A new knife review - Taylor 7OT Chinese knife

lrv

lrv

Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
2,556
Being a bit of a devil's advocate I felt like feeding a piece of meat to a lion.
I am the guilty party in supplying Robert Clemente with his first copy of the Taylor version of the 7OT.
Following is his first wriite up on the subject.
Enjoy

----------------------------------------------
Robert Clemente
23 December 2005
Re: New “Schrade 7OT China” Report

I was hoping; I really was! I wanted the new 7OT to be at least a shadow of its former self. . . sad to say that in the eyes of this devotee to Schrade products and not unaware of their quality, details, and nuances, this new product is a poor copy. First distant impression, including pictures, mirror the famous pattern and most favored hunting knife. Closer inspection opens the door to an avalanche of issues and differences. These differences make me wonder of the quality of the steel itself as to keeping an edge, sharpening ease, and being durable and trustworthy in the field.
First, consider the new sheath. It appears to be the original ballistic nylon with the addition of a clip. Our sub-cultures seem to be guiding designs these days and in my opinion, to our degradation. If the clip is a good idea, and I suppose that issue is to be answered by the individual user, then a better fastening design is warranted. From an engineering standpoint, all the weight of the knife and pressure on the sheath centers on the plastic rivet pin at the base of the sheath strap that holds the clip in the cute little pocket. In time, that pin or the sheath material itself will give way. It seems to me that getting the knife out of the sheath must be easy, but getting the sheath off the belt never seems to have been an issue before. Is T-S answering a question nobody is asking, building something nobody needs?
A Schrade aficionado will recognize immediately the different “feel” in the handling of the knife. The knife is lighter, and the bolsters are thinner, giving the knife a fatter handle feel. Tolerances on the spine are tight, but the tolerances between the bolsters and handles are sloppy, gapped, and uneven. The unit I am looking at even has some glue oozing from the gaps. The handle material is no longer the traditional and classic cream and dark brown; it is a rosy brown beige with a painted-on-look dark brown. The colors themselves bring into question the material used. The classic shield of brass has been replaced with an over shined shield with rope edges around the “OLD TIMER” insignia. I doubt this material is real brass; it must be some kind of brass plating over cheap, soft metal. The three dominant pins on the handle are of the same “look” as the shield, that fake shiny brassy look. The blade does not fit centered in the track made by the two brass liners, and the inside edges of those liners are not finished off but are rough and jagged. The heads of the pins are unevenly hammered. The handles are unevenly ground at all eight corners where the handles meet with the edges of the bolsters. And, the bolsters are actually different sizes, left and right. The blade appears to be standard Schrade fare, but with all the rest of this ambiguity and apparent lack of attention to quality in the details, who can tell without lab testing?
Conclusion: this 7OT is not a Schrade. It is easily recognized as a bad copy. I have seen better, tighter, closer tolerances on knives from other less fortunate countries. As to field testing, I really do not know anyone who would want to risk their hands and fingers on such testing. Faithfulness in little things usually means that one will find faithfulness in the more important things. Find a friend who made the mistake of buying one of these and inspect it. Too bad, really; a bunch of us out here probably would have been loyal to a product that took on Schrade’s quality and unseen devotion to honest knife crafting.
 
Unlike Robert, having already seen and closely inspected the TBLLC chinese 15OT and 171UH, I had no real expectations of better quality with the TBLLC chinese 7OT, but still agree that this knife is a poor quality copy of my original mint example.
As with the TBLLC 15OT I reviewed, the first thing seen is the box. I was recently sent the newly manufactured imported version of a venerable Imperial Schrade 7OT by Robert for examination and review, and the 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 also has the image of an American flag on it to help confuse the buyer. The side of the box does have the importer’s name on it, Taylor Brands, LLC. Only on the barcode endflap does the word "China" appear, and in the product I.D. Title. "Schrade 7OT China". The box itself is thin semi-matte cardboard stock, and I predict it will be the bane of retailers who stock them because of shelf wear. My first impression of the box is likewise,"cheap".
At this point I feel like I need to let the reader know that I am not a novice in the realm of knives, and Imperial Schrade knives in particular. I have spent many hours examining the original of this pattern in minute detail, and written a fairly in-depth paper on them, one the most detailed reports written to date on this particular pattern. I have a mint example before me for detail comparison.
Upon opening the box, I notice the fact that the knife is shipped with a black ballistic nylon sheath, nearly identical to the ones used by Imperial Schrade in their last years, right down to the tinsel garnished “Schrade Old Timer” cloth label sewn across the closure flap. Other than the deletion of the notation “USA” on the label, and the addition of a plastic clip to the belt loop in the back, it appears substantially the same as the U.S. version (itself most likely made in china, and possibly from the same lagole). The clip, which I personally have no use for, is secured by a metal compression rivet, blackened on the outside of the sheath. The single rivet attachment, as Robert noted, is not any more secure then the perimeter of the cloth surrounding the rivet hole, and it’s durability is questionable at best. The clip does not interfere with the use of the belt loop, but would be uncomfortable because it protrudes from the sheath back by nearly a half inch. As far as I can see, it is not easily removable without filing off the head of the rivet.
The insert was missing from this box when I got it, but with the other chinese Schrades I have examined, they used a “one insert for all”, and likely this one was the same, a revamped copy of the original Schrade insert, but giving the name of the importer and a mailing address for the limited lifetime warranty claim. They are triplicated to comply with the NAFTA three language rule, English, Spanish, and French. Evidently, insert and box are not intended for domestic sales in China. Nowhere on the insert is a country of origin identified, or the knife materials and construction specified.

