[JB White]

I agree. The hooks were removed in service and are documented as an official military modification. Bubba didn't remove the hook the way he did woodwork and bits on the rifles.
Adding a hook is universally viewed as forgery/fakery/deception...
Nobody will be impressed but you, since afterall it's an example of your workmanship.

IMA is offering a reproduction hookie if all you want is one for looks. If you're bothered by the markings, then just buy one of the forgeries already on the market and pay a lot more for a practically worthless bayonet.
Also, by adding a hook back to a bobbed version you would actually be lowering the value of the original piece.

Be patient and be ready for when one eventually comes along. Mine came to me by way of a trade. Not the most pristine example, but then I only gave up two low-end firearms and $30 to get these.

 

[JB White]

JGSlugg,

I do believe the bottom line is not to mess up an original, collectable example just to fill an empty slot. I was able to fill some slots with EFD's having the hook (1908), the hook removed (1910), and one made without (1914).

You would need to find one with a lopped hook since the crosspiece profile is sometimes slightly different from those made without. Find a damaged one with a bit of 'meat' left where is was cut, ground, and polished.
Also, you must be aware that the different manufacturers all had slightly different profiles in the hook. The most noticable is between Lithgow and the British makers. However, the British makers also had some variations due to their finishing methods.
I won't divulge my observations in an effort to thwart more forgeries, so you'll need to do your homework.
Many of us have incorrect blades I'm sure, but there needs to be some sort of evidence it's not original. My latter day Camillus M4 is one of those.
In fact, I'm working on a dilapitated P88 myself. A $12 abused and pitted hulk. Sort of a rainy day project. Whenever I get around to finishing it off it will appear to be a trade conversion to a P88 MkIII. Strictly for open display in the cabinet since I prefer to keep my more desirable specimens locked away. The underside of the grips will be signed and the back of the pommel will also be stamped deeply with the date I finished it.

When it comes to a hookie, I think your best bet for a looker is to strip and work up a reproduction. So what if it doesn't "sound correct"? You're not trying to pass it off as authentic anyway. Right?

Since P14's were mentioned, I too retro-graded a Winchester P14. There are no WRS markings on the stock and the wooden plug in the butt was already cracked and loose.
The simple fix at the time was to screw a blank ID disc into the slot. Then my father handed me a rear sight iris and another friend provided a Winchester dial plate and pointer. I opted to buy a repro screw and washer. A spare M1917 stacking swivel finished off the early look.
To put it back, all I need to do is put back the original cut iris/spring detent and the original dial plate. Then remove the piling swivel and insert the blank wood plug I have for it now. (See, I'm ready) Easily reversible at any time with a screwdriver and a mallet.

So there you have it. You aren't the only one who desires a 'restored fake' for nostalgic reasons