59' Kodiak questions

[TRAP]

[alaskabowhunter]

CKruse- The rosewood site window '59 is the earliest variation in my opinion. Bear had the dark rosewood on hand in 1958 that they  were using on the '58 Kodiak Specials.  Here is a pic of the 1958 Kodiak Specials with the dark rosewood site windows:

 

then there this 1959 Kodiak from my collection,  no coin, rosewood site window serial # EL963 64" 40#:

 

Now note my 64" 1958 Kodiak is serial number EG035. Maybe this  dispells the theory that the first 64 inch '59 Kodiak was DA001.

Soo,  I believe this to be the earliest version of the '59 Kodiak.

[Wade Phillips]

Shaun – From our posts here, I’m certain you are beginning to see part of the real mystique behind the 1959 Kodiak… lots of variations, and no standard definitions or methods of categorization.

CKruse – I try to deal first in facts, that is written documentation from the era, then look at the artifacts that are known to exist, then draw logical conclusions. The 1959 Bear Archery Catalog shows several Rosewood Sight Window 1959 Kodiaks. I don’t see any Maple Sight Window Kodiaks in the 1959 Bear Archery Catalog. Do you see any Maple Sight Windows? Both mentioned bows are known exist… Now I will answer your questions with questions… What would your logical conclusion be as to the earliest? Do you also have your answer as to WHY…  If not let me know…

CKruse – Not trying to be a smart character, but just trying to illustrate how easy it is for collectors to draw logical conclusions. Rather than accept some folk lore, I suggest you first go to the facts and then be logical.

I would like to point out that there are several other little tidbits in the 1959 Bear Archery Catalog that totally and completely turn some of the presently accepted 1959 folk lure completely upside down.

Bear catalogs are never 100% accurate, but when bounced off the actual artifacts in existence, they offer invaluable insight.

Reading auction text, or reading undocumented or un-researched postings should never be a substitute for doing legitimate research and getting a formal education.

[Wade Phillips]

Chuck – Thank you so much for your post of January 19, 2009 10:52 PM, with the 1958 and 1959 photographs and explaining the sequence of the serial numbers. Like the older brother who teaches the younger, I am proud that I taught you well.

While I personally place little store in “Cosmetic Features or Varations” like serial numbers, many original serial numbers, such as in this example, only substantiate the legitimate facts.

If there are any readers of this thread who believe that another 1959 Kodiak preceded the production of the  Rosewood Sight Window, please offer your evidence… We are always enthusiastic to learn additional facts…

Most respectfully, Wade

[ckruse]

Wade, I guess most of us would qualify as "dabblers", instead of true collectors! No offense taken. I just haven't been exposed to the number of bows that some here have. I too believe the rosewood sight window predates the maple. I acquired this nice example last summer. It is BA031, no coin, rosewood I beam. The pictures are not the best, but it's all original save for a new feather rest. CKruse
 
 
 
 
 

[ckruse]

Also, "Reading auction text, or reading undocumented or un-researched postings should never be a substitute for doing legitimate research and getting a formal education."

AMEN! Too much of what we take to be fact is unrefined BULL$H*+ carelessly spewed by various factions. Too True! CKruse

[Shaun]

I have been learning much from this thread. Thanks all and keep the dialog going as long as it helps us all.

It looks like I may have to obtain one of these bows for a pattern to be able to try a repro. Not trying to better the originals, would just like to try my hand at making one to learn from the process. Even a wall hanger with irreparable damage could work as a template.

[Wade Phillips]

Shaun - If you want a 1959 Kodiak to use as a pattern, I have a few damaged 1959 Kodiaks and would be happy to loan one of them to you. I've been thinking about making a lamp or stool using these damaged bows. Most need to be refinished, but I don't want inconvenience one of the professionals with these bows. My junkers are all 60". Let me know the weight you are shooting for. Best regards, Wade

[Wade Phillips]

CKruse - Your BA031 Rosewood Sight Window is a real looker for an all original. Thanks for sharing your photographs.

