Need ideas for knife blank.

[NorthFork]

I picked up this knife blank awhile back. Was thinking at the time it would make a reasonable facimile of a riflemans knife. The blank is rather thin. If I remember correctly it is roughly .088" thick. Assuming a proper handle and NOT using 3 cutler type rivets but proper pins instead, could a passing riflemans knife be made from it? Thanks.
http://www.applecartcreations.com/images/items/1506.jpg

If this image link violates the rules please delete.

 

[Black Hand]

I suggest looking at images of original knives of the period. Number and positioning of pins depends on the country of origin (French vs English vs Dutch vs other). Antler handles are overrepresented. Blade profile will also show country of origin. Then you have full vs partial tang, tapered tang vs not. Handle materials, pin stock, bolster, etc are all to be considered.

In other words, easy question but not so easy an answer.

I would use that blade to make a partial tapered tang knife with 2-3 iron pins and a wood handle. It looks like a "scalper" profile though the straight spine makes it look a little like a "roach belly"....

 

[NorthFork]

Correction, it's .084" thick. Could you better describe the partial tapered tang please? Tapered in profile or tapered in thickness? Thanks.

 

[Black Hand]

Tapers in thickness from full at the front to almost nothing at the end (for a half-tang). This one looks closest to your blade shape. Trade knives were imported into the colonies by the barrel-full and were still in use during the Fur Trade. Boxwood (as best as I can tell) handle with 3 steel pins and a half-tang (Construction details).

I suggest you look through Wick's knives at http://www.wickellerbe.com/index.html

Image of interest RE: Blade shape https://www.bing.com/images/search...2257746&selectedIndex=106&cbir=sbi&ajaxhist=0

 

[Crewdawg445]

Also keep in mind blades were not "thick" by todays standards. A thinner, razor sharp blade will serve you well with a multitude of tasks.

Looks like a Jeff White blank?

 

[NorthFork]

Yes it's a 1095 J. White blank.

 

[Artificer]

First, here is some general info and pay special attention to the “Scalper” types of trade knives, that your blade is closest to in shape. www.manuellisaparty.com/articles/pfd's/Some Thoughts on Butchers.pdf

This link has a nice grouping of excavated French and English Trade Knife blades. The English ones are all “Scalpers.” http://woodsrunnersdiary.blogspot.com/2011/03/little-more-on-knives.html

More excavated blades:
https://www.nps.gov/media/photo/gallery.htm?id=65EF48A2-155D-4519-3E0F6AE0E30C3599

Many of the CHEAPEST trade knives only had tangs that were 1/3 to at most half the length of the grip. These tangs were often tapered down in thickness toward the rear, as Black Hand mentioned.

Pins to hold the grip on should be Iron and NOT Brass. You can get 1/8” mild steel rod from Home Depot or Lowes and make the pins. Two or three pins at most, were the most common.

Wood was the most common material for the grip, though knives with bone scales were also pretty popular.

This link has even more good info and the repro at the bottom may be something of a model for your knife blade. ALSO, please note where the pins go through the grip on this wood grip knife and probably a short/shorter tang. (If you decide to use bone scales, then three Iron pins spaced along the length of the grip would do it.) http://ofsortsforprovincials.blogspot.com/2011/03/cuttoe-knife.html

Hope this helps.

Gus

 

[Elnathan]

There is a distinction between French and English knife tangs. French tangs are usually about half the length of the handle, the full width of the handle, and taper in thickness to the rear. English tangs were no more than half the length of the handle, but they were also not full width. Unlike French tangs, however, they did not taper in thickness, so the total amount of metal used was about the same in both cases. The pins were set below the centerline of the tang so they would be centered on the handle.

I believe these are both English, probably from around the last quarter of the 18th century:

The overall profile of the blade you have is better suited for an English knife than a French one, and an English knife is more likely as a rifleman's knife anyhow, so I'd suggest going in that direction.

The gap in the handle was filled with cutler's epoxy (pine pitch, beeswax, and a binder, usually brick dust, mixed at about 4:1:1) and the wood could be rosewood or pauduk (I think) for red handled knives or possibly ebony for black handled knives. If you scale up the pictures I think that the pins will come out to about 1/16" thick.

 

[NorthFork]

So if I understand this correctly, most of these knives were of the 'cheaper' variety and had partial tangs. Does this mean some full tang knives did exist at this time? If I use bone scales and space 3 pins out along the scales, I assume this means a full tang? Not trying to be dense, I'm trying to learn.

 

[Black Hand]

I guess it all depends on the type of knife and era. That said, a half-tang knife would work for 1700 (and before) to now. I'd avoid bone scales myself as they can chip/break and are less forgiving when the pins are being peened (one tap too many and the scale can/will crack). The greatest majority of knife images I've seen had wood handles

Some info here that might be helpful.

 

[Artificer]

Yes, the majority of both Butcher and Scalper knives were partial tang knives. This because the shorter tangs kept them noticeably cheaper, because the makers didn't have to use as much Iron for the tangs. This is kind of hard for us to wrap our modern minds around that even that small amount of Iron saved real money with partial tangs, because Iron cost a lot more than the labor.

However, there were a good number of full size tang knives with bone scales on them, that cost a bit more and were very popular for those who could afford them, as enough of them show up on trader's inventories. This wasn't a "high status" thing only for the rich, though. Though this may not be an exactly similar example, think of the price difference between an inexpensive Chinese folding knife and an American Case brand folding knife.

