All About Pocket Knives

carrmillus wrote:.........just re-read all these posts about the #80- so the #80 pattern is the same as a #72, except for the etches and markings,right????....................... ............................

These two pics are both from a folder of catalog pages I got from Tom Williams.
They are supposed to be from the 1950s, but the individual pages are not dated as to the year they were published.

Other than the handle material and the "CAMILLUS de Luxe" etch on the #80, I don't see much difference.

OK JerryD, what do you think?

...dale, i'm assuming all of these were synthetic handle mat'l. right???...the only ones I've got that are bone are the split-backspring ones and the short-line ones that had the pen blade on the same end as the master blade........ .............

72 & 80 are the same pattern.

72 has no blade etch - brass liners - brass handle & rocker pins - no milling on the liners

80 has "Camillus DeLuxe" etched on the master blade - nickel silver liners - nickel silver handle & rocker pins - milled liners

Both have nickel silver bolsters and whatever handle material is being currently used. Nothing special there.


Dale -- The 72 picture came out of the '55 catalog. The 80 picture came out of the '57 catalog. The difference? '55 catalog said "Stagged" for the #72 and "Genuine Bone Stag" for the #80. The '57 catalog said Brownstag for both.

..........jerry, does that mean the "stagged" and "genuine bone stag" were synthetic or is the latter really bone on the #80????...................... .......................

Tommy -- (Edited out because it was incorrect). We need to be asking Tom Williams these questions.

...........it's about time for me to clean and oil all of mine-I think i'm going to get a magnifier and look at all the handles- i thought the only 72's that had bone handles were the short-line ones that have the pen blade on the same end as the master blade............... ...................

"Stagged", "Brownstag", "Cabone" - synthetic materials
"Genuine Bone Stag" - really bone

Yeah Vit, I think you're probably right. I'm guessing "Stagged" was that black synthetic shrinky dink crap they put on in the late '40s-'50s.

I just checked my 2x80 and Powa Kraft ( nickel silver liners - nickel silver handle & rocker pins - milled liners ) they have synthetic material handles.
The sword brand knife I was watching and I think someone has custom made it and it looked like it was over polished(coping blade).I have purchased some knives of the this seller but his descriptions sometimes does not always match the knife ( he relies on you sending the knife back ) and why describe mill liners and not show them.
That's my opinion but I am just a grumpy old man.
I still consider it would be a good knife to own and carry.
Grant

In the Camillus catalogs;
http://www.collectors-of-camillus.us/Ca ... talogs.htm
I think they have the 1957 and 1965 catalogs the wrong way.
If you look at the coping blades on the 72 and 80 in the 1965 catalog.
If the made a 80 that patent it one more to search for.
Grant

Grant -- Someone must have grabbed some old line drawings for that catalog. That's the first generation #72 with the pen blade paired with the main and a coping blade on the lower end. Good eye. I've looked at those images dozens of times and never noticed that.

I have two bone handle short line 72s. One is 1st generation, the other is 2nd generation. 2nd generation (my terminology) is the blade configuration almost all 72s have.

Just to mix things up a bit, I also have one of the last 72s made that has the coping blade in the position of a 1st generation knife but paired up with the main is the expected small clip blade that was on the lower end for 99% of the knives.

See below.

• 1st Generation blades, short line with bone handles
• I had a third which is like the first one shown but I gifted it to treefarmer but I still have pictures of it.
• 2nd Generation blades, short line with bone handles (also one of the 1st Boy Scout 1047s with Scout etch on blade)
• What the...? (made in the 2000s)
• While you're at it, notice how the profile of the main changed from the very early knives where the swedge had an exagerated swoop up to the tip (my favorite by the way) and of course the very early ones were saber ground on both sides.

Enough! All these details are giving me a headach.

The question is did they made a 80 with the coping blade at one end the same as the first 72 or where they using the same pictures in different catalogs.
Jerry don't get a headache over this one I just like asking questions.
Where's Dale ? I will see if I can give him a headache instead.
I see MountainMan is hooked.
The picture is out of the 1965 catalog.

jerryd6818 wrote:Grant -- Someone must have grabbed some old line drawings for that catalog.

I think there's copious evidence that Camillus paid little attention to detail.

jerryd6818 wrote:

jerryd6818 wrote:Grant -- Someone must have grabbed some old line drawings for that catalog.

I think there's copious evidence that Camillus paid little attention to detail.

....................I give up!!!!!!................ ............................

carrmillus wrote:

jerryd6818 wrote:

jerryd6818 wrote:Grant -- Someone must have grabbed some old line drawings for that catalog.

I think there's copious evidence that Camillus paid little attention to detail.

....................I give up!!!!!!................ ............................

You and me brother. You and me.

.....hey, fellow "72" nuts!!!...I've noticed we've got a kazillion posts about the #72,and almost none about the original split-backspring Camillus, which, to me is a true whittler!!...is it because they are so rare, nobody has any???...I've got 3, and they are my favorites among the whittler's!!!.....actually, the #72 is what I would call a swell-center stockman!!!.....let's see some pictues of the "original"............ ..................

carrmillus wrote: .....hey, fellow "72" nuts!!!...

I believe the correct terminology is "Fellow Ward Residents".

carrmillus wrote:I've noticed we've got a kazillion posts about the #72,and almost none about the original split-backspring Camillus, which, to me is a true whittler!!...is it because they are so rare, nobody has any???

I think you may be on to something. It's a rare occasion when I run onto one on eBay.

carrmillus wrote:actually, the #72 is what I would call a swell-center stockman!!!

Camillus called it a "Carpenter's and Whittler's knife". Since they had the baby, they get to name it. Genetically speaking though, you are probably correct based purely on general appearance.



Thanks to your generosity, I have one. Based on your reluctence to step into the 21st Century, picture-wise, (make that mule like stubborness) I think it only proper that I post a picture of the 72s forebearer or as I call it, "The Alpha".

...jerry, with all the crap that's going on in the 21st century, I wish I could get in one of them star trek teletransporter's and have my ass zapped back to the 20th. century,like when I was about 12 years old and sit with my grandpa and watch him whittling with one of these old Camillus whittler's or his old sunfish................ ......................

I hear ya Tommy but you know how it is. If wishes were horses...

jerryd6818 wrote:I hear ya Tommy but you know how it is. If wishes were horses...

Yeah, we’d all be neck deep in road apples!

................ ..............that's a new one for me, dale!!!!.............

Ain't dat da troot.

Here's my Camillus whittler.
I heard you can grow good tomatoes in horse apples .

That's a looker Grant. You're lucky to have it.

carrmillus wrote:................ ..............that's a new one for me, dale!!!!.............

What can I say, I grew up on a ranch. That was what we called it in polite company.

Nice whittler Grant! I have a single blade trapper with the same type celluloid handles.
It is pretty stuff and seems to be pretty stable too!