I try not to "believe" any thing about collectibles that is not based in facts. I especially enjoyed your comments following the word AMEN! …

I'm more than pleased if you found anything in my ramblings to be useful.

[Wade Phillips]

Trap – Judging from the photograph of 5 bows under your name, I assumed you were fairly serious about collecting old bears. I have no problem with the term "odd duck", as long as you have defined it.

It appears from your definition, that “odd duck” is interchangeable with the term “un-documented variation”. I’m cool with using those terms interchangeably, if you are… I only use the term “un-documented variation” as it seems to be self-explanatory.

Like you, I would try to speak with “Joe Six-Pack” on whatever terms he is comfortable with. Additionally, I would always have at least one extra unopened case of his favorite beer in my garage refrigerator, to take to our next bow/cash exchanging rendezvous.

Trap – You stated “While different than a "documented variation" I would still classify the "odd ducks" as legitimate collectibles and maybe even more desirable.”

As you know, each collector must determine their own field of interest, priories, and what they consider desirable, valuable or legitimately collectible. Collectors thrive on owning rare or one of a kind items, so your observation that “odd ducks may be even more desirable”, does not surprise me at all.

Hypothetical example – Lets say that you find an “undocumented variation” or “odd duck" of the 1959 Kodiak that is the only example of its kind known to collectors. Because I am a Certified Appraiser of Archery Collectibles, you pay me a minimal fee to write a certified appraisal and place a value on your bow for insurance purposes….

Three months later, I find a photograph in previously unfound Bear Archery Documentation from the era that shows a 1959 Kodiak, which has the same undocumented characteristics of your previously undocumented bow… Now your bow becomes a “documented variation” with a pedigree that establishes legitimacy.

I contact you and state, that your previously “un-documented variation” has now been identified as a legitimate “documented variation” with a greatly increased value. At no additional expense to you, I send you an updated certified appraisal in which the value of the 1959 Kodiak greatly increases.

You put both appraisals in your safety deposit box in the bank. The next day, your house catches fire, but fortunately, the only thing burned beyond salvaging, is this 1959 Kodiak. Your insurance policy states that you must prove the value of the loss in order to collect.

Which appraisal do you present to your insurance agent?

[TRAP]

LOL Wade, Point well taken,  The "Odd duck" or "Un-documented" appraisal probably wouldnt get me much of an insurance settlement.

Thank You  Sir for the perspective, Okay now back to my question. Let me try to phrase this correctly. I feel like I'm in class and it's late, but hey I dig learning.

What other "documented variations" of the 59 Kodiak are out there pertaining to "I" Beams? Are there any others besides the Purple Heart, Maple, Dark Rosewood and Bubinga?  I wasnt aware of the Bubinga "I" Beam untill Len listed his and had not even heard of it.  

Also, what's your theory on why these variations occurred?  Experimentation?  Special Order?  A mistake?  A Joe 6-Pack employee that extended his partying a little too much the night before he glued up risers?  

I find the bows with variations really neat.  The rare wood combinations, "wrong" glass colors, butcherblock  "I" Beams and risers, etc etc.

Trap

[alaskabowhunter]

I remember hearing that  there were production problems with the early '59 Kodiaks. Specifically the problem was stress cracks in the limbs. Bear was telling dealers to destroy the bows that were stressed,  making the early models even more scarce.

 Maybe Wade could expand on this. I am referring to the bow that Glenn St Charles sanded the serial numbers off...

[d. ward]

The earliest 1959 Kodiaks also have black lettering rather then gold.The gold came shortly after 1959 because the black did not show well on the rosewood...go figure huh ? and this color tip combo...... bd

[alaskabowhunter]

yes Doc, I agree about the black lettering. Under magnification you can see my bow had black lettering and then they went over it with gold paint, very cool.

