Codger_64
Moderator
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Messages
- 62,324
TBLLC 171UH Review
The purpose of this review, besides examining the actual quality of the imported copy of the 171UH Pro Hunter knife, is to inform the reader of the obvious and subtle differences between the two, aiding in the future identification of the real knife for Imperial Schrade collectors and users. Hopefully some of the details I present here will be of aid in determining which is which, even if only to let people make an informed buying decision between the two.
The first thing we will look at is the box. While the boxes I had seen to date for both the imported Old Timers and Uncle Henrys bore an unmistakable resemblance to the Imperial Schrade boxes, right down to the American flag image on the top, this box is an entirely new (to me at least) design. I was recently sent a newly manufactured imported version of a venerable Imperial Schrade 15OT Deerslayer knife for examination and review, and that box does resemble a real Schrade box, such that an unknowledgeable clerk or potential customer might mistakenly believe it to be an original American made Imperial Schrade. The top of the box even has the image of an American flag on it to help confuse the buyer. The side of the box does have the importers name on it, Taylor Brands, LLC. Only on the barcode endflap does the word China appear, and in the product I.D. Title. Schrade 15OT China. The box itself is corrugated pasteboard, not at all like the slick cardboard stock of the original American knives we are used to seeing, even those printed for Imperial Schrade in the last days. This 171UH box is similarly constructed, but has Uncle Henry in large red lettering on the top, bottom, and one end flap, the Schrade Tough logo on both sides, and Taylor Brands LLC on one side on a gray, black, and tan background. While the words and motifs mimic the last Schrade boxes, one familiar with the historic version of this particular knife would never be likely to confuse this box with the earliest woodgrain, or last tan/gray boxes in which the 171UH was sold.. Like the 15OT imported box, the only indication of importation displayed is on the barcode flap, but this time in small lettering Made in China. Likewise, my first impression of the box is cheap.
I am not a novice in the study of knives, and Imperial Schrade knives in particular. I have a fair sized collection of mostly Schrade fixed blade knives, have handled hundreds more, and have one example of this particular pattern in my collection. While I am by no means an expert on them, I have owned and used Uncle Henrys and Old Timers since the late sixties/early seventies, and spent many hours examining the pattern in minute detail, and written a fairly in-depth papers on them, to my knowledge the most detailed reports written to date on these patterns.
Opening the box, I am struck first by the fact that the knife, like the 15OT I reviewed before, is stored/shipped in the sheath. This is not a problem for a knife made from stainless, as this one is claimed to be by Taylor, but it does indicate a distinct difference in packaging technique from the Imperial Schrade originals, which would have been shipped separated, sheath in a plastic bag, and knife with a folded cardboard blade protector sleeve. With the brass guard on this knife, it does lead to speculation that verdigris could form in the sheath during storage and shipment. The box insert was the same a reworded copy of the original Schrade insert, and also gave the name of the importer and a mailing address for the limited lifetime warranty claim. Likewise, it is triplicated to comply with the NAFTA three language rule, English, Spanish, and French. Evidently the insert and box is not intended to be used for domestic sales in China. Nowhere on the insert is a country of origin identified, or the knife materials and construction specified.
Next we see the sheath. Not as bad as what I had come to expect from listening to other murmurings on the internet, but not really what I would expect from an American made Schrade sheath either. The pattern of the sheath is a close duplicate of the later Imperial Schrade 171UH stone pocket sheath. So close that again, it is obvious that a NOS original was exported for making the leather blanking die. Sheath color is medium russet, and what probably would have been a smooth glossy finish has been dulled down by imprinting a fine pebble texture. I understand it was intended to give a natural grain appearance, though it is of slightly better quality than the previous 15OT sheath. Sheath leather thickness approximates the original. The snap on the handle keeper strap is impressed SCHRADE as is the smaller one on the stone pocket. This was not the case on my original. One may speculate whether the hardware is stainless, nickle silver, or chromed steel, but stainless is my own best guess. I do also note that there is rubber cement overruns around the stone pocket. There are no throat rivets as on the original. Also, the gusset material which separates the front and back panels seems to be thick pieces of tan color edged paper/pasteboard, instead of the original skived leather used to protect the sheath stitching from the sharp blade. I suppose it could be leather fiber composite though.. While the sheath on first blush appears to be of slightly better quality than the imported 15OT sheath, I seriously doubt its serviceability and its survivability for real world usage. Summation? A pathetic copy of an original sheath.
