You bet!
Some new project photos for approval?
- Thread starter Two Feathers
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Howdy again MountainSmoke
Thanks fer the pic. I may have to try this?
God bless:
Two Feathers
Hatman/2nd line:
Thank you. It's good to know that folks have an opinion about my work. Some not always positive.
God bless:
Two Feathers
I think @Brokennock may be referring to the rounded choil. This was characteristic of a lot of French trade knives. I don't have a picture of an original handy, but this reproduction by Wick Ellerbe is historically accurate:
English "scalpers" might have a more angular choil, as on these historical reproductions...
... or more rounded, as in this original sketched by Steve Allely:
The early butcher knives of the fur trade era generally had a very small choil, i.e. the blade was only slightly wider than the handle, where the blade and handle met. These are some original Wilson butchers:
Later butcher knives had wider blades and a more pronounced choil. These are some original American-made Green River knives:
The knife presented by @Two Feathers feathers appears to most closely represent a "roach belly" or "Rochebury" type which was traded by the HBC pretty early. The sweep of the blade and the shape of the handle are a good representation of the type, although choils on the Roach Belly knives varied, from squarish to angled to no choil at all. That rounded choil on the Two Feathers knife is a practical and authentic representation.
That looks like a nice knife, Two Feathers! It ought to feel right at home with some trapper's kit!
Notchy Bob
Last edited:
Notchy Bod:
Thank you sir. As always, the fountain of PC knowledge, for which I am ever grateful.
I got as close as I could to the one in the picture. The pic. did NOT specify English OR French, just HBC trade knife, BUT it DID say HB Roach.
Here's a copy of the knife I tried to replicate? I do see the error in my choil shape. It didn't start out that way, but it did end up there. Probably from the free hand grinding? Hopefully you folks will take pity on me?
OK... I tried, maybe next time I'll get it right? I never give up.
Thank you again for your input Notchy Bob. I suck it up like a sponge.
God bless:
Two Feathers
Thank you sir. As always, the fountain of PC knowledge, for which I am ever grateful.
I got as close as I could to the one in the picture. The pic. did NOT specify English OR French, just HBC trade knife, BUT it DID say HB Roach.
Here's a copy of the knife I tried to replicate? I do see the error in my choil shape. It didn't start out that way, but it did end up there. Probably from the free hand grinding? Hopefully you folks will take pity on me?
OK... I tried, maybe next time I'll get it right? I never give up.
Thank you again for your input Notchy Bob. I suck it up like a sponge.
God bless:
Two Feathers
Here's a link to the one I copied. Hudson's Bay Company Trade Knife, 5-1/2" blade, replica 1750 - 1790 era Trade Knife, made in the U.S.A. - Track of the Wolf
God bless:
Two Feathers
God bless:
Two Feathers
Michiganmuzzy
40 Cal
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction score
- 180
That is a good looking setup. I was thinking something more like this
Then i can use it RH, LH, inside or outside my belt. Just wondering.
Two Feathers, when you get a sheath made, shoot me a price for it. I like it, even if you want to sell it without the sheath. I could make a sheath with brass rivets and some leather I have laying around here.
Mike
Mike
[QUOTE="Two Feathers, post: 1904708, member: 11970]
Here's a copy of the knife I tried to replicate? I do see the error in my choil shape. It didn't start out that way, but it did end up there. Probably from the free hand grinding?
God bless:
Two Feathers
[/QUOTE]
Oh, no! I don't think you made an error at all! Those early knives showed a lot of variability. I thought the blade shape looked good. I was sort of commenting on Brokennock's comment, which I thought was in reference to historical choil shapes. The devil really is in the details.
Your knife looks fine to me! You do nice work!
Notchy Bob
Here's a copy of the knife I tried to replicate? I do see the error in my choil shape. It didn't start out that way, but it did end up there. Probably from the free hand grinding?
God bless:
Two Feathers
[/QUOTE]
Oh, no! I don't think you made an error at all! Those early knives showed a lot of variability. I thought the blade shape looked good. I was sort of commenting on Brokennock's comment, which I thought was in reference to historical choil shapes. The devil really is in the details.
Your knife looks fine to me! You do nice work!
Notchy Bob
Michiganmuzzy:
Thanks. I see the 2 handled coffee mug approach?
While it looks intriguing? It would be difficult to make to the design you've shown? The design here would require a 2 piece sheath with a double seam, front and rear, or spine and cutting edge. It would be a more modern "Buck knife" looking sheath rather than a Mountain Man style. All I can say is, it looks good, but I'm not a good enough leather worker to make one and do it justice.
