All About Pocket Knives

I need some opinions on this one. Are the scales on this one bone or a synthetic? In the first two pictures it looks synthetic to me, but the last picture has me leaning towards bone. It crossed my mind that a dark dye could be obscuring the pores you'd see in bone. Unfortunately, I haven't seen the knife in person, otherwise it'd be easy to tell. Thanks in advance.

Dave its hard to tell but I am leaning towards bone my self. Looked at all three pics. I have held jigged black handles in hand and still had trouble telling. But the last pic sure looks like bone to me!

Dave, I enhanced the picture some and I'm going with bone.

Click on this bad boy twice.

Looks synthetic to me. The last pic could just be lighting. If you are buying it I hope it's bone.

The black or dark brown dyes are the hardest to tell but the light coloration on the sides look like it might be bone.

The first 2 pictures look like synthetic. The last one looks like bone. I've seen Delrin handles that I swore were bone but they weren't. Hard to tell.

___________
Mike

Thanks a lot for the input, guys. The knife is a newer German knife (about 1960-1980) stamped American Knife Co. I'm still uncertain about the handles, but I decided to buy it anyways. Since it's a newer knife it isn't expensive, so even if the handles are synthetic it's not that big of a deal.

I mainly wanted it because of the pattern/blade configuration. It's a serpentine jack with a small hawkbill secondary blade. I saw a Fight'n Rooster like this and wanted one, but I was unwilling to pony up for it (I'd rather save my pennies for antique knives). The top picture is the knife I bought. The bottom is the Fight'n Rooster.

Well bone or synthetic it is a cool nice knife Dave with that frame style and blades

To me it is a toss-up on bone or synthetic - if it was bone it almost looks like a lacquer was applied as it looks thick on the color - but for me pics can be tough sometimes when trying to determine a handle cover - in hand is always better as you know .... I can tell you I had some pleasant surprises on a few knives where a seller said ebony though the handles were clearly horn when I got them in hand - the pics were not entirely clear except for the fact there were no bug bites

Thanks, Lee. It's not the kind of knife I'd normally go for, but the heart wants what it wants, I guess.

You are so right. Sometimes pictures don't tell the whole story, and sometimes you do get a pleasant surprise. I've had it happen to me a few times where the seller said the handle was bone but it turned out to be ivory. And one time I bought a small group of knives with faux tortoiseshell handles and one turned out to be real tortoiseshell.

In the past one of the AAPK members [apologies for not recalling who] explained to me a simple test for synthetic versus bone. One taps the handle scale on a tooth. I can usually distinguish between the two sounds. The synthetic produces a "flat" or dull sound while bone has a somewhat higher pitch. Best to experiment with known knives to become familiar with the sound.

Quick Steel wrote:In the past one of the AAPK members [apologies for not recalling who] explained to me a simple test for synthetic versus bone. One taps the handle scale on a tooth. I can usually distinguish between the two sounds. The synthetic produces a "flat" or dull sound while bone has a somewhat higher pitch. Best to experiment with known knives to become familiar with the sound.

With some practice, as a field test, that's not a bad way to tell (it takes some time and experience) but the best way is still 45X magnification.

Bone, because of the transparent areas at the edges.

Disclosure: I've been wrong before, and very recently too!

Quick Steel wrote:In the past one of the AAPK members [apologies for not recalling who] explained to me a simple test for synthetic versus bone. One taps the handle scale on a tooth. I can usually distinguish between the two sounds. The synthetic produces a "flat" or dull sound while bone has a somewhat higher pitch. Best to experiment with known knives to become familiar with the sound.

I do the exact same test, Quick Steel. It also helps to study it under magnification like Jerry said. Once I have the knife in hand I'll be able to tell really quick what it is. Unfortunately all I have to go on right now are pictures.

SolWarrior wrote:Bone, because of the transparent areas at the edges.

Disclosure: I've been wrong before, and very recently too!

Felix, I hope you're right this time.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that it's bone. Although I've been known to be wrong, often more than I'm right. Lol.

The 'tap on your teeth' test was told to me years ago by a Schrade collector Hal B.
It is a help but hard to be 100% certain as the difference in sound is subtle. Actually it is not just the usual sound heard via air vibrating on the ear drum. It is bone transmission that you feel as much as hear when you tap your teeth.
kj

jerryd6818 wrote:Dave, I enhanced the picture some and I'm going with bone.

Click on this bad boy twice.

After looking at Jerry's enhanced photo, I'd go with bone. Terry

The mystery has been solved. I got the knife today and the handles are indeed bone! I'll try to post some pictures of the knife tomorrow. Thanks everyone for your invaluable input!

That's awesome, Dave. Bone covers always rises the knife's appeal factor. Good for you, buddy!

Thanks, Felix. Nothing against synthetics (I love Westinghouse micarta), but you are absolutely right. Good-looking bone handles can really elevate a knife's aesthetic value.

Here it is, guys. I posted it in the Mail Call thread, but here are a couple more pictures. The handles are bone but the dye is so dark you need to shine a bright light on the edges to tell for sure. I was comparing it to the the Fight'n Rooster (last picture) and to me the jigging looks kind of similar. Maybe they came from the same factory? For a Sabre it's pretty well-made.