Never would have thought...

Thanks Joe, I appreciate the opportunity to get to read this article. It would have been nice if they had included a nice picture of Roger's knife.
 
Keith,

That is a great knife to order, I can't wait to see the results!!
As far as spending the money, I think you're doing the right thing if that's the knife you want. A true investment in IMHO. I have a few that are in that category and don't regret any.
Seeing so many people buying uninspired cutlery , your choice is
a pleasant departure.

Win
 
Originally posted by fisk
That is undoubtable the hardest knife that I have tried to make and do it exactly like the old one ...you will not find many people at all that will make more than one of these knives.
Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance, but what makes this knife so difficult to make?
 
Wulf, I'm not a maker...but I know a little about these knives. It's not extremly hard for a good maker to make one "similar"...I stress similar! But you have to have GREAT skills and patience to make an EXACT reproduction!!!!!!!!!!

The tang taperes from top to bottom and from ricosso to pommel. The walnut is cut so that the silver inlays at the front of handle. The silver piece on the ricosso is sweated on and fits perfectly under the handle. The pins are silver as well and on each pin, silver washers have to be made. The pommel wrap is a NIGHTMARE!!! It took Massey (and yes he is SKILLED) 12 hours to get it RIGHT! Remember, were not talking similar, but EXACT. ALL OF THE SILVER WORK HAS A PURPOSE! It keeps moisture away from the tang and is a CLASS ACT at the same time. It gives you a knife with simple lines and ELEGANCE. Black was SKILLED too.;)

I know there is alot more to why it is hard to reproduce, it not just this Bowie #1, (although it's the hardest for them to make) it's most all fo the Black knives.... hopefully Fisk and some others who have made them will chime in.

Good Day
 
Here's the pic so everyone can see it at a glance:

picture.JPG


I would also be intersted in hearing more about the construction difficulties in re-creating this blade.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Sidenote...I seem to recall reading that the original bowie was designed to be held "blade up" (sort of "saca tripas" style)...the handle on that pic looks like it may be configured for this type of grip...is it true??

Thanks,
RL
 
RogerP, THANK YOU for taking my slack AGAIN!:)

RL, yes there is information that states that. Walker told me he also liked the way you could cut and not have your knuckles in the way.

The file work on the top and bottom is NOT filed into the silver. (Keith, did you know that?) The tang itself is filed and the silver is hammered onto it AND THEN IT HAS TO BE CLEANED UP!!!!!

Remember, a reproduction....
 
Here is part of an email from Ron Newton, who is the bladesmith that I am having make this knife. I asked what were the difficulties in making this knife and this was what he got back to me with:

I'm going to share some of the difficulties in building the Bowie # 1.

Two edges of the full tang on Bowie #1 are rope fileworked and have
silver sheetmetal overlayed on top of the filework. The silver must be pushed and formed down into the filework without damaging the thin silver sheetmetal. There is an odd number of these ropefileworked rungs on the spine side and an even number on the cutting edge side. These rungs need to be filed in a certain spiral direction in order to replicate it correctly. I have a closeup photo of the Bowie # 1 handle showing all this.

The multiple angles in the full tang that abruptly transition into the blade pose a more difficult than normal forging evolution.( and grinding) Just the whopper blade size alone is a little more difficult to forge that the average bowie blade.

There is a silver ricasso wrap around the ricasso of the blade. This
must be soldered in place without removing temper from the cutting edge. Not to mention keeping solder from running all over the place. There is also a silver wrap at both ends of the handle that has to be hammer formed over the Black Walnut without cracking the wood. The dome head rivets in the handle that hold everything to the tang are two-part construction. All twenty of the silver dome head rivets are hammer formed from silver sheetmetal and have 1/16" inch holes puched in them. 10 ea. 1/16" silver pins run through the tang & walnut handle and have a dome head rivet cap hammer formed into place on both sides of each of the 10 pins. The ends of the 1/16" silver pins going thru the handle must be hammer riveted without deforming the
dome shapes of the rivet caps.

