Older Randall Carving Set

Joined
May 16, 2005
Messages
15,781
Reaction score
38,391
Location
Oregon
I bought this early Randall carving set recently. The seller estimated it to be early 1950s. I've been doing some research to see what I might be able to learn.



The first thing I noticed was that for a set, the two pieces did not seem to match well. The spacers are different. The pins, or bolsters, are of different sizes. The fork is stainless and the knife is not.





It also looks to my eye that the stag handle on the knife is more aged than the handle on the fork.

Looking into this, with internet research and reviewing old Randall catalogs on line, I learned that the type of hilt — small, nickel silver — was introduced in 1948; an even smaller, silver hilt was used earlier — and continued until 1963. While there is no mention of a matching fork in the 1948 catalog, it is mentioned in the accompanying text in the 1952 and 1953 catalogs, and picture of the fork is first shown in the 1954 catalog.

Interestingly, the spacers on the knife and the fork, as shown in these early catalogs, like on my set, don't match.

The 1954 catalog is also the first catalog mention I found of the availability of stainless knives. I have not found anything on whether forks were offered in tool steel as well as stainless, so I suppose they may all have been stainless. (But forks were offered in 1952 before mention of stainless availability...)

The small nickel silver hilt is present on the carving knife in the 1963 catalog, but has been replaced with a larger nickel silver hilt in the 1965 catalog. (I think the pin/bolster is also still visible in 1963, but is gone by 1965.)

And in the later catalogs I looked at, 1963 and 1965, the spacers on the carving knife and the fork, still don't match.



I think the matching, knife and fork, of spacers as standard practice for carving sets must be a later practice. The newer sets I have seen online all seem to match.

(That said, I did come across a beautiful carving set from the pinned handle era that had matching spacers, so I guess at times they matched. Scroll down in this knifetalkforums Randall sub forum thread Knife Of The Week Model 6!!!!!! - Knifetalk Forums)

My take on this is that the knife could date anywhere from 1948 to 1963 or 1964, but I favor the earlier years based on the age/color of the stag. I think the fork is likely 1954 or later, since it is stainless. Since it has a pin as well, I'm guessing 1963 is also the latest likely date. (One can't see the pins in the fork handles in the catalogs because of how the fork is positioned.) While the knife blade shows it has been well used, repeatedly sharpened over time, the fork shows little signs of use. But, forks are not sharpened, so not sure if that signifies anything.

I think the knife and fork may have been purchased together, or may have been purchased separately, and put together as a set at a later date.

Observations and comments welcome.

(For those interested in researching their Randalls, this is a useful site: https://www.randallmadeknife.com/)
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
You could be right . The knife appears older than the fork .
The details you mention point to this not being a matched set from Randall but a purchased separately and put together to create a miss-matched set .
The little details show the truth .

Good post and Thanks for the Randall Link,
Gary
 
Thanks for the comment, Gary.

My thought is that since catalogs prior to 1967 do not show carving knives and forks with matching spacers, and catalogs from 1967 on do, perhaps the practice was not to sell them with matching spacers prior to 1967...

On the other hand, the only "pinned era" set I found a photograph of did have matching spacers.

As for my set, in addition to the doubt caused by the spacers, I think the age of the stag is different, and the steel is different (stainless fork, carbon steel knife), so believe the set was put together at some point, with the knife being purchased first. With the stag, I suppose the color difference might be due to the way they were stored as well, if they were stored separately, but that, too, would argue for their being purchased separately.

I'm hoping someone will post another pinned set for comparison, or comment on the existence of carbon steel forks.

Edited to add: In reviewing the picture of the vintage set I linked to in my first post, I see that carbon steel forks do exist. Unlikely someone would order a carbon steel knife and a stainless fork if purchasing a set.


Or, is the fork — not mine, but the one I linked to — nickel plated? What do you think? Seems to be peeling...



My stainless steel fork is interesting to me in that the "stainless" marking is placed in the most conspicuous place possible. Maybe early on stainless was seen as a prestige factor, and something to draw attention to.
 
Last edited:
Very nice set! I can't help you with the dating. I seem to remember a member here that had a few sets, and was nice enough to give them as wedding presents to some lucky newlyweds he knew. For some reason though, I was thinking his sets had 3 pieces. Thanks for showing them to us.
Larry
 
I don't think just due to the looks that the knife is older then the fork.
I think it's more about usage, just in general kitchen use a knife is used much more then a fork like that. The knife was most likely used for normal food preparation.
 
... I seem to remember a member here that had a few sets, and was nice enough to give them as wedding presents to some lucky newlyweds he knew. For some reason though, I was thinking his sets had 3 pieces. ...
Larry, I think that was rburg. I think over time he found several sets at gunshows and then gave them to his sons as they married. The carving knife initially came with a handled "carborundum" sharpener, per the early catalogs, to which one could add a fork to make a three-piece set when ordering. Nowadays I think most commonly the knife, with its steel, and the fork are ordered as a set. (Although not always, as we can see from Charlie's post above.)

I don't think just due to the looks that the knife is older then the fork.
I think it's more about usage, just in general kitchen use a knife is used much more then a fork like that. The knife was most likely used for normal food preparation.
You may well be right, Andy. Had not thought of that. The knife is certainly well used. (And the pin in the stag handle of the fork was proud, emerging from the handle, indicating to me that the antler shrank. I assume this was over time as part of the aging process. I pushed the pin out a bit with a hammer and punch, filed it down, and tapped it back in so that it is now flush with the handle. This stag shrinking phenomenon did not affect knife, insofar as I know.)
 
Last edited:
Larry, I think that was rburg. I think over time he found several sets at gunshows and then gave them to his sons as they married. The carving knife initially came with a handled "carborundum" sharpener, per the early catalogs, to which one could add a fork to make a three-piece set when ordering.

I believe you are right, it was rburg.
Larry
 
On the subject of carving sets, I have a similar looking set made by Remington-UMC in very much the same style - a knife, serving fork, and sharpening steel, all with stag handles (which do not appear to be plastic) in an Art Deco lidded black Bakelite case. My guess is that it is pre-WWII. I've had it for many years, not sure where I got it and I have never used it. But it does show some scratches on the blade so it has been used. I have no idea whether these have any value. Does anyone know about these Remington carving sets and could give me some idea about what they sell for?
 
Wow, that knife looks brand new now. I had another thought after reading through the old thread. I suppose the original owner could have ordered a stainless steel fork, but a carbon steel knife, because he was used to sharpening carbon steel knives. To me, it is much easier, and a carving knife would need to be sharpened quite often.
Larry
 
When buying things used you never quite know what the word "set" means.....

Could be a set that was purchased together in one box.

Could be a set that was purchased at the same time but from 2 different lots and put together by the seller

Could be a set that was purchased at different times and the seller is just calling it a set because they are both from the same manufacturer and also available as a set in a catalog.

In the past I have purchased items (not just knives) that were sold as a complete boxed set but had minor variations within the set. Depending on what it was, I either exchanged them for a perfect set or is it wasn't an important item to me - just left them as is.

Manufacturers sometimes will use up older stock that was made slightly different (when boxing up a set) but do not want to throw them away. Most recipients will never notice. I'd suspect most here on this Forum probably would just because of their nature (being collectors and aficionados).

When buying on eBay one always takes chances as we never know the true history!

Just judging from Randall's reputation I would doubt your "set" was actually boxed up as a factory set that way. That said, - still very nice! Don't think the Turkey will notice - LOL!! :D
 
Last edited:
Back
Top