What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Question about U.S. Pineapples

I have checked the various manuals, FM23-30 from 1942, 1944, and 1949. The first mention of the M21 is in the 1949 manual, before that its practice Mk. II. I did find in Elements of ammunition 1946 mention of the M21. I am thinking the the M21 came into use at about the same time as the Mk.2A1 loaded with TNT became standard, May 1944. My best guess to date. If I find anything else I will post it.
 
I have checked the various manuals, FM23-30 from 1942, 1944, and 1949. The first mention of the M21 is in the 1949 manual, before that its practice Mk. II. I did find in Elements of ammunition 1946 mention of the M21. I am thinking the the M21 came into use at about the same time as the Mk.2A1 loaded with TNT became standard, May 1944. My best guess to date. If I find anything else I will post it.


Hi, OK, thanks very much for looking at your manuals. I also read cover to cover 1942-FM-23-30 and M21 is not mentioned. Surprised the 1944 manual does not mention the M21. Were there no TM's from 1943 or 1945?

Did you see anything about the shellac or varnish to be used and brushed over the corks? Procedures for training grenades, the shipping containers, the end usage etc?

I think maybe it's like I said, they never really got off the ground with the M21 procurement during the war. There must be a document somewhere that tells when they accepted them or wanted to start using them and what the specs were supposed to be for them. :tinysmile_cry_t: I hope this search for info is not going end on a dead end street.
 
I just found a small pamphlet in my files, produced in December 1944 by the "Office of the Chief of Ordnance" that lists the M21 as standard. Having thought about this and finding little difference between the M21 and Mk. II Practice grenades and also in light of the M21's in the fibre containers dated 1944 being no more than Mk. II bodies. I now believe that the M21 was nothing more than a redesignation of the Mk. II Practice grenade to M21 practice grenade to avoid confusion between live grenades and practice grenades. Makes perfect sense to do that to avoid confusion. Can you imagine ordering practice grenades and having someone not read the whole designation and send by mistake live Mk. II grenades for the Mk II practice grenades. OOOPs, oh dopey me......

I have never found anything in writing (other than on BOCN) that mentions varnishing the corks in place.
 
I just found a small pamphlet in my files, produced in December 1944 by the "Office of the Chief of Ordnance" that lists the M21 as standard. Having thought about this and finding little difference between the M21 and Mk. II Practice grenades and also in light of the M21's in the fibre containers dated 1944 being no more than Mk. II bodies. I now believe that the M21 was nothing more than a redesignation of the Mk. II Practice grenade to M21 practice grenade to avoid confusion between live grenades and practice grenades. Makes perfect sense to do that to avoid confusion. Can you imagine ordering practice grenades and having someone not read the whole designation and send by mistake live Mk. II grenades for the Mk II practice grenades. OOOPs, oh dopey me......

I have never found anything in writing (other than on BOCN) that mentions varnishing the corks in place.



Great, thanks very much. Maybe the varnish on corks will be found in another pamphlet or manual. But I think we are on the same page with most of this. You may be correct. What you say about name change is also something I was thinking, and this could be the one of the answers. You're also right about that there is little difference of the MkII and M21, "especially" when looking at my photos in post #19. This is because 3 of the grenades shown in are all the same grenades, the same shape & the same maker, "C" Crane Co. (this is just by chance I have 3 Crane bodies)

My Theories...............I hope it makes some sense

The one "M21' shown, the dark blue grenade that has just a perfect round hole, no threads, this is the same body as the light blue "MkII" that has a threaded filler hole, and the same body as the other MkII light blue trainer shown, that has a "very out-of-round hole"

That MkII light blue blue trainer with the "out-of-round hole" has had it's original threaded hole "drilled/reamed out" to conform with what I believe is the other change made to MkII practice grenades.

Besides just re-naming the grenades "M21", I think the new specs for M21's called for just an un-threaded hole. Maybe the procurement paperwork or something else might prove this when found.

So I think besides re-naming the MkII's to eliminate confusion and possible accidents or delays in training, that they also called for all blue trainers to just have an un-threaded hole.

So my theory of what was done with practice grenades in the 42-45 time frame is that some of the regular threaded hole MkII practice grenade bodies had their threads removed by drilling/reaming to conform with new "M21 standards", and thus theoretically a MkII practice could become an "M21" by drilling/reaming the threaded holes. (not all were able to be modified, and this is why you see WW2 blue trainers both threaded MkII, and un-threaded holes M21)
I have seen quite a few WW2 era blue practice grenades with the out-of-round, and usually off-center chamfered edge holes like I've shown.