The knife blade is a very close approximation of the original as well. Blade right has a tangstamp "7OT" over a microscopic “china”on the tang read from the handle, and on the left "SCHRADE”, also read from the handle. These positions and markings mimic (but not copy) the ISC production knives. Surprisingly, there is no "super sharp", or “china 05", or “first production run” blade etch, which the new owners of the brand names seem to favor on the fixed blade Chinese knives. Perhaps they think it adds an air of legitimacy to the reproductions. No where on the knife does Taylor Brands LLC claim maker status. Once the box is tossed and the light “china” stamp is worn away (or removed by a counterfeiter), there will be no identification of country of origin on the knife. But is still one step better than it being incorporated in an etch (or inkstamp).

Slight nuances in the details of the grind certainly spell a difference in what I see on my Imperial Schrade originals. The primary grind and buff look almost as good, though the secondary (hollow ) grind upper line is higher, making for a slightly smaller spine cross section, and the final grind appears to be flatter (therefore wider) than the original. The final grind is ok, a bit of a chatter from the grinding bit (not done on a wheel as was the original), but then my original’s factory edge is not honed slick either. Most user sharpening and polishing will remove these tiny manufacturing defects from either. The chinese blade is 1/8" shorter (3 5/8" vs. 3 3/4"), the pulls are different lengths, though basically the same shape and depth, the TBLLC being near a full inch long while the original is closer to three quarters of an inch. So while the blade from the china knife is a close copy, it is not an exact duplicate.

Robert was correct about the color differences in the handle materials. And the fit of the scales to the bolsters is horrible on this example. More disconcerting to me is the fastening devices used to secure the whole assembly. What one pin in a folding knife is the most important in determining fit, function and durability? The pivot pin. A smaller diameter steel pivot pin is used. And a smaller diameter lock bar pin. And substantially smaller scale pins (half diameter or less). With the exception of the pivot pin, buffed flush with the bolsters as on the original, the pins on this knife are left proud of the scales, and the heads still show peening marks. The scale pins of the original are flush and smooth, the lockbar pin heads are smoothly domed.
While the handle/bolster assembly is a near duplicate in profile, when the two are laid on their backsprings, and compared from above, the bolsters and liners of the chinese knife are seen to be significantly thinner than the American Schrade. Evidently this was not taken into account when molding the scales (near the same thickness as the originals), since it required a really deep radius buff down to lower the scale ends to meet flush with the thinner bolsters. Likewise, the scales are unevenly chamfered to make them flush out top and bottom with a top and bottom bolster chamfer not present on the thicker original bolsters. Again, no cigar. One more difference? O.K. Robert mentioned the rope border shield. Well, it is faux rope border. I have a limited edition Schrade with a roped border, and this one isn’t close. It is more like a series of little raised squares forming the border. And it is not evenly inleted, the bottom half protruding while the top half is near flush.

Alrighty then, failing grades for assembly and fit. What about function? I open the original slowly. It moves like butter. Tight enough not to move on it’s own, but slightly varying in resistance as the tang cams over to the open position. Then SNAP! A firm lockup with no movement horizontally or vertically. A stiff lockup. I open the TBLLC knife slowly. It grinds and bumps like my knees after squatting too long. Feels like the mating surfaces have not been smoothed at all. Oil. (Genuine Schrade NOS oil, thank you for asking). No improvement. It does “pop” into lockup. There is slight vertical play when I lift on the blade. Not bad really, just not the same tight lockup. Then as I am checking for lateral movement.... wtf?????!!! The entire knife, nose to tail flexes in my hand!! Not badly, but it feels lose, not solid. Thin liners? Small pins? Different scale materials? A combination of all of these, I think. Does it forecast the lifespan of the knife? Does it point to probable future lock failure? Summation? I give this knife failing marks all the way around from a user, collector, manufacturing engineering and quality control perspectives. By far a worse example than the two fixed TBLLC knives I have examined.

Codger :thumbdn:
 
Good job Codger! Makes me want to run right out and buy one.........the original that is not the chinee PO$. :D
 
Codger, thanks for all your reviews of these chitaylor knife-like things. It has been a very valuable caveat emptor series of reviews. I hope very few of these find they're way into the hands of collectors and users, that would only soil the venerable Schrade name.

I would like to add that if folks are looking for real Schrade lockbacks, they are still available on ebay for modest prices. The most common one seems to be the 6OT, a somewhat overlooked version. Made right up to the end in large numbers, it is a great user and you don't have to worry about it wearing out after a little use or folding up on your fingers. Priced so you can put a mint one away and have a nice one to use.
 
I wish you knew how hard it is for me to set aside all the other issues that come into play when I review one of these. It is really hard, but I try my best to be unbiased, and limit my hyperbole. And if anyone cares to review one of the chinese manufactured knives imported by Taylor, and feels that my review was unfair, that the details of design, material, and manufacture are not as I have represented them to be, please post a rebuttle review on the appropriate thread. I'll not take offense.

I would not bother to even look at them for myself, but do so hoping to help others make informed buying decisions, if not based upon obvious quality and material differences, then to at least recognize a chinese copy when you see it, and not think you are looking at an Imperial Schrade knife. So far, I have been able to detect major differences that should make identification easy.

Codger
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top