God bless:
Two Feathers
Thanks. I see the 2 handled coffee mug approach?
While it looks intriguing? It would be difficult to make to the design you've shown? The design here would require a 2 piece sheath with a double seam, front and rear, or spine and cutting edge. It would be a more modern "Buck knife" looking sheath rather than a Mountain Man style. All I can say is, it looks good, but I'm not a good enough leather worker to make one and do it justice.
God bless:
Two Feathers
Oh, no! I don't think you made an error at all! Those early knives showed a lot of variability. I thought the blade shape looked good. I was sort of commenting on Brokennock's comment, which I thought was in reference to historical choil shapes. The devil really is in the details.
Your knife looks fine to me! You do nice work!
Notchy Bob
[/QUOTE]
Notchy Bob:
Sorry buddy. Our oldest son says I'm my own worst critic and too touchy?? I didn't meant to impugn your assessment... sorry. I always appreciate your advice, that's why I ask you first.
Thank you for your compliment it means a lot to me. Yup...the Devil IS in the details! Hopefully, I got some of the details right? Thank you again.
God bless:
Two Feathers
Brokennock
Cannon
Lol. I don't have the pics from a previous discussion we had about this grind line or lack thereof. I had asked what it is called, we don't see 18th century knives having it,,, which doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be sharp all the way to the rear corner.
But, you provided a pic for me,,,
Some modern knives have this grind line almost all the way to the spine. Maybe this is a "plunge line"? Not sure the correct terminology.
I like that the new knife you posted doesn't have it, or at least that it isn't so obvious.
The "pokey" comment was meant as a compliment, BTW.
It does seem that maybe some folks mix up 18th century and 1800s.
Things from the early 1800s being labeled as 18th century.
Brokennock
Cannon
More the grind line I mention in my reply to the o.p. just before this.
But, thanks. Any chance to view any knife by Wick is soothing to my eyes.
Brokennock:
Thanks. Yep, Plunge line is the correct terminology.
I try to avoid them if I can, as they don't look PC to me???? Mine does have a very small one, but once I touch up the grind, and run it across my stones, most; if not all of it will be gone.
Thank you again for your time to comment. I always enjoy you "coming after me" about these things. It keeps me on my toes. LOVE your "Pokey" comment. The century is always the number AFTER the year span. 1700's=18th. century. 1800's=19th. century!
God bless:
Two Feathers
"1750+ Hudson's Bay trade knife complete with 6 brass pins and curly Maple handle."
My knowledge is not complete, and my recent study of the Hudson's Bay products is ongoing. But two things stand out to me. One, your blades are "blacksmith finished" and not "factory finished" which is not what I have seen in trade knives. Trade knives were made for the trade in England and brought to the trade in Northern Canada and what became the US in huge lots. They were a well developed trade good with certain standards. They were not crudely finished.
The other is the sheath. Brass rivets appear later in the period (1800's) not 18th Century (1700's.). Hudson's Bay started trading in the 1600's and continued through the 1860"s, so there were many iterations of the Hudson's Bay knife as time and styles progressed. Your sheaths appear to me to be from the Mountain Man period, which appeared much later (1820-1840) and for only a very short time by Hudson's Bay standards.
I am open to more information if mine is deficient.
ADK Bifgfoot
My knowledge is not complete, and my recent study of the Hudson's Bay products is ongoing. But two things stand out to me. One, your blades are "blacksmith finished" and not "factory finished" which is not what I have seen in trade knives. Trade knives were made for the trade in England and brought to the trade in Northern Canada and what became the US in huge lots. They were a well developed trade good with certain standards. They were not crudely finished.
The other is the sheath. Brass rivets appear later in the period (1800's) not 18th Century (1700's.). Hudson's Bay started trading in the 1600's and continued through the 1860"s, so there were many iterations of the Hudson's Bay knife as time and styles progressed. Your sheaths appear to me to be from the Mountain Man period, which appeared much later (1820-1840) and for only a very short time by Hudson's Bay standards.
I am open to more information if mine is deficient.
ADK Bifgfoot
Looks great Dave. I would think a different sheath can be a nice touch. Brian.
I give it a thumbs up!!
toot:
Thank you brother, much appreciated, however...I think I may have erred by posting these pics.?
God bless:
Two Feathers
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
