Mitchell -

I also think it is time that we have some intelligent discussion about these sheaths.

I have to go on record though stating I did not intend for this thread to turn into what it became. I think I tried to maintain some civility while under attack, actually, I did a damn good job considering what I would normally do. I did so because I wanted to get some involvement from the members here. With the tone of "contributions" from certain parties, I am not surprised we didn't.

For the umpteenth time, I presented a sheath that had what I called or better yet I will use Jack's term had "Johnson-esque" characteristics. Those characteristics led me to believe that there was more than a better chance it could be an early Johnson BB. I still believe that. While Ron (and Jack) wants to take cheap shots, he forgets, that I make only opinions with varying degrees of certainty using photographs. Historically you can look at anything I have said using photos only, and it is always with the caveat of a hands on evaluation. Nevertheless as you can see from his most recent post above, he tactfully removed only a portion of the paragraph from an earlier post of mine in what I can only conclude was a feeble effort to discredit me in some fashion. Epic fail.