Dating a model 8-4

[samg]

Any ##eas when this 8-4 may have been made? Specers and choil give any clues? Any ##eas? ( I know the knife is in sheath wrong. Not my photos :-)

Thanks, Samg

[samg]

I actually found this knife discussed on another forum, and the response from an respected collector was:

"It was standard on Bowies and common smaller knives to have 5 spacers with stag during the 7 spacer period...
It is 3 thick, 2 thin, which is right for '64"

Another respected collectors response:

"The deal with the 5 spacers on the "smaller" knives I have found to be that 3/16" blades would come both ways, 5 spacer or 7 spacer, with the 5 spacer seemingly the more common of the two as the decade (1960's) wore on. "

The seller was stating that it was purchased in 1964.

Regards, Sam

[Ta2bill]

I wish that I could see the logo stamp a little better.

[samg]

This is about the best I can do at this point till I have the knife in hand Ta2bill.

[Ta2bill]

Looks to me like the seller is telling the truth! Great little knife!

[Jacknola]

That is a type 1 stamp, pre-early 1966. It would not have been used to stamp the blade later than that, therefore production OF THE Blade in 1964 is very possible.

There are three dates that can be of importance for "dating" a vintage Randall.

(1) when the blade was made which can sometimes be ##'d by blade stamp;
(2) When the knife was finished - which is sometimes ##'d by handle, spacers, etc;
(3) When the knife was sold - which is sometimes ##'d by sheath characteristics.

Most of the time, especially during the later 1960s, all these dates occurred in conjunction. But there were cases of the less popular knifes having the dates separated by some time. And in the case of ... say ... fighter blades in the late 1950s, a couple of years could elapse between forging the blade and shipping the knife. However, in the case of this knife, I would suggest that it is legit...

Regards

[Ta2bill]

Seems like the greatest chance of mismatched dates for knives vs. sheaths are with the big Model 12's. A sheath may be much older than the knife itself back in those days.

[samg]

Thanks for your input Jacknola. As usual, your posts are insightful, and challenges us to really look close, and seek out those comparisons that help us date these knives. The seller d## claim that he purchased it in 1964, but as we know, buy the knife, not the story.

When the knife arrives, I will post a clearer picture of the stamp.

In the meantime, I will be reviewing your stamp thread. I became pretty good at ##entifying the earliest stamp, as my interest was in WW2 Hunters, but later generation stamps...not so much.

Just shows how much there is to learn about the subtle and not so subtle changes over the years.

Thanks again Jacknola for your sharp eye.

Regards, Samg

[samg]

In going thru Jacks stamp thread "dating old Randall blades by blade stamp" it appears that the stamp on this 8-4 falls into the '63-'65 range, will have clearer photos next week.

One of the obvious differences between the early 60's stamp, and the late 60's stamps is the position of the comma " , " on the bottom line with the " M " of MADE on the top line.

As Jack had commented, we don't know if there was overlap of stamp usage, and for how long.

Perhaps Dirty Water can weigh in on this.

In Gaddis' book, when Bo ordered his 2nd stamp in the early 40's, he sent the 1st one back to have it sharpened. So he used them both. D## he have the power stamper in the 60's that we see in Pete's book? That would seem to imply using the same stamp continuously, as apposed to a hand stamp that could be interchanged.
So if there was significant overlap in usage, then the other methods of spacers, choil, sheath have to be more heavily relied on.

Any opinions?

Regards, Sam

[samg]

The little 8-4 bird and trout arrived yesterday, and I am very happy with it. Great piece of stag, and with the curve, fits nicely in the hand. M## 60's vintage. He had it as buy now with a make offer, I made an offer and the seller accepted. Got it for a bit less than the new ones are going for now, so we both walked away happy. Apparently he had it listed for quite some time.
I targeted m## 60's, because growing up in Flor##a, Tampa specifically, my father worked on power plants around Cocoa and Titusville, so we would pass thru that little town of Orlando, long before Disney came to town. It was more like orange groves as far as the eye could see. Randall probably owned some of those. So though I d##n't know about Randall knives then, as a k##, we sure passed close to the shop on the way to the coast.

It will make a great little user.

Regards, Samg

[Jacknola]

Sam, cool little vintage knife, good keeper.

I doubt DW can (or will) add to my study unless he has spent time examining hundreds of stamps, double checking ages with various features, and has a data base of many documented knives. He probably has a day job that limits focusing on 1960s era knives . But of course I would welcome any pertinent comments.

I think you may have mis-read my original thesis and conclusions. Nowhere d## I conclude that there was a question about the type 1-2 stamps overlapping the use of the type-3 stamp. There may be some variations in stamps, but the basics of the type 1, 2 and 3 stamps and the dates I pointed out, especially the switch to type-3 in early 1966, seem accurate in my opinion.

I have since found three knives that are odd...in that they have a seemingly variant type-3 stamp, two of them with a low S. One of these is from an E-bay seller with a shady reputation. While the type-3 stamps on these three seem to look a bit different from other type-3s stamps (of which there may well be several variants through time), there are not enough examples to proclaim a different time period for the stamp and the oddball low S can be explained away as indiv##ual production anomalies, unless there are a lot of examples.

The use of type 1 and type 2 stamps d## indeed overlap. The type-2 seems to have been from late '50s until about 1964, while the type-1 was the more-or-less original form that extended until early 1966. But once the type-3 began to be used it was apparently virtually universal on all models immediately. There have been several slightly different type-3 stamps going forward in time that might be worth exploring, but that was not my focus.

If you have a reason for question the basic early 1966 change-in-stamp thesis, by all means please post it. I have not seen anyone including Joe, Mitchell, Gary Clinton, or other vintage collectors challenge the basic thesis since the subject was introduced.

Regards...

[samg]

Originally Posted by Jacknola

I think you may have mis-read my original thesis and conclusions. Nowhere d## I conclude that there was a question about the type 1-2 stamps overlapping the use of the type-3 stamp. There may be some variations in stamps, but the basics of the type 1, 2 and 3 stamps and the dates I pointed out, especially the switch to type-3 in early 1966, seem accurate in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Jacknola

If you have a reason for question the basic early 1966 change-in-stamp thesis, by all means please post it. I have not seen anyone including Joe, Mitchell, Gary Clinton, or other vintage collectors challenge the basic thesis since the subject was introduced.

Hi Jack. I think you misunderstood my meaning. Where I stated:

Originally Posted by Samg

As Jack had commented, we don't know if there was overlap of stamp usage, and for how long.

I was referring to the overlap of the first 2 stamps. The original, and the 2nd one that Bo ordered. I haven't studied the generations of stamps at this point, and was commenting on the statement that Gaddis made.

Great research Jack. When I have time, I will look at those comparisons too.

Regards, Samg

This 8-4 that I just received has a small stamp. I have it pictured with my m## 60's Astro.