Western Model Difference

Troylet said:
Okay.... jpgs.
I only hope these links work!!!
Apparently Google doesn't support any direct way for Android phones to copy pics to "Clipboard" for pasting elsewhere.
I've never used "Link Sharing" before, so it is what it is.
If these aren't accessible, just let me know and I'll figure out a work around.
Thanks
Signed:
I HATE TECHNOLOGY
https://s.amsu.ng/pyb9Sqli0chN
https://s.amsu.ng/3vCcbvBwoknN
https://s.amsu.ng/9BXk585HOoLN
https://s.amsu.ng/xMiv7KeW2pAN
https://s.amsu.ng/rXzXSJypUINN
https://s.amsu.ng/eKM0dWSm2DdN
Click to expand...
If I may, please take a look at the blade profile and give me your opinion as to whether you think it's truly crooked or merely an optical illusion.
I'm leaning hard to "crooked"!!!
I just, for whatever reason, assumed that blade blanks came already profiled.
I suppose if they were part of a "manufacturer closing" liquidation sale, they could have come in any stage of completion, because if this blade profile is truly crooked, it wasn't done at Western, unless it was headed for the "recycle bin" and inadvertently got misdirected into the liquidation sale stock.
I mean, who knows?..... and at this point, I guess that's really neither here nor there.
I also notice the original sheath is lacking, which seems to be the case with every later model "stag" handled W77 or 777 I've seen.
I think where this heading, is that zzyzzogoten was correct, when in an earlier post, he concluded that this "777 stag" was most likely a product of liquidated Western stock, assembled by "others" after the manufacturer's closing.
That said...... any thoughts/opinions would be greatly appreciated!!!
Thanks!!!
 
As I understand it the auction that Camillus won was for all intents the "liquidation sale".
We're really at the point of lots of speculation here. IMHO, it doesn't get us very far. We have the chance to get closer to some of the things that did and didn't happen with the closing of the Longmont operation.
Phil Gibbs still drops by here. He was sent out from New York to oversee the transition of Western to Camillus. If he chooses to he might be able to shed some light on some things when it comes to what did and didn't happen. At least he was there.
I do recall Phil telling me that Camillus used a lot of Westerns remaining stock to help fill outstanding orders, (especially for Western's remaining large volume customers), while Camillus was busy getting their own production set up and on line.
 
sac troop said:
As I understand it the auction that Camillus won was for all intents the "liquidation sale".
We're really at the point of lots of speculation here. IMHO, it doesn't get us very far. We have the chance to get closer to some of the things that did and didn't happen with the closing of the Longmont operation.
Phil Gibbs still drops by here. He was sent out from New York to oversee the transition of Western to Camillus. If he chooses to he might be able to shed some light on some things when it comes to what did and didn't happen. At least he was there.
I do recall Phil telling me that Camillus used a lot of Westerns remaining stock to help fill outstanding orders, (especially for Western's remaining large volume customers), while Camillus was busy getting their own production set up and on line.
Click to expand...
Thanks sac troop!!!
I agree, a lot of speculation.
I think zzyzzogoten was correct in his earlier post, that the 777 "stag" handle in question (see pics) was most likely crafted by a knife maker not associated with either Western or Camillus, following the public sale of a portion of this stock.
Then again, who REALLY knows???
zzyzzogoten offered up a couple of other scenarios as well, any one of which may very well be what "actually" happened!!!.... again, who REALLY knows???
My concern at the time I asked, was whether or not it's value, as a collectible, would be affected, if it had, in fact, been assembled by "others" (meaning anyone outside Western or Camillus) thus making it not a "true" Western!!!.... despite the stamp!!!
Arguably, I don't believe it can be considered "authentic" if it wasn't crafted from start to finish under the roof of either company!!!
That said, I believe zzyzzogoten addressed my concern when he stated that it's worth was relative to the market (sic), in that some Western collectors appear to covet these knives regardless of who finished crafting them..... in my mind, "asked and answered"!!!
Bottom line at this point is.... does this particular 777 "stag" or "bone" stag or "Delrin" or resin or whatever.... does this knife warrant consideration for a place in a collection or is the craftsmanship just too poor???
I'm kind of answering my own question here as since I've received the new images, I just can't see how the crooked blade profile could be an optical illusion.
However, you guys look at far more images of knives which in a lot of cases you either own and have photographed or examined images of and subsequently purchased, that you would most certainly know much better than I, the distortions that can be created by a shiny blade.
Final word..... is this thing a treasure or a turd???
Thanks!!!
And I do apologize for the rambling!!!... I'm a writer, and sometimes I just can't shut my finger up!!!
 
For right now if it was mine I'd have it on my curiosity shelf.:) But thats part of the reason to keep looking for good clues.
 
Troylet, I would say the blade is straight. The way it was photographed makes it look bent. The sheath has the correct clip on the back. I would guess that someone bought the blade and had a horn handle put on it.
 
Maybe the blade is straight, but the grind is clearly curve (photo 2, 3). Someone used a defective blank.
 
