Again Joe, in the "historical King Faisal" thread, you stated:




First thing, I have not argued with you, debated, yes.

Moderate understanding? What's there to understand Joe? The workmanship on the sheaths speak for themselves, no need for discernment.

Clouding the issue? I think I have been spot on in my observations.

"Repetitious diatribe?" Joe, use words that you understand....please.
Meaning of word diatribe:



Challenge? Oh yes. Bitter verbal attack?
I don't think so.

"Misguided from the left coast?" Perhaps a nudge from Ron with the number stamp differences, and Jacks good research on stamp orientation, but other than that....no puppetry here.

Most insulting of all:

"Original thought of my own?" If this isn't the epitome of an unwarranted insult... I will let that statement stand on its own. It needs no explaining. Perhaps you should review Rhetts' forum etiquette in the thread above this one.


You want to end it Joe? Simply debunk my observations with pictures that you said were coming soon in another thread. Its as simple as "pictures are worth thousands of words." Yeah...I altered the quote just a bit. Hey, I enjoy having thoughts of my own :-)

Thanks

Sam,
We know one another. We have spoken on the phone...When? Today or yesterday? (Tulsa makes days run together)...
Anyway: Take it as you may and I am sure you will, once again, pipe in for your last word, something that is blatantly evident..."BUT"...(Get ready for the lecture)... Call it argue...Call it debate...Whatever you wish.
You have called me out to produce sheaths, even to the point that you stating you were going to "hold me to it". Now you tell me I am in a predicament? No Sam: I'm not. Be very careful to keep things civil. Don't call me out anymore and don't disrespect me. You may think you're the second coming of sheath expert but not from where I stand. I am way past any point of commending you for a lot of hard work. Now things come across as the appearance of a shill or troll, arguing points from other (or former?) forum members.
I'm glad we're in the lounge. This is where this topic belongs at this stage. I am sure you will want to "box-in" and "quote" me and anyone else to make your points. It's past tiring for me....and I can't "not read" the stuff. I'm a moderator and it's my responsibility to read this stuff.
Best, Capt. Chris

Thank You Cap.
It (several threads) has all just gotten to the point of being obnoxious and boring. There does come a time when "enough is enough". I think we are at that stage.

Cap, simply put, and no quote capturing necessary, there was no disrespect intended. My tone was not so.

However, its OK for others to insinuate that I have no original thoughts of my own? Insulting my intelligence?

Civil? That's what isn't civil.
Disrespectful? That's what's disrespectful.

Thanks

So now you choose to insult me too Cap Chris, with name calling, "troll" and second coming of sheath expert, and like Joe,"not having a thought of my own?" Implying being a puppet?

Of course the initial observations came from someone else, but I researched those two:

Number stamp differences

Edge beveling differences.

So those two topics have been explored as they relate to transitional RMK sheaths? If it has, please show me where.

Sheath expert? No. I actually claimed that you guys have probably forgotten more than I will ever know about Randall knives. Is that the language of a self appointed expert?

What I am guilty of is being tenatious, staying on task, CORRECT Randall history is important enough to me to do that.

By the way Michael, the sheath research been relegated to the lounge now, so please don't come here and tell me enough is enough. If ya don't want to read about it, stay out of the dungeon :-)


Thanks

No problem there Mr. Sam. It's a shame, because at first it made for some pretty interesting reading. But the continuous on & on has gotten to be a bit much.
I'm outta here.... bye bye !!

Sam, understand something, I nor anyone else for that matter, are under any obligation to educate you. You have your coach and mentor to do that for you, right or wrong.

I nor anyone else is under obligation to respond to your questions, demands, or "challenges".

Here we go:



Followed by:



and of course conveniently LEFT OUT by you so all is taken out of context - again




Work? Well researched? By whom? How many of these sheaths have you had in your hand Sam? Give the readers, not me, the readers a number.

Like you are some moral compass, as you badger, insult, antagonize, and annoy most on this forum to no end?



I am only responding to any more of your posts because I have been REQUESTED to do so. Otherwise you can just rattle away and answer your own posts which you frequently do.

I think Wally said it best in the King Faisal thread about these types of discussions and the participants therein.



Not one iota. You have not influenced anyone I know of. There is nothing that has come from you that has any merit or substance. Only vapid rhetoric to “hear” yourself talk(type). Hell, half the time you respond to your own posts!

The serif stamps is contrary to what you think, nothing new. Your mentor and I had this conversation years ago. There was nothing that came out of your claim about serif stamps being exclusive to Heiser/HKL, other that that they were NOT exclusive to Heiser/HKL.



Hallelujah! Like that is some accomplishment?!? Anyone can do so. I am talking about and always have been talking about HKL brown buttons and Johnson brown buttons from the 1962 transitions period. THAT is what it has always been about.

