The Bayonet Lug - still desireable?

Now that is not something you see every day.

Marlin444fin.jpg


I really don't care one way or the other, but I do have an irrational requirement that if I own a gun with a bayonet lug, I must own a bayonet for it.
 
I used to see a bayonet lug adaptor advertised that would have let me put a bipod on my K.98's. I saw loads of adverts for them years ago and thought 'that looks a good idea, I must get one. '

Now I really want one, the d****d things are out of production, and no one has them in stock anymore. Ya Snooze, Ya loose......

Seriously someone once told me the bayonet on the AK 47 is a poor general purpose knife, an average bayonet, but if you clip the blade to the scabbard it is a first rate wire cutter.

The Russian military wanted to ensure every infantryman had a wire cutter with him when taking part in an assault. If they had issued a dedicated wire cutter, 50% of troops would have thrown it away on a long, tiring route march. No conscript is ever going to throw a bayonet away because it gives him some psychological comfort.

But I digress. (It's been a very long day and I am enjoying a large Jack Daniels.)

The only bayonet I own is permanently fixed to my M44. The rifle shoots about 3-4 inches left at 100 yards with it folded. Swing out the spike and its dead on.
 
If you don't have a bayonet on your rifle, your gonna feel foolish when you run into the Kaiser's infantry and you aren't prepared... really foolish...
 
I use the bayonet lug on my Colt M-4 because it's a good place to mount my flashlight. There's a nice small rail adapter that secures to the lug via a slot and setscrew. The little short rail accepts lights that slide on and snap into place same as attaching to handguns that have built in rails. The under the barrel illumination works best for my needs. I don't happen to have or use things like a quad rail, so that's why I went with that little adapter fitting the bayonet lug. And it's fine.
 
While from a practical standpoint it makes absolutely no difference to me if a rifle has a bayonet lug or not. I will second the opinion that if it drives one of those anti-gun socialist a-holes up a wall I want one on every rifle.
 
While from a practical standpoint it makes absolutely no difference to me if a rifle has a bayonet lug or not. I will second the opinion that if it drives one of those anti-gun socialist a-holes up a wall I want one on every rifle.
Click to expand...
So if nobody objected to them, you wouldn't want one, but because someone objects, you want to get it? Isn't that the kind of adolescent attitude that drives a lot of criticism of the pro gun community? I am really not trying to start a fight, but c'mon, does it make sense to promote doing something just to get on someone else's nerves?
 
Well, the Garand is still enjoyed by quite a few folks who don't know it is obsolete. Or don't care.

And, for detail stripping, you are supposed to tap on the bayonet lug with a piece of wood to remove the gas cylinder.

So, even if you don't have a bayonet, it is an essential part of the rifle. :)
 
I didn't really care other than for aesthetics until I saw that little rail adapter. Now I need to make sure that I have a bayonet lug on my M1A or AR. The quad rails are heavy and I don't want anything else mounted forward other than maybe a light.

I wonder if the adapter will fit on my Garand?

Oh, and I did pony up and get one of the M5 bayonets for the Garand, just because it had the lug.

-J.
 
A bayonet also serves as a decent knife if needed. Since most military style rifles come with the lug there's no harm in having the correct bayonet to mount on it. There were recorded bayonet charges during WWII as I recall. I heard the story of one in which the American unit was out of, or low on ammo and ended up taking a Japanese held position on a hilltop with a bayonet charge. I wish I could recall the particulars like where and how many of the enemy they killed, but it was old school fix bayonets and charge ahead type fighting. They suffered casualties, but managed to take their objective and hold off a counter attack until relieved.
 
I think in a close quarters situation a person would be more hesitant to take a grab at your rifle if there was a bayonet hanging off the front of it.
 
"So if nobody objected to them, you wouldn't want one, but because someone objects, you want to get it? Isn't that the kind of adolescent attitude that drives a lot of criticism of the pro gun community? I am really not trying to start a fight, but c'mon, does it make sense to promote doing something just to get on someone else's nerves? "

Well, yes. The point for me is that while a bayonet lug is a relatively useless appendage, the idea that the liberal politicians use it as a feature to identify certain guns as "bad" irritates the hell out of me.

I think that as gun owners we need to stop being willing to give up certain things so that we can seem reasonable. Screw the liberals, I am tired of trying to appease them. If me being able to have a rifle with a bayonet lug on it pisses them off, so be it.

I respect your right to have your opinion, but I have been in this fight for a long time. I have yet to see the anti gun people be satisfied with anything they have taken away from us, they always want more. I am not willing to give anything else up.
 
I think that as gun owners we need to stop being willing to give up certain things so that we can seem reasonable. Screw the liberals, I am tired of trying to appease them. If me being able to have a rifle with a bayonet lug on it pisses them off, so be it.
Click to expand...

Just to interject here for a moment. When I started this thread, I wanted to remove all the anti-gun hype from the bayonet lug issue. In other words, please don't take my OP as being some kind of appeasement, or "throwing a bone" to the antis. (I myself have purchased a number of firearms with "evil" features just because the antis didn't like that I can have them.)

But, when I look at companies still making new, modern guns with bayonet lugs, it got me wondering about at what point do these things start to look a little ridiculous? Then, I read some of the posts for having bayonets, and I thought, ok, maybe not completely useless in some situations.
 
Highpower - I'm honestly not trying to start a fight. It just seems to me that going out of your way to do something for no other reason than to annoy the anti-gun crowd really serves no purpose other than getting them even more rialed up than they already were. For people who actually WANT weapons with "evil" features, by all means, exercise your rights and get them, but getting them just to be annoying simply throws fuel on the fire.
It's like ordering pie at a resturaunt when I am already full just because my wife told me I don't need it... not that I have ever done that... I guess I'm BIGmikey for a reason.
Anyway, my point is that I do believe we should protect our rights and resist those who would try to take them away, but taking actions that are intended to do nothing but tick the anti-gun folks off just makes them want to try harder to take away our guns. Nobody wins that kind of fight.
 
Highpower - I'm honestly not trying to start a fight. It just seems to me that going out of your way to do something for no other reason than to annoy the anti-gun crowd really serves no purpose other than getting them even more rialed up than they already were.
Click to expand...

First off let me reiterate what I said in my first post. Bayonet lugs are pretty much useless and I would not let the absence of one stop me from purchasing a rifle that I wanted.

Edited to add: looking in my safe I notice that all my military and military based (AR15) type rifles do indeed have the dreaded bayonet lug. I also seem to have the appropriate bayonets for them.

Please understand, I too, am not trying to be argumentative. It just seems that there is a double standard with the left. I see all sorts of what I consider to be confrontational rhetoric (including some really insulting bumper stickers) coming from the other side of the aisle. They certainly don't seem to be worried about whether what they say and do would offend me.

When I hear people express statements similar to yours, I wonder why does it matter what I do and say? I can assure you that if the mere fact that a gun has a certain feature is going to put some liberals' panties in a bunch, what type of guns I own is going to make little or no difference as far as their voting habits. You must understand, they hate ALL guns and the baynot lug is just another reason for them to want to take them all away.

I have reached the stage of my life where I am NOT going to live on pins and needles worried about offending someone. How did it come to the point of us being afraid of hurting someones feelings?

We as gun owners always seem to be the ones to compromise and lose a little more of our rights each time. The anti-gun crowd always seem to be taking a little more each time.

Quite honestly, I don't care if someone likes what I say or if they approve of what I do as a hobby.

As I said, I also am not trying to start an argument. I just think that as gun owners we should be more worried about the constant erosion of our rights than the feelings of someone who wishes to take them away.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top