Kohai999
Second Degree Cutter
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2003
- Messages
- 12,554
Fit and finish defined, as seen by one individual with some degree of experience.
I learned a lot about fit and finish when I worked at GT Knives in San Diego, CA from 1996-1997.
Fit is fairly easy to explain. It is the relation of the components of a knife, forming the whole package.
Fit is usually measured in increments of .001 of an inch with calipers and micrometers, sometimes with more advanced equipment. A few weeks ago, fit and finish was brought up in a discussion about Sebenzas, somewhat derisively, in relation to the expense of the item.
Fit relates to the components in the sense of striving to obtain the closest relation of the parts to each other. Less than acceptable tolerances will result in at least, side to side, and front to back wobble in a folding knife. At worst, the poor fit of components will result in the failure of the locking mechanism, regardless of type. A poor choice of basic components will result in a knife that is doomed from the start, things such as an incorrect thickness of liners, or a bad lock to tang mating, poor angles, things of that nature.
Poor fit can also result in "proud" handle materials, leaving sharp edges that can result in the unintended deployment of a blade for example, or a surface that can damage clothing or skin, leaving blisters or scratches.
An ideal fit will result in surfaces that seem to have been created without seams, an almost organic mating of dissimilar materials. There is not really such a thing as having a fit that is too close, unless the knife was poorly engineered from the start.
This does not necessarily apply to a folding knife, however. Each user has their own ideal of good fit, as applied to the knife's action. Some users want a knife that seems to fly open of it's own volition. Other users want a knife that is very "stiff" to deploy, this can be seen with slipjoint afficianados, frequently. My personal belief is that an ideally fit folder will have the optimum tension from the blade to handle. I spend a lot of time "tuning" folders, so that there is the slightest bit of resistance, but the knife still operates smoothly. Side to side, or front to back play is anathema to me. Butch Vallotton feels that I tighten my knives a little too much, but regardless of if it is a user or a safe queen, that is my preference. We are all free to have our own preferences with regard to this feature.
Finish can be defined by many terms. In most machine shops, there are reference tiles, used to determine what the ideal finish of a metal part will be for an application.
Many times, finish is also applied to how the knife "feels" when completed. Some makers and manufacturers prefer to leave crisp and sharp lines on the handles and blade spine. It looks fantastic when done by experts.
Just as in the case of firearms, depending on the application, this crispness can be unpleasant. It looks exceptional, but does not "feel" very appealing, resulting in "hot spots", and damage to clothing and skin.
My personal preference is for slightly broken edges, especially on the spine of a knife. I have found the opening holes in Spyderco and Benchmade knives to be left a bit sharp for my taste, and usually "break" the edges with a Cratex wheel or fine grit sandpaper. Same thing for handle edges on some knives as well.
As far as surface finishes go, with custom knives, I prefer a hand rubbed satin or mirror polished blade. Hand satin looks outstanding, but can be a bit of a challenge for upkeep. If you have a buffer, and know how to use it, which I do, mirror polish is fairly easy to maintain. Bead or sandblasting looks really cool, and minimizes surface glare, but is easily the most difficult finish to maintain, unless of course, you have a cabinet blaster, which I do not. Beadblasting can also be tricky, because it can hide less than optimal final blade or handle finishes, say something on the level of scratches left from 60 or 80 grit belts.
For using knives, that really get thrashed, like my Benchmade 710 that I have been carrying for 4 years, daily, the belt satin finish that they use is easy enough to maintain. No matter how badly a knife gets scratched, if it matters to you to bring it back to a nice finish, and you have the skill, it can be done.
Now the thing is, cost and finish are not always related. Many makers, including, Buck, CRK, Microtech and others use what they call a stonewashed finish, which is sort of a ceramic media in a tumbler. I am not particularly fond of this finish, but it does reduce the amount of blades that get rejected due to surface flaws, and it is fairly easy to do in an industrial setting. The combo finish that CRK offers when a knife is factory refinished of stonewashed flats and cork belted hollows is more than acceptable in my opinion. In addition, the coatings used by many companies, including Ontario, CRK, Busse and SwampRat, and TOPS... are not optimal IMHO, because they DO NOT allow the average user to maintain them in ideal condition, once a certain level of surface degredation occurs. Of course, your "need it to be non-reflective" crowd is going to disagree with me on this point. You pays your money and you makes your choice. I have a SwampRat, RAT and a number of TOPS knives that I use, and am going to see if I can find some commercially available coatings that will allow me to maintain the knives at home, once the finishes become thrashed, and ratty looking.
My purpose in this post was to help define some less than clear bandied about terms, and open up a dialogue as to what features of fit and finish are important to the other users in the community.
If I left some things out, please feel free to open up discussion, as I am always interested in learning more.
