Ka-Bar Offset?

DRE,

The very first gen WWII KA-BARs were more oval than the others (and they were hand finished) but eventually the later generations became more round as handle profiling machinery was built to handle the large volumes. The leathers on the first gen knives were thin on the top as more leather was removed on the top as opposed to the bottom. As you can imagine that wasn't a good idea in the jungles of the Pacific.
If you have a chance to handle the Camillus, Ontario and early KA-BAR versions: Camillus was the fattest of the round handles, Ontario is thinner, Old KA-BARs varied from both fat and thin. Probably depended on who was running the profiler.:D
The government spec is fractional when it comes to the handle dimensions so there is some lenience built in.

The Small KA-BAR F/U has the handle in line with the centerline of the blade. We did away with the offset for that model.
Hope all of this helps. I don't mean to hijack a KA-BAR thread as I don't work there any more, but I consider all of you as knife friends and hope you don't mind.

Best Regards,

Toooj
 
Toooj said:
DRE,

The very first gen WWII KA-BARs were more oval than the others (and they were hand finished) but eventually the later generations became more round as handle profiling machinery was built to handle the large volumes. The leathers on the first gen knives were thin on the top as more leather was removed on the top as opposed to the bottom. As you can imagine that wasn't a good idea in the jungles of the Pacific.
If you have a chance to handle the Camillus, Ontario and early KA-BAR versions: Camillus was the fattest of the round handles, Ontario is thinner, Old KA-BARs varied from both fat and thin. Probably depended on who was running the profiler.:D
The government spec is fractional when it comes to the handle dimensions so there is some lenience built in.

The Small KA-BAR F/U has the handle in line with the centerline of the blade. We did away with the offset for that model.
Hope all of this helps. I don't mean to hijack a KA-BAR thread as I don't work there any more, but I consider all of you as knife friends and hope you don't mind.

Best Regards,

Toooj
Click to expand...

As always, thanks Toooj.

And you are always welcome, as always....

:D

Moose
 
Moose,

Thanks brother. It was good seeing you and your daughter at Blade. She will be a great knifer in the future.

Best Regards,

Toooj
 
Toooj said:
Moose,

Thanks brother. It was good seeing you and your daughter at Blade. She will be a great knifer in the future.

Best Regards,

Toooj
Click to expand...

Yeah, she will. And thanks, it was good to see you also.

Moose
 
D R E said:
Observe the differences in WW2, post WW2 contract knives and the modern Kabar reproduction. There is a big difference visually:

Click to expand...

It looks like the biggest difference between the modern reproduction, and the WW2 version, is the leather washer at the top of the handle.
 
Toooj, your always welcome in the old neighborhood! In no-way did I intend to suggest that Camillus had some magic cauldron bubbling with "Carbon V" steel in it. I was once told by a former Camillus employee ,who I consider to be pretty much unimpeachable, that the Carbon V blades were made from 0170-6C steel with a double quench heat treatment, his initials are (PG). For awhile now I've wondered if we compared the old Carbon V to 1095 Cro-Van we would pretty much see differences with little distinction?
 
sac troop said:
Toooj, your always welcome in the old neighborhood! In no-way did I intend to suggest that Camillus had some magic cauldron bubbling with "Carbon V" steel in it. I was once told by a former Camillus employee ,who I consider to be pretty much unimpeachable, that the Carbon V blades were made from 0170-6C steel with a double quench heat treatment, his initials are (PG). For awhile now I've wondered if we compared the old Carbon V to 1095 Cro-Van we would pretty much see differences with little distinction?
Click to expand...

Nope. No difference. There in the Tech Talk thread there was a brief discussion. Names may change but the steel stays the same...

Moose
 
Hey toooj! Miss ya here!

flatgrinder - I asked this exact question a couple years ago. We have dozens of antique shops here in our area, and I've seen and handled at least one example from each mfr. of every WWII contract F/U made.* The handle alignment differences are pretty obvious up close, but at a distance, they all look like the good ol' Kabar. My OCD was really twitching after seeing the differences in the handles.

One shop owner told me he gets asked the Kabar handle alignment question occasionally and couldn't answer it. I emailed him the link to the "tech talk" thread after toooj explained it. Apparently it had to do with finger clearance. To me it makes sense: I cooked professionally for a while, and that's the way a lot of kitchen knives are designed. The handle sits higher for clearance underneath.

Here's the "tech talk" thread. I asked the question in post #697, and toooj answered in post #700.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/872443-Tech-Talk-With-Toooj?p=12184374#post12184374

~Chris

*I've also gotten to compare the Cattaraugus 225Q, the Case 337-6Q, and the Ontario version as well. For war-era knives, the F/U's and Quartermaster knives all got the job done, and did it well. I'd be happy to take any of them into a war zone if I had to.
 
Years ago, I wanted KA-BAR to make three changes to the USMC and the 1211:

1) Raise the stinkin' grind, which was lower than the original specification and made the knife nearly impossible to sharpen adequately.
2) Switch to the wider "Next Generation" tang, which would solve the bending/breaking issues we are seeing so frequently on youtube.
3) Center the tang on the blade. The blade offset, whatever the reason for it back in 1942, is ugly.

They gave me #1 in 2013. I am still waiting for the other two.
 
whitethronebooks said:
Years ago, I wanted KA-BAR to make three changes to the USMC and the 1211:

1) Raise the stinkin' grind, which was lower than the original specification and made the knife nearly impossible to sharpen adequately.
2) Switch to the wider "Next Generation" tang, which would solve the bending/breaking issues we are seeing so frequently on youtube.
3) Center the tang on the blade. The blade offset, whatever the reason for it back in 1942, is ugly.

They gave me #1 in 2013. I am still waiting for the other two.
Click to expand...

I think the blade offset is there to strengthen the blade. The tang is so tiny that it really helps with stresses to have the tang not perfectly in line with the blade. I can see how it would improve strength. It is just my opinion and thoughts on this: I think that the tang was made so slim and tiny to save some steel.. This might be completely untrue and irrelevant.. I have no idea why anyone would design a knife with a slim tang like that for any other reason...The Camillus Quartermaster 225Q had a THICK tang, so who knows why the Mark II was designed so spinelessly in comparison... Both Camillus and Kabar both were contracted to make the 1219C2 in WWII and both used the same design... That is why I think that the 1219C2 was designed that way in the first place. If you can save some metal on some tangs and still have the knife work that might be a jeep or tank eventually... Who knows, honestly if the designers of the 1219C2 specified the tang to be so narrow for any other reason, they must have been smoking something else in their pipes... IMHO. Still tried and true with failures like this.. Usually from abuse.

I have no idea why Kabar doesn't make a 1217 with a tang like Camillus's Quartermaster 225Q. I love the new EK model 3's that just came out with what looks a lot like BM CO/Victory Plastics NORD Govt' sheaths of the original EK period. Good work on that one. Kudos to Kabar for that.. That would still be one hell of a knife though.. - Cold Steel made a version of the 1217 called the "Leather Neck" just like that. I would like to see Kabar make a M II knife with twice the tang on it for more money than the normal 1217's... I would rather buy a Kabar than CS's version personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top