At What Point is a Knife OVERPRICED?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally I think any knife over $150 is over priced. Way over priced. I've had many knives that cost in the $300-$400 range and they were no better than a $120 Spyderco I had. I refused to pay for a "name" and I refuse to pay for CNC machined knives that are high priced because they are "hand made".
 
Bungwrench said:
Personally I think any knife over $150 is over priced. Way over priced. I've had many knives that cost in the $300-$400 range and they were no better than a $120 Spyderco I had. I refused to pay for a "name" and I refuse to pay for CNC machined knives that are high priced because they are "hand made".
Click to expand...

A custom, or even production knife, with something like stag, ivory, or pearl AND something like Devin Thomas stainless damascus will COST the maker/manufacturer $200.00 in materials.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and may have absolutely no interest in these materials, I just wanted to share this information because you might be ignorant to these material costs.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
As just one of many counter examples, consider the extreme advantage that Fowler claims for his methods which have been directly opposed by Cashen as having NO basis in materials science and been directly contridicted by his work. Now either Cashen or Fowler is spreading misinformation because they are saying the complete opposite. Both of them sell highly on performance and yet one of them has to be hyping their products by definition.
Click to expand...

Nothing factual there other than the fact you are putting words in people's mouths and reaching illogical conclusions. That is a FACT.
 
Some (not so few I guess) people buy knives as a status symbol (like watches etc), so they can show off...I understand that for such person a knife cannot be overpriced, on the contrary, the more it costs the better even if it's just mediocre knife by perfomance or even a crap...
 
No the facts are clear, Cashen has clearly disputed the claims made by Fowler as to the advantages of the heat treatment used on Fowler's knives. This has been stated clearly on Swordforums. Not only that he has disputed strongly the methods used by Fowler to determine the performance he states. This is all clearly in print.

Just as for example Mayer contended strongly that the method used by Paul Bos to heat treat 154CM produced strongly inferior blades and Mayer had the materials data from Hitachi on his side. This same arguement was also later independently confirmed by Landes who measured that the edge stability was lower with the high temper as was the corrosion resistance (it also has lower toughness).

Again I am not speaking of passion, or stories, simply the performance stated by makers and the tests they use to support them. The fact that hype is rampant is obvious because of the significant amount of contention which clearly means that misinformation is common and continuous over long periods of time.

-Cliff
 
What Fowler espouses is based on his experience and passion for getting the most out of the steel he chooses and the methods he uses for achieving that goal.

When his words are used to compare his findings and experience based on his methods to other makers it is obvious that logic is no longer in play. When those same words are used to place words in Fowler's mouth regarding the work of others, neither science nor logic are being used.

Now if Fowler had stated that he has used every method on every steel and found that his methods and steel are superior to anything else, you would have a valid logical point.


But he has never stated that (as a matter of fact he states quite the opposite espousing the inclusion of all in the world of knives).
 
Cliff,

The actual point is the information is based on experience. Obviously no one (even you) has the same experiences as anyone else when it comes to knives.

Passion and experience are quite relevant to the information an individual posts. Leaving out passion, your experience, my experience anyones experience is quite relevant to the posts that are made.

To deny that is to deny reality.

If passion is not relevant, neither is hype in this case since your are confusing the two when it comes to Ed Fowler. (That is a fact also).
 
Cliff Stamp said:
No the facts are clear, Cashen has clearly disputed the claims made by Fowler as to the advantages of the heat treatment used on Fowler's knives. This has been stated clearly on Swordforums. Not only that he has disputed strongly the methods used by Fowler to determine the performance he states. This is all clearly in print.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

Kevin Cashen is unavailable for comment until next week. I have spoken to him about this before, and he has, as I stated before, disagreed with some, but not all of what Ed Fowler purports.

SwordForums lost a lot of its' luster years ago, when the idiots overran the castle.

I will confirm, personally, with Kevin when he becomes available, and post back here.

Certain forumites have been known to twist/pervert writings to suit their purposes, no matter how it goes against the original intent of the writer.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Bastid said:
The actual point is the information is based on experience. Obviously no one (even you) has the same experiences as anyone else when it comes to knives.
Click to expand...

The subject is MEASUREMENTS used to support performance arguements. If you even just glance at all at any of Cashen's writings it is obvious that he strongly contends the proposed facts by many of those who forged knives as not being facts at all and that cause and effect are not what is claimed. The following thread alone has Cashen noting many such oppositions over and over :

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=68731

He critizes the bending test used by Fowler, he critizes the rope cutting tests, he critizes the triple quench, etc., and states clearly about many of the common proposed benefits of forging which are quicte frankly false. He has noted on many occasions how even the tests used by those makers are also misinformative. The bend tests for example fail to note that the strength dramatically decreases and that such blades actually take a set under lower forces.

