Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 08:22:00 AM
The interesting part is that they were all purchased in immaculate condition.
Lets see how long a list we can actually generate of a single prefix of arguably the most collectable of the Kodiak series.
Pics would be nice, however, I would rather have the info without a pic rather than not have it.
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 11:40:00 AM
The 1960 serial numbers continued on from the 1959 numbering so the first letter B was also used for the 60" Kodiaks at the beginning of 1960.
Over the years, the serial numbering sequence changed over 12 times on the Kodiaks...
From 1959 into the first part of 1960 the new numbering was
BA (1959 60" maple or dark rosewood sight window Kodiaks)
BB (1959 60" mostly purple heart sight window Kodiaks)
BC (1959 60" Kodiaks)
BD (1959 60" Kodiaks)
BE (1959 60" Kodiaks)
BF( 1959 60" Kodiaks)
BG (1959 60" Kodiaks) - maybe some 1960s in these numbers
BH (1960 60" Kodiaks) - maybe some 1959s in these numbers
BI (1960 60" Kodiaks)
BJ (1960 60" Kodiaks)
I have three 1960s that are BJ which is about as far as that lettering went until it was changed to begin with two numbers.
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 11:47:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 11:50:00 AM
BA which is the 60" maple sight window Kodiaks and the 60" dark Rosewood sight window Kodiaks.
AA which is the 56" 1959 Kodiaks and later the 1960 Kodiaks.
Several of the AA and BA bows have sold for well over $1,000, some for over $1,500 and a few for over $2,000. Many of these bows with specific wood in the sight window are extremely rare, in one case only a single example has surfaced so far and only found as late as 2010. Other extremely rare Kodiaks may surface in the future. One thing I have learned, is that anything could have been made.
Although I have never seen a BH approach the high end sale price of the AA or BA Kodiaks, anything is possible.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 12:05:00 PM
The BH 1960 Kodiaks I have are
BH 059 - 55# - 60" - Medium Width Tips - Floyd Eccleston's Bow
BH 98 - 36# - 60" - Medium Width Tips - Al's Bow
BH 501 - 48# - 60" - Narrow Width Tips
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 12:51:00 PM
Also have three BJ 1960 Kodiaks
All three have narrow tips
Post by: Jack Shanks on March 09, 2011, 02:46:00 PM
(http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k267/bowjack/IMG_9401.jpg)
(http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k267/bowjack/IMG_9402.jpg)
Post by: NumPls on March 09, 2011, 02:53:00 PM
Very puzzling!
Ray
Post by: yeager on March 09, 2011, 03:37:00 PM
My 1959 Kodiak has rosewood in the sight window, but the serial number is BB341....I guess it must be one of the "mostly" bows. Also, what color is the glass on the 1960 compared to the '59s brown and burnt orange?
Great info, thanks
Post by: bctgrad on March 09, 2011, 03:58:00 PM
Did the serial number change later in the year for the 60's? Mine doesn't even start with a letter:
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/bctgrad/P1040137a.jpg)
Brian
Post by: NumPls on March 09, 2011, 04:19:00 PM
The last line of Wade's first post on this topic answers your question:
"I have three 1960s that are BJ which is about as far as that lettering went until it was changed to begin with two numbers.".
Nice grain in that sight window, by the way!
Ray
Post by: bctgrad on March 09, 2011, 04:55:00 PM
Brian
Post by: hayslope on March 09, 2011, 05:18:00 PM
BH 909
60"
50#
I have some photos somewhere, but not on PB.
Bob - I have one of the "others" in the "mostly" group as well from '59:
1959 Maple Sight Window
BB143
60"
60#
http://tradgang.com/noncgi/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=004489
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 05:28:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by bctgrad:That is some beautiful rosewood grain in the i-beam.
Wade:
Did the serial number change later in the year for the 60's? Mine doesn't even start with a letter:
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/bctgrad/P1040137a.jpg)
Brian
What a lot of people fail to realize is that the wood of the i-beam, although it only shows up well in the sight window, really goes from fade to fade.
I will post a pic of my 61 KS where it is very obvious.
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/015.jpg)
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 05:32:00 PM
DDave
Thanks so much everyone for contributing.
Post by: 69RECURVE on March 09, 2011, 07:52:00 PM
60" & 52#
Post by: ahandle70 on March 09, 2011, 08:18:00 PM
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 09:22:00 PM
The serial # 11N41 would be a 1960 Kodiak in the scheme of Bear's numbering at the time, but remember there are always exceptions to nearly every rule, especially this one as hand written letters and numbers were put on by humans. And mistakes are made, we all make mistakes every day, some of us more than others.
I don't usually put much store in serial numbers, especially as an absolute for dating bows. As I have said many times, the form the bow was built on is the determining factor in dating a bow as everything else could have been changed either accidentally or on purpose.
The 56" 1960 Kodiak is a fairly rare bird and in my experience a damn good shooting bow.
Of the three 56" 1960 Kodiaks that I have, AA886, 56" 50# is the best shooting. Doc refinished it and it looks awesome. I named it "Speedy" for obvious reasons.
Some of the serial numbers and lettering on these old Kodiaks are hard to read because a coat of finish was not put over the letters and those with a lot of use are usually the hardest to read. Many 56" are weighted and lettered @26" because they were designed for 26" draw lengths as stated in the catalog.
I've only seen a couple of Bears that have two lengths and weights written on the bow. Doc has probably seen a lot more of that than I have.
Post by: ahandle70 on March 09, 2011, 09:41:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 09:53:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by 69RECURVE:You realize that when you finally give up and sell that bow to me I will have two pairs of consecutive number bows. :pray:
Mine is BH 668
60" & 52#
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 09:53:00 PM
With a 29-1/2" draw, you are wise not to shoot that 56" Kodiak. Percentage wise, I've seen more of the 56" Kodiaks that were broken than any other length. I am convinced that the breakages and separations were mostly due to being drawn over 26".
It is good for you to stick to the 60" bows and longer.
I don't remember the the really nice 59' that was hanging in a store window for 15 bucks, but then I don't rmember what I had for lunch today either...
Those 65 and 66 Kodiaks are way to heavy for me to haul around all day. Mine just sit on the pegs and collect dust.
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 09:57:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 09, 2011, 10:03:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Wade Phillips:So the good news is you probably at least ate lunch.
ahandle70 -
With a 29-1/2" draw, you are wise not to shoot that 56" Kodiak. Percentage wise, I've seen more of the 56" Kodiaks that were broken than any other length. I am convinced that the breakages and separations were mostly due to being drawn over 26".
It is good for you to stick to the 60" bows and longer.
I don't remember the the really nice 59' that was hanging in a store window for 15 bucks, but then I don't rmember what I had for lunch today either...
Those 65 and 66 Kodiaks are way to heavy for me to haul around all day. Mine just sit on the pegs and collect dust.
As for those 65 and 66 bows I have already decided to live out my hunting days with a bow that is 50 years old at the time so I will be needing one of each in 2015 and 2016. We all know that a coating of dust greatly reduces the value.
DDave
Post by: ahandle70 on March 09, 2011, 10:12:00 PM
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 09, 2011, 11:35:00 PM
That blue truck was my favorite until my pal hit a black Angus cow with it going 65 miles an hour and totaled it. Fortunately, nobody was hurt except the cow, who expired.
Grumleys, my favorite 1930s and 1940s bows. They are the best from that era. You should have been at the NTA Banquet two weeks ago in Fremont, we had 10 cases of Grumleys there all lined up in the Fremont Auditorium. They are true works of art. I love them.
Post by: Bjorn on March 10, 2011, 02:08:00 AM
1959 Kodiaks
AA 034 56" PH SW
BA 260 60" MSW
BorD A 589 64" MSW
all three are black ink
and a
1960 56" Kodiak
AA 735
I have other 1959's and 1960's but did not look at those.
