No. I don't give chances to things that are brought out just because the are cheaper to produce. Victorinox has been on a trend these past few years f cheapening their product. First it was thinner blades and they had to addf a dimple on the liner to compensate, now it's the discontinuing of alox models. These were the bombproof models of the Victorinox line, but I guess it's more profitable to make stick on plastic handles these days instead of all metal riveted on scales. It's one thing for a little keychain knife like a classic to be built on the light side, it's only a keychain knife. But if I'm taking this knife out in the boonies, or off to a war, which I've been to one, I don't want cheap. I want something that's put together to stay that way, 'till death do us part.
Victorinox scales have been known to fall off the knife, and on one SAK forum they even recomend that Goop is the recommended stuff for sticking them back on. I'm sorry, but if I'm a soldier, I DON'T want a knife that has a rep for handles falling off. Plus I detest the cheap cellidor handles that start to melt if they come in contact with certain gun cleaning solvents or bug repellent. The nylon scales are a step up, but then anything wojld be a step up from cellidor. I've got an old Wenger SI that has stood up to some dirty use for over 25 years. I have an old pioneer that is a close rival. Both are as ready to go today as when I bought them. But I've sent some plastic handled SAK's back to the Shelton facility for replacement of cracked scales. I will never trust the plastic handles like I do the alox SAK's. There is just no way they are as rugged.
I have a long lifetime of experience of the new stuff that is lauded as the latest and greatest being the end all, only to have it not live up to the claims. I was trained on the M-14, and loved that gun. Rugged and reliable and accurate. Then they gave us the new M-16. I didn't like that plastic and aluminum piece of junk then, and still don't. It was not nearly as realiable as the old M-14. Then, just as now, there was numerous complaints from the combat zone of the guns having problems. Now we hear from vets of Iraq and Afganistan of problems with both the rifle and 9mm pistol. If the 9mm is getting it done, why are the Marines spending millions of they're budget dollars buying brand new Colt 1911 .45's? The gun is superior to the Italian thing as the .45 round is superior to the 9mm. Unfortunatly, combat tuperware doesn't rule as you think. The people on the line demand something better. When I did my own tour of the southeast Asia fiasco, there were GI's picking up AK-47's and using them because of the problems with the M-16. Yet the military was not going to admit they made a mistake. JUst like now, decisions on what to buy are all too often based on political or fiscal basis, not what is actually good for the soldier.
Bottom line is, we all can make out own decisions. And mine is to stick with all metal SAK's when I can. They have proven themselves to me too often, while the plastic ones had me searching for that bottle of Goop. I don't give chances to things that have let me down in the past. If I'm out in the woods, failure of something is not acceptable. There's no knife store at that third oak tree on the left.
Carl.