Dealbreakers

[Joss]

This is going to sound simplistic, but a good sheath is all that it needs to be, vs. no sheath.

Personally, prefer leather, and like the wrap around molded, which most sheathmakers refer to as a fully welted sheath, vs. a pouch type.

Color and stamping are definitely up to the maker.

No one said that the maker had to MAKE the sheath, because frankly, some makers really suck at it. Kenny Rowe is a professional sheathmaker, and he is at the top of his game. Would rather give the maker an extra $40 for his knife, and not have to screw with getting a sheath made, but sometimes that is the only option.

I agree with that. For me all time invested in a sheath is somewhat wasted because most my knives are not users. Embellishments are completely wasted.

 

[jdm61]

Major Pet Peeve
Fixed Blades Sold without Sheaths
makers Like Fuegen Hancock Foster Fowler and Burke..you Guys Rock the Leather!..

Ed Caffrey makes some of the neatest sheaths i have seen from a smith and he flat out says that he hates making them. But I guess there is a valid argument that says if you are trying to make a living at this, you don't want to give away any more of your hard earned dollars than you absolutely have to. $40-80 is probably 40-50% of what I could charge for a knife right now, but i am going to have to use someone like Kenny Rowe, Sandy Morrisey, Chcuk Burrows or the guys at Tree Stump in the short term. Such is the life of the hobby bladesmith

 

[Bladeandbarrel]

Burt Foster makes the nicest sheaths of any maker I think. I have only seen a few but they rock.

 

[RogerP]

Sheaths for me aren't a deal-breaker, but the absence of a sheath - or the inclusion of a crappy sheath - fall into the pet peeve category. I agree with what others have said - if you don't like making them, have Kenny Rowe do it for you and pass the cost onto the customer.

Conversely, the inclusion of a first rate sheath can really be a strong selling feature. Burt Foster is indeed one of the very best - each sheath is in itself a work of art that was designed (both in terms of function and aesthetics) to compliment the knife it carries:

I would also put Ed Caffrey, Rodrigo Sfreddo and a few others in this group.

Having done it all of once I can relate to why many may not find the leather work particularly enjoyable. But I also can't for the life of me figure why it should be beyond the abilities of any maker who can produce a half-way decent knife, to turn out a half-way decent sheath:

Roger

 

[Joss]

Did anyone mention uneven grinds?

 

[Bladeandbarrel]

For me, brass on new knife is like poison-I prefer stainless or bronze. I don't care for giraffe bone, mosaic pins, excessive number of pins or too much epoxy repair on a wood handle.

I despise pakkawood, miraclewood, wildwood or whatever you want to call it.
Plywood is good for hockeysticks, thats about it.

There is room for a bead blasted finish on certain knives, but I would greatly prefer a finish like gunkote or hard chrome after blasting. I could never keep my bead blasted stainless microtechs free of rust.

Most makers make handles too short, too flat and too small. I have pretty large hands, but a handle can generally be smaller, its hard to go the other way.

I stopped collecting folders about 5 years ago, so my comments really just apply to fixed blades.


The #1 deal breaker for me is poor design. I have seen some really nicely made knives that exhibit really poor design. In my opinion, about 75% of handmade fixed blade knives I examine at shows exhibit design issues of some sort.

Tactical "combat style" knives should be non-slip, have a thonghole, and at a minimum all areas not covered by the sheath should be non-reflective. The sheath should be synthetic, sturdy and able to be compatible with webgear. I think a Mad Dog ATAK is a good example of what a tactical fixed blade should look like.

Hunting knives should have a thonghole,IMO and a functional integral or attached guard and exhibit excellent edge geometry. .250" stock is a poor choice for a 3.5" hunting knife . The handle should be shaped or contoured to be non-slip. Hunting knives should be gap-free or they will most certainly rust under the scales regardless of the steel used (unless its non ferrous). I like Jason Knight and Adam Desrosier hunters. I also like hunters with stag. It is pretty, non-slip, and fits the theme.

Reproductions should be reproductions. Making a replica of a 150 year old knife and then adding a mosaic pin or using materials not in use at the time just doesn't work for me.

