Why On the TL-29 does the bail change positions?

[Captain O]

I have noticed on several varying "editions" of the venerable TL-29 that some have bails mounted toward the end of the knife, while others ar mounted further up on the knife's body?

Does anyone have any information for the reason behind this variance?

Arf The Wonder Chicken want's to know. (To the devil with "inquiring minds").

[Tsar Bomba]

First, the what. To illustrate what (I think) the good Captain is referring to, here are two Camillus TL-29s with approximately 60 years between them. Ignore the Schrade in the middle, it's got no bail anyway:

Camillus TL-29 (4-line)

Camillus TL-29 (2000s)

Now, the why. I base this on nothing more than my own senses and reasoning, but it seems the bail pin moved outward because the bail itself got smaller. Less room to travel = pin closer to edge. While this would be entirely speculation, I imagine Camillus figured they could reduce materials cost by reducing the total number of pins on the knife and reducing the amount of steel required for the bails. Beyond that, I have no real answer for your question, but I do think it's a worthy question!

[jerryd6818]

Camillus moved the bail between 1976 and 1977. They also changed handle materials sometime between 1965 and 1972 from Rosewood to plain brown Delrin. Why? I don't know the answer to that. I'm going to guess the reason was as always; money. It would be a small savings to make the bottom handle pin the attachment for the bail instead of having a bottom handle pin and a bail pin.

[KnifeSlinger#81]

Camillus moved the bail between 1976 and 1977. They also changed handle materials sometime between 1965 and 1972 from Rosewood to plain brown Delrin. Why? I don't know the answer to that.

Times are a changin'. That's about all I can figure

[jerryd6818]

And by the way, to get persnickety, that's a #27. The TL-29 is the military version of the #27.

[Tsar Bomba]

I knew a Devil Dog would set that one straight. For what it's worth I think both my 4-lines are true TL-29s, they both have faint hints of the TL-29 stamp and I am fairly sure both were wartime-produced. I have my EDC 4-line in my hand right now and my other one IIRC is the same - steel everything. In the right light, the beat-up wood on my EDC still gives up just a hint of a "TL-29" stamp right where a shield would usually be on a barehead jack.

Frankly, I don't think Camillus gave up much by going to the 2-pin Delrin knives. Sure, it's always nice to have an organic material in hand but the Delrin is durable, "tactical" and covers a knife that IMO is just about every bit as tough, sharp and versatile as the wartime TL-29s. The abuse my poor EDC 4-line has taken would have killed an ordinary knife, but I have an inkling that a #27 from that catalog would stand up to it just as well.

That being said, I do enjoy the symbolism of the last year they truly made 'em like they used to being the year I was born. Apparently pops was right when he said they broke the mold after me.

[#goldpan]

I think Tony hit on the head. To save money. I have two tl's apart right now. Modding one for my self an the other for my brother's up coming birthday. He was in the Navy during the Vietnam era, hull tech. Anyway one has the forward bale and the other don't. I took a long look at all the parts, economy of parts=lower material cost and just a little less time involved putting em together. Just my plug nickles worth.

[Captain O]

Camillus moved the bail between 1976 and 1977. They also changed handle materials sometime between 1965 and 1972 from Rosewood to plain brown Delrin. Why? I don't know the answer to that. I'm going to guess the reason was as always; money. It would be a small savings to make the bottom handle pin the attachment for the bail instead of having a bottom handle pin and a bail pin.

Thanks, Jerry. That figures. Black Delrin seems to be the name of the game with today's TL-29. I hope that those being issued in the military are as high quality as they were until 2007. I just never noticed the securing point of the shackle until I obtained my Camillus.

[Old Hunter]

And by the way, to get persnickety, that's a #27. The TL-29 is the military version of the #27.

Ah ha! I've have wondered what was the difference when I could find only cosmetic differences when looking them over - you have taught me something this morning. OH
Ps Two Camillus knives I own: TL29 and a #27. I also note that the old TL29 has the bail in the forward position while the #27 has it in the rear position.

[jerryd6818]

It's the same knife with the one marked TL-29 and being made under government contract while the other is stamped 27 on the back of the tang and is made for retail sale. I think y'all would be surprised how much that bail move saved Camillus over the long haul. Or maybe not.

[gsmith7158]

Jerryd, I can't imagine the sheer numbers of those that have been produced . Even a minute savings would have been huge.

[tjmurphy]

They saved a pin, installation and material for the bail.

[jerryd6818]

They saved a pin, installation and material for the bail.

They saved two pins (one for each side on the bottom). Plus the labor to drill the extra holes unless you are including that in "installation".

[ea42]

The old TL-29's were put together like any other pocket knife, once it was together you had to shape the handles and cut down the pins in the process to make them flush. This would have been impossible if the Bail was attached so it was installed through separate holes after the knife was finished.

The newer knives have delrin handles that were pre-molded to the exact shape of the finished knife handle save for a bit of overlap on the backspring and front. You could basically just grind the backsprings and glaze the bolster and be done with just a bit of buffing. This is why you see a spun center pin rather than a flat one. In this way the bail could be attached during assembly, with its pin also serving as the butt pin.

Eric