[Wade Phillips]

Trap – I am pleased that you can appreciate the perspective of how an Ugly Duckling can become Duck a l’Orange.

Sorry to report that I know of no other documented variations of the I-Beam 1959 Kodiak, although others may well exist.

I know of one person who told me he “thought” he had an I-Beam of another wood, but that report is unconfirmed. As with appraisals, if I do not see the item in person, I can not authenticate it nor appraise it.

I will not perpetuate the misinformation that someone thought they had a Kodiak I-Beam that was made using partially fossilized cartilage from the impacted canine tooth of a castrated Sabretooth Tiger and that the limbs were backed with unborn calfskin of a prehistoric albino 8-legged, near sighted, bi-polar, walrus with a harelip.

Trap – In answer to your question, “Also, what's your theory on why these variations occurred?”

Sorry, but I have no theory as to why these variations occurred and know of no Bear Archery documentation from the era that explains the “why”.

I am a pretty boring guy, and try to deal only in facts. The items exist, we collect them and record their identifying characteristics and document the recorded facts about them from the era. We shoot the heck out them, run over the hills and kill a lot of animals with these old Kodiaks.

I’ll leave the speculation and creative writing about Kodiaks to the conspiracy theorists, science fiction writers, and professional storytellers.

Yes, I too love the Butcher Block "I" Beams. Do you have a 64”, Short Sight Window, Butcher Block "I" Beam 1960 Kodiak ?

[TRAP]

Wade, to answer your last question, nope, sure don't but I'd like to see one.  I have a butcherblock "I" Beam Kodiak Deluxe but don't consider it very rare.

I think the light colored Bubinga could have easily been mistaken for Maple in a stack of lumber, but who knows.

Are there any records that document how many 59 Kodiaks were made?  

Trap

[Wade Phillips]

Trap – There are a lot of butcherblock "I" Beams in the DeLuxe bows. The DeLuxe is another story all unto itself.

There may have been records kept of the total number of each model bow made at Bear, but I don’t know of their existence. Most factories track their output in one or more of a number of different ways, e.g., production each day, production per employee, units shipped to each dealer, etc. If an auditor had all the internal paperwork Bear ever created, they could probably make a pretty accurate calculation.

A simpler, faster and likely much less accurate method that some speculator might use would be to pull some numbers out of his posterior using serial numbers. I personally don’t place much store in every serial number on every bow because anything could have been written on any bow. Some collectors live and die by serial numbers, but they have probably never owned any mis-marked bows. I own many bows that are mis-marked so know first hand that many mistakes were made. However, for some years, Bear serial numbers can give you a good idea about the bow.  

If we talk just about the 60” 1959 Kodiak bows and their serial numbers… of the several dozen I have owned over the years, with very few exceptions, nearly all have a serial number that begins with a “B”, which is letter Bear used to designate a 60” Kodiak in 1959. Remember these first letter designations were not the same every year and sometimes changed mid-year or were completely abandoned to not even start with two letters.  

If we accept the designation of the second letter as being the first in the series, and being followed by 001 as being the first bow of the A series, from BA001 to BA999 there would be 999 bows. The highest second letter on any 1959 Kodiak that I own, is BF825. If the guess-tamation is for each of series, BA, BB, BC, BD, BE, BF, that 999 bows were produced, within those 6 letter series, there would be 5,994.

Now, make no mistake, I would not hesitate to bet a large sum of money that this ‘calculation” based on assumptions is not accurate to within the margin of error of +/- one bow, of 5,994 for the total number of Bear Kodiaks produced in 1959.

I’m not offering this as my idea, but rather as an idea that has been discussed by “speculators”. To me the total number of 1959 Kodiaks that were made is unimportant. The important number is how many have survived in collectible or shootable or restorable condition?

