Quote:

---

Tony / Perry / Rhett: Thanks. My pleasure.

Joe,

I appreciate your thoughts. I'll try to address them all:

Quote:

---

A couple of things come to mind here Ron. The leather on the unmarked sheath, particulalry the nape on the rear, is a bit different than on the RMK marked sheath, although it is not atypical of Johnson leather. It does not appear to be Heiser leather nor stitiching for that matter.

---

I've seen a large variation in the look and surface finish of the backs of both Heiser and Johnson sheaths. IMO there is no way you can attribute the back of the unmarked sheath to either provider in particular. The stitching (and all other attributes)of the unmarked sheath and the Heiser marked sheath are so similar that there is no doubt in my mind that the unmarked sheath is a Heiser.

Not so fast my friend! The nape I mentioned was not what I was basing my opinion on. The finished leather appears different, and Heiser leather is different than Johnson leather. You have it in hand so I can't say for sure.

Quote:

---

Also, the keeper snap location is different than on the Johnson. If you look at Heiser or Johnson brown button sheaths from the period, generally the keeper snap is located in the middle of the sheath as on the example pictured, not to the far side as on the unmarked sheath. The Heiser is odd in that it has the keeper in that same location as the unmarked sheath. I can see that throwing you a curve ball.

---

Again, I don't think you can attribute the set position of a diagonal keeper strap to either provider. I believe the reason for this is that the shop set the keeper and not the provider. In both Heiser and Johnson sheaths you see the set both in the middle and at the far side. Take a look at the group of sheaths below.

No, you can't base it on the set of the snap, but there was a period where the middle seemed to be the norm. The shop only sets the female portion of the snap on the keeper strap. The male portion is generally set at the sheath makers.




The 5 on the left are Johnsons. 3 with middle sets and 2 with far side sets. The one sheath on the right is a Heiser. It has a middle set which differs from the earlier Heiser marked sheath which is far side set. (If you look closely at the both the unmarked sheath and the earlier Heiser sheath which is far side set, you will see a "pin prick" start of middle set on both!).

What makes you think the Heiser with the metal snaps is earlier than the blonde one in the photo, which by the way is a good example that shows the difference in Heiser leather vs. Johnson leather.

Quote:

---

One thing that really stands out is the guy that stiched it must have been have way though his bottle of Beam when he made this sheath. This, is reminiscent of Stockman quality, or lack thereof.

---

Have you ever had a bad day at work, Joe

Not that bad

Quote:

---

I don't think it is unreasonable to say this could be an early Johnson prototype or 'one off' not unlike Stockman had been doing for some time. Based on the evidence we have seen over the years, I think it stands to reason and the consensus seems to be Maurice Johnson was involved at some level as early as 1960, but definitely by 1961.

---

As I stated above, I'm convinced that the unmarked sheath is a Heiser. I'm also not convinced that Johnson was involved earlier than 1962. It's more than OK that we have different opinions and that we have these discussions. That's the only way that we're going to get closer to the truth.

The unmarked sheath could be a Heiser. I am not saying it is impossible, but from what I see I don’t know if I would bet the farm on it. One day I will take a look at it. A point to ponder is that when Johnson came on board, he had issues with the brown buttons and thought they were inferior to the baby-dot snaps. Gaddis states that Heiser did not have the machine to set the baby dot snaps and continued to use the brown buttons. It is plausible that Heiser tried to accommodate Bo’s request for a better snap, or at least wanted to see what they had to offer in lieu of the brown button a la Johnson. Could have been samples, and that may explain why some may be unmarked. Heiser may not have known about Bo’s frugality and figured they would never be used. Who knows.

I don’t want to get into a debate about Johnson’s involvement with RMK. All I know is, if he got involved as late as stated, then that means he only used brown buttons for maybe only a few months according to Gaddis’ timeline. According to a source, it took Johnson 7-8 months to get up to full production so it doesn’t really jibe with the number of Johnson brown button sheaths that exist. This is partly based on Gaddis stating that “since late ’62 or early ’63, all Johnson-made Randall sheaths use these snaps” referencing baby-dot snaps. There are just too many examples of sheaths with the RMK logo that pre-date the 1962 timeline that are not Heisers.

Soemthing else we have to consider is there is no known evidence that states Heiser had an RMK stamp. There is no evidence anywhere that Heiser sent RMK unmarked sheaths in bulk. There is evidence however that RMK never stamped sheaths in the shop. Also remember, Johnson moved to Florida around either 1956 or 1958 IIRC. Either way, he was in the area for some time prior to his involvement with RMK. The Orlando area was not much back in those days, so I beleive being small town USA people kinda knew who was who when and where, particularly when Bo had been looking for a local sheathmaker at least since the beginning of Stockman's involvement in 1958-59.

I think the key questions are: When did Bo order the RMK sheath stamp? Who was it sent to and when? Directly to the shop? To Johnson? Heiser? Did he initially order more than one?

If the center sheath in the orignal photo looks like a Heiser, than the #1 sheath Rhett posted a photo of actually looks more like a Johnson, save for the snaps, a later one at that wouldn't you say? No one addressed that. Throws another wrinkle into the mix.

Best,

---

Quote:

---

And why isnt this 2-5 in a pancake sheath??

---