Fancy Turned Penny Knife

[LRB]

Just finished today. Blade is 3 3/8" 01 steel. Grip is turned from European Beechwood 4" long, and about 7/8" at the butt, tapering to an 11/16" mild steel ferrule with 1/8" steel pivot pin of W-2 steel, hammer peened. Grip is finished with 3 coats of MinWax Antique Oil Finish. Hope you enjoy a look.

 

[BillinOregon]

Wick, your work is always such a feast for the eyes. This has to be the prettiest penny knife I've ever seen.

 

[omarick1948]

Ditto on what Bill said!...That is a honey!

Rick

 

[50cal.cliff]

Hey that one turned out really well! :bow:

But then I have come to expect nothing less from you! :thumbsup:

 

[crockett]

Really nice Wick, I like the stamp/etch mark horizontally on the blade- just like the originals. Good job as always.

 

[Old Creek]

that is top shelf !!!!!!
dumb question, why are they called penny knives??

creek

 

[PaulN/KS]

WOW! :thumbsup:
I'd pay more than a penny for that beauty...
:hatsoff:

 

[M. De Land]

Nice job Wick! Does that design have a blade lock? MD

 

[LRB]

that is top shelf !!!!!!
dumb question, why are they called penny knives??

creek

What I have been told is that during the 18th c., they cost a penny. They were made and sold for those who did not find the need for better made folders. I recently saw a pic of one that T. Jefferson reportedly owned, and I believe Crockett once posted one found in the basement of the house? of another famous figure.

 

[LRB]

Nice job Wick! Does that design have a blade lock? MD

No lock MD. As long as one is aware of that, there is seldom a problem. They are really little more dangerous to use than a spring blade without a lock.

 

[Rick Son]

That's one of those knives you would see in a movie and think ,"dang wish i had one like that"~

 

[re-enactor]

Wick, that is very nice work. I am still hoping to make one of those. Perfect way to utilize scraps from turning chair leg spindles. Thanks for posting the pictures.

Jim

 

[crockett]

That was William Clark of Lewis & Clark fame. Any inexpensive folding knife without a spring is technically a penny knife but for purposes of clarity I think it is a lot easier for muzzle loaders to think of a penny knife as having no spring AND the metal ferrule and a friction folder as having no spring but instead of the metal ferrule the friction folder has metal washers.
Penny knives are safe to use as long as you cut away from you. When I was a kid lockbacks were rare and any spring back folder could accidentally close (even with the spring) so I grew up always cutting away when using a folder.

 

[LRB]

Thanks Dave. I thought that was who it was, but didn't want to say without being sure. I like your definition of a penny knife vs a friction folder. A penny knife is a friction folder, but all friction folders are not penny knives. I finished a plain version of a penny knife yesterday in Beechwood. I'll probably post it. The Beechwood turns well enough, but takes more care in finishing. It whiskers up quite a bit, when compared to walnut or boxwood.

 

[hoochiepapa]

Nice, Wick!!

 

[crockett]

The Carl P Russell book: Firearms, Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men says the Clark knife has a spring which is incorrect, there is no spring, there is a dot of paint on the handle and maybe Russell mistook that for a stub on some sort of spring. I have good photos and also spoken to two different currators at the museum- no spring. The drawing in the Russell book is also wrong, the stamp is MT and I thought maybe it stood for Missouri Territory since Clark ended up being the Governor/Agent for the Territory. The stamp is also at an odd angle. I've thought about it- one explanation may be that the blade was cut from some other type tool with the stamp mark on this other tool so that's the way it came out.
The Lexington Historical Society (Lexington MA) has a penny knife in their collections that was taken from a wounded soldier at the battle of Bunker Hill 1775- just thought I'd mention in case either is of interest.
I don't mean to bad mouth Russell, he was one of the first to start collecting data and did a huge job but he was wrong on a few things. Personally I think he is a good place to start but a lot of what he wrote needs to have a second back up documentation. The doral type springs on some "Spanish" lock knives, these are the types still seen (wings or tabs on sides to hold on to handle)- I can't get any information on those and the Ft. St. Joseph knives- how he claims they had springs seems odd. Those blades are now at the city library in Kalamazo, MI and there were no springs recovered with the blades. Russell seems to me to make a find but interpretes it and adds a little something of this interpretation as if it is part of the original find, so...caution is needed.
That Lexington Knife, they say it measures only 6" when open.
PS: to those for may wonder, the proper way to measure a folding knife is the handle length when closed, for example a 3 1/2" folding knife would have a 3 1/2" handle and the blade may measure 3" or maybe 3 1/4'. The way to measure the blade is a straight line from the tip to the ricasso area- or at a diagonal rather that straight along the spine. This diagonal gives a slightly longer measured length which is probably why manufacturers use it.

 

[50cal.cliff]

The Carl P Russell book: Firearms, Traps, and Tools of the Mountain Men

:shocked2: Really good read in MHO! :thumbsup:


I don't mean to bad mouth Russell, he was one of the first to start collecting data and did a huge job but he was wrong on a few things.

Personally I think he is a good place to start but a lot of what he wrote needs to have a second back up documentation. :idunno:

Russell seems to me to make a find but interpretes it and adds a little something of this interpretation as if it is part of the original find, so...caution is needed.

Really, I mean is this really how you feel! :stir:

Don't feel bad Crocket we all get it wrong sometimes!

His work is sometimes disputed because the documentation on his work is missing from the actual archives, anymore. I grant you its not 100% but it was a mile high leap that he made back when it was originally published! No one had tried so hard to get it right before that. And in some cases the relics were left up to interpretation because of their condition was so poor at the time he examined them!

Wick, I apologize for putting this in here on your great thread but sometimes I just can't help myself!
I don't think anyone sets out to falsely publish what they want to be a factual account of history. But as they themselves were not there the more time that passes the more history becomes an interpretation because, many relics are so degraded and actual accounts only exist in some one's writings but as said that is MHO!