 

[brightred]

as there are users and non-users, it would be best if the maker offered to make a sheath in case the buyer wants one. for a user a knife without a sheath is almost worthless. in the past i didn't buy a knife without a sheath, no matter how much i liked it. now i ocasionally buy a knife without a sheath as i have plenty of sheaths to choose from. this does only apply to medium size hunting knives, not to bigger blades. a maker who claims to make working horses is somewhat implausible imo if he doesn't offer a sheath with the knife, self-made or by somebody else.

hans

edited to add. the term "working horse" has nothing to do with the price. before i bought a beatiful damascus camp knife from kevin cashen i had been stupid enough to ask him if the knife is intended to be used. needless to say that an excellent sheath, that had been made before i asked, came with the knife...

 

[billf]

I think this is an interesting thread for alot of reason, but here's my take at least

Performance matters to me in a blade I'll USE - this is a minority of my collection, but I do use my Doziers and especially my RJ Martins because they are cutting machines and have excellent ergos.

In "safe queens" , to be honest, I don't see the usefullness of a sheath. I mean, you're not going to store it in one (moisture issues etc), you're not going to carry it so why make lack of a sheath a deal-breaker? If you want, certainly, ask the maker to have one made for the knife and the sheathmakers already named do a terrific job. Of course, if you are going to use your Fisk/Fogg etc then by al means get a sheath.

To me, the "overall look" is most important - most of you have alluded to this as well. Blade/handle ratio, how the materials "blend" and whether or not you can tell who the maker is from a distance. For instance, Bob Lum and Don Fogg make beautiful "eastern" knives, but they are clearly different and instantly identifiable from a distance!

My one "pet peeve", if one can call it that, in embellished Damascus knives is what I call "clashing" parts. My wife will be the first to say that as far as clothing goes I am clueless , but in knives I hate to see a "busy" mosaic blade next to a different "busy" mosaic/mokume/straight Damascus bolster next to an exotically patterned handle, which is wildly carved !! Each of the parts is beautiful, and the knife may be perfectly executed from a machining POV but I just can't look at it!

Only my opinion, of course - and after all, isn't that what matters most in the end when you're buying a knife ?

Bill

 

[Fred.Rowe]

For me personally and for many makers I would suspect; it is the challenge of making an object that verges on perfection.

I am retired, now, but throughout my life I have taken the path that offered the greatest challenges. Knife making is no exception. To do it well takes a huge effort. If it were easy to make an exceptional knife, fulfilling all the likes and avoiding all the dislikes posted here, there would be no collectors.
People collect rarity and perfection, not mediocrity.


Great thread, Fred

 

[Kohai999]

To do it well takes a huge effort. If it were easy to make an exceptional knife, fulfilling all the likes and avoiding all the dislikes posted here, there would be no collectors.

People collect rarity and perfection, not mediocrity.

Very well written, Fred. Thank you.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

 

[RAN]

personally I feel a well executed sheath does complete and enhance the package ...and in some cases a key part of the presentation of a knife..as in the ase with the Winkler Shook collaboration still I dont mind if the sheath is made by a pro sheath maker Like Rowe,Burrows or Nate Christenson(Loveless..Johnson style leather work) but leadtimes and expense become a factor for the maker...anyways it remains a Pet Peeve not a deal breaker

 

[flava]

This thread certainly constitutes an interesting read.
My list is not as long and precise, but it reflects how I decide to make a buy ... or to put it more precisely what I don’t buy:

1. Knives that are obviously made for display only (fragile handle, lousy ergonomics)
2. Knives that don’t cut good
3. Knives that are just the stratum for a different art (scrimshaw, engraving, etc...)
4. Black coated blades
5. Serrated blades
6. Daggers
7. MOP scales

Next you have my pet peeve flaws:

8. Bad welds in damascus (I hate that)
9. Uneven grinds
10. Gaps at the front bolster
11. Bladeplay (folders)
12. Blade not centered (folders)
13. Ricasso hand rubbed 90° from blade (top-to-bottom instead of lengthwise)
14. Sloppy blade finish.

It depends on the price too. I will certainly buy a good user (cuts and ergonomics are good) with uneven grinds if priced right.
I wouldn’t buy the most perfectly executed knife if it can’t function properly as a knife.

 

[Bladeandbarrel]

I like tasteful engraving, especially when done by the maker of the knife, however very few knifemakers are good engravers!

I like mokume in small amounts. I think it is great for dressier pieces or gents knives. In large pieces it is distracting. It clashes terribly with damascus in my opinion. I have seen a few small folders with mokume handle scales that looked great.

