a little help

[jonet143]

i picked this knife up because i like the pattern. the covers are schrunk and the front pins are missing. the holes on the covers do not align with the liners. i know almost nothing about winchester knives. there is no number on the other side. no date as well. it is 5" closed. is this an old winchester? any info will be appreciated.
thanks
johnnie (jonet143)

[SFC ADP]

You may want to check the front pins, from the picture it does not look like they are missing, just not set in place. I have had this happen on some knives, open the blade up and look inside, sometimes you can see the pin actually in there, set back inside of the knife. (Sometimes this can keep the blade from closing as well!)
As for the Winchester age, I am at work right now, and do not have my references to start reading.

[El Lobo]

Johnnie,

That looks mighty "clean/pristene" to me for a knife that would have to be at least 64 years old. I would think more likely a Queen made (for Blue Grass) recent version. But, I thought the newer ones had shields. Soooo...Let's see what others say.

Bill

EDIT>>>>>Is it pitting or just pepper spots?

[jonet143]

the front pins were loose when i bought the knife. they fell out on inspection. i don't think they were peened to the liners. the rear pins appear to have been re-peened. the blade looks like it has not been used much, but there is some light pitting. the knife walks and talks.

thanks for the input and maybe you'll find more info later.

johnnie

[jonet143]

hey bill, it is pretty clean but the tangs are still sharp. like i said, i know nothing about winchesters but reading the knife tells me it's possibly an old knife. but that's why i came here, a more educated accessment.
as to the spots, they seem to be pits or light pepper. they show in the picture above the tang.
i think i read the later ones have the year of manufacture on the tang. this one is blank and does not appear to have been ground off. there is no thinning of the tang at the spine.

thanks, johnnie

[jonet143]

doing a little more research i found a reference to a 5" celluloid toothpick, pattern 1050 in c. houston price's 14th edition, collector knives, page 421.


thoughts?

johnnie

[El Lobo]

There is no doubt that there was a 5" Toothpick pattern #1050. It is listed in several sources, with assorted celluloid handles. There was also a #1936 version with bone handles. But, the front pin (s) falling out does give ME some pause as to whether it may have been altered in some manner. However, it could be the real deal.

Nice knife no matter.

Bill

[jonet143]

hey bill,

was'nt the pivot pin, just the pins securing the covers at the front.

i wondered if it had the handles replaced or just repaired incorrectly.

i would also be surprised if it were the real deal as well. i picked the #1050 because the #1936 was a bone handle.

thanks for the input.

johnnie

[El Lobo]

Johnnie,

I corrected my post about the pins, after I had punched it up and realized my mistake...just typing too fast, I guess, as the picture clearly shows it wasn't the pivot pins.

It might be worth your while to contact Bernard Levine for an appraisal, if no one else can offer additional help. Try a couple more pictures, maybe. You would probably need them for Bernard anyway...if you chose that route.
http://pweb.netcom.com/~brlevine/appr-k.htm

It doesn't seem right that someone would replace the covers with celluloid that had shrunk. Maybe they started, then bailed on doing it? Are there any pepper spots on the backspring, or patina inside the frame?

Bill

[jonet143]

just the smallest pepper on the backspring. inside looks clean but not polished.

i wanted to try here first before i did the levine thing.
anywat thanks. check out my ka-bar in my last post.

johnnie

[knifeaholic]

Looks real to me....it appears to be one of the less expensive Winchester "assortment" knives from the 30's.