I have mentioned this drilling /reaming of threads and the out-of-round & off- center holes before but no one commented on this, but I really think this is what was done. I certainly think we did not start at a time of war some new type of production to start making special "lower quality" or "special training grenade" bodies with just a hole, as I've heard others suggest... ESPECIALLY if they re-used old WWI bodies like the other M21 shown, and they still called it an "M21"...... then I don't think they were making any special lower quality training bodies during the war.

Does what I'm saying make any sense?

During WW2 I think for all training grenades, no matter the name they were called MkII or M21, we used and then modified just regular threaded hole bodies. If these grenade bodies were never pulled off the production line to use as trainers, then they would have been used as a regular explosive-HE grenade. I say "No special lower grade bodies" specifically made for trainers during late war years of WWII. This is of course only "during" the war. After the war they obviously specifically made some new M21's trainers ....The RFX M21's.



So it looks like to me, at least the Crane company who already was making regular HE bodies at the time, and probably....or maybe obviously, judging by my one non-threaded hole body, Crane probably still made bodies with threaded filler holes, and they just pulled some grenade bodies off their production line before they were threaded, and these would have already conformed to the "new" M21 specs. Then obviously they supplied some of these new "M21's" to the Gov as we have seen from the fiber containers ...........................................................................................and then I buy a couple from a guy who found them in a dumpster over 40 years ago, and they make me think and type a lot, and then also make people hate me for making loooooooong posts. haha, funny how things work out. :tinysmile_eyebrow_t :tinysmile_cry_t4:
 
Hi Hink, I'm not sure, and as of right now, nobody here in the BOCN community knows the answer to this, and the shellac/varnish question.
If they did come with cork installed, this would probably mean they would also have the black powder bag installed inside too, which I personally think they did not. All these details are what I'm trying to find out.



At this point, anything is possible. Some type of official documentation for procurement, shipping procedures, and end usage for these mysterious WW2 era M21's is needed for the time period between 6-42 and 9-45.



Here's some pics again of what I have.
From Left to right.......

***1. Crane Co. "C" marked body with threaded filler hole. This obviously was a body intended for use as an explosive real grenade, but pulled from production or stock, and used as trainer instead

***2. Crane Co. "C" marked body that had a threaded hole at one time, and was "reamed or drilled out" possibly to "conform" with the "New Standard" "Hand Grenade Practice M21" sometime during the war. I'm pretty confident the new (new at the time) specs for M21's called for them to have "just a hole" on bottom. If you look closely at the hole on this grenade it's not even close to being a perfectly round hole like the other Crane "C" marked grenade next to it. I have seen other grenades that were also drilled or reamed like this that were not Crane bodies, so it's Not just something that is only found on C bodies.

***3. Crane Co. "C" marked body from one of M21 8-44 date cans. This body I believe was cast with the hole, and was meant to be threaded for filler plug, but was never threaded, thus making it one of the "New Standard" M21 training grenade. This grenade was inside one of the 8-44 dated M21 cans.

***4. Reused "T" marked late WWI narrow base, round shouldered grenade body with threaded filler hole. This grenade was also inside one of the 8-44 dated M21 cans. This is odd. Why a WWI era threaded hole grenade would be in a M21 can is any ones guess, but it was found like this in this in the 1960's. An odd one for sure.

Personally, my guess about this threaded hole WWI "M21" grenade is now I think that the M21 practice grenades never really got off the ground so to say "during" WW2. I think we had more priorities at this time of war than starting production of new practice grenades, and when they started calling practice grenades "M21's" sometime between 41-45, they just continued using any serviceable bodies that were in stock like they always did...... and that's why a WWI body is in a 8-44 date M21 marked can.

This of course is just my theory of how a WWI body could be in a M21 can. As said already, there is very limited official info on this entire WWII M21 subject so far.

As far as I know, the two 8-44 dated "M21" cans I have (with grenades), and the other can shown with 12-44 loading date (no grenade) are the only ones that have been shown here on BOCN.

I will say now, that in my opinion, the M21 grenades have got to be one of the most, if not the most unknown US grenades of WW2. I'm hoping we all will learn more about these WW2 M21's from Gov. documents-minute reports, or manuals that will be found sometime by some other members.
What would be really nice, is to have a few more WWII dated M21's and their cans turn up, to see what the cans are marked, and what type grenade is inside.
Hi Steve, I think you'll find all C mold (Crane & Co.) m21 bodies have the bottom hole bored off center. I don't think this is product of thread removal or a ream job, but rather a mis aligned (porked) arbor on the drill machine. What does surprise me is that the finish on the Crane bodies is so good, that it is hard to think they screwed up that bad on the bottom hole. I have seen 3 or 4 other Crane bodies and their bottom hole was borred off center as well. For what it's worth.....Dano
 

Attachments

  • Picture 974.jpg
    Picture 974.jpg
    54.3 KB · Views: 13
  • Picture 975.jpg
    Picture 975.jpg
    43.9 KB · Views: 15
Miguel now that is funny. Well, I apoligize, I think, Steve for a man that needs more Mk.II's and M21's!