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 10:12:00 AM
So our official total for the first day, March 9, is 9 1960's and 1 1959 with BH prefixes.
The best part is the existence of two consecutive number pairs.
Joe St Charles, who would be as likely as any to have seen them, told me a while ago he has never seen a single consecutive number pair of 1960 Kodiaks let alone two.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 10:23:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 10:31:00 AM
One with a 1962 International 3/4 ton, hit a bull. The truck was not that badly dented so he must have seen it and slowed before he hit. I finally asked how the bull fared and he said, "sure made him mad, we had a hell of a time catching him".
The other happened the same year and she hit a cow with a VW bug. She got a pretty cut up forehead. Do not remember how either the cow or the car did.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 10:37:00 AM
It was a joint venture involving both GM and Toyota.
It too died an ugly death, into an avalanche and then rear ended by the van following. Moments later a semi nearly wiped them all out.
We are learning lots of neat stuff in this thread. Where else but on tradgang?
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 11:34:00 AM
The first letter for all 64" MSW bows that I have seen is D which would make yours DA 589.
Dave -
Regarding your comment "It was a joint venture involving both GM and Toyota."
Fremont, Nebraska is the town I mentioned, there is no GM and Toyota joint venture there that I know of.... But of course some pot smoking kids could have something going there.
Post by: Bjorn on March 10, 2011, 11:40:00 AM
Thanks for the insight on 64" MSW's.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 12:00:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by yeager:yeager - Sorry I missed your question last night...
Wade,
My 1959 Kodiak has rosewood in the sight window, but the serial number is BB341....I guess it must be one of the "mostly" bows. Also, what color is the glass on the 1960 compared to the '59s brown and burnt orange?
Great info, thanks
In the normal scheme of things that I have seen, BB341 should be a 60" 1959 Kodiak, built on the 60" 1959 Kodiak form which has slightly less recurve than the 1960 Kodiak form.
The tip overlays and the riser overlays should be red and cream marcarta rather than the typical black and white glass on the 1960 Kodiaks.
The sight window wood for bows in this serial number sequence is most commonly purpleheart.
Sometimes the purpleheart is so dark that it looks like rosewood. The finish darkens to the point that you can only use the grain of the wood to determine the wood type... unless of course you want to scratch off some of the finish :knothead: - which is usually not recommended...
There are a handful of early 1959 Kodiaks that have dark rosewood sight windows. This rosewood is the same as you would see in the sight windows of the 1958 Kodiak Specials.
The dark rosewood sight windows in 1959 Kodiaks are very rare and highly collectible.
Even rarer are the Bubinga sight windows in the 1959 Kodiaks of which I have only seen a couple.
Post by: Bjorn on March 10, 2011, 12:03:00 PM
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 12:09:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bjorn:Bjorn - Yes, I did just come up with the "Joint Venture" - Guess it was a pretty natural thought for a kid who grew up in the 1960s and who was exposed to some of the hippe culture and who went off to basic training in 1967.
"Joint Venture" hahahaha Wade did you just make that up?
Thanks for the insight on 64" MSW's.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 12:27:00 PM
Yes, the depth of the string groove is really a valuable tip and one that I like to stress when guys ask about acquiring a 1959 Kodiak to use extensively.
The string grooves were cut by hand and do vary a bit as far as depth through the glass.
I have a few BC 1959 Kodiaks and one BD 1959 Kodiak with the string grooves cut all the way through the glass into the limb lamination.
The main thing is to examine the bow to see if the string groove is cut through the glass, regardless of the serial number.
The real problem is the glass lifting at the end of the taper of the glass. I'm convinced most of this was caused from guys unstringing the bow and then putting the sting on the back of the bow in both string grooves... sometimes referred to as "reverse stringing". When someone pulled back the bow when it was reverse strung it sometimes pulled the glass off the laminations or even cracked the laminations along the string groove.
I am always careful to completely examine the entire bow with a 10x loop before shooting an old bow for the first time. I want to make sure there are no separations or cracks in the glass or laminations.
I am overly cautious with an old bow for the first time and never shoot one that shows any signs of damage. I make sure it is repaired properly before shooting it.
It is our job to make sure these old bows that have survived for 50 years or more are properly taken care of and repaired, so they can survive another 50 years or more so the future generations can enjoy these great old bows as much as we have enjoyed owning and shooting them in our lifetime.
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 12:31:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bjorn:Hey the topic is basically build the knowledge base around one series of 1960 Kodiaks which includes any and all bits of the minutest trivia.
I know this was not the topic but will include it here anyway. Knowing these letter prefixes on 1959 Kodiaks is particularly useful if you want something specific, like a 1959 Kodiak to hunt with. You would then want one with fiberglass up the string groove for a more durable bow. So, the prefixes might steer you to something later in Wade's list-like a BC in the 60" or DC in a 64", or anything after 'C' for that matter. I don't think any of the 'B' series had that-did they Wade?
I can feel Papa Bears presence saying "way to sort out the puzzle" or "what a bunch of silly old fools" depending on whether we are right on with our guesses, close or way off base. The seller of the BH bow I just bought has a 64 inch 59 for sale as well and with a 30 inch draw I would be far better off for hunting with it. I may just end up with it as well now.
Do you ever think I expected, when I started this thread, that I would find out that the next bow in sequence to my latest belongs to a fellow tradganger. Now I have no choice but to act on that knowledge. It have already pm'd the owner with a proposal.
You guys have forgotten more about Bear bows than I will ever know and I am humbled and honoured to be in your company. I love to teach people anything and everything that I can and what I need is a broad and accurate knowledge base.
And btw the Freemont I was referring to is in California where the concept of joint venture takes on an even greater meaning.
DDave
Post by: Bjorn on March 10, 2011, 12:46:00 PM
Post by: Steve95 on March 10, 2011, 12:54:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 12:57:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bjorn:Okay so now I gotta come visit you cause that was one hell of a car. I sold it to my stepson and it had been in two accidents before he bought it. He had so many accidents with it he was not even sure. One day when he was working someone hit it and caved in both passenger side doors in the parking lot.
I kinda' thought that was the Fremont in question the plant is about 15 miles from my house, and we are arm pit deep in 'joint ventures' here. 'Joint Venture' I'm glad this thread came along. Ol' Fred would be proud. :bigsmyl:
They were a Corolla with GM wrapper and the Corollas from that era rusted like crazy whereas the Novas, what few are still left around, generally look pretty nice.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 01:07:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 02:34:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bjorn:Bjorn - Yes, Fred is one who always enjoyed a laugh.
...'Joint Venture' I'm glad this thread came along. Ol' Fred would be proud. :bigsmyl:
Steve95 - In answer to your question about the meaning of DD 021 64", 46# @ 28"
The first D means the bow is a 64" 1959 Kodiak
The second D means it is the letter in the numbered series, DA, DB, DC, DD, or better stated, it is the 4th group of 999 64" Kodiaks
The 021 means that it is the 21st bow made in the DD series
So if you subscribe to thought that there are 999 bows in each the DA, DB, DC, DD
Your bow would be the 3,018 th 64" Kodiak made...
However there is some speculation as to the exact number of each bow made in a given length.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 02:42:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by damascusdave:Dave, about the DV... V is a very high second letter. The highest second letter 64" 1959 Kodiak that I have is DE, which I have always thought was near the end of the run as logically there were fewer of the 64" Kodiaks made than the 60" Kodiaks.
Okay now, so the serial on the 59 in question is DV440 telling me it is a later 59 and then there is an "E" below the draw weight. Now what might the "E" mean?
DDave
I'm sure that Doc can shed some light on this as he has probably worked on more 1959 Kodiaks then most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
Supposedly a letter under the draw weight indicated the employee who measured the draw weight.
Like many word of the mouth statements about Bear Bows, I have never seen any documentation from the factory to substantiate the statement as absolute fact.
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 04:05:00 PM
I think I am gonna let the 59 slide as I need a long bow in my arsenal for the North American Longbow Safari and I have been playing with a very nice Robertson for quite a while.