Thanks everyone!!!
I appreciate all of the great info and informed opinions!!!
After searching hours and viewing many, many dagger blade pics, I've yet to find a single blade that appears "crooked"!!!
At the end of things, I find myself still sitting on the fence with this "777 stag" and that fact, in and of itself, serves as the final red flag regarding this knife.
Again, thanks to all of you for your time and assistance!!!
Both are very much appreciated!!!
 
Years ago I bought a Westmark knife off the bay. Western used the Westmark name for three knives (701, 702 and 703). This one is marked WM77. Pictures are the WM77 (right knife) with a W77 and W75 and a couple of pictures of the box. Another mystery.

IfuUfbO.jpg

5pqV4hE.jpg

NGMaR3T.jpg
 
The more I look at the pictures of this knife the less I like it. It might be an optical illusion, but I don't think so. The center ridge of the blade does appear to be offset from the tip of the point. IMHO, the people bidding on this already got the price above what I'd be interested in. This thing has me wondering if we're looking at a discarded blank that turned into a "lunch box special" and the hilt was applied as a practice project. The whole piece looks too rough for me.
 
Smokey Mountain Knife Works had a working relationship or partnership of some sort with Camillus over Westmark. Then at some point SMKW took over sole "ownership" of the Westmark mark.

I know of the boot knife, a doctor's knife and an eagle head pommel dagger Westmark knives. All of these were Camillus made, post-Western/Coleman-Western era knives.

The models 701/702/703 Westmark knives were the only Westmark marked knives produced during the Boulder/Longmont, Colorado era.
 
OK ... Stupid question ...
My Western L66 has a "D" date code, which if my calculations/counting are correct makes it a 1980 production.

According to what I read in post 9, Coleman did not take over until 1984.
In post 6, it is stated that Camillus did not make any bifurcated tang knives. (Yes, I know Camillus did not take over until 1991)

When did Western drop the bifurcated tang on the L66? (For that matter, did the L66 ever have the bifurcated tang construction?)
The pommel on my 1980 L66 is pinned. There is no nut. The tang is as visible on my L66 as it is on my nuthin fancy Buck 119 Special.
If it matters, the guard is brass, the pommel is aluminum. The fiber spacers are black/white/red/white/black on both ends.

Lastly, I know my knife has less than zero "collector value". Which is just as well, since I bought it to be a user, not a "Safe King". (which is probably a "good thing", as well, since I don't own or have access to a safe :D )
That said, what should I use to clean the handle?
Saddle Soap and Steelwool?
I have saddle soap (I think) and coarse steelwool.
I'm not worried about taking off what is left of the varnish that Western put on the handle in 1980.
I have (food grade) mineral oil to waterproof the leather. Truth be told, if that makes the grip a little more grippy when damp or wet, I won't complain. :)
 
Neither WESTERN Western nor COLEMAN Western dropped the split tang on the L66.

ALL L66s produced by either Western or Coleman/Western from 1941 (when the L66 was first introduced) until Camillus took over in 1991 were manufactured using the split tang/double pin construction.

Camillus dropped the split tang construction on ALL models of Westerns they made after they bought the company and moved production from Longmont Colorado to Camillus NY.

A "D" date coded Western (1980 is correct) will have the split tang - you should see TWO pins in the pommel - 1 pin for each tang segment.


edit to add -

I have to admit I was wrong in this post. I am NOT going to change the post as I intend to leave it as evidence that I make mistakes.

See post # 35 below.... Western dropped split tang/double pinned pommel construction on the L66 around the 1973 time-frame.
 
Last edited:
Found a YouTube video on a Western L66 with D date code.
I'm not sure what language the guy is speaking, it isn't English.
He does show the end of the pommel near the end of the video.
No peened twin pins.
During his review(?) he points to the side of the pommel and talks about the area that the cross pin is.
On mine, it looks like a tapered pin was used. Maybe 1/8" on the mark side and 3/16" on the pile side.
Like I said, he is not speaking English, so I don't know if he was simply pointing out the pommel is aluminum, or the tapered cross pin.
 
Last edited:
Western used two cross pins for the "birdshead pommels", whether they were aluminum or plastic. IMHO, I doubt that they were ever tampered. Might be an illusion from the spreading of the pin head when they were set in place.
 
Have you ever had a "fact" so indelibly ingrained in your brain that you never realized that your were WRONG?????? :confused:o_Oo_O I now have to eat crow.:oops::oops::oops:

I just watched the video link posted by afishhunter, (the video poster is speaking German by the way) and from what I could see it was undoubtedly a REAL Western L66 D date coded knife BUT it does not have a split tang and only has a single pommel pin.

But wait!!!! How could that be???:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

I then started searching fleabay for pictures of L66s currently for sale. Lo and behold, every L66 for sale on fleabay that I could identify as a date-coded version (B, C, D, H, J), a Camillus made version, as well as a 1973-1976 version was manufactured using a hidden tang, single pin pommel method of construction.

All pre-1968 L66s that I could find had split tang, double pommel pin construction.

So that means that at some point between 1968, when Western started tamping the model number into the guard and 1973, when Western dropped "BOULDER COLO" from the stamps, Western also dropped the split tang construction on the L66.:eek::eek:

My guess would be 1973, when Western dropped the reference to BOULDER COLO. Without pics and receipts from someone's purchase of a single pin pommel prior to the 1973 stamp change, it would be difficult to identify when the change actually occurred.

