Tony / Perry / Rhett: Thanks. My pleasure.

Joe,

I appreciate your thoughts. I'll try to address them all:

Quote:

A couple of things come to mind here Ron. The leather on the unmarked sheath, particulalry the nape on the rear, is a bit different than on the RMK marked sheath, although it is not atypical of Johnson leather. It does not appear to be Heiser leather nor stitiching for that matter.




I've seen a large variation in the look and surface finish of the backs of both Heiser and Johnson sheaths. IMO there is no way you can attribute the back of the unmarked sheath to either provider in particular. The stitching (and all other attributes)of the unmarked sheath and the Heiser marked sheath are so similar that there is no doubt in my mind that the unmarked sheath is a Heiser.

Quote:

Also, the keeper snap location is different than on the Johnson. If you look at Heiser or Johnson brown button sheaths from the period, generally the keeper snap is located in the middle of the sheath as on the example pictured, not to the far side as on the unmarked sheath. The Heiser is odd in that it has the keeper in that same location as the unmarked sheath. I can see that throwing you a curve ball.




Again, I don't think you can attribute the set position of a diagonal keeper strap to either provider. I believe the reason for this is that the shop set the keeper and not the provider. In both Heiser and Johnson sheaths you see the set both in the middle and at the far side. Take a look at the group of sheaths below.




The 5 on the left are Johnsons. 3 with middle sets and 2 with far side sets. The one sheath on the right is a Heiser. It has a middle set which differs from the earlier Heiser marked sheath which is far side set. (If you look closely at the both the unmarked sheath and the earlier Heiser sheath which is far side set, you will see a "pin prick" start of middle set on both!).

Quote:

One thing that really stands out is the guy that stiched it must have been have way though his bottle of Beam when he made this sheath. This, is reminicent of Stockman quality, or lack thereof.




Have you ever had a bad day at work, Joe

Quote:

I don't think it is unreasonable to say this could be an early Johnson prototype or 'one off' not unlike Stockman had been doing for some time. Based on the evidence we have seen over the years, I think it stands to reason and the concensus seems to be Maurice Johnson was involved at some level as early as 1960, but definitely by 1961.




As I stated above, I'm convinced that the unmarked sheath is a Heiser. I'm also not convinced that Johnson was involved earlier than 1962. It's more than OK that we have different opinions and that we have these discussions. That's the only way that we're going to get closer to the truth.

Best,
_________________________
Ron Mathews
RKS No. 4223