Had a neat experience a while ago. Went out to shake down some crabapples for my back yard mulies and there was my cat in the tree trying to catch a magpie. We got a little contest on for whose cat can make a documented magpie kill.
On second thought a 64 incher like that does not appear every day.
Oh well, only cure for this addiction is more bows.
DDave
Post by: Larry m on March 10, 2011, 04:40:00 PM
Post by: yeager on March 10, 2011, 04:52:00 PM
(http://i779.photobucket.com/albums/yy71/64kodiak/1957and1959Kodiaks026.jpg)
(http://i779.photobucket.com/albums/yy71/64kodiak/1957and1959Kodiaks024.jpg)
Wade,
No problem at all. Thanks for getting back. Now that I looked closer, it just might be purpleheart in the riser which, like you mentioned, sometimes becomes very dark. And it does have the red/cream tip & riser overlays.
I'm in the process of refinishing one of my 1957 Kodiaks, and when complete I'll start on my 1959. Hopefully that will bring out the color of the purpleheart. It wouldn't be my luck to have one of those rare 1959's with the dark rosewood!
Again, thanks!!
Yeager
Post by: yeager on March 10, 2011, 04:55:00 PM
By the way, I hope you don't mind my asking Wade a few questions on "your" post.
Yeager
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 05:19:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by yeager:When Wade comes out to play we should all benefit.
Dave,
By the way, I hope you don't mind my asking Wade a few questions on "your" post.
Yeager
I pretty much just bought the 59 as well which has, surprisingly, a purple heart i-beam ( and i do not even like purple heart). On the other hand the rosewood is to die for.
I might have just missed it if you had not started the ball rolling with Wade back a couple of pages.
Thank you.
DDave
Post by: yeager on March 10, 2011, 05:23:00 PM
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 05:35:00 PM
You posted some very nice photographs of your 59 Kodiak.
Judging from the grain in your I-Beam and the color of the wood, I am certain that it is Purpleheart.
A word of caution from an overly cautious old fart, if the bow were mine, I'd make certain the diagonal crack in the Purpleheart was properly repaired before I shot it.
Post by: Larry m on March 10, 2011, 06:33:00 PM
Post by: yeager on March 10, 2011, 06:50:00 PM
I guess I'm just used to seeing that beautiful true purple color that the Bowdoc gets when he refinishes a bow. And yes, she won't be shot until I refinish her, crack and all.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 07:22:00 PM
Unfortunately, Al isn't here any longer to give us his insights. And a lot of time has passed which has brought many more bows to the surface for us to examine and catalog. I have the benefit of reading what Al wrote, talking to Al many times about these things, having the partial Bear factory serial number records to examine and dissect and the time to focus on this particular subject for quite a while since Al's death.
I'm pretty much a fact based guy who likes to have concrete evidence in documents and/or artifacts from the era.
Larry - I have covered the 1959 Kodiak Special serial numbers in great depth in another thread somewhere. I'll try to find it and post the link here.
That thread will answer your question, and you can plug in your serial number.
In 1959, each different bow style and length had the first letter to designate that specific bow. There were 5 different lengths of the 1959 Kodiak Special.
Your XF086 should be a 66" 1959 Kodiak Special.
It is possible that any bow could be mis-marked as humans were marking them. And as I have said many times, there are exceptions to nearly every rule with Bear Bows.
For the 1959 Grizzly, it was advertised only in 62" length and all of those bows that I remember seeing were marked with the first letter F.
Of course there is the lone 64" 1959 Grizzly which is also marked with an F as the first letter. Proof again, there is nearly always at least one exception to any rule.
Forget the coins, they are the most unreliable method to determine the date of a bow... If you re-read Al's comments about dating bows, he specifically stated coins should be used with other features.... he never stated it should be the only feature...
I try to preach this to everyone.. Any coin could have been put in any bow at any time.
Using only coins to date bows is for the beginning armature.
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 07:55:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Larry m:Thanks, Larry, for the positive feedback. Check out the pics of the Twins in my earlier 1960 Kodiak thread and you will see they both have copper coins, so copper got used for at least some of the early 60 bows.
Wade, You guys have perked my curiousity so I just have to ask. It would appear that a lot more research has gone on since the Shooting and Collecting Article came out by the late Al Reader on the dating of Bear Bows. :"numbering system on 50's and early 60's the serial numbers were started over every month." As opposed to every 999 bows. A few other questions comes to mind and that being would each model of the Bear line in those years have a similar numbering system only with a different initial letter? I have a 59 KS XF086 and 59 Griz FG584L. And, as the 59 year came to an end could they have used the silver coin due to running out of brass. Just wondering....... Great Thread Dave
BH667 has an aluminum coin.
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 08:02:00 PM
As I have stated numerous times, I have owned and seen more 1960 Kodiaks with copper coins than with aluminum coins.
Again - Any coin could have been put in any bow at any time.
It is best to just forget the coins, they are as unimportant as other cosmetic features such as the rest and strike plate which are also easily replaced.
There are even 1959 Kodiaks as well as 1960 Kodiaks with No Coin Hole and No Coin ...
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 08:48:00 PM
The reason I buy, shoot and recommend these bows to others is that they have the character of not being truly mass produced.
BTW the id number for my bow on the bay is:
150573570307
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 09:02:00 PM
Better yet, - Can you imagine a modern day production bow leaving the factory with a Brazilian Rosewood Riser ? - No Way
They don't make them like they used to...
Your 150573570307 is a very nice looking bow. Judging from the price, there must still be a lot of interest in the LH 1960s....
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 09:12:00 PM
I want to touch again on the incorrect belief of what you quoted...
"numbering system on 50's and early 60's the serial numbers were started over every month."
The records from the Bear Factory actually state the serial numbers for each month. Some times a single series spanned several months...
I will give you a good example which we have talked about during the past two days....
The 56" 1959 Kodiaks are all numbered AA... now do you really believe that all 700 of these bows were made in the same month ???? And then no others were made during the other 11 months ???
That is not even logical. Not to mention the fact that serial number records prove that in some instances that a single series spanned several months.
Again, facts from the era in conjunction with examining a large number of the bows from the specific years, clearly proves the facts.
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 09:39:00 PM
And the best is yet to come, we got some key players who have yet to be heard from.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 10, 2011, 09:42:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 10, 2011, 10:48:00 PM
Here is the link to the Kodiak Special Numbers that I mentioned....
http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=002059;p=1
I just copied the KS Serial Numbers here and put your KS in there with these assumptions. You can tell us if my assumptions are correct...
1959 66". ??# - XF086 - no underlays - Larry
My crystal ball isn't working well enough to come up with the draw weight, you will have to help us with that number until I can get the crystal ball polished up a bit...
