Herrick Hardware; Waco, Texas.

[dcgm4]

whitebuffalo58, here are some links to help you get more of the story, but first I will summarize it for you. Around 2007 a seller on eBay called obadyah began selling rare jack patterns (congress, coffin, eureka, etc.) with rare stamps (Herrick, Wallkill, Thomas Mfg, Paxton and Gallagher, etc.). They were all bone-handled and the only difference was the stamps and the shields. He was selling them falsely as vintage knives, but when questioned he claimed that they were assembled from parts found in an old factory, but we can't know if this is true or not (read the links to see some of the rumors about this). If it is true we don't know if he assembled them or if some company assembled them. And personally, if he is telling the truth I seriously doubt that the blades had stamps on them before being assembled. Anyways, ever since then people he swindled into believing they were buying the real deal will put one of these up for auction once in a while believing they have a good piece.

To be considered a reproduction the company or person making the repro must own the license of the stamp being used. If they do not, then it is a fake. And in my mind a reproduction can also be considered a fake if the seller is trying to pass the knife off as vintage without fully disclosing the knife's origins, even if it is made from original parts. This is because it was not the actual company that put it together. Jim Parker was notorious for putting together knives like this, but he did tell you that they weren't vintage. He called them "new-old stock."

And to answer your question as to why someone would use an obscure stamp and not a well-known one is very simple. Rare stamps can demand a lot of money. This is especially true if a collector collects only certain patterns like say, congress jacks. Also, rare patterns can demand a lot of money. Mix a rare stamp with a rare pattern and you're talking big money. Furthermore, people are less wary of rare stamps because they falsely believe forgers only make fakes of popularly collected knives. Plus, a collector is usually going to be less familiar with a rare maker, which makes it harder for the collector to spot it as a fake. I mean, with some companies like Remington or Case some collectors can spot a fake just by the jigging of the bone. Simply put, it is easier to pass off a fake as authentic if you use a rare stamp rather than one that many collectors are familiar with.

http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... ck#p159012
http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... gress+jack
http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... gress+jack
http://www.allaboutpocketknives.com/kni ... gress+jack

[whitebuffalo58]

Fair enough Dave, i'm seein' much more of the picture then I was just from this thread. I appreciate the help in getting a grasp on it. It would appear then, that the operation that brought these into the market was no dude workin' out of his garage on weekends. But rather a large, well organized outfit bent on the total deception of the knife buying public. That is...well I don't know what that is. Mind boggling? By the basic definition, that's organized crime! I guess it's hard for me to imagine the number of knives that had to slip in under the radar before this venture would have seen enough return to go to that much trouble.
You know whoever took this on had to have a fair amount of money invested in it. I can't really buy into the whole NOS parts theory. Too many manufactuers to be able to put that many knives together. Each one would have had their own blade to backspring setups. The kicks would have all been different. Hole positions, blade thicknesses, blade lengths, the list of modifications would be endless.
So that leaves starting pretty much from scratch. Wow! The investment in all those different custom made stamps alone would have been enough to make a banker weep. Not to mention the steel, the bone, nickel silver, brass, pin stock, machinery, a facility, utilities........
Ahhh...now that I think about it, there is one other scenario that comes to mind. The availability of all the parts, already made from the same manufaturer, bought in bulk, without tang stamps. Then the only other investment would be the custom stamps for each of the different hrdwr. co.'s. And of course the neccesary facilities, etc...to pull it off.
That would beckon the question, what company that went out of buisiness produced all these obscure patterns? Time frame...say 80's-90's? Didn't Boker move all their operations back to Germany along about that time. They made a congress jack but not sure about the other patterns. Anything look Bokerish about the op's knife?
Anyway, I find this whole thing fascinating! On the one hand it bites that this could be part of the knife collecting world, but on the other hand, you almost have to admire the shear inginuity of it all. I'd really like to have seen what their bottom line was on this brainstorm.

[dcgm4]

I think we all have to keep in mind that no one except the person who made the knives has the whole picture. There is conjecture and second-hand evidence that supports a small group of guys built these as knockoffs. Had it been a company producing licensed reproductions one would think someone would've heard some type of product announcement. So assuming the evidence is correct and they aren't reproductions, which is more likely: one guy had a bunch of rare mint knives that were all the same hard to find patterns from different obscure companies that look absolutely identical except for different shields and tang stamps, not to mention duplicates of some of the knives, or some guys were pulling one over and selling fakes to unsuspecting collectors? Unfortunately, I'm going to have to go with the latter. Occam's razor and all that.