There are 2 silver escutcheon plates on the handle. The one on the
right side or passenger side of the knife has two fonts of engraving that spell "BOWIE no. 1". "Bowie" is in one font and "no. 1" is in a completely different font. To replicate the escutcheons historicaly correct, 2 carbon steel pins must be installed to the silver. One area where the current replicators of Bowie # 1 missed the boat is that the engraving( "Bowie no.1") on the right hand escutcheon is legibly read right side up when the knife is held in the fighting position. In other words when you see this engraving in a photo it looks up side down. At least until you hold the blade upside down or in the fighting position. I saw the engraving font reproduced correctly on the current reproductions but they installed the
escutcheons wrong.

The thick 3/8" spine at the riccasso must have a drastic distal taper
all the way to the point in order for the knife to have proper balance.
Click to expand...

He added something else that was exceptionally interesting that I am going to look into and will report on later.

Take care,
Ron Newton
 
Ron's details on the work involved in making Bowie No. 1 are absolutely on target and he's right that the escutcheon plate on the passenger side should be upside down. I was one of the smiths that made that knife - the makers put the escutheon plates on the handle and the Territorial Restoration Museum had "Bowie No. 1" engraved on the drivers side only. I'm looking at mine as we speak and it doesn't have any engraving on the passenger side. You've picked a good knife to have, Keith, and have picked a fine maker.

Jim Walker
 
Really glad to have your input here, Jim. It is great to hear from another of the Mastersmiths that made one of the reproductions of this magnificent knife. When I came to the forum this evening I noticed that we had a new member by the name of Roger Massey. I sure hope he pops up in this thread as well.
 
Fascinating...

Jim Black was no slouch. Knowing some of what was required to craft this knife now makes me appreciate it that much more.
 
Keith - a fantastic choice of a knife and a person to work with (both from the point of view of a maker and a person). -Gus
 
Originally posted by RogerP
Here's the pic so everyone can see it at a glance:

picture.JPG


I would also be intersted in hearing more about the construction difficulties in re-creating this blade.

Cheers,

Roger
Click to expand...
the the
 
I can't add this to the previous post by Roger, but I took it from a thread that he started and am putting it here because I think that it belongs here.

Bowie #1

The hard part of the knife for me was the handle. As Newton explained the tang is filed and the silver is overlaid on the file work and soldered. This is very tedious as it is very thin. Once you get the silver in the file work you can then put on the handle slabs which are silver covered in the front. Also, you must inlay the escutcheons in both sides preferably before you put the slabs on. Once they are on you will have to wrap the back of the handle with silver. If you inspect the way it is put on you will discover it is inletted on the sides of the slabs so it is smooth with the sides. Very difficult to do correctly with no gaps. As Newton explained about the pins is correct they are 1/16 pins peened over a larger round piece to appear as a larger pin than they are.

rm
Click to expand...

*Edited to add:

It sure is good to have you here Roger. Welcome.


__________________
rm
 
I just wanted to say a particular thank you to the makers who have taken the time to contribute to this thread - their insight is invaluable and much appreciated.

Cheers,

RogerP
 
THIS IS FUN!!!!!!!! I LOVE LEARNING!:D

I talked to David Etchieson at the HAM museum this morning, this is some of what I found out.

The escutheon plate on the original at the museum IS turned upside down. WHY? That is the way it was when they recieved it. THEY HAVE A PHOTO, TAKEN SOMETIME IN THE 30'S OR 40'S, THAT SHOWS IT TURNED RIGHTSIDE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The makers that signed contracts to make AUTHORIZED reproductions were: Massey, Walker, Flournoy, Crowell, Gaston, Cook, Anders, and Fisk. Of these 8, 5 have made them: Massey, Walker, Cook, Anders, and Fisk. Massey is the only one that is making the 2nd one at this time. The contract allowed them to make two each. These authorized knives are marked with the makers last name, MS and ATR 1; with Massey's 2nd will be ATR 2. At this time the museum has Cook's still available for the price of 3500.00, part of which goes to the museum. Walker's was for sale, but Keith lit a fire in me and it's no longer available!;)

As for as the steel pins, the bowie authorities, think that they are replacments. (NOT ORIGINAL TO THE KNIFE!)

GOOD DAY!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top