If you are portraying a young and poor frontiersman/farmer on the frontier, you most likely would have had a short tang knife with a wood grip. However, you may have gotten a more expensive full tang knife as a gift. Or as your economic situation improved, you may have splurged a little with the bone scaled/full tang knife.

Having written this, I agree with Black Hand that a wood grip will be much more serviceable than bone scales. Many of the lists or advertisements mentioned "box" or "boxed" knives as the description. That meant the grips were made of English Box Wood, which must have been pretty cheap in England at the time, but was and still is a very durable/stable wood. This was the primary wood for folding wooden rulers in the 19th century.

Gus

 

[Elnathan]

As far as the 18th/early 19th century goes, I've only seen bone handles on knives with stick tangs:

(note that lower one is a table knife.)

Where are y'all seeing knives with bone scales?

Having written this, I agree with Black Hand that a wood grip will be much more serviceable than bone scales. Many of the lists or advertisements mentioned "box" or "boxed" knives as the description. That meant the grips were made of English Box Wood, which must have been pretty cheap in England at the time, but was and still is a very durable/stable wood. This was the primary wood for folding wooden rulers in the 19th century.

I've seen it suggested "boxed" may have indicated a type of construction with bolsters on both ends rather than the type of wood.

 

[Black Hand]

I've seen it suggested "boxed" may have indicated a type of construction with bolsters on both ends rather than the type of wood.

I think this unlikely based upon the "uncommon" presence of bolsters on knives. You see bolsters on table knives and swords (and maybe a few high-end knives) but not so much on everyday knives. This seems to be the pattern for 18th & 19th century knives.

Boxwood was used due to its durability and stability.

 

[Artificer]

Where are y'all seeing knives with bone scales?

The link I provided above has one example.

"The Papers of Henry Laurens contain another box handled knife reference specific to Butcher knives:

"3 doz. & 10 Clasp knives, 3 doz. box handles Butcher knives, 3 1/2 doz. Split bone handle do...6 doz Buck Spring Knives, 4 doz & a Small do. 2 doz. buck handle Knives, 2 Blades, 5 dozen Inlaid Small Knives, 2 Doz & 3 Black handle ditto, 13 Ivory Handle pen knives[p378] 1 doz. Large Buffler knives..."

Gus

 

[Rifleman1776]

A bit small for a riflemans knife. On those the blades ran from about 10" to 14". But it would make a fine belt or camp knife. Any period correct material would be fine for scales. Boxwood was mentioned. While a good choice, good boxwood is a very scarce commodity these days.

 

[Crewdawg445]

I have a trade knife made by White, while it's a wonderful knife it's far to thick IMO for my liking, as to which it never gets used. Solid blade and excellent steel though. You should be a able to turn that into a good usable tool.

 

[NorthFork]

Yes, most of the blanks and knives I've seen from him are thick or very thick. This blank was bought from a vendor at a historical event. It caught my eye because it was thin. Much thinner than his other blades. the blade on mine is roughly 7.25" long. Total length is roughly 12.25". Blade is .084" thick or in other words roughly half way in between 1/16" and 3/32". I'm determined to make a proper knife from it. Just want to make sure I don't go at it completely wrong from a HC/PC standpoint.

 

[Elnathan]

A bit small for a riflemans knife. On those the blades ran from about 10" to 14". But it would make a fine belt or camp knife. Any period correct material would be fine for scales. Boxwood was mentioned. While a good choice, good boxwood is a very scarce commodity these days.

I'm not aware of any knife fitting that description outside of a Spanish belduque prior to the beginning of the Bowie knife era. As far as I can tell, the notion of a "rifleman's knife" as distinct from an ordinary butcher or scalper knife is a reenactorism based on the existence of the Ames 1849 Rifleman's Knife, a mid-19th century Bowie-type knife intended to be issued along with the 1841 Mississippi rifle (and never issued, IRRC). I can't think of a shred of evidence that riflemen carried a distinctive knife prior to then.

Only verifiable 18th century knife that even comes close to the modern idea of a "rifleman's knife" is the Fort Ticonderoga example, and I don't believe there were any riflemen present at the site when it was lost.

 

[Elnathan]

Where are y'all seeing knives with bone scales?

The link I provided above has one example.

"The Papers of Henry Laurens contain another box handled knife reference specific to Butcher knives:

"3 doz. & 10 Clasp knives, 3 doz. box handles Butcher knives, 3 1/2 doz. Split bone handle do...6 doz Buck Spring Knives, 4 doz & a Small do. 2 doz. buck handle Knives, 2 Blades, 5 dozen Inlaid Small Knives, 2 Doz & 3 Black handle ditto, 13 Ivory Handle pen knives[p378] 1 doz. Large Buffler knives..."

Gus

I saw that. I was hoping for something a little bit more definitive as to construction. While bone is a bear to work with, I love the finished product and would dearly like to make a bone handled knife if I could find an original example that I could reproduce with the tools and material available to me.

 

[nhmoose]

[

Only verifiable 18th century knife that even comes close to the modern idea of a "rifleman's knife" is the Fort Ticonderoga example, and I don't believe there were any riflemen present at the site when it was lost.

Makes it very suspicious there then. {sarcasm/off]