Bernard Levine said; “Dating knives by the tang stamp is a fools game.”
Tom Williams the Camillus Company Historian told me that Camillus tang stamps can be very deceptive; one can date the knives better by materials, technology and manufacturing techniques, rather than by the stamp. Tom pointed out that even these methods of dating Camillus knives are not foolproof. Changes could be made in the middle of a production run depending on the availability of parts. If they had an order for 10,000 knives and they had pre-made 5000 liners for prong type handles they would begin the production run with the prong type parts and switch over to stud type handles when they had exhausted the pre-existing supply.
It seems that Camillus did not throw anything away, but would keep it and use it later. Tom told me the tang stamps were kept on a shelf in the factory. When someone needed to stamp a batch of blades they would grab a stamp and use it, even if it was not the current stamp being used at that time. Now, this strikes me as a strange way to run a factory, but that is what Tom told me, so I will take him at his word. Tom should know what he is talking about, he worked there for 30 years and his mother worked there for over 50 years.
I believe the Cabone handles were a jigged synthetic handle material.
This is from a 2009 post on AAPK by Steve Pfeiffer (knifeaholic):
knifeaholic wrote:The Camillus knife in that auction has jigged black compostion handles. I do not think they were delrin since the use of that material by Camillus (I believe) predates the invention of delrin.
Camillus used the term "Cabone" in their catalogs to denote imitation jigged bone (compostion) handles. Just as KABAR used the term "KASTAG" to denoteds their imitation bone handles, and Case used the term "Delstag".
From what I have seen of older Camillus knives and catalogs, they used that jigged black compostion material as well as genuine jigged broen bone on the "three-line" stamped knives starting after WWII and continuing into the 1950's.
Then at some point they swithced to a compostion that was similar in appearance (jiggin wise) but had a deep maroon color.
Then later by the 1970's they had switched to the more familiar delrin imitation bone handles that had a combination of brown and tan colors.
I think that the progression from black to maroon to the delrin with more color represented advances in the plastics industry in terms of both the materials used and the coloring processes.
But the catalogs at least in the 1970's called the material "Cabone". I always assumed that the "Ca" was from the name Camillus.
You can read the thread at this link:
http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... ne#p112547
I did more digging after finding the above post.
I have a copy of the 1965 catalog Tom Williams sent me.
Here is a page from that 1965 catalog showing.
As you can see the Cabone handles are very different from the saw cut bone in the Barlow in question. Cabone was obviously a jigged material,
in this instance.
travman wrote:Thanks robinetn
for showing those two examples
Two knives same time era with different tang stamps
It goes to prove you can not use the tang stamp on Camillus knives as the only way to age a knife
I think it shows that they didnt throw anything away and would use it when needed to fill in an order ?
Now all we need is to find a Camillus catalog from the 50s to help fill in some more of the blanks
Like what year did they stop with Camillus on the Barlows ?
Thanks Trav
I was curious as to when Camillus did stop putting the Camillus name on the bolsters of the Barlow, so I did some checking in the catalogs I have.
The Camillus name is there on the #10 & #11 Barlows in the 1948 catalog.
By 1951 it appears that only the name “Barlow” is on the bolsters and that the numbers have changed.
- Camillus Barlow -1951 catalog.JPG (47.57 KiB) Viewed 5490 times
In 1965 we again see the name “Barlow” on the bolsters and it is now pattern #51.
- Camillus Barlow- 1965 catalog.JPG (49.05 KiB) Viewed 5490 times
Tom did mention that Camillus had changed their numbering system after WW II, but it appears the Barlow pattern changed twice.
I do not have an explanation for this. I will have to ask Tom next time I talk to him.
At this point I have more questions than I did before we started on this, but I am sure the Barlow posted by
morglan is a bone handled Barlow, not cabone.
Dale
PS-Just to confuse everyone further, I did find a 1972 catalog drawing of a Daddy Barlow with saw cut type Cabone handles.
Another knife mystery.
To be continued (no doubt)......... 
