Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tobias Gibson on April 13, 2015 at 10:56

I'm not sure about that but the Rough Rider one simply calls it an "Improved Muskrat" which is a name Hawbaker gave to his Muskrat made for Schrade!

I don't have a picture of my Schrade Improved Muskrat handy but will try and get one in a day or so.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tobias Gibson on April 13, 2015 at 11:31

Jerry, it is my understanding that S. Stanley Hawbaker & Sons owns the trademark and over the years several knife companies have paid royalties to use it, including Queen, Case, and Schrade. At one time Schrade had an exclusive contract with the company but that was many, many years ago.    That said, I am no expert on muskrats (the knives or the critters!) or S. Stanley Hawbaker!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Syd Carr on April 13, 2015 at 13:05

I recently looked at the "improved" Muskrats, and wondered just what was improved about them; now I know. That memory about the "Wolverine" is pretty firm in my mind, I just can't remember the particulars. I even remember reading an article or brochure about it. Of course it could be a memory twisted around something else, but I have always associated it with that particular Buck knife. One of the problems with getting older is the shear volume of memories one has to filter through, and I'm sure I could be mistaken, but hopefully it will ring a bell with somebody. Thanks Tobias.

Jerryd6818 said:

All the Hawbakers I've seen have a clip at one end and a long sheepfoot blade at the other end (some unauthorized have a Wharncliffe). I've been told that only Case and one other company were licensed to make a Hawbaker and call it a Hawbaker. (I think that's the way that story goes.)

Click here for Hawbaker Examples

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jerryd6818 on April 13, 2015 at 13:07

Sounds like what I was told. The memory banks gather a little more rust with each passing year.

And then Schrade made the 77 OT and called THAT an "Improved Muskrat". How are ya expected to keep up?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tobias Gibson on April 13, 2015 at 13:21

I was just looking at muskrats on Amazon and the Buck Knives 4665 Muskrat is very similar to the Buck shown at the beginning:  a href="http://www.amazon.com/Buck-Knives-4665-Muskrat/dp/B004RDOIRC" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/Buck-Knives-4665-Muskrat/dp/B004RDOIRC >

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Syd Carr on April 13, 2015 at 13:25

Ok Jerry, now you are shaking up those brain cells, that sounds very familiar. I think maybe Buck differentiated their version from the competition with a difference in blades. So maybe Buck "improved" the Muskrat decades before anyone else, and the world just kinda forgot about it? As that particular frame has been discontinued by Buck I assume it wasn't one of their most popular frames, but in my case it has been my most used, and most treasured knife. Thanks for helping me remember, or at least for trying to.

Now you guys have me oogling Hawbakers!! I'm hopeless, faulty memory and not enough pocket knives...what to do?

Jerryd6818 said:

Syd, I'm going to post an opinion for your consideration. I can see why Buck might have named the knife  ""Wolverine" as opposed to Muskrat", because in my opinion, it's not a Muskrat. Some would take exception to this but to me it looks more like a "Moose" pattern. The "Muskrat" has an identical "muskrat" clip blade at each end and this knife has a "muskrat" clip blade at one end and a long "spay" blade at the other as does the "Moose" pattern (usually). Since there are no absolutes in the knife world, I apologize if I've gotten too persnickety. The way I understand it, pattern names are a modern invention (second half of the 20th Century or so) so it doesn't really matter anyway. Good looking knife and if you enjoy it who cares what it's called.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tobias Gibson on April 13, 2015 at 14:20

Okay, I seriously doubt this!

Syd said: "So maybe Buck "improved" the Muskrat decades before anyone else, and the world just kinda forgot about it?'

I know Buck fans love to date the company back to 1902 but good ol' Hoyt Buck was not known to make knives until 1941 and set up his shop in  1947!  S. Stanley Hawbaker  had a contract with  Schrade Walden who supplied him with his muskrats and other folding knives and one of the knives he chose became the Hawbaker Special.  Hawbaker started his mail order catalog in 1941 and it would appear his Hawbaker Specials came out sometime in the 1940s, first by Schrade and later by Case.

