Here is my first #2, which is a #2-8" with Nickel Silver furniture and an Ivorite handle:

Ken, that's a great looking #2 with the Ivorite handle and nickle hardware.

Dan Snyder
RKS #5537
SHAG #010

Very nice. I must soon get a mod 2. :-)

Here is a #2-8" that I recently purchased for an old SF comrade from Vietnam, “Dr. Lonny,” now a retired surgeon (he doesn’t buy much over the internet).

I think it is an outstanding blade. The knife, stone, and sheath all have a patina of age, but in almost perfect condition. The logo on the blade looks like it was etched as there is no indent… but I’ve heard that etching the logo is a myth.



When I first saw the pictures, I thought maybe the stone was incorrect, with the white lettering possibly indicating mid-late ‘60s … however, I am hardly an expert. But after seeing the knife it all looks good in the steel … whatever…. It is a knife that was obviously carefully preserved.



The odd thing is that a search on the net for “FBY, Jr.” found another knife, a #12-8” with almost the exact same options, same inscription plate and initials. Unfortunately it had been sold.

My friend wanted to reunite the two knives. He wonders if anyone knows who the “FBY, Jr” collector was, and if there are other presentation knives, perhaps other models in the set, now floating in collector-ville.

I”ll be happy to put the owner of such a knife from this set in touch with Dr. Lonny.

Here is another #2-8” I purchased this week. It fits my taste, obviously beat-the-heck-up, old, carried extensively, probably/possibly in Vietnam (all Randalls actually carried in the field in Vietnam were pretty cruddy and beat up in short order, and the sheaths were frequently blackend and slick and shiny from embedded sweat and dirt on the back).







Once again, this logo almost looks etched... no stamp indent visible... and though it is not marked as such, I want to check the steel... it almost as a stainless feel to it... probably not though. Did Randall ever make a stainless knife that was not marked?

But it also is a lesson about buying when pictures are not so good. The two-tone stone was apparently broken and then epoxyed together, and some name or lettering was very crudely ground off the blade from the side opposite the logo.



Neither of these flaws were shown in the pictures… I actually like the poor baby orphan knife that obviously has a lot of real history... It's like a lost puppy that needs tender loving care.

But I’m thinking of sending it back because the flaws were not pointed out or pictured. I am attracted to interesting pieces of history. I don’t mind the grinding off a name … it was pretty common in Vietnam … new troop in country, buys or trades for a knife from a guy going out … grind his name off. But I do mind the price when these things were not made evident in the sale. The next couple of days, we’ll see if I can live with it.

Regards, Jack Williams

PS: The seller apparently does not deal much in knives as he has no others for sale... he apparently deals in antique brass, metal stuff, statuettes, etc. So to give him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps he just didn't notice the damage. We'll see.

I know many of you are wondering why such a nag (above) was posted amid a stable of thoroughbreds ... but there was a special reason.

I bought the knife, discovered the condition and after examining it and lots of thought, I returned it. It has now been re-posted on e-bay and sold.

But this knife had some strange and special qualities. Note the condition of the blade... no rust, no pitting, dispite the gouge on one side, dings, dints and obviously heavy use. Also note the marks showing attempts to sharpen the blade, without sucess.

I am 99 percent certain this is a stainless blade ... but not marked as stainless. But there is more.

I have heard that there were some RMK stainless blades that were not marked. At least one was shown by Joe on "this old Randall" line. This knife has a serious gouge on the side opposite the logo ... and I am pretty sure a name or initials were crudely removed, one can almost make them out.

This knife then, might be one of a very few that had an unmarked stainless blade... AND... initials (at one time) etched on the opposite side... something that was not supposed to have been produced.








Too bad it was so wrecked, because this knife as seen some exotic use...and has a real veteran history... oh if it could talk. Also one reason I returned it is that I thought there may have been some efforts to disguise the gouge. It looked like the name-initials were removed long ago... by probably using a chisel. But there was a more recent attempt to smooth out the trench using a polishing drill. You may be able to see what I'm talking about by noting the lighter colored markes at the ends of the "trench." The polishing drill hardly was able to mark the stainless blade much... but I'm not a fan of disquised flaws.

Jack,

There's a simple test for stainless that I picked up from Crutchtip:

Get some liquid gun blueing. Put a small amount on a Q-tip and dap it on a non conspicuous area like under the choil. If it's stainless, it will wipe right off. If it's 01, it will "take".

This worked for me.

Best,

Posterity Post:

Model 2 - 8

7 Options:

SS, Nickel Asymmetric Hilt, Alum/Black Spacers, Stag, FG, WT and Compass

Back Side:

End View: