How do you tell? This blade looks pretty old, but it also has some waviness/dimpling that I haven't seen. Almost like it was hammered by hand. Nearly impossible to capture in photos, but I tried.
Is this Rodgers a regrind?
- Thread starter CongaJon
- Start date
First photo sure looks like someone hollowed it after the fact.
End shot looks like they did a decent job of it.
So long as the temper is still good - no worries.
End shot looks like they did a decent job of it.
So long as the temper is still good - no worries.
- Thread starter
- #3
Thank you, Sir! That is good info to know.
I can't swear to it Jon but even older razors were pretty consistent in their grinding unless it was home made.
Either way, it is a gorgeous blade.
I don't think it's a regrind.
Rogers had sort of a signature transition point on their blades with that shoulder less grind, and yours has it.
Rogers blades with typical shoulders and/or stabilizers, or the wedgier blades, did not have that transition point.
Of course, there are always outliers and exceptions. But, I've owned many of them and when I looked at your blade that's the first thing I look for.
The other thing is that when the old Sheffields were re-ground, they were usually done in lots by perhaps not the best artisans. Many times you will find the tang stamp has been compromised. Yours is intact and the lines of the grind match what i remember from other shoulderless Rogers blades.
Lastly, the deep pitting, less common on reground blades. Not unheard of but it's another data point to consider.
If it was mine, I'd consider it to be original.
The 'imperfect' grinding you see is a trademark of sheffield razors, esp pre 1890s blades. Not an indicator of 'regrind'.
Rogers had sort of a signature transition point on their blades with that shoulder less grind, and yours has it.
Rogers blades with typical shoulders and/or stabilizers, or the wedgier blades, did not have that transition point.
Of course, there are always outliers and exceptions. But, I've owned many of them and when I looked at your blade that's the first thing I look for.
The other thing is that when the old Sheffields were re-ground, they were usually done in lots by perhaps not the best artisans. Many times you will find the tang stamp has been compromised. Yours is intact and the lines of the grind match what i remember from other shoulderless Rogers blades.
Lastly, the deep pitting, less common on reground blades. Not unheard of but it's another data point to consider.
If it was mine, I'd consider it to be original.
The 'imperfect' grinding you see is a trademark of sheffield razors, esp pre 1890s blades. Not an indicator of 'regrind'.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #7
Thanks for that great info, Keith. I was wondering about that area you pointed out. In fact, that blade is in my list as "Rodgers with strange heel grind." I actually thought it was modified. Stay well and be careful!
Edited: Why less pitting? Did the act of regrinding smooth the blade, or perhaps because it was reground more recently? Just guessing!
The grind at the back is not what I was looking at.
The wave in the hollowing in the first photo where the transition from the deepest part of the hollow near the toe looks like a slip and the line is lost.
Maybe its just the light but that does not look original to me.
The wave in the hollowing in the first photo where the transition from the deepest part of the hollow near the toe looks like a slip and the line is lost.
Maybe its just the light but that does not look original to me.
I am no professional but while the grind and shape are original it does look like to me that someone along the way hit it with a brass wheel on a dremel. It will not hurt the temper as brass is soft, but will score the metal in that way. At this point there isn't much you can do beauty wise without taking away alot of material to polish it out. My opinion is hone er' up and give it a shave and see....could be considered an ugly ducking of the bunch.
The telltale signs are the mismatched horzontal scoring on the blade. A blade grinding machine uses 2 wheels rotating in opposite directions and the blade is inserted between them. I have some blades with the scoring pattern but its more unified and runs perpindicular to the edge and has more of a finished look...as shown with my Torrey shoulderless pic below.
A year guestimate on your blade, definetly pre 1890's because of the lack of "England" stamping....given the tang shape, id say lands it from 1870-1890. Seems lately all the vintage ones are getting bought up and are getting harder to find good ones.
Larry
The telltale signs are the mismatched horzontal scoring on the blade. A blade grinding machine uses 2 wheels rotating in opposite directions and the blade is inserted between them. I have some blades with the scoring pattern but its more unified and runs perpindicular to the edge and has more of a finished look...as shown with my Torrey shoulderless pic below.
A year guestimate on your blade, definetly pre 1890's because of the lack of "England" stamping....given the tang shape, id say lands it from 1870-1890. Seems lately all the vintage ones are getting bought up and are getting harder to find good ones.
Larry
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #10
Ugly??? Who you calling ugly, Mister? Oh, you must be talking about my older brother...
Me, I'm as sharp as they come!
LOL sometimes the no so good looking blades shave a bit better then the nice looking ones.
Larry
I'm wondering if that's an earlier iteration of what became the Rattlers (faux frameback), notwithstanding some touch ups as mentioned.