The knife blade is a very close approximation of the original. Blade right has a tangstamp 171UH over small letters CHINAon the choil read from the handle, and on the left SCHRADE, also read from the handle. These positions and markings do not really mimic the U.S. production knives, and this is the first pattern I have seen where the country of origin is incorporated in the tangstamp. There is no super sharp etch which are commonly seen on the other reproductions. Neither is the tiny left blade etch of the cutler with hammer and anvil, wording Schrade over China 05" present. No where on the knife does Taylor Brands LLC claim maker status, and this knife, known to be one of the very first off the boat from the first production run have the etch denoting that. Given the tangstamp position differences and with the identification of country of origin on the knife, this should be a no-brainer to identify as a copy in the future. Also missing is the UH signature from the brass guard.
Again, as with the 15OT copy, slight differences in the details of the grind certainly spell a change in what I have come to expect from Imperial Schrade originals of the 171UH. The primary grind and buff left the knife blade with a wavy appearance, as if looking at it through a sheet of thin clear plastic shrinkwrap, and the secondary grinds have a really faint crocus finish. Again, not a big deal in a user knife. The final grind is obviously done by CNC, is much better than expected and indeed better than some of the last of days Imperial Schrade knives I have seen.. There is no apparent manufacturing defects with the grind.
The handle is better fitted than the 15OT import I examined, though this should be expected when a knife tang is hidden rather than exposed as on the 15OT and with no inlaid shield or rivets. While an attempt was made to copy the original molding of the Staglon handle, it is obviously not cast from the same mold, and the mold halves were far from aligned. Heavy buffing after molding and dying did not hide the parting lines at all. Though it did even out the uneven edges left from molding, the dying before this step left obvious lines top and bottom where the high side was buffed clean of accent dye, and the low side remained with the dark dye intact right to the parting line. As with the 15OT import, I question also the actual handle material as being the same as was used on the original. Nowhere does the manufacturer, or Taylor claim a certain material composition, and it does seem to scar more easily then the patented Delrin material used on the originals. I do not have a plastics lab to do a gas chromo analysis, so this is only speculation at best. Bi-colored as it should be (though entirely different colors from the originals), it does not seem as hard as Delrin. The handle texture has much larger buffed flats than the original with much more cream plastic showing. As much as 50% more in my estimation. Mostly this is due to a much less detailed mold than was used on the originals. It has no real effect on function, other than a slightly less textured grip, but it does give a cheaper appearance than the original, which had more bumps and dark accent than the new copy. Again, to one familiar with the original, this should make copy spotting easier in the future. I would rate the handle fit as fairly well done.
The brass castings are also well done, slightly different appearing because of the very light brushed finish left and not buffed smooth. The overall shape of the (cast?) guard and pommel components are near identical to originals. The pebbled front cavity of the guard does not have the UH signature of the original, and of course no serial number which some of the originals had. There is a noticeable difference in the tang screw. The original fits flush with its chamfered hole in the brass pommel on the original, and the copys tang screw, also brass, has been ground flush on the lower half where it protruded from the chamfer after assembly, leaving the upper half untouched by the grinder and recessed in the hole. I dont think this is a detail the ISC inspectors would have overlooked.
My overall impression of this knife is mixed, even when as with the 15OT copy, ignoring the sheath, the packaging, the purloining of Henry Baers design, and my personal aversion to items from this particular country of origin. It could quite simply have been done better. And was during the two production runs done by Imperial Schrade. I have to admit, given the rarity of the originals, this would be a good knife for non-collectors to use in practicing batoning (splitting firewood using the knife as a bludgeoned wedge), and maybe the occasional outdoor hunting trip or other activity where damage or loss to an original might be encountered. Mostly because of the cheap price and availability. If it were not for my promise to forward this example for further reviews, I might be tempted to do destructive testing, i.e. melt point of the plastic, torsional rigidity of the blade, failure mode of the tang, corrosion and wear resistance of the steel.
