"HUGE" Wusthof....Purpose?

[Logan09]

Alright, I picked up this Wusthof because I had to have it. It was the most I have ever shelled out for an older blade but I have never seen one this big. This thing is massive!
16 inch blade.
22 inches overall.
7/16" spine that tapers to just under 1/16".
2lbs-12oz.

Blade has a divot and seems to have been messed with a little(thinned maybe?) Its covered in rust but the blade is stamped. Seller didn't see it and just went by the Trident logo on handle. Going to try and remove the rivets(they're already popping loose) and see if I can get the rust off)

I'm guessing post 1960's?

Any thoughts on it? Bad photos I know.

14" sitting on top.

 

[TB_London]

I’ve got a ludicrously big ODC too, and whilst impractical it make me smile when I use it. Just enjoy it for being ridiculous, and as an excuse to cook big hunks of meat

 

[McMan]

I wouldn't be surprised if that's a tad bit earlier than the 60s. It's got the nice thin bolster. The bolsters got clunkier as time went on.

 

[chiffonodd]

If you can clean up the blade enough to get a clear look at the stamp that's probably gonna be your best starting point for dating this thing. Might be able to narrow it down further based on the material of the handle scales.

Have fun that's a cool one. Nice to have a kitchen sword.

 

[Logan09]

There's a lot more rust than I originally thought and is going to be a long soak. But stamp on blade is clear and as follows.

"Trident Dreizack Solingen Germany 4586-562/16"

I came across one on worthpoint in which someone commented on. Seems to be modernish numbers as Wusthof still uses them.

Scales are Walnut. Its an awesome knife either way.

 

[refcast]

Those gigantic knives are for beef fabrication.... There are a lot of vintage Japanese ones too, like 390mm, for quite cheap too, about $90

 

[GorillaGrunt]

I’ve never seen anything larger than 14” and I’ve looked! This is awesome, I’d fix it up and find something to use it for once in a while. Beef fabrication makes sense, I’m surprised it’s a chef knife shape though and not a more butchery-specific one

 

[Ericfg]

Holy Toledo, what a monster!!
I thought my big Henx was large. ([Vintage chef's knife] Holy Toledo boys!)
Here's some specs on mine: The blade itself weighs 463g. 1.02lbs. 16.3oz. and the spine width at the bolster is 9mm.
By the looks of it I'd guess pre-1960s, at least. Although that makers mark is indeed a later Wusthof version. Earlier Wusties had the model number stamped on the right side of the blade, sometimes.

PS. I posted an image of a Henckels 20 inch slicer knife recently.

 

[Heckel7302]

Does it have a stamp? Can’t tell from the photos. That would help narrow the date range.

these monster, tall, super thick heavy knives I usually see described as being for lobster So you can cut a whole lobster in half with one big guillotine cut.

edit.Noticed the reply with the logo. I think probably between 1951-1967

 

[James_L]

Kind of a tangential question: Is it generally consensus that you should rehandle old finds? I'd imagine rehandling give you a chance to clean off any embedded dirt or rust, create a better seal between tang and scale but do collectors favour fully original knives with original pins and scales?

 

[Heckel7302]

Kind of a tangential question: Is it generally consensus that you should rehandle old finds? I'd imagine rehandling give you a chance to clean off any embedded dirt or rust, create a better seal between tang and scale but do collectors favour fully original knives with original pins and scales?

My personal take on this, I prefer to keep the knives as original as possible. Sure I work on the blade quite a bit, thinning, taking out pits, adusting the profile if needs be, but I take a minimal approach to handles. If they are severely damaged, then I think replacing scales is justified, but a lot of their character is in the handle. that, and for many knives (4* elephant, dexter, etc) the stamps are on the handle, so removing the scales would remove any identifying markers.

I just clean off the crud, sand them down as lightly as possible, oil them,and fill any gaps with beeswax (speaking of wood scales anyway).

 

[Carl Kotte]

If you can clean up the blade enough to get a clear look at the stamp that's probably gonna be your best starting point for dating this thing. Might be able to narrow it down further based on the material of the handle scales.

Have fun that's a cool one. Nice to have a kitchen sword.

Classic slåsskniv

 

[Carl Kotte]

Alright, I picked up this Wusthof because I had to have it. It was the most I have ever shelled out for an older blade but I have never seen one this big. This thing is massive!
16 inch blade.
22 inches overall.
7/16" spine that tapers to just under 1/16".
2lbs-12oz.

