ron, the construction of the little sheath you posted looks far more like the 1-8 sheath that started this discussion than the prototypical HKL sheath which is the tan one on the left that jack posted. From the frontal view, the ONLY real difference is snap placement which I asked you not to get hung up on by the way.

From the rear the ONLY difference is stamp orientation which I asked you not to get hung up on by the way.

I wanted you to look at this sheath w/o consideration of those two factors for a minute. Didn't happen.

So that is it Ron. You and Jack base your whole opinion on the 1-8 sheath in question on those two traits, and completely disregard any other points brought up to make the case as though they don't exist, or deny that there is any possiblity that some or all of the points made have merit. How about the throat flair that "disappeared in the 50's" on the sheath posted by Jack? All I hear is crickets.

So you are in essence doing the very same thing (as stated previously) the "card-carrying collectors" initially did with the RMK stamp saying all of them were Johnson's. You are saying every "west" facing RMK brown button is an HKL sheath. Every BB center snap sheath is a Heiser/HKL.

You guys foolishly think that there is a line or date when Maurice Johnson started to make sheaths and immediately, the first day, heck, the first hour, made these two changes. Like there was some conscious effort on his part acknowledging "If I put the snap towards the edge and flip the orientation of the stamp, people will know these were made by me and not Heiser".

Who knows, the 1-8 could be one of the first ones he made. I can't say. I can say this though with relative certainty, that is NOT Heiser/HKL leather from what I see.

I don't know why you are bringing up "all the sheaths documented going back to 1960.........." Who said anything about those sheaths? They aren't even part of the debate because there is no debate there. I am talking about this single 1-8 sheath and wanted opinions on what it was. That is why I brought it up in the first place, because of the Johnson traits I saw.

Then I get this barrage of not only amateurish but somewhat condescending rhetoric about desert islands and my reputation. For the guy that came on the forum within the last week with the kumbaya reconciliation and can't we all just get along mantra, I find it surprisingly hypocritical. Disappointing.

I will put it out there my friend, because I think it is exactly what I say it is. An early example, maybe one of the first Johnson BB sheaths to be identified as such. Of course a hands on examination would be best and the possibility of me changing my mind although somewhat remote could happen. I guess it is a no brainer to think I could expect the same from you at this point, so while not ideal, the photos will have to do.