Difference between Sheeps Foot and Wharncliffe blade?

[Andya27]

Great chart!

 

[pmew]

Wharncliffe was also a knife patttern before it was applied to a blade shape.

Simmons Hardware 1930

That kind of proves my point. Was there another picture of a wharncliffe pattern that you meant to post?

 

[Andya27]

This is just fantastic. What a great find. I think I "need" to purchase a wharncliffe blade soon.

 

[Codger_64]

That kind of proves my point. Was there another picture of a wharncliffe pattern that you meant to post?

If you wish. "... first introduced around 1832 by Joseph Rodgers & Sons in Sheffield, England for their patron Lord Wharncliffe."

Catalogue of Joseph Rogers & Sons By Appointment Cutlers to His Majesty 1894:

 

[Andya27]

I have a sheeps foot blade knife on the way. I'm thinking a wharncliffe is next. I tend to prefer single-blade knives. Between 3.5" and 3.75" closed. Any knives come to mind?

 

[2Dead]

I have a sheeps foot blade knife on the way. I'm thinking a wharncliffe is next. I tend to prefer single-blade knives. Between 3.5" and 3.75" closed. Any knives come to mind?

Well, the #47 Viper from GEC is going to be a single blade swayback. I like having a second blade so I'd recommend looking at the #62 Easy Pocket Congress. It is as slim as a single blade but has a second blade too due to the pen configuration. They made them in 440C like the below and there may still be a few around of the ones in 1095 like from this link http://greateasterncutlery.net/blog/patterns/62-easy-pocket-congress/ (the 440C ones in elk, jigged bone, and wood don't appear in the group but they're out there )

Here's a GEC #62 (3 3/4"), Case Bose Norfolk (3 5/8" I believe), #61 Half Congress (3 5/8"), Case Swayback Jack (which I believe is a little smaller than 3 1/2")

 

[jon_slider]

I have a sheeps foot blade knife on the way. I'm thinking a wharncliffe is next. I tend to prefer single-blade knives. Between 3.5" and 3.75" closed. Any knives come to mind?

Case Sway back Gent is a 3 3/16" single blade with Stainless blade and Pocket worn red bone. Very slender. Some people prefer fatter handles, in which case you can have CV steel with a pen blade

Here's my group of Case sway backs - two jacks and one gent:

I like them all a lot. Great knives in my book. There is a significant difference in the thickness of the two blade versus the single blade. I find myself really taken with the PW red bone though.

Ed J

 

[Andya27]

I like the Case Swaybacks. Good looking knife and a reasonable price. Thanks!

 

[akadave2]

I like the Case Swaybacks. Good looking knife and a reasonable price. Thanks!

I think its Case's best pattern right now. Its a great design and the Wharncliffe blade grows on you. Its probably my favorite for a slipjoint.

 

[pmew]

@Codger_64

I'm confused. I feel rather like the man who has an apple held in front of him and is told "look, it's a banana you idiot!"

In those last two images that you posted I can see three, possibly four different wharncliffe blades on three, possibly four different patterns.

When I say pattern, I mean the shape of the handle, as in congress, sleeveboard, serpentine, eureka, sunfish etc. However, some patterns are determined by other means for example a whittler could be a swell-center, dogleg, or congress thus determined by the split spring/blade configuration. A jack, hinges at one end only, regardless of the handle shape or blade shapes.

These intricacies are what draw me to traditionals and the fascinating variations thereof, but my point is... what we know of as wharncliffe is defined by the shape of the blade.

You have said that those pocket knives were designed "for their patron Lord Wharncliffe" but they are all different; some fixed blades, some folding, some novelty and gimmicky, some with other tools. The second image reads "fancy knives with instruments" which is pretty ambiguous.

I think your point is that they are all wharncliffe patterns because they were designed "for their patron Lord Wharncliffe". In that, I think I can see where you're coming from.


Paul

 

[Codger_64]

No, each illustration shows one Wharnecliffe pattern knife. It is unique. Many of the knife frame names currently in use are modern constructs, not what they were called when they first appeared last century or before.

In the bottom illustration it is "P 527". In the top illustration it is the same pattern with different handle materials, but showing the two blades on the opposite end from the pocket blade, which we subsequently identify as a "wharncliffe" blade pattern apart from the original frame.

 

[pmew]

This is descending to argument. I concede.

 

[Codger_64]

This is descending to argument. I concede.

Nope, no arguement here, just a review of blade and frame pattern names from a historical perspective. Many of the newer cutleries... most in fact... have adopted collector's terms themselves. Few have much interest in cutlery history. I can't blame them. Even the old cutlers weren't about making "history". They were about making and selling knives... money.

 

[jon_slider]

This is descending to argument.

I think it is just a reflection of current usage vs historical origins, as Codger says. Here are the specific photos of wharncliffes from his great catalog photos

What we now call a Wharncliffe blade, just the blade

the original Wharncliffe whittler with a blade like on an Ettrick pruner on the fat end of a tapered serpentine handle, different than the ettrick handle pattern, plus a coping blade and a pen blade

another 3 blade Wharncliffe whittler knife, with serpentine handle, and with what we now call a wharncliffe blade on the fat end

another Wharncliffe pattern whittler knife, not just the blade

Ettrick is the pattern, not a blade type. You can have different blade shapes on an Ettrick frame, but generally they use wharncliffes. The Ettrick is a long slender swayback frame with a handle to blade ratio of about two to one.

I agree that the Ettrick is a knife pattern with a handle as you describe, not just a blade that we now call a Wharncliffe. I believe the blade pattern existed prior to the building of the first Wharncliffe whittler knife pattern.

I hope someone refines any of my misunderstandings.

 

[Codger_64]

Cool. Did you notice the Sloyd blade on the Wharncliffe knife?

 

[mtangent]

Cool. Did you notice the Sloyd blade on the Wharncliffe knife?

OK, what is a Sloyd?

 

[Codger_64]

OK, what is a Sloyd?

Most often today called a copeing blade and seen on a carpenter or whittler pattern knife.


ETA: Here is a quickie Web-find of a Boker whittler pattern with Sloyd blade.

 

[Codger_64]

Here is a circa 1930 Winchester blade chart.

 

[mtangent]

The pic of model P 527 seems to give the Sloyd an arched spine. Was that so, in reality?

 

[Codger_64]

The pic of model P 527 seems to give the Sloyd an arched spine. Was that so, in reality?

With some makers, yes. With some, no.

Take a look at the #4 "Mechanic's knife" in the 1947 Schrade Walden catalog:

http://collectors-of-schrades-r.us/Catalogs/images/1947-SW-CATS.pdf

It really depended on the individual maker. While most offered a variety of blades in a variety of configurations on a more conservative number of frames, each made their own blades to their own specs.