Well, we will agree to disagree.

It is not just the stitching on the butterfly, but the front of the sheath. Totally different, no edge tooling. Not the same.

That leather is not HKL leather. That sheath looks nothing like a Hesier/HKL. You put one next to it and it ain't the same, not like the sheaths we have been talking about.

The knife, stone, and sheath package is exactly that, and all pointing to the beginning of the Johnson period.

If you are hanging your hat on the snap position, not gonna fly. Hunt was correct that Johnson did make Heiser(HKL) copies early on. Those are what he used as examples. Johnson put the snap in the same place on some of his early stuff until he determined they weren't that good. Hence the change in snap location and ultimately the switch to the BD's.

You are very adamant about what the HKL sheaths are Jack, so if this is not a Johnson BB to you, albeit and early one, perhaps you can show what you think one is.

ADDED:

The photo of my sheaths above, the one on the left, the HKL we will say, looks like a Heiser, edge tooling on the front and all. The sheath that started this little conversation does not look like it. To say that it does is intellectually dishonest. Save for the snap location, nothing is the same.

One other thing I forgot to mention is the typical Heiser throat flare which is also absent from the sheath that started the conversation. Not to mention it was cut with a completely different die and a completely different shape than the Heiser/HKL.

The LH black sheath was documented to mid-late 63 IIRC.

In the end Jack, what you are looking at is an early Johnson, and the reason I presented this sheath the way I did, in stages, was to see what people said with limited information.

It worked out pretty much the way I thought it would with some sticking to their guns w/o looking at the subtleties. Once you sit back and examine it with the points I have brought up, I think it is relatively clear.

Good discussion.