1959 62", 42# - VA040 - underlays - Bjorn
1959 62", 59# - VA105 - underlays - BowDoc to Tom to Bill
1959 62", 46# - VA 228 - underlays - Chuck
1959 62", 50# - Display - underlays - Wade
1959 62", 50# - VA467L - no underlays - Wade
1959 62", 50# - VA558L - no underlays - Trap
1959 62", 55# - VA612L - no underlays - Wade
1959 62", 40-45# - 17HX12 - no underlays - Chuck
1959 64", 52# - WA139 - underlays - Wade
1959 64", 32# - WA728 - underlays - Mike
1959 64", 52# - WA749 - underlays - BowDoc
1959 64", 48# - WB504 - underlays - Trap
1959 64", 28# - WB934 – no underlays - Bill
1959 64", 45# - WB998 - no underlays - minnesota_hunter
1959 64", 45# - WC020 - underlays - Chuck
1959 64", 53# - WC061 - no underlays - Jeremy
1959 64", 47# - WC365L - no underlays – Wade
1959 64", 40# - WC839 - no underlays - Auction 8-30-09
1959 64", 50# - WD438 - no underlays - Hoof
1959 64", 50# - ?????? - no underlays – Wade
1959 64", 52# - WL197 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 64", 41# - 30HX1R - no underlays - Wade sold
1959 66", 55# - XA523 - underlays - Hoof
1959 66", 40# - XA591 - no underlays - Auction 8-22-2009
1959 66", 28# - XA844 - underlays - Wade
1959 66", 43# - XA969 - underlay - Bjorn
1959 66", 37# - XB05 - underlays - Dennis
1959 66", 40# - XB62 - Auction 2-8-2010
1959 66", 42# - XB348 - underlays - Auction 2-14-2010
1959 66", 40# - XB626 - Auction 8-30-2009
1959 66", 42# - XC412 - no underlays - Chris
1959 66", 44# - XD049 - no underlays - Scott
1959 66", 48# - XD119 - no overlays - Trap
1959 66", 49# - XD178 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 66", 40# - XE403L - no underlays - seboomook
1959 66", 47# - XE685 – no underlays Dennis
1959 66", 42# - XF074 - no underlay - minnesota_hunter
1959 66". 40# - XF086 - no underlays - Larry
1959 66", 39# - XF090 – no underlays - Chuck
1959 66", 40# - XF790 - Auction 2-13-2010
1959 66", 40# - XF877R - no underlays - Chuck
1959 68", 45#@29" - YA349 - underlays - Dennis
1959 68", 45# - YA367 - underlays - Wade
1959 68", 39# - YA456 - underlays - 2-26-2008 Auction
1959 68”, 32# - YB499A - no underlays – Chuck
1959 68", 55# - YA540 - Auction 2-8-2010
1959 68", 47# - YB626L - no underlays - Jeff
1959 68", 38# - YB965 - no underlays - Wade
1959 68", 39# - YC039 - No underlays - Trap
1959 68", 55# - 9YX29 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 70", 40# - ZA110 - underlays - Chuck
1959 70", 38# - ?????? - underlays removed - Wade
1959 70", 50# - 5VX26 - no underlays - Trap
Post by: Larry m on March 10, 2011, 11:33:00 PM
It was meant as a question and not stated as a fact. Obviously your knowledge is far superior and that is why I posed the question to you. The illogical quote on monthly dating was taken from Shooting and Collecting Older Bear Archery Bows. I have a tendancy to let my mind wander a bit. There is alot of info that has been covered here over the years that is buried and not readily accessable. I realize nothing is cast in stone on the production of Bear Bows and that human error was a constant and changing factor and yes, the placement of coins was also included. I gave the KS and Griz # as an example only. The idea is to move beyond amateur and become more knowledgeable. Thanks for the KS link. Hurry and get that book written!
Hope I didn't offend you Wade.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 11, 2011, 12:10:00 AM
You didn't offend me at all. I simply took your question at face value. I certainly hope I did not offend you as that was never intended.
I'm glad you asked the question, because we all need to know the latest findings and updated information.
When I make a statement that is in conflict with what might be accepted as fact stated by another person, I like to clearly state the facts that support my statement, and let all the facts come to light.
Our objective should always be to arrive at the genuine truth, rather than try to determine who may have been incorrect on some point.
The KS and Griz were great examples...
So what is the draw weight of your KS, so we can updated the records.... ???
You are correct, there is much information lost in the buried threads that have gone before.
I'm just thankful that there is a thread search capability so I can find these previous threads.
Post by: Larry m on March 11, 2011, 01:19:00 AM
Thanks and please pardon me but as stated I have a Tendency to let my mind get to wandering when it comes to neat old items. A little info can be dangerous at times. The KS numbering system is dead on. Mine is a R/H 66" 40# with no underlays. Not sure on how to check the archives here other then a Google search. The longer I use this site the more I realize a lot of subjects have previously been covered.
Ok, now back to the Kodiak's cause I'm learning a lot here.
Post by: Larry m on March 11, 2011, 01:32:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on March 11, 2011, 03:11:00 AM
I start out focused and then get into a couple of pics that are interesting and next thing you know I have fogotten what I was searching for.
This thread is a great example of what wandering can do. I am now a collector of 64 inch 59's as well. And I have still not bought one that looks like it has been used much.
Wade has a great pic of a bunch of 60 Kodiaks lined up side by each, which shows the wide variation in limb tips, and I have been trying to get back to it for 2 days and still not even close.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 11, 2011, 04:12:00 AM
http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=002799;p=2
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 11, 2011, 04:35:00 AM
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/P3111707.jpg)
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/P3111705.jpg)
I will let the pics speak for themselves.
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 11, 2011, 06:55:00 AM
Will just copy that text and photograph from the July 2009 thread here so we have it to view..
Scott - Yes, many of the 60 grips are fat. Some of them are almost like having a hold of a tennis ball.
Lon - Yes, there are lots of variations.
The 6th from left with limbs like yours is # BJ116 which is toward the end of the B series numbers before they were abandoned.
There are really some different looking riser overlay shapes, particularly right at the shelf.
Not difficult to pick out the bows that are refinished... (and those that beg for refinish)
(http://i386.photobucket.com/albums/oo301/WadePhillips/60K.jpg)
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 11, 2011, 07:04:00 AM
The history of the ownership of VA105 is updated - BowDoc to Tom to Bill
Thanks for calling my attention to that badly needed update.
Let me know if anyone has other updates to add...
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 11, 2011, 07:14:00 AM
Your questions are right on, no need to ask to be pardoned. It is important to revisit many of these issues and update the information that needs to be updated.
Glad you discovered the search feature. It is helpful, but sometimes gives us too many options...
Yes, the KS numbering system is dead on with your 66" KS with no underlays. I'm glad you only gave partial information so the rest could be filled in for you.
But remember there is almost always at least one exception to every rule about Bear Bows...
Post by: Larry m on March 11, 2011, 12:28:00 PM
Great Pictures. Thanks! Just the transition from 59 to 60 and all the variables can be a bit mind boggling. In the past I have tried to use old Bear catalogs and previous stated info for the dating process. I'm in the process of chucking that out the window because nothing seems to be cast in stone when it comes to Bear Archery. I especially found the dating numbering system on the Kodiaks to be very interesting.
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 12, 2011, 05:07:00 AM
I hate to beat a dead horse, but want to re-visit something you brought up so we can finish the discussion about the once popular belief that each month the serial numbers were started over.
When we look at these 1959 Kodiak Special serial numbers and see when the underlays were abandoned, we see these facts...
For the 62" bows, VA228 is the last known number with underlays, and VA612 is the highest known number...
So if we buy into the VA series being made in the same month, roughly only the first 1/2 month the bows had underlays... and the VA was abandoned after the first month... both are not logical assumptions...
For the 64" bows, WB504 is the highest known number with underlays... and numbers after WB934 have no underlays... so if we buy into the letters changing each month the WB series would have been made in the second month...
It is not even logical that underlays were abandoned during the first month for the 62" bows but not abandoned for the 64" bow until the second month.
And if the letters were changed each month why were the 62" bows made one month and the 64" bows made 12 months...
62" made 1 month - VA612 highest # - ???
64" made 12 months - WL197 highest # - ???
66" made 7 months - XF877 highest # - ???
68" made 3 months - YC039 highest # - ???
70" made 1 month - ZA110 highest # - ???
