Cattaraugus Q225 ~

Rez_Dawg said:
I cut a notch in the end of the tang and fuse welded a screw tang. I then cut off the remainder after adding my handle material. I'm a knifemaker, so these repair/refurbish jobs are nothing for me to do. I fused without jeopardizing the heat treatment/hardness of the blade. It has been processing meat, used on several hunting/fishing trips since it's been finished. It's as good as new, gets nothing but compliments. I've done 4-5 since, made custom sheaths for them as well. 👍👍
Click to expand...

Thanks. I won't be trying that at home (can't even solder). You do great work.

I just found one with an intact handle and a worn out sheath. I know I have some leather around here somewhere.
 
Love seeing these left handed sheaths. Obviously the troops carried these on the left side due to having a sidearm on the right?

I do something similar but the opposite since I use a knife more than my pistol but the need exists to have a pistol handy where I am in the woods all the time.
 
Hale Storm said:
Love seeing these left handed sheaths. Obviously the troops carried these on the left side due to having a sidearm on the right? I do something similar but the opposite since I use a knife more than my pistol but the need exists to have a pistol handy where I am in the woods all the time.
Click to expand...

Sometimes guys just wore them with the pistol, too. Ya gonna quarrel with Dutch Cota?

Gen%20Norman%20Cota%20Cattaraugus%20225Q%20ed.jpg


(Photo from http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/old_photos_70.htm, which is a wonderful site to explore.)

My understanding is that like the Mark 1 USN knives (most of which also had a left-side sheath), the expectation was that any sidearm would be carried on the right side, putting the knife on the left side. However, there's evidence (above) of right-side carry of both pistol and knife. Also note the gouged and roughened center portion of the handle.
 
Last edited:
I've notice a lot of civilian hunting knives prior to the 1950's often had lefty sheaths. As a southpaw, I've always kinda figured it was because back then it was more common for outdoors men to carry a pistol on the right side????
 
AreBeeBee said:
My understanding is that like the Mark 1 USN knives (most of which also had a left-side sheath),...
Click to expand...
Weren't most USN MK 1s issued with the M8 fiberglass ambi sheath? The pics I've seen of Mark 1s with USN marked leather sheaths were right handed sheaths.
 
leghog said:
Weren't most USN MK 1s issued with the M8 fiberglass ambi sheath? The pics I've seen of Mark 1s with USN marked leather sheaths were right handed sheaths.
Click to expand...

According to Frank Trzaska's article in the Military Knives; a Reference Book, the USN Mark 1 knife came with both types of sheath.

The leather ones cost Uncle 25 cents each, the hard-shell ones 85 cents. The knives themselves were made by many manufacturers — Kabar, Pal, Camillus, Boker, Colonial, Kinfolks, Robeson, Geneva Forge, Shuredge, Western, probably more — with lots of minor variations.

The leather sheaths also show a lot of variety for the same reason, and they exist in both left- and right-hand models. I believe the left-hand ones were more common for the reasons mentioned above. The ambidextrous hard-shell sheaths came from Beckwith Mfg and its subsidiary, Victory Plastics.

But a Catt is always a Catt —
 
I managed to pick this one up at a local antique store sometime last year.

Everything seems to be in nice condition. I've put a little beeswax/mineral oil compound on the leather handle just to re-hydrate it a bit.

J5LPSvZl.jpg


Have a good one!

Ken K.
 
I'll just say that a Catt 225Q is very dictionary picture of the "sharpened prybar" term that everyone applies to Kabar/Becker knives.
 
AreBeeBee said:
I'll just say that a Catt 225Q is very dictionary picture of the "sharpened prybar" term that everyone applies to Kabar/Becker knives.
Click to expand...

It's a touch over 1/8" of through-hardened 1095 and, so, like the MK II, not very suitable as a prybar.
 
AreBeeBee said:
According to Frank Trzaska's article in the Military Knives; a Reference Book, the USN Mark 1 knife came with both types of sheath.
Click to expand...
Can you link a citation for the 225Q being issued with both left and right hand leather sheaths?
 
leghog said:
Can you link a citation for the 225Q being issued with both left and right hand leather sheaths?
Click to expand...

That left- and right-hand reference (and all the mfgrs) was for the USN Mark 1, not the 225Q. I'm sorry if I gave the wrong impresssion. As far as I know the 225Q sheaths were (1) all leather and (2) all left-handed. Even Gen. Cota's in the photo is a lefty, but moved over to the right side.
 
Thomas Linton said:
It's a touch over 1/8" of through-hardened 1095 and, so, like the MK II, not very suitable as a prybar.
Click to expand...

But the blunt point helps the impresssion! I wonder how many 225Q points were broken off through (mis)use compared to the various Mk II knives?
 
A "left handed" sheath causes a right-handed user to draw the knife with the edge upwards ("practical" knife-fighting grip of the day, which may be a coincidence). A "right-handed" sheath causes the right-handed user to draw the knife with the edge down. Both regardless of the side on which the sheath is worn.
 
Thomas Linton said:
A "left handed" sheath causes a right-handed user to draw the knife with the edge upwards ("practical" knife-fighting grip of the day, which may be a coincidence). A "right-handed" sheath causes the right-handed user to draw the knife with the edge down. Both regardless of the side on which the sheath is worn.
Click to expand...

I'd love to know how much discussion went into the decision to issue these knives with the left-hand sheaths. Or was it just a matter of someone saying, "Oh, put them on the left, the pistol's on the right..." and that was that.
 
AreBeeBee said:
But the blunt point helps the impresssion! I wonder how many 225Q points were broken off through (mis)use compared to the various Mk II knives?
Click to expand...

My guess would be even when we consider that more MKII/fighting utility knives where made and adjust for that, the "Q" knives probably showed how robust they were.
Cat 225Q above compared to a Camillus USMC fighting/utility knife.

IMG_0762_zpsyqif5pji.jpg


Sorry that the picture isn't better, but this should give an idea of the thickness of the two blade tips.

IMG_0763_zpsmo921kgr.jpg


There are examples of right-handed sheaths for the Cat 225Q knife that exactly match the common left-handed sheath in all the details and hardware, but they seem to be few and far between. IMHO, I suspect these are post war sheaths that were made for the commercial market.
As far as I know no one has uncovered any official documentation to explain the reason why some knives were supplied with left-handed sheaths while others only are matched to right-handed sheaths. A subject of continuing speculation and conjecture. The theory connecting left-handed sheaths with the intention of a blade forward fighting stance seems compelling when presented, however I can't reconcile that to the fact that the U.S.M.C. fighting/utility knife always came with a right-handed leather sheath.

Colonel with a Q knife

225Q%201_zpshu3cutzp.jpg


Ranger forward artillery observer with a Q knife.

337Q%20ranger%20forward%20artilary%20observer_zpswzphqzg7.jpg
 
AreBeeBee said:
I'd love to know how much discussion went into the decision to issue these knives with the left-hand sheaths. Or was it just a matter of someone saying, "Oh, put them on the left, the pistol's on the right..." and that was that.
Click to expand...

A "right-handed" is easily worn on the left side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top