Blade has a divot and seems to have been messed with a little(thinned maybe?) Its covered in rust but the blade is stamped. Seller didn't see it and just went by the Trident logo on handle. Going to try and remove the rivets(they're already popping loose) and see if I can get the rust off)

I'm guessing post 1960's?

Any thoughts on it? Bad photos I know. View attachment 175691
View attachment 175692
14" sitting on top.
View attachment 175693

When I found a giant old dick a year ago it was sold as a ’hog splitter’. Not as long as yours but it had heft.

 

[chiffonodd]

Classic slåsskniv

Don't forget your trusty slåssköksyxa

 

[Logan09]

Some shotty updated photos. One side was/is severely pitted. Not sure where/how this was found but it must have been exposed to moisture on one side. It has been my most rusted blade so far(which is saying a lot)

Spine has some battle scars from a "mallet" funny because they correspond with the dishing in the blade. Decided to leave the finish on the blade as is. I got most of the dishing out on the blade and only had to remove about 2mm of edge steel. Sharpened to paper cutting sharp(I doubt I'll ever use it) edge still shows some steeling, but it doesn't seem as messed with as I had originally thought. All the factory grinding is still present.

Handles were by far the most aggravating. Rivets came out easily enough, but were twisted to hell(and matched to the shaping of the handle) in hindsight I should've remembered their order. I left the finish on the heads as is. The hard part was getting the right position and squeezing them in. As you can see on some I indented the wood which I'm not happy with. Also a lot of gaps in the original scales. Probably going to fill them with carnauba wax.

 

[daveb]

You win the BFK 2day!

 

[Ericfg]

these monster, tall, super thick heavy knives I usually see described as being for lobster So you can cut a whole lobster in half with one big guillotine cut.

When I found a giant old dick a year ago it was sold as a ’hog splitter’. Not as long as yours but it had heft.

I've also seen the term "lamb splitter" used to describe these type knives (long blade, massive spine). As for lobster; their shells aren't that thick. Yeah, you need a long blade to cut them in one movement and therefore a fairly robust spine to support the edge. I guess a tall heel would help as well so that's where this profile fits. In my years in kitchens I saw whole lobsters served less and less, as opposed to lobster tails. And the tails would usually be cut/snipped open with shears.

Kind of a tangential question: Is it generally consensus that you should rehandle old finds? I'd imagine rehandling give you a chance to clean off any embedded dirt or rust, create a better seal between tang and scale but do collectors favour fully original knives with original pins and scales?

I like rehandling, I do it as a hobby. Usually I rehandle only if needed; like if the wood's gone beyond what I can conserve, or if there is even a smallish amount of foreign material (like rust and gunk) between the scale and the tang. Which is often the case.
But yes, collectors often prize original scales and rivets/pins.

OP. Very nice rehab on that absolute unit of a Wusthof! Well done.

 

[Carl Kotte]

Some shotty updated photos. One side was/is severely pitted. Not sure where/how this was found but it must have been exposed to moisture on one side. It has been my most rusted blade so far(which is saying a lot)

Spine has some battle scars from a "mallet" funny because they correspond with the dishing in the blade. Decided to leave the finish on the blade as is. I got most of the dishing out on the blade and only had to remove about 2mm of edge steel. Sharpened to paper cutting sharp(I doubt I'll ever use it) edge still shows some steeling, but it doesn't seem as messed with as I had originally thought. All the factory grinding is still present.

Handles were by far the most aggravating. Rivets came out easily enough, but were twisted to hell(and matched to the shaping of the handle) in hindsight I should've remembered their order. I left the finish on the heads as is. The hard part was getting the right position and squeezing them in. As you can see on some I indented the wood which I'm not happy with. Also a lot of gaps in the original scales. Probably going to fill them with carnauba wax.
View attachment 176054View attachment 176055View attachment 176056View attachment 176057View attachment 176058View attachment 176059View attachment 176061View attachment 176062View attachment 176063View attachment 176064

I love it! Great work!

 

[McMan]

I wouldn't be surprised if that's a tad bit earlier than the 60s. It's got the nice thin bolster. The bolsters got clunkier as time went on.

Nevermind. The pictures you put up of the hallmark at the spine point to 60s+.
50s and earlier had the hallmark at mid-blade. Like this:
https://www.kitchenknifeforums.com/threads/antique-wusthofs-dating-help-please.37745/