Best Regards,
STeven Garsson
I learned a lot about fit and finish when I worked at GT Knives in San Diego, CA from 1996-1997.
Fit is fairly easy to explain. It is the relation of the components of a knife, forming the whole package.
Fit is usually measured in increments of .001 of an inch with calipers and micrometers, sometimes with more advanced equipment. A few weeks ago, fit and finish was brought up in a discussion about Sebenzas, somewhat derisively, in relation to the expense of the item.
Fit relates to the components in the sense of striving to obtain the closest relation of the parts to each other. Less than acceptable tolerances will result in at least, side to side, and front to back wobble in a folding knife. At worst, the poor fit of components will result in the failure of the locking mechanism, regardless of type. A poor choice of basic components will result in a knife that is doomed from the start, things such as an incorrect thickness of liners, or a bad lock to tang mating, poor angles, things of that nature.
Poor fit can also result in "proud" handle materials, leaving sharp edges that can result in the unintended deployment of a blade for example, or a surface that can damage clothing or skin, leaving blisters or scratches.
An ideal fit will result in surfaces that seem to have been created without seams, an almost organic mating of dissimilar materials. There is not really such a thing as having a fit that is too close, unless the knife was poorly engineered from the start.
This does not necessarily apply to a folding knife, however. Each user has their own ideal of good fit, as applied to the knife's action. Some users want a knife that seems to fly open of it's own volition. Other users want a knife that is very "stiff" to deploy, this can be seen with slipjoint afficianados, frequently. My personal belief is that an ideally fit folder will have the optimum tension from the blade to handle. I spend a lot of time "tuning" folders, so that there is the slightest bit of resistance, but the knife still operates smoothly. Side to side, or front to back play is anathema to me. Butch Vallotton feels that I tighten my knives a little too much, but regardless of if it is a user or a safe queen, that is my preference. We are all free to have our own preferences with regard to this feature.
Finish can be defined by many terms. In most machine shops, there are reference tiles, used to determine what the ideal finish of a metal part will be for an application.
Many times, finish is also applied to how the knife "feels" when completed. Some makers and manufacturers prefer to leave crisp and sharp lines on the handles and blade spine. It looks fantastic when done by experts.
Just as in the case of firearms, depending on the application, this crispness can be unpleasant. It looks exceptional, but does not "feel" very appealing, resulting in "hot spots", and damage to clothing and skin.
My personal preference is for slightly broken edges, especially on the spine of a knife. I have found the opening holes in Spyderco and Benchmade knives to be left a bit sharp for my taste, and usually "break" the edges with a Cratex wheel or fine grit sandpaper. Same thing for handle edges on some knives as well.
As far as surface finishes go, with custom knives, I prefer a hand rubbed satin or mirror polished blade. Hand satin looks outstanding, but can be a bit of a challenge for upkeep. If you have a buffer, and know how to use it, which I do, mirror polish is fairly easy to maintain. Bead or sandblasting looks really cool, and minimizes surface glare, but is easily the most difficult finish to maintain, unless of course, you have a cabinet blaster, which I do not. Beadblasting can also be tricky, because it can hide less than optimal final blade or handle finishes, say something on the level of scratches left from 60 or 80 grit belts.
For using knives, that really get thrashed, like my Benchmade 710 that I have been carrying for 4 years, daily, the belt satin finish that they use is easy enough to maintain. No matter how badly a knife gets scratched, if it matters to you to bring it back to a nice finish, and you have the skill, it can be done.
Now the thing is, cost and finish are not always related. Many makers, including, Buck, CRK, Microtech and others use what they call a stonewashed finish, which is sort of a ceramic media in a tumbler. I am not particularly fond of this finish, but it does reduce the amount of blades that get rejected due to surface flaws, and it is fairly easy to do in an industrial setting. The combo finish that CRK offers when a knife is factory refinished of stonewashed flats and cork belted hollows is more than acceptable in my opinion. In addition, the coatings used by many companies, including Ontario, CRK, Busse and SwampRat, and TOPS... are not optimal IMHO, because they DO NOT allow the average user to maintain them in ideal condition, once a certain level of surface degredation occurs. Of course, your "need it to be non-reflective" crowd is going to disagree with me on this point. You pays your money and you makes your choice. I have a SwampRat, RAT and a number of TOPS knives that I use, and am going to see if I can find some commercially available coatings that will allow me to maintain the knives at home, once the finishes become thrashed, and ratty looking.
My purpose in this post was to help define some less than clear bandied about terms, and open up a dialogue as to what features of fit and finish are important to the other users in the community.
If I left some things out, please feel free to open up discussion, as I am always interested in learning more.
Best Regards,
STeven Garsson