[wlf]

I hope this thread doesn't die.

[FRJ]

Thank you all for contributing and adding to this thread.
I'm glad this exposure of fake knives is brought to light. It's important for others to read.
The earlier threads about these knives were important at that time, but folks tend to forget (except those of us who were burned) and new members come along who will benifit from the exposure.
Speaking of exposure, I also had to expose the knife for what it apparently is. A fake.
This does not reduce my desire for the knife. It is really a great knife and I respect it and will carry it and use it with care. No one will be duped by this knife again.
There is a lot of good correspondence here. Certainly part of what a good knife forum is all about. I'm glad to be a part of it. Again, thanks to everyone.
I hope the discussion continues.

[jerryd6818]

What a clever idea, Joe.

[Owd Wullie]

wlf, there are a multitude of highly knowlegable people here, i'm not one of 'em. I tend to ask more then I tell. I think you're probably right. Most older knife co.'s did high polish their blades. In today's terms, I think Case refers to the knifes finish in this post as "satin" finished. Whether there was a term for it back in the day, i'm not sure.

It was common in the old days to polish one side of the blade and leave the other side "glazed". The side toward the shield was usually the one with the high shine.

Ofttimes knives of "lesser" quality, that is a knife that say sold for fifteen cents as opposed to one that sold for a quarter, might have the glazed finish on both sides of the blade. When I refer to lesser quality, I mean the knife might have ebony scales as opposed to bone, pearl, or stag. All of the other factors we look for such as fit and finish would still be the same. More of a working man's knife, or one that because it was a few cents cheaper might be bought.

[Owd Wullie]

I asked, a while back, about congress jacks because I bought one on Ebay and was uncertain of the results of my itchy trigger finger.
Well, it showed up.
Can anyone help me with the maker of this knife and when Herrick Hardware was selling these things.
Impulsive purchase or not, this is about the finest knife I own. Absolutly bulldog solid and bulldog snappy.
And a congress jack to boot. I never knew of such a thing. I am really thrilled with this thing. 3 3/4"
If just fingerprints means it isn't mint, then it's not mint, but that's all that would be against this knife.
I looked up Herrick Hardware, but found nothing on the knife.
I will call University of North Texas to see if they can offer anything.
I would appreciate any help you could offer. Thanks a lot.

Just found this in one of the other threads referenced above from back in Jan of '09.

This seller sold a bunch of real nice coffin jacks about six months ago, he said they where made from spare parts, i bought a Old Herrick Hardware congress jack that was dead mint, sure its pretty much mint, but probably only a few years old! I WOULDNT TRUST NOTHING FROM THIS SELLER.

I think he was referring to OBADYA as the seller.

[Miller Bro's]

The investment in all those different custom made stamps alone would have been enough to make a banker weep. Not to mention the steel, the bone, nickel silver, brass, pin stock, machinery, a facility, utilities........

The tang stamps I have seen on these knives have all been reproductions, not originals. I recall studying the Miller Bro`s tang stamped knives this seller was selling, all those were stamped using a modern re-made tang stamp.

You would be surprised how inexpensive a tang stamp can be made, especially if you are a knife factory and have them made all the time, or have the machinery to make them yourself. The sale of just one of these knives would cover that cost with money to spare.

I believe these knives were made in most likely Germany by a legitimate knife factory for somebody over here that wanted to pass them off as originals. The knives are too well made and consistent to have been put together by someone it their spare time.

Also, I have a reproduction Winchester knife that was made in Germany and it has the same jigged bone handles with that reddish dye that you tend to see on these knives.

[whitebuffalo58]

The original Colonel Coons were parts knives. I have to wonder, if these knives had of been properly represented and marketed, what they'd be worth to collectors today? It'd be sad to learn that the original makers intent was pure, but it got flushed down the toilet by some ne'er-do-well seller on Ebay. IMHO, knives of this quality deserve better. I know, for the right price, i'd love to have one of each.

[FRJ]

Thank you Jerry, just trying to keep the flies out of the kitchen.

Thank you Willie and Dimitri, for adding more insight and information to this thread.
All very interesting reading.

[RobesonsRme.com]

A "right price" of $240.00 would most likely persuade me to part with my beautiful Jonathan W. Price, Pine Knot version.

Just kidding.

Charlie Noyes

[Miller Bro's]

Charlie,

Could I see a close up picture of your Pine Knot tang stamp ?

