Nice. would hold a small bear IMO

That is a very well made trap, a nice piece of art. But, here is what a real one looks like.

I am the furthest thing from a trap expert, but just exactly what is the bronze colored substance on your "find"?

I never did say that the trap was an original #5. In fact, if you look close at the picture, you'll see a serial number stamped on the top of the base, just ahead of where the chain is attached. Just showing off another one of Ed Hutzel's amazing works. I'm really glad that I got my #'s 5 & 6, while the getting was good. No one else in this world has made anything like it. I know if I were a bear, I wouldn't want to find myself caught in that "piece of art", lol!

Thanks for posting the pic. of a supposedly, original #5. Would like to see an original #6, too. The only example I've seen is in Gerstell's book.

I think it's called Patina

Dean, who's trap is that? That wouldn't happen to be the trap that Archie Stevens had in his collection, is it?







Which one of the two traps do you think would actually be capable of holding a bear ... the original or the "piece of art"?

Bill. Was wondering how long it was going to take you to fess up to that #5> Pan stamping is in the wrong place, no pat date on the pan, jaws are too short and squatty, wrong pan shank, and just obvious as it is a repro. Here is a #6 Double under spring.

Fess up? No one ever asked. I figured that most would be able to tell, just by looking at it. Although he may have already known, and per Ed's request, I had planned to pm Cascade, this evening, to let him know that it's a Hutzel. Then Dean posted his pictures so I figured I'd just post the news, here.

Thanks for posting the #6, Bruce.

Bill, I think every one knew what you were up to as the serial number and the crappy repro was quite evident in its self. I am sure out of respect to ignorance, and not wanting to be blatantly disrespectful to a poor example of a repro, everyone was just holding their tongue. Sorry, but being a purist collector, I no longer could.

Reproduction? maybe. You'd have to ask Ed what his intentions were. Crappy? I think not. It's just like every other trap that Ed makes .... better built than any original.

No 4, I am not sure who's trap it is, they are just photos that I have saved to my computer for reference. Like I said, your trap is well made and I am sure that Ed did not intend for it to be used to catch anything. That is why I called it art, it is meant to be looked.

The old traps are where its at. The history. Repos are great to look at but the originals may have caught something....when bear trapping was still legal...I look at my old bear traps and wonder what stories they could tell. Without history I wouldn't collect them.

To me, the less use a collecible trap has seen, the better.

I agree....get the best condition you can afford