Again, none of these are logical assumptions...
http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=002059;p=1
1959 62", 42# - VA040 - underlays - Bjorn
1959 62", 59# - VA105 - underlays - BowDoc to Tom to Bill
1959 62", 46# - VA 228 - underlays - Chuck
1959 62", 50# - Display - underlays - Wade
1959 62", 50# - VA467L - no underlays - Wade
1959 62", 50# - VA558L - no underlays - Trap
1959 62", 55# - VA612L - no underlays - Wade
1959 62", 40-45# - 17HX12 - no underlays - Chuck
1959 64", 52# - WA139 - underlays - Wade
1959 64", 32# - WA728 - underlays - Mike
1959 64", 52# - WA749 - underlays - BowDoc
1959 64", 48# - WB504 - underlays - Trap
1959 64", 28# - WB934 – no underlays - Bill
1959 64", 45# - WB998 - no underlays - minnesota_hunter
1959 64", 45# - WC020 - underlays - Chuck
1959 64", 53# - WC061 - no underlays - Jeremy
1959 64", 47# - WC365L - no underlays – Wade
1959 64", 40# - WC839 - no underlays - Auction 8-30-09
1959 64", 50# - WD438 - no underlays - Hoof
1959 64", 50# - ?????? - no underlays – Wade
1959 64", 52# - WL197 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 64", 41# - 30HX1R - no underlays - Wade sold
1959 66", 55# - XA523 - underlays - Hoof
1959 66", 40# - XA591 - no underlays - Auction 8-22-2009
1959 66", 28# - XA844 - underlays - Wade
1959 66", 43# - XA969 - underlay - Bjorn
1959 66", 37# - XB05 - underlays - Dennis
1959 66", 40# - XB62 - Auction 2-8-2010
1959 66", 42# - XB348 - underlays - Auction 2-14-2010
1959 66", 40# - XB626 - Auction 8-30-2009
1959 66", 42# - XC412 - no underlays - Chris
1959 66", 44# - XD049 - no underlays - Scott
1959 66", 48# - XD119 - no overlays - Trap
1959 66", 49# - XD178 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 66", 40# - XE403L - no underlays - seboomook
1959 66", 47# - XE685 – no underlays Dennis
1959 66", 42# - XF074 - no underlay - minnesota_hunter
1959 66". 40# - XF086 - no underlays - Larry
1959 66", 39# - XF090 – no underlays - Chuck
1959 66", 40# - XF790 - Auction 2-13-2010
1959 66", 40# - XF877R - no underlays - Chuck
1959 68", 45#@29" - YA349 - underlays - Dennis
1959 68", 45# - YA367 - underlays - Wade
1959 68", 39# - YA456 - underlays - 2-26-2008 Auction
1959 68”, 32# - YB499A - no underlays – Chuck
1959 68", 55# - YA540 - Auction 2-8-2010
1959 68", 47# - YB626L - no underlays - Jeff
1959 68", 38# - YB965 - no underlays - Wade
1959 68", 39# - YC039 - No underlays - Trap
1959 68", 55# - 9YX29 - no underlays - Bjorn
1959 70", 40#@29 ZA067 - underlays - Minnesota hunter
1959 70", 40# - ZA110 - underlays - Chuck
1959 70", 38# - ?????? - underlays removed - Wade
1959 70", 50# - 5VX26 - no underlays - Trap
Post by: Larry m on March 13, 2011, 01:22:00 AM
Thank You. Your research and dedication is outstanding! It amazes me the detail you have managed to bring out in your efforts. There is nothing out here such as this that I have ever had access to. I really should not be surprised after going through your book, Broadheads 1871-1971. A very finely detailed piece of work. Your right in your word of caution in the archives but I see you guys have done a lot of work there also. More please!
Post by: damascusdave on March 13, 2011, 01:33:00 PM
You know this info has really been available all along, what we are doing is ammalgamating it in one location.
And we still have not heard from some key additional players.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 13, 2011, 07:32:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 16, 2011, 11:38:00 AM
Just a quick question for all. Were rug rests a factory install on this era of Bear just like the featherrest was?
DDave
Post by: hayslope on March 16, 2011, 12:26:00 PM
Post by: Bjorn on March 16, 2011, 12:46:00 PM
Post by: vintage-bears on March 17, 2011, 12:06:00 PM
I learned alot from following this tread.Thanks....Philip
Post by: damascusdave on March 17, 2011, 01:13:00 PM
DDave
Post by: vintage-bears on March 17, 2011, 02:16:00 PM
Post by: Mikenmn on March 17, 2011, 05:00:00 PM
Mike S.
Post by: damascusdave on March 18, 2011, 03:59:00 AM
Your bow is also very close in number to my 60 twins, 376 and 377.
Thanks for keeping the ball rolling.
DDave
Post by: hayslope on March 19, 2011, 10:43:00 AM
Still shoots great, even with its worn feather rest......its about time to order a few from Trap!
(http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac44/hayslope1/Bows/DSC_0655.jpg)
(http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac44/hayslope1/Bows/DSC_0656.jpg)
(http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac44/hayslope1/Bows/DSC_0658.jpg)
Post by: d. ward on March 19, 2011, 11:57:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on March 19, 2011, 06:07:00 PM
ddave
Post by: Larry m on March 20, 2011, 03:11:00 AM
That's a fine looking bow. The 60 K is next on my list that I would like to find. After what I learned on this thread I know what I'm looking for.
Post by: damascusdave on March 20, 2011, 07:06:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Larry m on March 20, 2011, 01:20:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 20, 2011, 01:58:00 PM
You realize the twins are 38 and 45 @ 26 inches and have the copper coins and you are first in line if I ever sell them.
And since you have been such good luck for me I am gonna help you find what you are looking for.
DDave
Post by: alaskabowhunter on March 20, 2011, 03:33:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 20, 2011, 07:19:00 PM
My twins BH376 and 377 have the butcher block as well.
Thanks for posting, I know you are a busy guy these days.
DDave
Post by: Craig/FL on March 20, 2011, 08:48:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 20, 2011, 09:49:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Craig/FL:From what we have now it does not, so how about some info on the other specs of the bow such as length and limb tip configuration. Pics are always the best way to identify bows.
I have one with the ser# 2J154 46#, were does that fit into the mix?
DDave
Post by: Craig/FL on March 21, 2011, 05:23:00 PM
(http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll179/crabman1957/DSCF3918.jpg)
Post by: Craig/FL on March 21, 2011, 05:24:00 PM
(http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll179/crabman1957/DSCF3919.jpg)
Post by: Craig/FL on March 21, 2011, 05:25:00 PM
(http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll179/crabman1957/DSCF3920.jpg)
Post by: damascusdave on March 22, 2011, 12:13:00 AM
And btw that is not an attempt at pics, that is a very good result at pics.
All we can do for now is wait for Wade Phillips or possibly Bowdoc to enlighten us. Those limb tips are so much like the ones on my BH bows.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 28, 2011, 08:09:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 28, 2011, 01:21:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Craig/FL:Craig - Your bow falls in after the serial numbering sequence of two letters followed by three numbers, was changed in 1960...
I have one with the ser# 2J154 46#, were does that fit into the mix?
I have a draft for the book about the serial numbers and all the changes that is now over 2 dozen pages of explanation... Far too much to post here...
Post by: damascusdave on March 28, 2011, 09:04:00 PM
That bowdoc is just silly. He said in another post that another old bow blew up when he looked at it.
Everyone knows you have to touch them to make them blow.
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on March 28, 2011, 09:58:00 PM
Guess if the bow was just laying on the table strung up, it could de-laminate while you were looking at it....
Stranger things have probably happened, but I can't think of any off hand...
Post by: Bjorn on March 28, 2011, 10:15:00 PM
I went upstairs to change my shorts, and when I returned to examine the bow and string everything was just fine.
Scary; but ended well.
Post by: Bowbent on March 29, 2011, 11:19:00 AM
(http://http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks010-1.jpg) (http://http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks011.jpg) http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks012-1.jpg
Post by: Bowbent on March 29, 2011, 11:22:00 AM
!["Photobucket"]("http://s699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/?action=view¤t=59Kodiaks011.jpg")
) (http://!["Photobucket"]("http://s699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/?action=view¤t=59Kodiaks010-1.jpg")
)
Post by: Bowbent on March 29, 2011, 11:24:00 AM
Post by: Bowbent on March 29, 2011, 11:26:00 AM
http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks011.jpg
Post by: SAM E. STEPHENS on March 29, 2011, 12:33:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on April 02, 2011, 06:08:00 AM
Thanks to all for some very enlightening and entertaining input.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 02, 2011, 06:15:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by SAM E. STEPHENS:Sam, just a lil warning. Internet archery can be very dangerous to the health of your bank account.
Very cool read I have a lot to learn thanks guys,why havent I been a internet guy this is great
I will post a pic of my bows once I have them all in hand. I am currently waiting to finish a blank long bow, receive a custom bow and receive 3 bows that I bought on ****.
I will post a pic of a few just to give you an idea.
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/002-1.jpg)
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 02, 2011, 06:18:00 AM
DDave
Post by: zepnut on April 04, 2011, 08:48:00 AM
Post by: vintage-bears on April 04, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Bowbent:Those are magnificent.........
(http://http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks011.jpg) (http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv355/Bowbent/59Kodiaks010-1.jpg)
Post by: Bowbent on April 04, 2011, 09:39:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on April 09, 2011, 09:16:00 PM
Here are some pics of BH 667, which went gopher hunting with me for the first time yesterday. I would love to say the gopher I shot was charging me at the time, but alas, it was simply sitting there waiting. You think a broadhead on a 660 grain arrow out of a 55 pound bow might be a bit of overkill?
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/P4091777.jpg)
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/P4091776.jpg)
(http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab54/damascusdave_2009/P4091773.jpg)
I am learning that to get the full effect out of these gorgeous creatures the pics need to be taken outside in natural light.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 09, 2011, 10:57:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 09, 2011, 10:59:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Hoof on April 16, 2011, 09:34:00 PM
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q118/Hoof43/2010-10-11075011.jpg)
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q118/Hoof43/2010-10-11074949.jpg)
It has a copper coin...and narrow tips
Post by: damascusdave on April 16, 2011, 11:20:00 PM
Thanks, what never ceases to amaze me is the average condition of bows in this series. I think that the original owners of these bows were all very serious archers.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 18, 2011, 04:03:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 18, 2011, 04:05:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Blackhawk on April 18, 2011, 09:59:00 PM
1959, 60", 47#, BG611 (copper coin and purple heart window)
1959, 64", 55#, DB732 (copper coin and purple heart window)
1960, 60", 49#, 18ZX4? (aluminum coin, rosewood window)
1960, 64", 41#, DD327 (copper coin, rosewood window)
Post by: damascusdave on April 24, 2011, 06:39:00 PM
Only thing is I would suspect you would want both my RH Kodiaks in trade.
Please do not tease us like this. I will send you my right arm and you post some pics please.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 24, 2011, 06:48:00 PM
So 265, 283, 301,302,327,350,396,400,427,454. Did I miss anything? I should be able to easily get those ones for right around 10 grand.
Lon, thanks so much for starting me on a life long quest which will leave me financially broken, yet with a strangely satisfied smile. :scared:
DDave
Post by: Hoof on April 24, 2011, 06:52:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by damascusdave:DD... I'm going to post a better pic of sight window, I didnt think it was one...
Looks like yours also has a butcher block i beam.
DDave
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q118/Hoof43/2010-10-11075026.jpg)
Post by: damascusdave on April 24, 2011, 09:15:00 PM
That looks very much like an original featherrest as well. I thought that mine were in great shape, yours is even better.
Once again thanks for some great pics.
DDave
Post by: Blackhawk on April 24, 2011, 10:09:00 PM
(http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697267.JPG) (http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697267.JPG)
(http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697416.JPG) (http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697416.JPG)
(http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697733.) (http://images.imagelinky.com/1303697733.)
Post by: ahandle70 on April 24, 2011, 11:35:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on April 25, 2011, 01:05:00 AM
A friend of mine was very badly injured in the late sixties in a wreck driving, as I recall, an Impala, with a 409. I have no idea how he and his passenger survived, the only straight and intact piece left on the whole car was a bit of the roof on the passenger side.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 25, 2011, 01:13:00 AM
It seems to me that the 64 inchers came with the rug rest rather than the featherrest.
At my 30 inch draw that lil sweetheart would be right at 45 pounds.
Thanks for posting a pic, those rosewood risers are just the best eye candy.
DDave
Post by: Hoof on April 26, 2011, 07:15:00 PM
Thanks I do have the original rest and it was natural barred also, but I gently removed it and installed a finely crafted rest made by Trap. I really like how all of his rest shoot and look! AAA+ quality.
Quote
Originally posted by damascusdave:
Nope, just a solid rosewood from the look of it. Still very nice grain and super nice looking.
That looks very much like an original featherrest as well. I thought that mine were in great shape, yours is even better.
Once again thanks for some great pics.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 28, 2011, 08:33:00 AM
DDave
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 04, 2011, 11:39:00 AM
[IMG]http://photobucket.com[IMG_0089.jpg]
[IMG]http://photobucket.com[IMG_0090.jpg]
[IMG]http://photobucket.com[IMG_0091.jpg]
[IMG]http://photobucket.com[IMG_0092.jpg]
Has anyone seen a 56" like this before with the red and white fiberglass ovetlays and with a Ser.# starting with DB? If so, any idea of how many were made?
Thanks!
Brian Tessmann
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 04, 2011, 12:41:00 PM
Lets see if this works, if not what am I doing wrong?
Brian
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 05, 2011, 09:06:00 AM
[IMG]http://www.Photobucket.com[/IMG_0089]
[IMG]http://www.Photobucket.com[/IMG_0090]
[IMG]http://www.Photobucket.com[/IMG_0091]
[IMG]http://www.Photobucket.com[/IMG_0092]
Last try then I'm done.
Brian
Post by: Blackhawk on May 05, 2011, 11:22:00 AM
photo should appear...but notice I said "should"
(http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d108/lwscott/59Kodiak-2.jpg)
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 05, 2011, 04:33:00 PM
[IMG]http://s1095.photobucket.com/albums/i466/mrbowjunkie/?action=view¤t=IMG_0090.jpg
I now officially give up!
Brian
Post by: hayslope on May 05, 2011, 05:24:00 PM
Let me see if I can help:
.....your PB doesn't seem to automatically copy the images....you have to copy them, put your cursor on the section at the bottom and copy, then paste them in the reply. But first....resize them.....they will get removed because they are way too big. No more than 600 pixels wide.
I started to copy them in to this post, but noticed how large they are.....then deleted them.
Do what I said above and it will work.
Post by: ahandle70 on May 05, 2011, 06:39:00 PM
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 06, 2011, 10:03:00 AM
Thanks to everyone for your help!!! Let me know what you think of the bow, I've never seen a 56" with thw fiberglass overlays.
Brian
Post by: Blackhawk on May 06, 2011, 10:50:00 AM
Post by: MrBowjunkie on May 06, 2011, 12:28:00 PM
Just bought it at a Trad. Shoot this last weekend, so I don't know it's origins. If Don refinished it, maybe he can confirm that. There are 2 expertly filled holes in the sight window.
Brian
Post by: chuprinko on May 29, 2011, 09:45:00 PM
Neil
Post by: damascusdave on June 21, 2011, 01:03:00 PM
DDave
Post by: 69RECURVE on June 21, 2011, 09:26:00 PM
My serial # for my 59 is either BEO84L or BEO841. Number is kind of faded away, but sure looks like 84L Oh yeah its 47# @ 60" butcher block, copper coin.
In MHO it is real hard to say which is sweeter to shoot but if I had to pick it would be the '59 by a hair.
Andy
Post by: damascusdave on September 08, 2011, 12:34:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on September 29, 2011, 04:19:00 PM
I am taking my lefty hunting elk and moose in a couple of weeks. Will post some pics even if not successful.
DDave
Post by: SportHunter on October 07, 2011, 08:15:00 PM
Post by: SportHunter on October 07, 2011, 08:19:00 PM
Post by: Windsurfer on October 09, 2011, 02:46:00 PM
Post by: Windsurfer on October 09, 2011, 05:43:00 PM
I have a 1960 60" Kodiak with serial # 9H63. Do you know when they went to a number before the Letter? Thanks, Dave B.
Post by: damascusdave on October 10, 2011, 08:36:00 AM
If you check the second post by Wade Philips you will see that BJ was the end of the two letter prefixes and then he says that things changed to two numbers. Dave, that means that if your bow really does begin with one digit rather than two we have another puzzle to sort out.
A huge part of the magic of owning these bows is trying to sort out what happened over 50 years ago without much, if anything, in the way of records.
Once again thanks for anything and everything posted. It all adds to the knowledge base surrounding these great bows.
DDave
Post by: hayslope on October 10, 2011, 09:53:00 AM
I was re-reading an old copy of Fred Bear's Field Notes last month. In the section on the 1959 Little Delta Hunt, Fred has a prepared "expense statement". At the bottom of Page 105, under "Material furnished for the $200 by Bear Archery Company" , there is a bow mentioned:
1 60" Kodiak AA023 $36.00
This tidbit gives us pause because:
IF it was a 60" bow, why does it have what we have determined to be a 56" serial number?
Maybe Fred made a mistake? Maybe we've made too many assumptions!
Post by: Wade Phillips on October 11, 2011, 10:41:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by damascusdave:Dave - The "two numbers" statement was an abbreviated way to let everyone know that the numbering had changed. With the second post on the thread, I didn't think it was good idea to include too many in depth details that would only confuse most readers.
If you check the second post by Wade Philips you will see that BJ was the end of the two letter prefixes and then he says that things changed to two numbers. Dave, that means that if your bow really does begin with one digit rather than two we have another puzzle to sort out.
DDave
However, now that a few guys have questions, it is probably a good time to give a more in depth explanation of what the scheme changed to...
If the last sentence were completed in detail, it would say...
"changed to one or two numbers, followed by a letter, which was followed by numbers...."
That will probably still confuse some guys.
Examples of 1960 Kodiaks with this later scheme have already been mentioned by others on this thread... here are some...
2J154 - Craig/FL mentioned
9H63 - Dave B. mentioned above
11N41 - Ahandle70 mentioned on second page of thread
12P65 - Brian posed photo on first page of thread
This later scheme isn't nearly as clean or understandable as the very straight forward BA, BB, BC etc
Post by: Wade Phillips on October 11, 2011, 10:58:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by hayslope:Many other possibilities too...
... Maybe Fred made a mistake?...
Maybe Fred didn't make a mistake and the bow was really marked that way at the factory...
Maybe Fred didn't make a mistake and someone at the factory made a mistake in mis-marking the bow ...
Maybe the editor made a mistake when he transcribed the statement into the book ...
I'm sure we could come up with lots of other possibilities too...
Post by: Wade Phillips on October 11, 2011, 11:15:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by hayslope:I try to deal in facts and not make assumptions.
... Maybe we've made too many assumptions!
Assumptions that some have made about the serial numbers, are pretty far off from reality.
Post by: damascusdave on October 12, 2011, 12:50:00 PM
I find myself frequently using the words "appears to be" rather than "is" and that is a good thing when you are dealing with clues that are 50 or more years old.
I just came back from an elk hunt with my 55 pound (closer to 60 at my draw length) left handed 60 Kodiak (BH 667). Before I left I ran it through the Chrony and with a 530 grain arrow I was getting 185 fps. Now my long draw helps, but that is a fast bow. I have no doubt it will punch the 630 grain 2 blades I hunt with right through an elk as long as there is not too much rib involved. Not bad for 51 year old technology.
I have also noticed that good things just keep happening when you hunt with old Bears. I could almost write a book just on my experiences from last week.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on October 24, 2011, 04:07:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on October 24, 2011, 04:47:00 AM
DDave
Post by: SportHunter on October 24, 2011, 03:02:00 PM
27K93R
50#
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa224/SOLOHUNTER/P1030556.jpg)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa224/SOLOHUNTER/P1030552.jpg)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa224/SOLOHUNTER/P1030559.jpg)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa224/SOLOHUNTER/P1030558.jpg)
Post by: vintage-bears on October 24, 2011, 04:10:00 PM
Serial # 1J137.......philip
Post by: SportHunter on October 24, 2011, 04:58:00 PM
Post by: vintage-bears on October 24, 2011, 07:16:00 PM
item # 280759839784
The bow belonged to Al Reader. His wife does'nt know that I mention it here on TG.
She has a couple of nice Kodiaks on auction.
I want to help her by mentioning it here.
I am no authority on Kodiaks. I can tell you what year model it is but that's about it.
The serial # is 1J137. Not sure if the "1j"
serial # has significance or not. Gorgeous wood in the sight window!
check it out......Philip
(http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt247/87philip/1jkodiak.jpg)
Post by: damascusdave on October 25, 2011, 08:36:00 AM
Too many great bows and too little money right now.
Thanks for posting. There is not better eye candy than a 59 or 60 Kodiak.
DDave
Post by: vintage-bears on November 06, 2011, 03:09:00 PM
(http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt247/87philip/phil10-2.jpg)
Post by: vintage-bears on December 03, 2011, 07:32:00 PM
I love seeing those Kodiak's! :clapper:
Post by: ahandle70 on December 04, 2011, 12:41:00 AM
Post by: vintage-bears on December 04, 2011, 12:44:00 PM
:goldtooth:
Enjoy......Philip
(http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt247/87philip/kodiak_1960.jpg)
Post by: ahandle70 on December 04, 2011, 01:05:00 PM
Post by: vintage-bears on December 04, 2011, 01:07:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ahandle70:These 3 are 1960 models...........Philip
I like tham all. Bear Archery hit it out of the park in 1959. A true classic that will never get old.
Post by: vintage-bears on December 04, 2011, 01:54:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by vintage-bears:
QuoteOriginally posted by ahandle70:Ahandle70,
[qb] I like tham all. Bear Archery hit it out of the park in 1959. A true classic that will never get old. [/b]
Your right, Bear Archery did hit it out of the park in 1959. :thumbsup:
(http://i616.photobucket.com/albums/tt247/87philip/kodiak_1959.jpg)
Post by: Wade Phillips on December 04, 2011, 02:34:00 PM
(http://i386.photobucket.com/albums/oo301/WadePhillips/1960Kodiaks.jpg)
Post by: vintage-bears on December 04, 2011, 03:42:00 PM
No, not that kind of rack Wade!
What a pretty sight..........philip
Post by: LPN on December 15, 2011, 10:51:00 AM
It was mentioned a few posts back about Bubinga site windows being rare in the '59's,,My 64" '59 has a Bubinga site window,,Just to know, how rare are they? 1 in 300..500?,,more so in the 60" than the 64"?,,Great thread here.
Post by: Wade Phillips on December 24, 2011, 11:50:00 AM
One of Floyd Eccleston's shop bows from a by gone era. Have had it for a number of years, not part of the collection or display & don't shoot it. It's just sort of "hanging out" here so to speak. Should be refinished for a shooter, but never got around to sending it off to have that done.
(http://i386.photobucket.com/albums/oo301/WadePhillips/196055.jpg)
Post by: Earl E. Nov...mber on January 11, 2012, 07:08:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on March 28, 2012, 08:45:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on March 28, 2012, 08:48:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on April 05, 2012, 10:56:00 PM
One thing that I have noticed on many of the bows is that it appears, from the shape of the characters, that there was only one person putting serial numbers on those bows. If only we could speak with that person, eh?
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on September 01, 2012, 11:38:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Littlekodiak59 on September 01, 2012, 10:42:00 PM
59-BA075,-60"-53# very dark window, NO Coin.
59-BA872,-60"-55# MSW,Long, copper coin.
59-BA958,-60"-45# Bubinga, Copper Coin.