You will note I am not asking any questions of you other than a follow up i.e. why don't you ask Capt. a second time about why his #7 sheath is a Johnson? Understandably he won't answer then you want to put it on me. How about YOU tell us why or why not it is or isn't a Johnson Sam. C'mon big boy, I issued you a "challenge". You say you are reasonably good at it now so it should not be a problem. So tell us Sam, for once, why don't YOU offer YOUR opinion and why YOU think what is what instead of always demanding others answer YOUR questions as though YOU reside in some position of authority or expertise so you can just argue about it. Like YOU already know the answer.



I am gonna put it on the line for you Sam. You don't understand much less retain anything you read. You don't identify with photos posted. You cherry pick elements of a case made and present them out of context. I could go on and on, but it just isn't worth it.

If you are serious about learning as you continually tell everyone on the forum over and over and over you are, and how so very important important the proverbial "Randall History" is to you, then perhaps you should go through hundreds if not thousands of knives yourself and learn a bit on your own. Quit depending on others to coach you and send you photos.

Speaking of coaches and mentors, more than few on this forum can clearly see Ron Mathews is feeding you. Make no mistake, the verbiage and presentation is exactly his. You think this is all new? I had some of these same conversations i.e. your late entry into the foray, sheath “beveling”, with Ron (and others) years ago.

I would welcome Ron Mathews coming back to say what he has to say, because you can't make an intelligible case. If he wants to come back on here and says his piece himself, I would have more respect than you being "nudged" as you say.

News flash, I have a thread with lots of photos (including a few from your mentor) and accompanying text. My thread is very clear. Therefore, there are more than enough photos for your perusal. In the future I will be sure to answer your demand of Ansel Adams like photos to ensure there is no question when you bless us with your heavily researched opinion.

So, let's get to the heart of the matter and………….tell us about Cap’s #7.

Nothin more, nothin less

Joe,

I told you three months ago that (given your fixed position and demeanor), I wasn't going to waste my time debating this issue with you. Nothing has changed, and that includes putting words into Sam's mouth. You're wrong about that! Please keep me out of this. I have better things to do.

Ron

OK Joe, Cap's #7

My observations that lead me to believe this knife is Heiser/HKL:

1) west facing stamp, proved with provenance that Heiser/HKL used, and stated in your timeline.

2) serif number stamp, proved with provenance that Heiser/HKL used, and stated in your timeline.

3) No front edge beveling, proved with provenance that Heiser/HKL did not do.

We will start with that Joe.

I would appreciate it if you would make your case that this sheath is a Johnson, with provenance.

Thanks Joe.

good try Sam, but again falls short of reality. This information is covered in my thread but I will revisit. I have to add though, this is the same tired argument that has been made for what, 3 months now according to Ron.

1)both hkl and johnson used the west facing stamp as proven with this stamp on this sheath. There are other numerous examples in my thread and elsewhere.

2)johnson also used the serif stamp for a period when he first started making sheaths for RMK, as depicted with this sheath and numerous other examples in my thread and elsewhere.

3)Neither did Johnson on some of his earliest sheaths as this one exhibits as do others pictured in my thread and elsewhere.

You seem to forget we are talking a short period here, months, so you can twist and turn all you like, but you can't refute, no one can refute these typical Johnson traits:

1)die cut of sheath
2)belt loop width & shape
3)overall stitching
4)butterfly shape and stitching
5)little to no edge "tooling" on body of sheath.

What is so disturbing about your take, is that the other two sheaths in Cap's thread are clearly HKL, yet are totally different than the model 7 you claim is an HKL. You don't see it. Cap sees it. I see it. Some other see it. Cap's sheath is the same sheath type in Ron's photos in my thread of six model 3 sheaths that he said 5 out of 6 were Johnson's. One was Heiser marked. If you reread my thread, you will see I agreed with his assessment, save for one which I think is HKL, so I am 4 out of 6 in agreement. And I am even going your way towards HKL!!



Ron -

good to see you posting, irrespective of the topic. Sorry you were dragged into this if that is the case, but it is eery how much Sam sounds like you when presenting his argument. Particularly with his latest foray with "edge beveling". Quite a coincidence that lo and behold something that we both know you and I discussed previously (on at least a couple of occasions) now suddenly appears at this late date. Shocker.

My demeanor? I could easily respond in kind, but I refrain due to our history. Fixed position? I have agreed with your assessment of things on several fronts. The only "fixed position" is you believe EVERY "R" up sheath is an HKL, EVERY center snap sheath is an HKL, completely discounting any other trait. Completely discounting the fact that Johnson used Heiser/HKL as a model for his sheaths. Completely discounting he copied them to the best of his ability using the equipment and materials he had. Were they exact? Of course not, the differences between the two are very clear. No one is or has said they were exact copies, but they were close servicable copies for a period until he came into his own. It is that simple.