Public rape, or two uneducated men meet?

Codger_64

Codger_64

Moderator
Joined
Oct 8, 2004
Messages
62,324
6606029427

I have said time and again that I am no expert on knives, but unless I am myopic and undeserving of my scant collection of knives and research materials, this seller misrepresented the item and the buyer got robbed, though willingly so.:eek:

Here is a #144 Hunter's Pride. Judge ye for yourselvins.


Codger
 
The three things I see are,the spacers are bright red on mine,the way the pommel is attached is different,and on mine there are 4 small spacers on the handle.What else did I miss and what is this Coles he refered to.Toby
 
I believe Coles is a guide to Military knives. Look at the tangstamp. All the rest is moot. They were made with red, or black, or brown spacers and the number changed. Pommel attachment evolved between 1957 and 1969.

Did you see the ending bid? Did you see my bid? I droped out when the bidding exceeded the value of the knife to me.

Codger
 
Wow I wonder what he would pay for a very good copy of that knife.I just happen to have one.Toby
 
It's possible that it's what's advertised. Here's why:

  • The Schrade in question is not marked on the obverse. Were the 114's so marked, or unmarked as in this case?
  • It looks like a USN MK1 or one of its many variants.
  • Schrade was one of the many makers of MK1's during WWII.
  • Not all MK1's were marked USN.
  • It certainly looks identical to the Schrade 144 Hunter's Pride pictured by Codger, but after the war, many knife companies continued making copies of the MK1 as civilian models. The MK1 pattern could have been the genesis of the 144 Hunter's Pride.

If anyone has a 144 of their own, maybe they can compare it to the one sold on eBay to determine if there are any differences in the markings.
 
Here is a similar knife, albeit an Imperial version, which sold recently to a more knowledgable buyer.

6607057278



Redshanks, I have no doubt that the series of knives has roots in the military knives of WWII. Here is the tangstamp on the first knife. This is not a WWII era stamp.


Codger
 
Codger, when does that tang stamp date from? There are plenty of legitimate WWII knives that sell for much less than the Schrade in question. On occassion, new MK1's pop up, found in a warehouse somewhere, still covered with cosmoline.

The big money seems to be in fake Vietnam era knives and there are a boodle of them out there.
 
I'm still trying to figure out if I got ripped off on this one. It just does not seem to have the heft of a pre 73 Schrade. I think I paid 60$ plus shipping and probably after more than two.


op2w49.jpg
 
In 1946 Albert M. Baer and brother Henry H. Baer bought Schrade Cutlery Company and renamed it the Schrade Walden Cutlery Corp. It became a division of Imperial Knife Associated Companies Group, formerly Imperial Knife Associated Companies Consisting of Imperial and Ulster Knife Company (purchased in 1941 from the Devine family). They kept the Schrade Walden Cutlery Corporation name even after moving to Ellenville in 1958, changing it again in 1973 to Schrade Cutlery Corporation. In 1985 the parent corporation became Imperial Schrade Corporation (after Albert Baer bought out other shareholders in 1983).

Before the 1946 Baer acquisition of Schrade Cutlery Company, tangstamps would have not had "Walden" attached with a hyphen. These are the knives known as "Schrade Cut. Co.'s.

Codger
 
Upstream said:
I'm still trying to figure out if I got ripped off on this one. It just does not seem to have the heft of a pre 73 Schrade. I think I paid 60$...
Click to expand...
The knife appears to be mint and also the sheath. Counting shipping in the cost is a win or loose proposition that you can make yourself feel worse or better with. I choose not to count it myself. It was incredably cheaper than round trip air fare, hotels, meals and taxis if you had gone to the seller's location to pick it up. I count shipping as overhead or CDB.

These knifes are uncommon with full retained legible blade etches. Likewise with matching mint sheaths. I don't think you overpaid, though I would not personally have paid as much for a knife of this series. That said, take into account that I only obtain these as research material, and do not justify the added expense of mint examples for non-display patterns. And that said, I have paid double that for uncommon mint variants of the patterns I do display.

Blade stock varied between the patterns of this series. My Imperial H-15 feels like a featherweight compared to my Craftsman Bowie hunter. The Bowie hunter carbon steel blade is nearly twice as thick as the stainless Imperial. If you have the means to accurately weigh these knives in your collections, maybe even mike the blade spines just ahead of the guards, I would be greatly interested in the results.

Given the listed retail prices of the H-15 and variants, it is highly unlikely that someone would go to the expense to repro them, IMHO.

Codger
 
Thanks Codger. One of the reasons I thought it may be a copy is that it just looks to good to be thrity years old. It does have what looks like a dried oil coating that will only come off with crome polish but I did not want to try it over the blade etch. With a cheap food scale it wieghs in at about 7 ozs and looks like the blade is an even 1/8 inch with a good Starrett ruler. The blade looks like stianless to me but I don't want to stian it to find out.

Thanks Rick
 
Here is a Hunters Pride marked exactly like the one in question.Upstream my knives are worth every penny I pay for them.If I want it I buy it.I agree with Codger about your knife, in that condition it's worth more than usual.I would say Good score.Toby
 
Upstream said:
....it just looks to good to be thirty years old...
Click to expand...

#138 101: the 138L Bowie Hunters were first listed in 1957 with carbon steel blades. They were discontinued from listings in 1974. Never once do I find a notation that they were stainless. The H-15 was listed as stainless from early on, but we know they were produced using carbon steel. So your knife was made between 1957 and 1973. It is at least 33 years old and possibly 49 years old.

As Arnold said, congratulations on a good score. BTW, WD-40 (I love to hate that stuff!) might dissolve the oil and grime without harming the etch. Try it with a q-tip on a non-criticle area first.

Arnold, your knife appears to be stainless as well. Is it?

Codger
 
The one in the picture also looks like stainless.Since the etch is almost gone on it I'll try the test tonight.Which is better,a lime or a potato.Toby
 
Lime. Potatos are terrible in Margaritas. They are better with cheap Russian vodka. Recycling test materials is a forum tradition.

Codger
 
Thanks again Codger, I knew you were the man that could could put a FIX on that blade. Being a highball man I don't keep any limes in the house. I do a have patato I could stick it in but I'll just take your word for it that it is not stianless
 
Reread what I wrote. I did not say it is not stainless. It very well could be. Schrade was notorious for producing knives in one steel and stating another in their advertisments and catalogs. I have a 137LWE serrated knife that was never cataloged as stainless, or with the Wonda-Edge. In fact, the model 137
isn't stamped on that knife as is normally done, it is etched on the reverse side. This was typical of Schrade, as some Old Timers were stainless and some Uncle Henrys were carbon steel. I am not saying good or bad, just ...was. Incidentally, the H-15 is listed in some years with the Wonda-Edge serrated blade. I have another knife never listed, a 172S which is like but different than the 172UH Wildcat.

Codger
 
Upstream (Rick),

As Codger mentioned, spraying the blade with WD40 should take the coating off with no harm to the etch. Just leave it on a minute or two, then wipe with a cotton cloth. WD40 isn't much good when used as a lubricant, but it is a good cleaner and water displacer (hence the name Water Displacer 40th formulation).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top