Codger
The purpose of this review, besides examining the actual quality of the imported copy of the 171UH Pro Hunter knife, is to inform the reader of the obvious and subtle differences between the two, aiding in the future identification of the real knife for Imperial Schrade collectors and users. Hopefully some of the details I present here will be of aid in determining which is which, even if only to let people make an informed buying decision between the two.
The first thing we will look at is the box. While the boxes I had seen to date for both the imported Old Timers and Uncle Henrys bore an unmistakable resemblance to the Imperial Schrade boxes, right down to the American flag image on the top, this box is an entirely new (to me at least) design. I was recently sent a newly manufactured imported version of a venerable Imperial Schrade 15OT Deerslayer knife for examination and review, and that box does resemble a real Schrade box, such that an unknowledgeable clerk or potential customer might mistakenly believe it to be an original American made Imperial Schrade. The top of the box even has the image of an American flag on it to help confuse the buyer. The side of the box does have the importers name on it, Taylor Brands, LLC. Only on the barcode endflap does the word China appear, and in the product I.D. Title. Schrade 15OT China. The box itself is corrugated pasteboard, not at all like the slick cardboard stock of the original American knives we are used to seeing, even those printed for Imperial Schrade in the last days. This 171UH box is similarly constructed, but has Uncle Henry in large red lettering on the top, bottom, and one end flap, the Schrade Tough logo on both sides, and Taylor Brands LLC on one side on a gray, black, and tan background. While the words and motifs mimic the last Schrade boxes, one familiar with the historic version of this particular knife would never be likely to confuse this box with the earliest woodgrain, or last tan/gray boxes in which the 171UH was sold.. Like the 15OT imported box, the only indication of importation displayed is on the barcode flap, but this time in small lettering Made in China. Likewise, my first impression of the box is cheap.
I am not a novice in the study of knives, and Imperial Schrade knives in particular. I have a fair sized collection of mostly Schrade fixed blade knives, have handled hundreds more, and have one example of this particular pattern in my collection. While I am by no means an expert on them, I have owned and used Uncle Henrys and Old Timers since the late sixties/early seventies, and spent many hours examining the pattern in minute detail, and written a fairly in-depth papers on them, to my knowledge the most detailed reports written to date on these patterns.
Opening the box, I am struck first by the fact that the knife, like the 15OT I reviewed before, is stored/shipped in the sheath. This is not a problem for a knife made from stainless, as this one is claimed to be by Taylor, but it does indicate a distinct difference in packaging technique from the Imperial Schrade originals, which would have been shipped separated, sheath in a plastic bag, and knife with a folded cardboard blade protector sleeve. With the brass guard on this knife, it does lead to speculation that verdigris could form in the sheath during storage and shipment. The box insert was the same a reworded copy of the original Schrade insert, and also gave the name of the importer and a mailing address for the limited lifetime warranty claim. Likewise, it is triplicated to comply with the NAFTA three language rule, English, Spanish, and French. Evidently the insert and box is not intended to be used for domestic sales in China. Nowhere on the insert is a country of origin identified, or the knife materials and construction specified.
Next we see the sheath. Not as bad as what I had come to expect from listening to other murmurings on the internet, but not really what I would expect from an American made Schrade sheath either. The pattern of the sheath is a close duplicate of the later Imperial Schrade 171UH stone pocket sheath. So close that again, it is obvious that a NOS original was exported for making the leather blanking die. Sheath color is medium russet, and what probably would have been a smooth glossy finish has been dulled down by imprinting a fine pebble texture. I understand it was intended to give a natural grain appearance, though it is of slightly better quality than the previous 15OT sheath. Sheath leather thickness approximates the original. The snap on the handle keeper strap is impressed SCHRADE as is the smaller one on the stone pocket. This was not the case on my original. One may speculate whether the hardware is stainless, nickle silver, or chromed steel, but stainless is my own best guess. I do also note that there is rubber cement overruns around the stone pocket. There are no throat rivets as on the original. Also, the gusset material which separates the front and back panels seems to be thick pieces of tan color edged paper/pasteboard, instead of the original skived leather used to protect the sheath stitching from the sharp blade. I suppose it could be leather fiber composite though.. While the sheath on first blush appears to be of slightly better quality than the imported 15OT sheath, I seriously doubt its serviceability and its survivability for real world usage. Summation? A pathetic copy of an original sheath.