All date coded W66 knives on fleabay maintain the split tang double pin construction, including guard stamped and H/J date codes. So do the L40s, H40s, L39s, W39s, H39s, S-666s.

I found a single L48B "J" date code with single pin hidden tang construction and a 648A "D" with double pin, so I'll have to research the 48A/B versions for when the construction change occurred on those models.

I hate being wrong, but when I am, I have to admit it.:oops::oops::oops:
 
zzyzzogeton said:
Have you ever had a "fact" so indelibly ingrained in your brain that you never realized that your were WRONG?????? :confused:o_Oo_O I now have to eat crow.:oops::oops::oops:

I just watched the video link posted by afishhunter, (the video poster is speaking German by the way) and from what I could see it was undoubtedly a REAL Western L66 D date coded knife BUT it does not have a split tang and only has a single pommel pin.

But wait!!!! How could that be???:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

I then started searching fleabay for pictures of L66s currently for sale. Lo and behold, every L66 for sale on fleabay that I could identify as a date-coded version (B, C, D, H, J), a Camillus made version, as well as a 1973-1976 version was manufactured using a hidden tang, single pin pommel method of construction.

All pre-1968 L66s that I could find had split tang, double pommel pin construction.

So that means that at some point between 1968, when Western started tamping the model number into the guard and 1973, when Western dropped "BOULDER COLO" from the stamps, Western also dropped the split tang construction on the L66.:eek::eek:

My guess would be 1973, when Western dropped the reference to BOULDER COLO. Without pics and receipts from someone's purchase of a single pin pommel prior to the 1973 stamp change, it would be difficult to identify when the change actually occurred.

All date coded W66 knives on fleabay maintain the split tang double pin construction, including guard stamped and H/J date codes. So do the L40s, H40s, L39s, W39s, H39s, S-666s.

I found a single L48B "J" date code with single pin hidden tang construction and a 648A "D" with double pin, so I'll have to research the 48A/B versions for when the construction change occurred on those models.

I hate being wrong, but when I am, I have to admit it.:oops::oops::oops:
Click to expand...

Sorry. :(

In answer to your first question, "More than once." :oops::(

As for the crow, I think it tastes best when curried, like pigions and chicken. :)
I don't think the crow hunting season has started yet, so you might want to postpone that meal. :)

Your timeline on the changes to the L66 make sense.
What doesn't make sense (at least not to me) is that the W66 (which I always thought differed from the L66 only by tang stamp and wood vs leather handle) used the split tang after the L66 went to hidden tang construction.
Why would Western make two different blades like that? It would have been cheaper (I would think) to make the L66, W66, and F66 "Black Beauty" with the same blade blank, wouldn't it? o_O:confused:
(I don't remember if my step pop's pre-1970 F66 had a hidden tang or not. If memory serves, it was stolen in 72 or 73. :( As far as I know, he never replaced it. If he did, I don't know what he replaced it with. We did not get along all that well. I lived with who I thought was my dad (long story) not with him and my mum.)
 
Last edited:
Don't feel bad Zzz, you did the collector's community a favor. Seems like there's always something, like looking for a Western L or even W 46 with a guard stamp. It's to the point where I'm convinced they must be made of unobtainium.
 
I have never seen a 46 with a guard stamp.

The L46-5, L46-6 and L46-8 were all still available per the 1968 catalog and theoretically, the model numbers SHOULD have moved to the guard at that time, but I have never, ever seen a guard marked 46-X. I would have been on any of them like a chicken on a June bug. My guess is that for some reason Western chose NOT to do make the shift on the 46s.

I have 2 theories -

first, Western had so many 46-x knives on hand (made already or stamped blanks on hand), they didn't need to stamp guards for them.

second, at least for the 46-6 and 46-8, Western had a ton of full guards already lying around and they didn't want to waste time and money hand stamping the the already stamped guards. The L46-6, L46-8 and W49 were the only full guard knives left in Western's offerings. This theory doesn't explain why the L46-5 didn't shift to guard stamps, as it was a half-guard only.

By the 1978 catalog, the only 46 left was the W46-8.

Another oddity - most of the H46-8s (Delrin handled 46-8s) that I have seen are stamped with the model number W46-8.
 
First I'd say that we can't take what we see in the catalogs, (just about any ones catalogs), with at least a grain of salt.o_O Actually I've been having to say that for a long time already.:cool:
Do you have a good idea of the time frames for the H46-8's? I'm asking because I've run across other Westerns with stamped stock numbers that don't conform to the early Platt's family formula. So far all of those are date coded to the Coleman/Western time frame and the investor group that followed.
 
The earliest I can recall for H46-8s is 1980, I.e., year code "D". In fact, there is one on fleabay right now.

They were made as late as 1990. Not that I have seen any with an "N" date code, but I have seen them made for the 50th anniversary Wyoming One Shot competition. These had stamp like the Camillus stamps (WESTERN over USA W46-8), with a serial number on the pile side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top