-info-228172/ 4 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.