This week in 19__

[Wade Phillips]

DDave,

For 10 years, I shot only a 55# KMag at 29-1/2". At the time, I didn't really realize how severe the string pinch was, even though from the last joint to the end of my ring finger was brown for 10 years. Just thought that was how my hand was supposed to look because I shot all the time. Now nearly 40 years after putting that 52" bow aside for longer bows, that finger is one of the few parts of my old body that looks almost normal.

[Wade Phillips]

Trap,

I like the '62 KMag in your photos. The way the Brazilian Rosewood faded to highlight the grain makes for a great looking piece of wood. I have an I-beam 62 Kodiak that has a self side slab with that has faded to that really light Brazilian Rosewood.  

Years ago, I made the mistake of refinishing a dramatically swirled Rosewood riser and learned the hard way that the wood becomes dark once the outer dried out surface is removed and it is refinished.  

The '62 KMag I have at present is still all original and still has pretty dark Rosewood. Likely because it seldom saw the light of day.

From one bow to the next, you just never know what Brazilian Rosewood is going to look like. It's just a shame that it became so hard to get.

[Wade Phillips]

Originally posted by TRAP:
... Have you ever seen film footage or pictures of Fred Bear shooting a Kodiak Magnum? I know in one of Fred's films, Bob Munger and I believe "Valiant Maid",boat captain, Ed  Bilderback were shooting crows with Kodiak Magnums.

Trap,

Can't say that I have never seen the footage, but at this point in time, I certainly can't remember seeing it.

The second thing to go is your memory, and I can't remember the first.

Will try to remember to look for that footage the next time I am sick in bed on a marathon DVD watching spree.

[Wade Phillips]

Trap,

You probably already know this, but both Bob Munger and Ed Bilderback were two of the guys who hunted with Fred and Dick here in Nebraska.

[damascusdave]

My righty was like that with matte refinish. Traded it for a lefty with sapwood I beam in great shape.

DDave

[damascusdave]

Wade I really take most of the weight on my middle finger so pinch is not that severe. I consider mine to be a moose bow so do not shoot it much. Minute of moose accuracy comes easily.

[crazynate]

That's a beautiful kodiak mag trap.

[damascusdave]

I am about to enjoy one big advantage of shooting my KMag. My basement has a low ceiling and I can shoot a 52 inch bow without worrying about taking out a light.

DDave

[TRAP]

Thanks Nate, I recently acquired the 62 from a good friend. I had no idea what it even looked like. Needless to say, I was/am very pleased.

I can't find a flaw on it but it has a star stamp over the specs. I'd still like to know for sure what the various stamps on Bear recurves indicated.

[desertrat49]

Trap:Still a newbie at my advancing age, so be gentle slapping me around if I state the obvious. Reading this morning in J.L. Coppen's book. On page 31 he notes that the star stamp happens on factory refurbished bows. On page 66, he talks about delamination problems in '61 Kodiaks which were often sent back to the factory. These typically "had the original serial number removed" before receiving the star stamp. Hope that helps. If at all needed.
Chuck

[desertrat49]

PS: your Kodiak mag is breath-taking! Nice glamour shots!

[vintage-bears]

The rosewood in that Magnum is stunning.
You got a good one Trap!

[TRAP]

Chuck,

I have read that in Jorge's book and I've researched archived threads here at Tradgang and over on the Wall.

I have no doubt the various stampings were done for a reason and meant something to Bear Archery and their retail distributors, but, all I have ever seen for an explanation, was, speculation, a hunch, or heresay.  

I own or have owned a few 22 stamped Bear bows, a few with star stamps, and a 61 Kodiak with the serial number removed with no stamp, and none of them were "severely defected", appeared to be "refurbished" or otherwise damaged.

I can buy in to the theory that stamped bows were returned items and either resold at a discounted price or donated to civic groups to promote archery, but just can't see Bear Archery "refinishing" or "refurbishing" bows. I mean, heck, Bear Archery retooled 3 times in 1961 to produce 3 variations of the '63 Kodiak Magnum. That tells my simple, and sometimes tunnel visioned brain that Fred wanted new shiny unflawed models out there on the landscape to promote next year's offerings. Kinda like the Detroit Auto Manufacturers mentality of, sell new shiny models early and keep improving them to stay ahead of competition.

As nice as the wood is on the 1962 KMag in the pics above, there is a long fairly deep and fairly straight scratch right down the middle of the overlays on the front side of the sight window.  Looks kinda like something you'd do, if you weren't careful,  with a utility knife while opening a cardboard box with a very nice bow inside. It could be pretty easily sanded out and resprayed.  Perhaps, it instead got a star stamp and sold at a reduced price in the "bargain cave" at Bear Archery. I don't know, anyone's guess is as good as mine.

[damascusdave]

In fact do we really know those bows were stamped at Bear Archery. Could be they were done at the distributor level. Anyone in touch with Joe St. Charles to get his opinion?

DDave

[seboomook]

Yes, that's another theory that last years undamaged bows were 'written down' and stamped at the retailer by a salesman or at the distributor level.

[Wade Phillips]

Originally posted by TRAP:
...
I have no doubt the various stampings were done for a reason and meant something to Bear Archery and their retail distributors, but, all I have ever seen for an explanation, was, speculation, a hunch, or heresay.  
...

Trap,

The observation in your above quoted paragraph is for the most part accurate.

First - I would suggest that "hearsay" is the correct spelling of the word you refer to as "heresay".

Second - I would ask, what is your definition of that word?

Just feel it is important to convey your definition of the word hearsay, so we all understand what we actually consider to be hearsay.  

As I have stated for many years, no printed Bear documentation has surfaced from the era that specifically explains these markings.

However, I have been working on something for several years that may eventually provide conclusive evidence regarding some of the markings on these 1950s and 1960s bows.

To me personally, as a serious collector of vintage Bear Bows, documenting the actual markings on the bows is the important point, e.g., These bows exist with these markings. These are actual facts that can be documented.

Many of the explanations of the "whys" are simply speculation and not deserving of the time & energy they have consumed.

[TRAP]

Had no idea this thread would turn into a lesson in grammar or a spelling contest.

     

Again, I've read and heard many statements,  often written or spoken very matter of factly, explaining the meaning of the various stampings on Bear recurves, but I haven't seen any documentation verifying those claims. The person writing or speaking those undocumented claims is passing on something they've heard from someone else and nothing more.

They are not passing on facts, which may influence or help establish parameters such as, rarity, condition, or value. They are instead, merely passing on someone else's speculations.

Lets put the misspelled word in a sentence for clarification purposes. "I consider what I've heard or read about Stamps on Bear bows to be hearsay."

[TRAP]

So, who's going to keep this thread going with a new "This Week in 19__ post tomorrow?

[Wade Phillips]

Trap -

Would you consider an actual quote from someone as hearsay?

Do you consider a written document from a Bear employee attesting to markings they personally placed on bows to be actual evidence or hearsay?

In the case of quoting Fred Bear's exact words from an unpublished VHS tape, I do not consider that to be hearsay.

It is important to first establish exactly what criteria we would use to accept something as fact and what would be considered hearsay.

The legal definition of hearsay is generally considered to be much narrower.

[Wade Phillips]

Speaking of Magnums...

How about the 1963 Dogleg Magnums...

Type I, Type II & Type III...

Purportedly redesigned and then re-redesined because of design flaws...

But who among us can post a photograph of a broken one?