I don't think that's necessarily definitive. I've seen dates older than that on Brit straps, and been seeing it since they were GIVING them away at surplus stores in the sixties. It was the manufacturers who dated them, anyway. I'd want more evidence before I drew any conclusion. Also, in "Empire" days, the same sling, authentic and to specification, could've made in half a dozen or more countries and still be entirely original.

Even the ancient leather sling on my Lee Carbine bore a date, and if not original, that beasty was a very OLD replica. Or who knows? Slings aren't exactly a military secret, and for a time, a lot of stuff was made by private enterprise for open market sale.

The earlier ones I've seen bore the primary inscriptions on the metal, some also showed other "stuff" in ink in the fabric portions. Never gave much thought to what it was.

 

That could even be a unit mark, applied locally for some reason. Usually fakers use well-known and rare makers to run up the price. Those slings are hardly pricey enough to justify making a bogus set of replicas.

 

That could even be a unit mark, applied locally for some reason. Usually fakes use well-known and rare makers to run up the price. Those slings are hardly pricey enough to justify making a bogus set of replicas.

Are you serious? There are tons of fakes and réplicas of these slings. WWI originals, when found, bring a lot of money.

 

Agreed...I had a similar question about some very authentic NZ marked slings and no one could find any evidence of New Zealand having marked webbing.

Not saying it didn't happen but evidence favored fake over real.

 

Wow! I seem, then, to be further out of touch with Brit/Commonwealth stuff than I am with others items. I've seen tons of doctored real and replica stuff for German, American, and Japanese stuff, but most of the web U.K./commonwealth slings I had were either known repros or had been in my hands since the early sixties, I suspect before heavy fakery got started.

Had some early one with markings on the metal plates that I was sure were genuine.

Many of the slings I had came out of India (a few were made there, not many) and bore local markings, but some of it was made in other places, or so my collector buddies surmised.

Me? I was just looking for slings that were appropriate and WORKED. Paid practically nothing. This was four or five decades ago. Many bore maker/date info on metal. Checked some imagery. Only a few from the WWI and before era had markings on the fabric. Doubt anyone back then would've executed phonies to sell them for a few cents each.

Never realized "Limey" stuff could carry that kind of premium.

Myself, especially on firearms I was actually shooting or setting to shoot, never minded repros, and indeed for heavy use, I preferred them simply because it matters less if they get damaged. Some were, of course, not really "fakes" or even "replicas" because the classic double brass "ring" hook set web sling in various colors was in service until very recently and, indeed, I see them in news clips on Indian and Pakistani rifles to this very day. They're probably still being produced for issue SOMEWHERE.

 

I did find new repros marked 1917 at soldier of Fortune so they are out there.

The same lot has a WW2 green garand canvas that looks legit but now I'm hesitant.

 

WW1 slings would have also been marked on the brass fittings. However, in discussing this sling off-forum, it has hollow rivets like one would find on Danish slings. So it’s possible the fittings were replaced during a Danish rework, see my Dane-reworked FKF-marked 1941 MECo with hollow rivets:

 

In regards to the OP sling being real or repro.
I’m familiar with MEC, but who in the heck is MEO? 🤔

 

Very big company in 1018 when the sling was stamped.

 

That someone would go through the trouble to mark a real sling with a fake stamp only to sell it for less than the real sling would go for is less believable than that marking itself.

As we all know, every ink stamp ever made was always applied completely legibly for all of eternity.

 

That someone would go through the trouble to mark a real sling with a fake stamp only to sell it for less than the real sling would go for is less believable than that marking itself.

As we all know, every ink stamp ever made was always applied completely legibly for all of eternity.

Yes. Much like their use of "stoving" (black paint, basically) some of the use of rubber stamps and ink seems to have become promiscuous both by the actual U.K. and commonwealth "authorities" and by the fakers.

The "M.E.C." on my eldest recorded sling does look like "M.E.O.", but there is a space in what might be construed as an "O". That impression was on the hooking plate metal, not ink.

None of the literature on this stuff seems very convincing or complete, either.

 

I had a look over at Karkee web but unfortunately it hasn't been updated for a number of years. I always thought that WWI stamps were on the metal and the inked stamps on the webbing came later!

 

I’ve read that ink marking slings didnt come about until the 30s, but I’ve also read conflicting information saying some were ink & metal. Probably worth asking on GWF.

 

Fake markings on P37/Brit gear? Naww....

Here is a long thread on the subject.

Fake alert FAKE! Commonly encountered fake markings on British webbing...

Hi guys, I wasn't sure if I should post this thread on spotting fake webbing markings on eBay and possibly aid the counterfeiter (potentially a member of Warrelics) in his technique, but I t

www.warrelics.eu

I believe that the OP on that thread, Karkee, is Edward H.

 

There is a name from the past - I've not seen any posts from him in over 10 years (since he got banned from every Enfield forum known to mankind !)

 

Doing some reading on GWF, supposedly no MECo slings post-1915 as they were only one of 2 makers that could do the reduction weaving for the ammo pouches.