Bogus!

But the emblem looked funky and the tang looked engraved rather than stamped. Never seen a case with that shape bolsters either, but Hey ME no expert.:o What tipped you off?



Send all the bidders little love letters that you think they are bidding on a fake, don't bother informing ebay, they will not pull a listing on a pretty fake. BL identified one, I thought it was wrong for them to continue to list it, over two hundred I think, I reported it as a fake, 16 or 17 bidders, even some snipers when I looked at the bids after it sold.
 
The tang marking looks very strange............and the odd-looking pin......

looks suspicious.

I bought a copperhead from this guy two months ago. Cheap.

It was ok, and came very sharp, but the bone scales did not match: one was red and the other side was natural..... but I like it, it is a good user.
 
You are better at this than me Charlie but what struck me right from the get~go was although well photographed there was no series number shown on the back of the blades.

And for another thing the back side shows the far left pin tab missing..

Also, the knife's main blade is just too damn crisp and clean. A knife that is that clean looking has got to be a counterfeit.. Right?. :eek:

The stag??. Did Case even offer balloon Whittlers in stag that year.. And the finish is wrong on the blades me thinks..


Now tell me where I am wrong..

I know, I know.. read the knife.. Well that is what I tried to do..:D
 
Definitely a fake. To me it looks like it was made out of a used example of a Case 6383 maybe 70's dotted....rehandled, restamped, and buffed and polished.

To answer some questions...yes Case did make the 5383 in the Tested era...and 99% of Tested stamped knives will not have a pattern number.

Looks to me more like it was made out a Case rather than a Queen due to the more propnounced swell center/balloon bolsters as compared to the Queen #48 and also the small clip (Queen uses a coping and pen).
 
If you look closely at the tang stamp, you will see that it is engraved! You can see the machine marks!!
Less sure is the stag. It just doesn't look like Case stag. But I agree with knifeaholic, it looks like a Case; and the finish looks wrong to me too, sunnyd. The main blade isn't as full as my '83 patterns. And the pin is wrong.
Maybe I should thank the seller for the close-ups!!!! NOT!!:D :D
 
Was looking at some of the sellers other knives from the 70s era. What do you folks think about these - are they fakes or the real deal. Couple that i would like to have for my use but dont want to be purchasing garbage.
thanks for the help
 
Waynorth

Thanks for the lesson..I noticed the tang stamping. But in reference to the main blade as not being as full..Are you referring to the the width of the blade or the length..Because from the pictures it's hard to tell if the main blade tang is partial hidden behind the bolster.
 
Looks to me like a newer knife thats been heavily buffed and treated to a new tang mark using a pantograph machine. The letters in TESTED look uneven, like they were done individually by hand. The font doesn't look right either, the letters aren't quite right, a bit different from the Tested marks I have seen. The pins are quite similiar to the ones on recent 83 pattern knives, theres no sharp corners anywhere and the tang seems like its a bit thinner than it should be, maybe where the original mark was buffed out. Also, it seems like the shield is set too deep and glued rather than pinned like it should be.
 
If I hold a mint '83 up to the image, it appears slightly reshaped, not as full or pointed; but it's slight.
So it's both length and width.
 
The stag trapper looks cold stamped. I didn't look too closely at everything, but I won't buy from him on general principles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top