Again, this is a case of measurements presented as facts, which should be consider on their own merit independent of the speaker.

-Cliff
 
Cliff Stamp said:
Just as for example Mayer contended strongly that the method used by Paul Bos to heat treat 154CM produced strongly inferior blades and Mayer had the materials data from Hitachi on his side. This same arguement was also later independently confirmed by Landes who measured that the edge stability was lower with the high temper as was the corrosion resistance (it also has lower toughness).

Again I am not speaking of passion, or stories, simply the performance stated by makers and the tests they use to support them. The fact that hype is rampant is obvious because of the significant amount of contention which clearly means that misinformation is common and continuous over long periods of time.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

I hate to sound ignorant, but, who is Mayer, google is no help, will some one relieve my ignorance? thank you, Oh, yes, and why would he go to Hitachi and not Crucible for information on 154CM?
 
I am following this thread with wonder. I wonder why so many people who say that they will never spend over xyz for a knife have so much to say about the value of knives over that price level. What drives them to spend hour after hour posting on the subject?

I also wonder about the injection of purported fraud into a thread on price and value? When the customers of makers like Ed Fowler are happy with the knives they buy from him, what drives those who want to tear him down to do so. How many of them have paid for one of his knives and been disappointed? Then why?

I understand the maker who is jealous of another and exposes his phony background and then has to live with the fact that the phony background means nothing to the customers who spend huge amounts.

What is this thread really about and should it be renamed?
 
Strider knives for example cost about maybe $20.00 to make ($15.00 worth of steel, 30 cents worth of para-cord for the handle and a couple bucks to put the stripes on the blade), yet they charge you $300 to $500 dollars to buy one. If that's not overpriced then I don't know what is. I have a Ka-bar in my pack right now that I used for two years (I gave that a hell of a beating in the woods) that will probably match if not outlast the Tom Brown Tracker. Or buy a Gerber LMF II, another knife I previously owned, for $100 dollars. You'll get your moneys worth and then some.
 
A. G. Russell said:
Does he have a web site?
Click to expand...

Steve Harvey would know more about his work, he owns several of his knives, they are martial based. I only became familiar with him due to the blowup Jim March had with Paul Bos over problems with a custom heat treatment and subsequent run over into rec.knives about high temperature tempering on ATS-34.

A. G. Russell said:
I also wonder about the injection of purported fraud into a thread on price and value?
Click to expand...

The point was made that if you can sell something, regardless of the means, lie, cheat or any deception, then the price is still "fair" because it was accepted. My viewpoint is that it would be considered overpriced if the facts were actually known and thus I would consider it overpriced because the only reason it is viewed otherwise is because of a lie.

-Cliff
 
This is a good question. Like others have said, it is overpriced when the market will not move it.

That being said, there is a niche market for various knives. Within that niche, the knives are worth more.

For me, a knife is overpriced if I am not willing to use it. :)
 
Comment on the previous posters remarks about the CZ75 vs. Randall. I had some Randalls when I was younger. I would not leave an 01 blade as "soft" as they do, but hey, that's just me. As for the CZ 75, it is a very rugged pistol that incorporates good features of a number of other pistols, like the frame rails of a SIG 210. It probably won't let you down, but it is NOT pretty. Another example is the CZ copy of the pre-64 Winchester Model 70. My brother bought one and found it wanting when compared to his real Classic Model 70's. Most firearms today are mass produced items. Even the wonderful Kimber 1911's are made on CNC equipment. That is the reason that the Winchester Model 70 Classic Super Grade cost the same when they stopped producing it in 2005-06 as it did when they introduced the model in the early 90's even though the new one has a fancier stock David Miller designed stock with an ebony foreend cap like the old Supers. Less hand work on the newer ones. If you want to know what good gun that requires a fair amount of hand work costs, take a look at a side by side shotgun. The most reasonably priced one of good quality is probably a Ruger Gold Label. Anyone priced one of thsoe lately? Now apply this to knives.
 
Cliff Stamp said:
The point was made that if you can sell something, regardless of the means, lie, cheat or any deception, then the price is still "fair" because it was accepted. My viewpoint is that it would be considered overpriced if the facts were actually known and thus I would consider it overpriced because the only reason it is viewed otherwise is because of a lie.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

This is where the phrase "Buyer Beware" comes in.

The ultimate bottom line is, if money changes hands, it was not overpriced.

Even if the price is propped up by hype.
Buy the knife, buy the hype.

Or don't.
Buyer beware.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top