The knife blade is a very close approximation of the original. Blade right has a tangstamp 171UH over small letters CHINAon the choil read from the handle, and on the left SCHRADE, also read from the handle. These positions and markings do not really mimic the U.S. production knives, and this is the first pattern I have seen where the country of origin is incorporated in the tangstamp. There is no super sharp etch which are commonly seen on the other reproductions. Neither is the tiny left blade etch of the cutler with hammer and anvil, wording Schrade over China 05" present. No where on the knife does Taylor Brands LLC claim maker status, and this knife, known to be one of the very first off the boat from the first production run have the etch denoting that. Given the tangstamp position differences and with the identification of country of origin on the knife, this should be a no-brainer to identify as a copy in the future. Also missing is the UH signature from the brass guard.
Again, as with the 15OT copy, slight differences in the details of the grind certainly spell a change in what I have come to expect from Imperial Schrade originals of the 171UH. The primary grind and buff left the knife blade with a wavy appearance, as if looking at it through a sheet of thin clear plastic shrinkwrap, and the secondary grinds have a really faint crocus finish. Again, not a big deal in a user knife. The final grind is obviously done by CNC, is much better than expected and indeed better than some of the last of days Imperial Schrade knives I have seen.. There is no apparent manufacturing defects with the grind.
The handle is better fitted than the 15OT import I examined, though this should be expected when a knife tang is hidden rather than exposed as on the 15OT and with no inlaid shield or rivets. While an attempt was made to copy the original molding of the Staglon handle, it is obviously not cast from the same mold, and the mold halves were far from aligned. Heavy buffing after molding and dying did not hide the parting lines at all. Though it did even out the uneven edges left from molding, the dying before this step left obvious lines top and bottom where the high side was buffed clean of accent dye, and the low side remained with the dark dye intact right to the parting line. As with the 15OT import, I question also the actual handle material as being the same as was used on the original. Nowhere does the manufacturer, or Taylor claim a certain material composition, and it does seem to scar more easily then the patented Delrin material used on the originals. I do not have a plastics lab to do a gas chromo analysis, so this is only speculation at best. Bi-colored as it should be (though entirely different colors from the originals), it does not seem as hard as Delrin. The handle texture has much larger buffed flats than the original with much more cream plastic showing. As much as 50% more in my estimation. Mostly this is due to a much less detailed mold than was used on the originals. It has no real effect on function, other than a slightly less textured grip, but it does give a cheaper appearance than the original, which had more bumps and dark accent than the new copy. Again, to one familiar with the original, this should make copy spotting easier in the future. I would rate the handle fit as fairly well done.
The brass castings are also well done, slightly different appearing because of the very light brushed finish left and not buffed smooth. The overall shape of the (cast?) guard and pommel components are near identical to originals. The pebbled front cavity of the guard does not have the UH signature of the original, and of course no serial number which some of the originals had. There is a noticeable difference in the tang screw. The original fits flush with its chamfered hole in the brass pommel on the original, and the copys tang screw, also brass, has been ground flush on the lower half where it protruded from the chamfer after assembly, leaving the upper half untouched by the grinder and recessed in the hole. I dont think this is a detail the ISC inspectors would have overlooked.
My overall impression of this knife is mixed, even when as with the 15OT copy, ignoring the sheath, the packaging, the purloining of Henry Baers design, and my personal aversion to items from this particular country of origin. It could quite simply have been done better. And was during the two production runs done by Imperial Schrade. I have to admit, given the rarity of the originals, this would be a good knife for non-collectors to use in practicing batoning (splitting firewood using the knife as a bludgeoned wedge), and maybe the occasional outdoor hunting trip or other activity where damage or loss to an original might be encountered. Mostly because of the cheap price and availability. If it were not for my promise to forward this example for further reviews, I might be tempted to do destructive testing, i.e. melt point of the plastic, torsional rigidity of the blade, failure mode of the tang, corrosion and wear resistance of the steel.
Codger