:tinysmile_tongue_t:
 
And by the way, I'll keep searching for those items, Stevie!:tinysmile_hmm_t:
 
Hi Steve, I think you'll find all C mold (Crane & Co.) m21 bodies have the bottom hole bored off center. I don't think this is product of thread removal or a ream job, but rather a mis aligned (porked) arbor on the drill machine. What does surprise me is that the finish on the Crane bodies is so good, that it is hard to think they screwed up that bad on the bottom hole. I have seen 3 or 4 other Crane bodies and their bottom hole was borred off center as well. For what it's worth.....Dano


Hi Dano, It's not just C bodies that are like this. I have seen other makers blue practice grenades that had an off centered hole. It's just a coincidence that mine are all C bodies. How does anyone now know that any grenade, a "C mold" or anything is a M21 anyway? The only way to know what you are looking at is to have the container....or........
As it stands at this moment, now that my two M21 have surfaced, ANY blue grenade you see, threaded hole or not, could be an "M21". Although, now ANY blue trainer that just has a Hole on the bottom, no threads is also an M21..... right? wrong? maybe? haha! see what I'm saying.

The one light blue body I showed that the hole is "not perfectly round" and the hole looks like it's "boogered up", this was a threaded hole Crane grenade like the other threaded hole light blue I've shown, that has had it's threads removed. I guarantee this 100%. So then in my view this light blue grenade is also an M21, not MkII practice.

I have seen a blue grenade that the hole on bottom was so much off center, that if you looked closely you could just barely see the "shadow" of the threads on the one side of hole that were not completely removed, (because of how off center the hole was)

Unfortunately, I do not have a photo of this grenade body to prove what I am saying.

I think I'm just going to let this big dog keep sleeping.

This is a subject that obviously no one knows much about, or cares much about, or has any solid proof of anything.....at least nothing yet.

All my talking, theorizing and typing, is me thinking out loud and trying to motivate other collectors who are interested, to think, to look and to research info, and to hopefully talk about this subject of ...................
"The True Story of Blue WW2 Training Grenades" or "MkII vs. M21" whatever you feel like calling it.

More important....I wish everyone to have a Happy and Healthy New Years!
 
m21

This arrived today and is your basic (repainted) Vietnam era RFX m21 grenade. I know it is not much but I was very happy to get it. It fills a void I had. This was among the last "GI" practice pineapple grenades to be issued. I'm going to get out the stripper and see if there is still blue paint underneath, for less than 30.00 I think it is a nice compliment to the Vietnam collection....Dano
 

Attachments

  • Picture 977.jpg
    Picture 977.jpg
    39.7 KB · Views: 25
  • Picture 978.jpg
    Picture 978.jpg
    38.4 KB · Views: 19
  • Picture 979.jpg
    Picture 979.jpg
    39.8 KB · Views: 21
Last edited:
This arrived today and is your basic (repainted) Vietnam era RFX m21 grenade. I know it is not much but I was very happy to get it. It fills a void I had. This was among the last "GI" practice pineapple grenades to be issued. I'm going to get out the stripper and see if there is still blue paint underneath, for less than 30.00 I think it is a nice compliment to the Vietnam collection....Dano

That is a nice one for your VN collection. If you strip it, and there's no blue under then you can always repaint blue, then age it a little and knock the paint of high spots a bit and it will look very nice. What fuze do you have on it?
 
That is a nice one for your VN collection. If you strip it, and there's no blue under then you can always repaint blue, then age it a little and knock the paint of high spots a bit and it will look very nice. What fuze do you have on it?
Hi Steve, Thanks. I am not sure on the fuze as the spoon has been painted over OD also, but the spoon obviously has blue paint under the OD. Should find out tomorrow when I strip it....Dano
 
I just got my first M21. It looks okay a little rough but I like it alot. I noticed that it also has the varnish around the filler hole. Thanks for looking.
 

Attachments

  • xmas2010 016.jpg
    xmas2010 016.jpg
    95.7 KB · Views: 24
  • xmas2010 020.jpg
    xmas2010 020.jpg
    86.9 KB · Views: 26
  • xmas2010 025.jpg
    xmas2010 025.jpg
    96 KB · Views: 22
Top