QC question re new Kabar Mark I received

D

D2FB

Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
107
Following are photos (crappy iPad version but I think they will work) of a new Mark I received today. This is second Mark I that I have purchased and I did not have the gap between the blade and the handle that this one has - see pics below.

Is this acceptable in terms of normal quality control or will I potentially have any problems with the knife? Again my other Mark I that I have had for a couple of years does not have this gap.

8b28c0a86f0f3562271a18ef3b982313_zps82fee9df.jpg
[/IMG]

4179452747fabd7b14eab275d1cbc9bc_zps8a79b766.jpg
[/IMG]
 
technically, its always better not to have any gap anywhere.
it is my understanding that the perfect lineup of the pommel, handle and guard,
helps keep the tang from undue stresses.
but seeing that the handle is kraton rubber,
and not stiff compressed leather;
it does appear that the tang alone
will have to take all of the brunt on its own.
 
I have 3 NIBs I received about 2 months ago. I opened them up and checked them for this issue. 2 of them have the guards flush up against the blade. The third one has a slight gap similar to the one in the OP's pics. Everything feels tight. My guess, and it is only that, a guess, is that the presence of the gap may depend on which way the guard is slid down around the tang, i.e., if the guard is slid on with "Side A" toward the tip, it ends up flush and if "Side B" is slid on toward the tip, the slight gap is present. Cause for this could be a bow in the guard from when it was stamped out of a plate of sheet metal.
 
zzyzzogeton said:
I have 3 NIBs I received about 2 months ago. I opened them up and checked them for this issue. 2 of them have the guards flush up against the blade. The third one has a slight gap similar to the one in the OP's pics. Everything feels tight. My guess, and it is only that, a guess, is that the presence of the gap may depend on which way the guard is slid down around the tang, i.e., if the guard is slid on with "Side A" toward the tip, it ends up flush and if "Side B" is slid on toward the tip, the slight gap is present. Cause for this could be a bow in the guard from when it was stamped out of a plate of sheet metal.
Click to expand...

Except that, unlike the USMC F/U, the MK I only goes on one way. The guard is longer on the edge side than on the spine side.
 
bigghoss said:
Except that, unlike the USMC F/U, the MK I only goes on one way. The guard is longer on the edge side than on the spine side.
Click to expand...

But I was referring to the flat faces of the guard, not the "hangy-down" finger protector part.

The guard still has 2 "flat" sides and can be "flipped over". The "long end" is still "down" either way. When the guard piece is stamped out, the tang hole is probably stamped through at the same time. All the stress of stamping is applied to "side A", and depending on whether "side a" or the opposite "side b" is slid down the tang facing the tip determines which way the "stress applied side" of the guard is facing - toward the tip or toward the hilt.
 
zzyzzogeton said:
But I was referring to the flat faces of the guard, not the "hangy-down" finger protector part.

The guard still has 2 "flat" sides and can be "flipped over". The "long end" is still "down" either way. When the guard piece is stamped out, the tang hole is probably stamped through at the same time. All the stress of stamping is applied to "side A", and depending on whether "side a" or the opposite "side b" is slid down the tang facing the tip determines which way the "stress applied side" of the guard is facing - toward the tip or toward the hilt.
Click to expand...

OOOOOHHHHHHHH. Right. I suppose that could be possible.
 
If the gap bothers you, you could mix up some JB Weld and apply it. If you are careful, it would be almost invisible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top