t1mpani
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
- Messages
- 5,527
:jerkit:good post
I can't even come close to understanding the reason for your attitude or your desire to resurrect this old thread in order to display it. Were you bothered by an owner of this brand of knives offering an opinion of them, the opinion he posted or perhaps the short history of the knives? I've read his post about twenty times now and am not finding the slightest thing for an adult to take issue with.
Anyway, since it has been resurrected, my own experience with EK knives has been mixed, but positive of late. The Effingham era blades seemed to be produced as lower-grade knives when compared to the Blackjack Randall-copies the same outfit was simultaneously producing. Many EKs of that period had wildly uneven grinds, guards that didn't fit particularly well, and handles that were seemingly left unfinished. I've seen other examples from that same period that were really very nice knives, but it seems to have been hit and miss. Now, of course, John Ek's original knives were DEFINITELY not beautiful knives and weren't trying to be, so my comments about the Effingham products is not comparative, just observational.
Now, the current maker in Virginia is turning out very nicely finished versions of the Ek patterns---probably the nicest to date. While the steel they use is difficult to find any information on, and stainless too (which I typically don't care for in a medium/large fixed blade knife) I do have to admit that my #5 bowies from them (yes, was so happy with the first that I bought more) are tough, prone neither to blunting or chipping even under impact, while at the same time holding their edge well in abrasive cutting tasks. Fit and finish is very good, grinds are clean and even, and the overall package is just a simple design, extremely well executed. I will say that those with large hands may end up having to make new scales if they plan on using these as utility knives, as the factory handle profile is definitely fighter-oriented and about as wide as it is thick.
Last edited: