|
Post by brokennock on Apr 30, 2020 10:24:26 GMT -7
I just bought a bison split from C.C. (intended for moccasins) and it is rough on both sides. Are these still good for moccasins or a bag? I would assume a bag would need to be lined with cloth.
|
|
|
Post by spence on Apr 30, 2020 10:50:11 GMT -7
I would assume a bag would need to be lined with cloth. I keep seeing this being done, but have never found documentation for it. Does anyone have a period description of this for either 18th or 19th century? Spence
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Apr 30, 2020 15:52:45 GMT -7
Bison splits, elk splits or moose splits will work wonderfully and will hold up for years. Recently started using moose splits and it's absolutely wonderful and extremely strong. Hawkeyes, Some questions if you please? Are the splits Veg Tanned? Are the splits rough on both sides of the leather? What weights do the splits generally run? Gus Thicker hides that are durable and can be successfully split will be bison or moose. Now I've seen elk splits, but they naturally tend to be lighter in the 4, 4.5oz range from what I've experienced, which is to be expected and certainly fine for most projects. However moose and bison top the list for splits. If anyone has had the joy, or misfortune of tangling a full, top grain unsplit bison/ moose hide it's an absolute bear and very hard to work given how thick they are. This is why you'll find most bison and moose split and not a full top grain hide. The last bison hide I tanned weighed close to 200lbs wet and was truly not an enjoyable project that I will never do again. When I must purchase hide they are veg tanned and tumbled to soften. People often think veg tanning is strictly tooling leather which isn't the case. I have some split bison that is approximately 5.5 oz and the last bit of moose I requested was very consistent at 6 oz's. Made a pair of mocs from the moose and still have yet to wear them out. A 6 oz weight is still a bear to work, just make sure your awl stays sharp.
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Apr 30, 2020 15:56:16 GMT -7
I would assume a bag would need to be lined with cloth. Dave, I am not trying to pile on from the question Spence asked and I hope you understand. There is plenty of documentation that Shot and Belt Pouches were made of Leather OR Cloth, but not both. "Hair" Pouches were also known, but this meant the leather was tanned with the hair left on, as a way to to make them more water repellent. Maryland issued such "Hair" Pouches and there is a quote that 8 such pouches were turned back in to Maryland stores from Capt. Dagworthy's company in 1762, during the close of the FIW. Gus
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Apr 30, 2020 16:06:20 GMT -7
Hawkeyes, Some questions if you please? Are the splits Veg Tanned? Are the splits rough on both sides of the leather? What weights do the splits generally run? Gus When I must purchase hide they are veg tanned and tumbled to soften. People often think veg tanning is strictly tooling leather which isn't the case. Thank you for the further information! Veg tanning was THE most common way the majority of leathers were tanned in the 18th century and that's by both private and commercial tanners. I would also like to make the point again that commercial Cowhide Splits sold by Tandy are often or usually not Veg tanned and are so thin, they make a terrible Shot Pouch, as I found out back in 1972. Gus
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Apr 30, 2020 16:07:21 GMT -7
I just bought a bison split from C.C. (intended for moccasins) and it is rough on both sides. Are these still good for moccasins or a bag? I would assume a bag would need to be lined with cloth. Will be absolutely perfect. It'll be tough to sew but once completed they will last.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Apr 30, 2020 16:09:48 GMT -7
When I must purchase hide they are veg tanned and tumbled to soften. People often think veg tanning is strictly tooling leather which isn't the case. Thank you for the further information! Veg tanning was THE most common way the majority of leathers were tanned in the 18th century and that's by both private and commercial tanners. I would also like to make the point again that commercial Cowhide Splits sold by Tandy are often or usually not Veg tanned and are so thin, they make a terrible Shot Pouch, as I found out back in 1972. Gus Your welcome Gus, I've never been a fan of the Tandy chains. I'm spoiled with leather because I dictate the quality based on what and how I tan. However, sometimes it's much more practical to buy, that's where I found Centralia Fur and Hide. They are fabulous people to do business with.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Apr 30, 2020 16:19:09 GMT -7
Here is a bison split carrying pouch for my everyday Buck 110. It's darn near over an 1/8" thick. You absolutely cannot hurt bison or moose splits. Also keep in mind once a split is properly treated with tallow or what not the grain will lay and be smooth. This will look very close to a brain tan hide. The above carry pouch isn't treated with anything and is in it's natural state.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Apr 30, 2020 16:46:11 GMT -7
A bag from an elk split and treated with natural foot oil. Nothing wrong with using commercially available hides. Even I use it as a resource when needed. It's understandable we all can't tan our own hides for various reasons and this offer's individual's great flexibility. I do however like to know my hides are ethically sourced and that's another reason I'm selective on purchasing when something arises. Again, check these folks out. furandhide.com/
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Apr 30, 2020 20:33:48 GMT -7
Hawkeyes,
I completely understand that when and IF one has the capability of tanning their own hides and when done in a period manner, one may not need or want other sources of leather. Yet for many of us, particularly people new/newer to the hobby, Tandy can be a good source for SOME leathers and especially for those folks to get used to feeling the temper (pliability) of different leathers and learning about thicknesses/weights, etc.
Well, more coming later. Too tired to go on tonight.
Gus
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Apr 30, 2020 22:45:16 GMT -7
I would assume a bag would need to be lined with cluoth. I keep seeing this being done, but have never found documentation for it. Does anyone have a period description of this for either 18th or 19th century? Spence I would generally figure most cow hide to not need it. But I often find deer hide to be very stretchy, thus the possible need for a liner. Was wondering if these thicker hides, having been split and loosing their outer surface would also be too stretchy for a good shot pouch.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on May 1, 2020 2:34:03 GMT -7
I keep seeing this being done, but have never found documentation for it. Does anyone have a period description of this for either 18th or 19th century? Spence I would generally figure most cow hide to not need it. But I often find deer hide to be very stretchy, thus the possible need for a liner. Was wondering if these thicker hides, having been split and loosing their outer surface would also be too stretchy for a good shot pouch. All hide will stretch to an extent, however these hides naturally have a thicker corium layer which enables them to maintain excellent strength and rigidity even when split. The amount it'll stretch won't even be noticeable, you'll be just fine.
|
|
|
Post by spence on May 1, 2020 8:34:16 GMT -7
Will someone please straighten me out on leather "weight"? Tandy says unequivocally that it is equivalent to thickness, apparently not related to the actual weight, as in 1/64-inch equals 1 ounce, regardless of texture, suppleness, softness or tanning method.
Spence
|
|
|
Post by artificer on May 1, 2020 20:18:26 GMT -7
Will someone please straighten me out on leather "weight"? Tandy says unequivocally that it is equivalent to thickness, apparently not related to the actual weight, as in 1/64-inch equals 1 ounce, regardless of texture, suppleness, softness or tanning method. Spence Spence,
Welcome one and all to the confusing world of leather thickness!
It seems somewhere back in time the original meaning of oz. weight came from cutting a 1 Foot Square of water wetted leather and weighing it. This because they did not have accurate tools to measure thickness. Once more accurate measuring instruments became "generally" available and affordable, it supposedly went to actual thickness as you reported Tandy mentions. However, even Tandy does not hold true to it only being a measure of thickness!
I found this out when I took Brown Bear's advise to check out "Oil Tanned' leather at Tandy AFTER I found period documentation that "Stuff'd" or "Stufft" leather was a period process of working oils and waxes into period Vegetable Tanned leather after tanning and that we now call "Oil Tanned' leather.
I'm not a professional leather worker, but I'm pretty experienced with the period correct "Veg/Vegetable Tanned" or "Oak Tanned" Leather that Tandy sells, having purchased many pieces of that leather from them in different weights/thicknesses from 1974 to as recent as maybe a year or so ago. I was so surprised I was almost shocked how much THINNER Tandy's two types of Oil Tanned Leather were compared to the comparable advertised weights/thickness of Veg/Oak Tanned Leather. I brought this to the attention of their experienced sales people and asked if the additional WEIGHT of the oils/waxes in the thinner leather caused them to be thinner than the advertised weights/thicknesses in Tandy's Veg Tanned leather. Best answer I got was a smile and "Confusing, isn't it?" This though they all agreed it had to have something to do with the added weight of oils/waxes in Oil Tanned leather.
OK, so I carefully examined not just one each, but up to a half dozen "sides" or half hides of each of both types of Oil Tanned Leather that Tandy sells. I will list them separately and give my thoughts on them; though I encourage people to take this information and GO to a Tandy store to make up their own minds.
The thinner of the two types of Tandy's Oil Tanned Leather is what they call "Stoned Oil Sides" and are advertised as "Weight/Thickness: 4 to 4.5 oz. (1.6 to 1.8 mm)." For those who like their Shot Pouches made of a thinner leather, this would be great for them. It compares closely to and may even be a tiny bit thinner than Tandy's 3 to 4 oz. Oak Tanned Leather. www.tandyleather.com/en/product/stoned-oil-sides
Now I got rather excited when I first felt different sides of the thicker Oil Tanned Leather that Tandy calls "Kodiak Oil Tanned" sides and advertised as "Weight/Thickness: 4 to 5 oz. (1.6 to 2.0 mm)." WOW, to me this was the almost perfect thickness of leather for a Shot Pouch, though some folks might think it is a bit too thick. HOWEVER, I was deeply disappointed the smooth side has a Machine Imprinted, Artificial Grain surface, which is not authentic to our period. So I dropped the thought of buying one of those sides. At least I now have a much better feeling about buying what is advertised as "4 to 5 oz" Oil Tanned leather, with a smooth/natural surface, from other sources. www.tandyleather.com/en/product/kodiak-oil-tanned-side-lt-tan
I was really impressed with the Oil Tanned Leather! It would be a much better leather for outdoor use as it is more water repellent than most Veg Tanned Leather and especially for those who don't oil/condition their leather goods as often as they should. The only "down side" to this leather is you really can't dye it a different color, so what you see is what you get. I preferred the lighter brown color, but others may like the dark brown or black color better.
A WORD OF CAUTION ON OIL TANNED LEATHER!! Not everyone who sells Oil Tan Leather is selling the same thing. Adding waxes/oils to leather tanned by more modern tanning processes is NOT what we want for our hobby. Tandy's Oil Tan is Veg/Vegetable Tanned before the added oils/waxes are applied to it and that is what we want for a period correct leather. So I strongly suggest when buying from other sources to ask if it is Vegetable/Bark tanned and with added oils and waxes. If they don't answer clearly, I would not buy from such a source.
OK, this post has gone along for a while and I don't want to lose it, so I'll continue in my next post.
Gus
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on May 2, 2020 1:18:33 GMT -7
Gus, I have one of the Kodiak sides and it does not have the imprinted grain. It does seem like an ideal thickness for a shot pouch, but to me it feels heavy for its thickness. But, it seems to have a very soft temper for its weight and thickness. The I made a Raptor style side quiver out of it and I would almost prefer that it be a little stiffer. Maybe I'll make a simple shot pouch out of what I have left and report back.
|
|