I love Phil Baldwin's mokume. My wedding band is polished White Gold and Palldium from his shop. From afar it looks like any old wedding band, up close it is spectactular.

 

[the possum]

Sounds like a neat band, Anthony. I made my wife's wedding ring from Baldwin's silver and gold mokume, in a double twist pattern.

This thread really took off since my last question regarding blued guards. Does the same thing apply to other surface treatments, such as anodizing on titanium/aluminum? How do you feel about blade coatings and or finishes that can only realistically be touched up by the maker?

Here's another question for you collectors regarding damascus patterns. Do you agree that the pattern should flow from hilt to point? In other words, how do you feel about multiple bar patterns where the center bar runs out somewhere on the curved edges rather than following the shape of the blade to the point?

 

[commodorewheeler]

I am late to this thread, but for me, there are only two things that would absolutely cause me to pass on an otherwise perfect knife (assuming it is priced at its appropriate market level):

1. A poor customer service reputation on the part of the maker.
2. A profile that just doesn't appeal to me.

I have found almost invariably that makers who have good customer service will fix flaws in their knife at no charge to the customer. Even if there is a small fee, it is worth it to make an otherwise perfect knife perfect. The only thing that can't be fixed is if you don't like the way the knife looks to begin with.

If I am on the fence about a piece, though, there are a multitude of things that would cause me to pass. Most of these things apply more to folders than fixed blades, and none of them are absolute dealbreakers for me, but here they are:

1. Lower end stainless steels (440C and below)- I don't like constantly having to resharpen a user
2. Beadblasted blades- the look doesn't appeal to me, and the finish shows scratches even more easily than a handrubbed finish
3. Fit and finish issues- gaps between scales and bolsters, etc.
4. Wood handles- I've had too many shrink up on me and have had better luck with even ivory
5. In folders, a weak detent- I like to carry tip up, and tip up with a weak detent is an accident waiting to happen
6. Button locks- for me, they have disengaged rather easily
7. Thin liners- weakens the lock up
8. Filework on liners- I though I love filework on a spine or backspacer, I think filework on liners makes them look thinner and more flimsy, and except when used very sparingly, it doesn't appeal to me visually at all
9. Square handles- if it doesn't feel good in the hand, I'm probably not going to buy it
10. Similar to 9, handles that are too slim or too thick, or that lack any kind of contouring
11. Leopard print fibermascus
12. Large choils in the blade- for me, that disrupts the lines of most designs

 

[DCM]

I've never seen filework on a spine that I liked.. most often, hating it.
On the backspring, recessed looks O.K.

Good thread!
DAvid

 

[Thor I am]

The "I" word is investment, and we got into like a 26 page discussion of "value" after Anthony Lombardo posted post-Blade 2006. If you have not checked it out, it was super-duper.

There have always been people that collect/invest with an eye towards a return, first and foremost.


Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

Thanks for the clarification. I obviously understood this one exactly upside-down .

Oh well. Here I thought I was the one who has it "wrong" by buying what I like instead of thinking of investment / resale value first, now I see that one shouldn't really think about investment / resale value. Confusion once again reigns supreme.

Thank goodness, neither meaning of "I" has any impact on my decision making process to purchase my next knife.

 

[Geode]

You all have covered every technical aspect I could list, and then some. However, one of the deal killers for me is a knife with no character, or soul, for lack of better words. I have seen some beautifully executed knives, but they just left me feeling nothing special about them. I have seen some that have flaws, but in spite of the flaws, they grabbed me.

 

[DaveH]

I may not have credentials to post on this topic, the only custom I have at the moment is a Mayo folder. Maybe someday I'll get a Hinderer. Also I only look at folders as I have no rational use for a fixed blade.

Most of mine have already been covered but I'll add:

Too much damascus, either the blade or the handle but not blade, handles, guard, inlay all at once.

And forgive me, but a folder maker needs to at least meet the minimum requirements of fit, finish and design set by a sebenza, or they shouldn't bother. First time at blade show last year and I was quite surprised by the number of folders that, IMO, didn't come close, but whose price was higher.

 

[Bladeandbarrel]

And forgive me, but a folder maker needs to at least meet the minimum requirements of fit, finish and design set by a sebenza, or they shouldn't bother. First time at blade show last year and I was quite surprised by the number of folders that, IMO, didn't come close, but whose price was higher.

This is a great, great point.

90+% of tactical folder makers do not meet this standard, IMO.