59-AA-165,-56"42# Rosewood, Copper Coin.
59-DA-588,-64"-55# MSW Short, NO Coin.
59-NO-SN, 64"-100# Rosewood, No Coin.
59-DA-616,-64"50# MSW, Long, Copper Coin.
59-BG878,-60"-42# Bubinga, Coper Coin.
59-BB264,-60"-45# Bubinga, Copper Coin.
59-BA312,-60"-50# MSW Short, NO Coin.
59-BA067,-60"-51# Black Sight Window, NO Coin.
59-DA152,-64"-56# MSW, Long. Copper Coin.
59-DA318,-64"-35# Dark Rosewood. No Coin.
59-BG199,-60"-61# Custom Made for Nel's Grumley, The Riser Was Customized Long and Thin, Custom Leather Grip With Compass, The Way Nel's use to Wrap His Grip.Cyrstallite Glass, Red and White Tips. Kodiak Decal. Copper Coin.
60-AA795,-56"-41#
60-4K39,-60"-47#
60-9HZ113,-64"90# NO Coin.
60-BH383,-60"-60#, Butcher Block.
60-19P20,-60"30#
60-DD754,-64"-48#
Post by: damascusdave on September 02, 2012, 04:33:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Widow's Son on September 02, 2012, 06:40:00 PM
Ross
Post by: Littlekodiak59 on September 02, 2012, 10:07:00 PM
Post by: Widow's Son on September 02, 2012, 10:10:00 PM
Ross
Post by: vintage-bears on September 29, 2012, 09:12:00 AM
I listed a rare Kodiak in the classified section.
Hope I am not breaking the forum rules Terry, if I am please delete.
......Philip
Post by: poodlehead on October 13, 2012, 08:59:00 PM
1959 60" 53# BD 584
1959 64" 37# DE 064B
1960 64" 41# DD 327
Dan
Post by: damascusdave on December 28, 2012, 03:13:00 PM
That bow shows a lot of limb twist when unstrung that is stubborn about coming out. When I string the bow things line up nicely and the bow behaves fine. I am just gonna shoot it that way for two reasons. Because I can and I just like shooting that bow.
DDave
Post by: Phil Magistro on December 28, 2012, 05:37:00 PM
(http://www.pmagistro.com/60kodiak/PM3_9182.jpg)
Post by: vintage-bears on December 28, 2012, 11:32:00 PM
The refinish is terrific and that leather work too.
Enjoy!
.....Philip
Post by: Phil Magistro on December 29, 2012, 10:06:00 AM
Post by: vintage-bears on December 29, 2012, 10:52:00 AM
unless your looking for a SHOW bow, I would leave it and enjoy it. That bow came out really nice.
Bravo!
......Philip
Post by: damascusdave on December 29, 2012, 12:05:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Cody Roiter on December 29, 2012, 09:45:00 PM
1959
BD 251
60"
45#
Post by: damascusdave on January 03, 2013, 09:42:00 AM
Just a bit of caution. Do not shoot that 59 unless you want to have to go looking for more. There is some magic in them.
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on February 09, 2014, 04:18:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Larry m on February 09, 2014, 04:44:00 PM
Post by: Blackhawk on February 09, 2014, 05:04:00 PM
Post by: Ray Lyon on February 10, 2014, 04:24:00 AM
Post by: Rick Enos on February 11, 2014, 09:06:00 AM
(http://i680.photobucket.com/albums/vv166/renos53/100_3215.jpg) (http://s680.photobucket.com/user/renos53/media/100_3215.jpg.html)
Post by: Rick Enos on February 11, 2014, 09:07:00 AM
Post by: Rick Enos on February 11, 2014, 09:11:00 AM
Post by: Rick Enos on February 11, 2014, 09:13:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on February 11, 2014, 11:05:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Wade Phillips on February 13, 2014, 09:40:00 AM
As many of you know, I acquired John Grumley's collection of bows made by his father, Nels Grumley. Actually the collection included Nels' photos, awards, tools, maps, letters, first deer, etc as well as the collectible non Grumley items.
Some may not realize that Nels was one of the Bear Archery Stock holders and kept his Bear Stock, even after he left Bear. He never sold it until all the stock holders had to sell, or exchange it, when Fred made the decision to sell the company.
The misconception that I'd like to clear up is that there is indisputable and conclusive evidence that Fred and Nels remained friends as well as business partners long after Nels left Bear.
Nels Grumley was the greatest bowyer of archery's golden era when men still made bows by hand. Nels' amazing God given talents as a craftsman were not being utilized by working on laminated bows that were being made by gluing up pre-fab parts that were then run through duplicating machines to turn out factory made bows.
Nels left Bear, started his own bow shop, and for a couple of years, did what he wanted to do and what he was great at doing, and made many styles of great bows.
Nels kept his Bear Archery Stock and kept his friends, don't let anyone mislead you.
Leaving Bear may not have been Nels' wisest financial decision, but then selling Bear Archery Company, may not have been Fred's wisest financial decision either.
Who among us has not made a less than wise financial decision? Whatever less than wise decision was made, we probably still managed to keep our real friends.
And yes, during the 1950s after Nels closed his bow shop, he began shooting Bear recurves... Anyone got a photo of Nels shooting a 1959 or 1960 Bear Kodiak???
Post by: Ray Lyon on February 13, 2014, 12:00:00 PM
Thank you for your post. I lived close to John Grumley and considered him a friend for over 20 years. I know he struggled with what to do with his collection of his dads bows and the other historical stuff he had and I was so glad to see it in your hands. I think I posted elsewhere on another thread that John was using a Gainesville wood B-handle takedown for his day in and day out hunting (in fact that bow was hanging with some of his clothing on a rack at his memorial service). If Nels or John had ill will towards Bear Archery, he wouldn't have been using there current bows and John never said a peep accordingly. The only time I saw John using a bow other than the take-down was when he had some copies of some bows from the Brooks Brothers out of Ohio that John said were the closest thing to his dads bows that he ever saw. In the TBM article that I wrote about Shrewhaven Lodge a year ago, there is a picture of John in front of the cabin and he's using the Brooks Brothers replica of his dad's bows.
John should've been the focus of an interview for TBM years ago, as he was one of the true historians of archery, just like Floyd Eccleston. That opportunity has passed. I think of John often.
Post by: Ray Lyon on February 13, 2014, 12:09:00 PM
(http:// [url=http://s1246.photobucket.com/user/shrewshooter/media/johngrumleyphoto_zps54a1a601.jpg.html] [img]http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg617/shrewshooter/johngrumleyphoto_zps54a1a601.jpg)[/url] [/IMG]
Post by: damascusdave on July 16, 2014, 10:55:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on September 09, 2014, 03:09:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on September 09, 2014, 03:49:00 AM
DDave
Post by: Gaur on September 18, 2014, 01:27:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on September 18, 2014, 08:22:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on January 06, 2015, 06:44:00 PM
DDave
Post by: Blackhawk on January 06, 2015, 08:00:00 PM
BTW, did I miss your post on the moose hunt? Did you bloody one of those nice Bears you have?
Post by: warpedarrow on January 06, 2015, 08:34:00 PM
I do not own any 1960 Kodiaks so there is no reference piece for me to handle and study. I am handicapped on this one.
Happy New Years to the few special people that show up on this forum.
Post by: damascusdave on January 08, 2015, 07:17:00 AM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on June 21, 2015, 04:08:00 PM
DDave
Post by: damascusdave on January 22, 2016, 10:59:00 AM
DDave
Post by: last arrow on January 25, 2016, 02:41:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on January 25, 2016, 07:46:00 PM
DDave
Post by: last arrow on January 25, 2016, 09:07:00 PM
Post by: damascusdave on January 26, 2016, 03:31:00 PM
DDave
Post by: warpedarrow on May 24, 2016, 05:23:00 AM
Post by: damascusdave on May 27, 2016, 01:40:00 PM
DDave