...1946-1950 tang stamp..

[carrmillus]

....I have a "short line"(1946-1950) Camillus #89 with the "staglon" handles which belonged to my dad. I thought the staglon handles were from a later date??...anyone kow what year the staglon was first used????........... .............

[carrmillus]

...just looked thru the camillus catalogs on this site and there's no mention of the 89 pattern or staglon in any of the 1946-55 catalogs????....... .......

[jerryd6818]

First off, if I am not sorely mistaken, "Staglon" is a Schrade name.

When it comes to dating Camillus knives, what a mess Camillus left us.

I am not, nor do I claim to be, an expert on Camillus. Anything I have to say on the subject is unequal parts of speculation based on catalogs, knives I have seen and knives I own or have handled.

That said, I've come to the conclusion that the generally accepted dogma on Camillus tang stamps is not correct. Dale has preached the sermon many times that dating a Camillus by the tang stamp is a fools errand.

The short line stamp is generally accepted as being from 1946-1950.
The three line tang stamp with no underline is promoted as 1946-1956 (very seldom seen)
The long line stamp is generally accepted as being from 1960-1976.
The italicized tang stamp is generally accepted as being from 197x-198x

Nothing for 1956-1960???? Puleeeze.

It's my belief that the short line stamp and the long line stamp may have over lapped sometime in the mid-1950s and the long line stamp was used up into the very early 1980s.

Besides bone and Celluloid, Camillus used that black synthetic (maybe two formulas for that because of the "shrinky dink" handles from the '40s & early '50s) from probably the 1930s into the 1950s or even the early 1960s. Then there was a brown synthetic that was used in the '50s some time and probably the '60s. Wallace Rockwell has said Camillus switched to Delrin® in 1969 or 1970.

Tommy, I realize that is not much help so take that for what it's worth, the speculation of a semi-educated novice.

[carrmillus]

...thanks, jerry!!......I know this knife was grandpa's, he gave it to my dad before he died in 1952 and dad gave it to me when I was in high school(1953-1955).....I remember someone posting somewhere that the staglon was from the '60's and that the 89 pattern didn't come along until about that same time!!.......... .......

[carrmillus]

....jerry,just found the box this knife was in, it says"deluxe quality knife...indian stag handle".....no date and the sticker on the end has been peeled off.............. ............

[Ramrod]

Carr,
It is a #89 right?
What is the closed length?
Mark
ps. In the 1972 catalog it lists the "NEW" Indian stag handles.

[jerryd6818]

Ahh, now Indian Stag was a name Camillus used but not until about 1972.

I found the #89 in the 1965 catalog (3-7/8" closed). It's listed as a "Sword Brand" but it says nothing about the handle material.

Is it possible your thinker on the history of this knife is broken. Happens to me just every now and then.

[carrmillus]

...it is a #89....I also have a long line #89(1960-1976) and the handles on it are much yellower than the short line. the older one is much browner-looking!!.......... ......

[carrmillus]

...ramrod, sorry, the closed length is 4 1/4"!!!..jerry, my "thinker" has been shot for several years, but the reason I remember so much about this one was because it was originally granddad's !!!........ ........

[Ramrod]

Like Jerry said, 1965 was the first catalog I could find the 89 listed in but its listed as 3 7/8".
Then in the 1972 catalog, it is listed as 'NEW' Indian stag and the length is listed as 4 1/4".
Im not sure what all this means (because my thinker is broke too), but just letting you know what I found when looking through the old Camillus catalogs.
Mark

[carrmillus]

........thanks,mark and jerry, it looks like this is another mystery i'll never get solved!!!............ ...................

[orvet]

First off, if I am not sorely mistaken, "Staglon" is a Schrade name.

When it comes to dating Camillus knives, what a mess Camillus left us.

I am not, nor do I claim to be, an expert on Camillus. Anything I have to say on the subject is unequal parts of speculation based on catalogs, knives I have seen and knives I own or have handled.

That said, I've come to the conclusion that the generally accepted dogma on Camillus tang stamps is not correct. Dale has preached the sermon many times that dating a Camillus by the tang stamp is a fools errand.

The short line stamp is generally accepted as being from 1946-1950.
The three line tang stamp with no underline is promoted as 1946-1956 (very seldom seen)
The long line stamp is generally accepted as being from 1960-1976.
The italicized tang stamp is generally accepted as being from 197x-198x

Nothing for 1956-1960???? Puleeeze.

It's my belief that the short line stamp and the long line stamp may have over lapped sometime in the mid-1950s and the long line stamp was used up into the very early 1980s.

Besides bone and Celluloid, Camillus used that black synthetic (maybe two formulas for that because of the "shrinky dink" handles from the '40s & early '50s) from probably the 1930s into the 1950s or even the early 1960s. Then there was a brown synthetic that was used in the '50s some time and probably the '60s. Wallace Rockwell has said Camillus switched to Delrin® in 1969 or 1970.

Tommy, I realize that is not much help so take that for what it's worth, the speculation of a semi-educated novice.

Succinctly and clearly put Jerry! Great post!
From my conversations with Tom Williams I know he felt the no line tang stamp probably preceded the short line stamp, but he was not able to prove that so far as I know before he passed away. If we ever had a chance of learning more about the dating of Camillus via tang stamps, I am afraid Tom's untimely passing has greatly diminished that likelihood.

[carrmillus]

.dale, I've got several short line knives, but, I don't think I have any of the no-line stamped knives!!!............ ..............

[tjmurphy]

I also believe that the NO LINE preceeded the SHORT LINE. It only makes sense, following the geneology of the stamps.

[jerryd6818]

I also believe that the NO LINE preceeded the SHORT LINE. It only makes sense, following the geneology of the stamps.

There's one thing you can say about the Three Line/No Line stamps, you sure don't see many of them. In fact you hardly ever see that stamp. I have one and it's on a #99 type Camp Knife. I say #99 type because the knife is from the era before they started numbering the patterns.

So some age markers for the knife:

• No pattern stamp, along with brass liners, to me equals before WWII.
• "Shrinky Dink" handles says 1930s or 1940s
• Two piece can opener puts it prior to 1950 or so when they started using the "Safety Opener"
• Three line tang stamp with no underline remains up in the air.

I had the knife re-handled (Another fine job by Elvis.) with Culpepper Catalina Amber Bone because the "Shrinky Dink" handles were awful.

[carrmillus]

.....you're right, t.j., I don't have my goin's in front of me, but I think the no-line was 1946-1956,short line was 1946-1950, don't make sense, does it??.............. ...............

[orvet]

It is hard to tell from the pic Jerry, but do you remember; did the 99 type have the handles attached by prongs or by pins?

[jerryd6818]

That particular one had prongs.