I would like to compare it to the one I have around here someplace, going to look for it now.

I want to see what the difference is in the original versus the modern one

[whitebuffalo58]

Uhhh...thanks Charlie, but my wife just said she'd rather I didn't anyway.

[msteele6]

dcgm4,

Here is a picture of my Paxton & Gallagher congress jack. I decided to throw in a couple of other knives. The Eureka jack is marked Shapleigh and I have seen others exactly like it.
The top knife is marked Utica in a straight line. I'm not quite sure if it is a reproduction (fake) although I think that it is. If anyone knows for sure I would appreciate them telling me.

Thanks

Mark Steele

P.S. this is the first picture I've uploaded that I actually took myself so please forgive the quality (my Blackberry). If you click on the picture it enlarges fairly nicely.

MS

[FRJ]

Mark,
your congress jack looks identical to mine, except for the shield.
And the sheepsfoot looks to be the same blade.
The nail picks on my knife seem unusually deep on both blades.
Would you say the same is true of yours?

[jerryd6818]

The top knife is marked Utica in a straight line. I'm not quite sure if it is a reproduction (fake) although I think that it is.

I'm not sure why someone would want to "fake" a Utica. They don't go for much money. No offense intended but I don't really consider a reproduction to be a fake. What was that saying? "Imitation is the highest form of flattery"?

That pattern must have been fairly popular at one time. I just bought an '87 USA Winchester 2921 that looks very much like your Utica, from the bottom bolster shape to the diagonal lines on the top bolster. Both knives look like this picture of a Keen Kutter Gunstock Jack I kyped from an online knife book (sorry, I don't recall the name). I don't know what you call your Utica but I've seen my Winchester called an English Jack, a Coffin Jack, in one source a Coke Bottle Jack and in the Standard Knife Collectors Guide Third Edition a Swell Center Gunstock pattern. I personally don't see the "gunstock" in the knife but what the heck do I know. Confuses me. Compare the three knives and tell me they don't share a genetic relationship.

[msteele6]

jerryd,

I don't consider a reproduction a fake either. My question really had to do with whether Utica actually made the knife. I would call a knife that was made under the auspices and with the permission of the company whose name it bore to be a reproduction (usually called an "authorized" reproduction) and I can see where my wording is ambiguous.

Incidentally,I own a Keen Kutter like the one shown in your post with the bone handles in lieu of wood (K1201) that is that rare knife where you can say it's actually in WORSE shape than it appears in the photo (the blade is down more than it appears).

[jerryd6818]

Oh, I don't know. I'd say the old girl has weathered the years very well. She's still a looker. I would be proud to have her in my accumulation.

[RobesonsRme.com]

Here is the knife that I, at the time of its purchase, thought was a product of The Robeson Cutlery Co. for Belknap Hardware. I had never seen a genuine Pine Knot knife before, so I had nothing to go on, but the bone handles were very evocative of some Robeson bone.

I have Robeson knives with bone like this.

I was unaware of the profusion of congress jacks poring out of whatever hole they were coming from at the time.

Since joining AAPK and having participated in more than one discussion concerning these knives, I removed its photo from my website and the knife is no longer in my rolls.

The tang stamp close up is from the bogus knife. If you're having trouble reading it, it states,
PINE KNOT (arched) over a woodpecker pecking a pine tree (what else could he be pecking?) over Jno. W. Price in script.

Charlie Noyes

[jerryd6818]

I understand what you guys are saying Charlie but isn't that just one swell knife. I like everything about 'em, uh, except maybe the deceit.

[Miller Bro's]

Here are some pictures of an original Pine Knot pocket knife.

The stamp is light and the center section is very hard to see, the stamp was worn or it was not struck hard enough, both tangs are stamped.

The stamp on the counterfeit knife the letters are thicker, it is not the same.

The bone handles are not the same either.

[RobesonsRme.com]

OK. Does anybody but me see the half nude ConeHead looking back over his left shoulder etched on the face of the blade in picture number three?

Or, have I just been looking at too many photos on AAPK?

MB, I wonder who made that knife for Belknap?

Jerry, I'd like this knife a lot more had I bought it for what it's truly worth, instead of what I paid for it.

Charlie Noyes

[jerryd6818]

Charlie, get professional help. Soon.

Dimitri, you're right about the bird. The back of the bird in the phony is straight and it's curved like Charlie's imagined half nude ConeHead on the real knife.

[Paladin]

Actually, I think Charlie nailed it on the cone head thing!