That said,  Schrade Walden had been making this pattern of Muskrat since 1904 (the clip/sheepfoot blade, long before Hawbaker began selling it.  The Hawbaker Special was called the Hawbaker Special because it was essentially an SFO for the Hawbaker the company. ( Initially it had rough black scales and the Hawbaker blade etch)  But the hawbaker has Sheepfoot/Clip  and these blade set is attributed to Schrade.  Yours is a Spay/Clip which in line with a Moose and not a Hawbaker or Improved Muskrat. 

 

The Spay/Clip Moose was actually described by  George Washington Sears  AKA, Nessmuk as his preferred folder.   As Nessmuk died in 1890.  He didn't give the knife a name but he drew it and his drawings clearly show a spay and clip blade!  

Nessmuk predates Hoyt Buck, Schrade Walden, and S.S. Hawbaker!  At one time, the moose was also called a Nessmuk folder because Nessmuk wrote about it and he was pretty famous in the woodcraft, trappeing and all things outdoors.   His particular style of fixed blade skinner is still often called a Nessmuk.  So actually, if any person has been forgotten it is George Washington "Nessmuk" Sears!

The spay/clip moose even predates Nessmuk because he didn't  design it he just preferred it.  And when you get down to it, the Moose is essentially a mixed-up trapper.  Nessmuk preferred that the blades open on opposite ends instead the usual trapper design.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Syd Carr on April 13, 2015 at 14:44

Ok, the name "Moose" rang a bell or two in my memory. Perhaps I'm getting Wolverine and Moose mixed up in my old brain cells. Point is I read something on the subject of the blades on this knife way back when that referred to why it wasn't exactly a Muskrat, and I never considered my Buck 313 as a "Muskrat" because of that. Of course there was no internet back then, so what I read had to be a magazine article or sales brochure. I worked for a short time in a sporting goods store, back when they were locally owned, way before "chain" stores existed, and it's possible I came across that info during that time. In fact, I was working at, and bought the knife from that store at that time, (1971). I will do some poking around on Blade Forums and see if any such thing is mentioned on that forum. Doesn't really matter I guess, but like I said, I've never considered my Buck 313 as a true Muskrat, just their version of a Muskrat-type knife.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Syd Carr on April 15, 2015 at 22:45

No historical info on it's name, but I did some searching on Blade Forums and at least found some pertinent data. According to what I read on BF, ALL Buck 313's were manufactured for Buck by Camillus, and that the model was made from 1946-1985, with back-stock being available as late as 1997 or even later. There were apparently three different versions or "types" over the years, and accordingly my knife is supposed to be version 3, (with nail nics on either side of the handle). There were even supposed to have been a now-rare yellow comp handle version made at one time. Having been made by Camillus makes sense, as the 313 has that Camillus "look" to it IMHO. There was also supposedly some differences in the printing on the tang stamp between versions, but they didn't go in to any further detail on that.

I'll keep looking for information on the 313, and will share anything I find here. Meanwhile, my 313 will continue to be my daily companion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tobias Gibson on April 16, 2015 at 7:25

Syd, Camillus was known as the "knife makers knife maker" due to the number of other large companies that had knives subcontracted through Camillus.  In a similar fashion, the Buck 315 Marlin Spike and Kabar 1121 rigger were made by Camillus on the Camillus 697 frame.  There might be differences in the steel used, depending on the contract, but they were all essentially the same knives with different tang stamps.  Case also subcontracted several knife patterns through Camillus including  some its Riggers and Camp knives.  

It was cheaper for the knife companies to subcontract with Camillus rather than spending money on tooling.  Camillus had the government contracts for some patterns and also had contracts with the Boy Scouts. These actually only paid pennies over the production cost but they could offset this meager profit by civilian sales and sub-contracting with other knife makers who could afford the tooling costs.   Other knife makers saved on tooling costs and so could afford pay Camillus to make knives for them. In the end it was win-win for everyone.  Camillus also churned out knives Remington, Klein Tools, Sears/Craftsman, Wards and other well known stores

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page