[Wade Phillips]

John – In your post you state, “…I will most likely not sell this Kodiak but I understand if I do I may not get back what I have into it.…”

Hey, if you do not sell the Kodiak, are you planning to take it with you when you check out of this world? And if you do take it with you, what do you plan to do with it when you get to your final destination? (just joking)

John – Seriously, let’s face the facts, we are all mortal, if we do not sell these bow while we are alive, eventually our heirs will sell them. You have already bought and sold enough bows to know that we are only the temporary caretakers of these artifacts while enjoying our short stay here on this earth.  

If we accept the reality that your Maple Sight Window will be sold at some point, we can speculate as to what its value might be depending on what is done to it from this point forward.

If we accept that values will not change due to fluctuations in the economy, large numbers of bows surfacing, and that collecting interests will remain stable, logically the value would change according to what is done to the bow…

1 – If preserved in its present condition. Value should remain stable.

2 – Restore to more original condition to make it more of a collectible by having original multi-layer tips put back on the bow. See BowDoc’s photo of old tip overlays. Value may increase slightly because it may appeal to greater number of collectors.

3 – Make into a shooter by a professional, glue up cracks, holes, install glass tip overlays, refinish entire surface, re-grip. As a restored shooter, its value may increase slightly, but don’t count on recovering all of your expenses for professional work.

4 – Same as #3, but have a factory quiver bushing professionally installed and hole sealed. Value should not change at all. Desirably may increase slightly. Once you poke the 2 spike holes from the quiver in the leather grip, you may decrease the value slightly. Having a factory quiver bushing is desirable; however, having the leather molested around a factory quiver bushing is not desirable.

5 – Same as #4, but also install a compass below the serial numbers as you suggested earlier. A number of collectors/shooters/hunters who like restored bows to be as close to original as possible, will see the compass installed low in the riser location as being undesirable and will not even be interested in purchasing the bow (myself included). If a collector wants it as an original, there is no way to fill the compass hole…

[johnnyrazorhead]

Some great points Wade.If I don't sell it in my lifetime,I figured my son may want to become the caretaker for awhile,maybe not.But it won't matter then,at least not to me.I agree 100% with all 5 of your obsevations.
 1.I could leave it as is,tips and stress cracks intact.But I want to shoot it.
 2.I could restore it to more original condition with original multi-layer tips.It would definitely be more desireable to a collector,myself included,but I would be leary to shoot it.But I want to shoot it.
 3.Have it professionally restored,glue up the cracks,glass tip overlays,re-spray,re-grip.At this point I think the bow is less desireable as a collector.At least to me.But I could shoot it.
 4.A factory installed bushing wouldn't hurt the value at all in my opinion either and as you said,may even increase it a little bit.I personally don't mind the two little holes in the leather if a quiver was used,but I do hate to see four holes from it being installed 180 degrees the wrong way too and the circular gouges from somebody doing doughnuts with the quiver. We all like factory quiver bushings in our Kodiaks don't we?I could still shoot it.
 5.This is where I guess I'm having my hardest decision.As you said,once that compass hole is drilled,there's no turning back.I have never drilled a hole of any size for any reason in any of my bows.This is a tough one.Installing it would make it the ultimate hunting bow,at least for me.That's perfect for the here and now.How people view the bow after it's done and after I'm gone,who knows.I imagine somebody would still like the bow,compass and all,and want to own it.How much would it be worth?Whatever somebody is willing to pay for it.Like every other collectible.But I could still shoot it(hopefully!)
I've seen alot worse damage done to a bow.Ask Rich about my 1960 Kodiak he's fixing for me.
 I guess I'll just have to think about it some more.But you've brought up some good points to consider.Thanks for sharing them.

[TRAP]

I'm hoping you do the complete package and absolutely hate it and decide to sell it for half of what it's worth to me.    

I would still like it.  Sounds like function and beauty all rolled into one to me.  I'd install it low on the riser just like the guy with the Fedora, and the High Tops.    

In all honesty, I doubt I'd install the compass if the bow were mine, but it's not mine, it's yours and I think your mind is made up.  I can't wait to see pics.

Trap