GEC 3 1/2" Dogleg Jack

[Morrow]

If the run-up was large enough to be flush with the backsprings when open; think of how high and obtrusive it would be when closed....

Mike,

Are you saying the blade and spring are not flush when open by design?

 

[VCM3]

On Pg. 18,post # 351,in the sticky thread "Old Knives",there is a post by Mike Robuck,with a dog leg that's got a clip bld.
This Co. (GEC) came all this way & built this knife & pattern,I just wish they would've put the secondary blade on the mark side & nail pulls on the same side.
It's not bad what they built,but it would've been outstanding,if done as the Empire knife.:thumbup:
-Vince

 

[knifeswapper]

Mike,
Are you saying the blade and spring are not flush when open by design?

Yes. They don't make each one from scratch then start the next. They cut out every piece in its own time to pre-determined specs then assemble the knives.

Just look at the knife in your hand and think about it for a minute. If the run-up (back of tang) was left large enough to come flush when open; it would also be same height higher when closed. Then there would be moaning about this sharp edge riding too high.

Other solutions would be to trim the backspring or the tang radius; both of which would weaken the knife.

You have a knife design with a small end carrying a large blade. They didn't always make knives so that the collector could see all flush interconnects when opened/closed. Some used to (and still do) make knives as heavy duty functional tools; that just happen to be collected for that reason. Case didn't make collectors 100 years ago, they made users.

Even at that I could pull 10 other knives from other makers out in 5 minutes that have the same build that not a word has ever been said about them here.

GEC's are already at the top end of what many people will pay, I would hate to see the price tag if we demanded that every knife be perfect in every possible functional and aesthetical aspect. (Guess that is why many people end up transitioning from factory to custom knives).

Every customer has the right to be satisfied; I just think sometimes we end up going into a fast food place and buying a small drink then being unhappy because it doesn't have as much cola as the large.

I won't even speak to the always-present comments about the quality of import knives. I have a drawer full of other GEC patterns that have smooth interconnects; because that is the way the pattern was designed. I also have a drawer full of other brand knives that have the same interconnect as this pattern; because that is the way the patterns were designed.

It will cost a lot of money to send that baby back until you get one of the same that has a smooth interconnect

 

[Arathol]

Yes. They don't make each one from scratch then start the next. They cut out every piece in its own time to pre-determined specs then assemble the knives

LOL
If the Chinese can manage it on a $5 knife I would expect that GEC could do it on a knife that costs far more. Its no more than properly designing the pivot geometry. It doesn't matter if the blades are made one at a time or stamped out by the millions. If the geometry is right the blade will be right. 70 years ago Remngton was banging out more knives in one day than GEC made all last year, and if any one of them looked as bad as this it would have been considered a serious flaw. Surely with todays technology its possible to do the same with knives made a handfull at a time.

I have a drawer full of other GEC patterns that have smooth interconnects; because that is the way the pattern was designed.

Exactlly the point. If it was designed right from the start it would be right in production.

 

[Blues]

Interesting debate, let's please keep it respectful and on topic so we can all learn from it. (I'm not implying it hasn't been respectful, just being a bit preemptive is all.)

I noticed that Jason's knife was under-bladed right away. I've seen this trait in many new as well as vintage knives and even some custom knives. For example, a Case XX era copperhead that I posted a couple of years back in BRL's forum as well as some custom and production knives in my own collection.

While I can't say I'm a fan of an under-bladed knife, when all factors are taken into consideration it may not be a deal breaker unless it rises beyond a certain threshold.

 

[knifeswapper]

LOL
If the Chinese can manage it on a $5 knife I would expect that GEC could do it on a knife that costs far more. Its no more than properly designing the pivot geometry. It doesn't matter if the blades are made one at a time or stamped out by the millions. If the geometry is right the blade will be right. 70 years ago Remngton was banging out more knives in one day than GEC made all last year, and if any one of them looked as bad as this it would have been considered a serious flaw. Surely with todays technology its possible to do the same with knives made a handfull at a time.



Exactlly the point. If it was designed right from the start it would be right in production.

Yes, it is a terribly flawed design if that helps. I'm holding a Boker Congress and a Case Dogleg Trapper that are terribly flawed as well. Almost all Toenails are terribly flawed, usually on the pen. As I mentioned before, I can find makers all over the world that have flawed designs and some patterns that every maker has produced in a flawed format.

Pause (10 minute pause to grab a few knives)

OK, several knives that have been around for up to 40 years and not had to answer these types of threads....

All designed flaws that collectors love.... The worst one of the bunch; a Case red bone 1971 6347 pattern. Possibly the most collected and used pattern in history (probably second to the trapper).

 

[knifeswapper]

For example, a Case XX era copperhead that I posted a couple of years back in BRL's forum

See, now a copperhead really has little excuse; because you have the "copperhead" to cover the exposed run-up in closed mode so you can build it up as much as required to meet the backspring in opened mode.

 

[Modoc ED]

Hmmmmm. I've noticed that on this knife discussed in this thread and on the Great Eastern Jack that there is no 4th pin. Unusual for a GEC knife except for some of the slim Whittler knives and some of the slim Congress knives.

Both the Great Eastern Jack and this Dogleg Jack have plenty of room for a 4th pin. I'm wondering if GEC isn't eliminating the 4th pin on these knives as a time saving/cost cutting measure?

Every one of my GEC knives (considerable) have 4 pins or 3 pins and a lanyard tube (in the case of the lockbacks). Even the small, slimmish, #25 Jacks have 4 pins.

Not being critical of the omission of a 4th pin on these latest releases by GEC -- just curious.

 

[Blues]

Mike, those are good examples you posted and a good point regarding the bolster of the copperhead.

Personally, I don't think GEC is being singled out as I have seen discussion of this very topic in BRL's forum as well as here in the Traditional Forum.

However, due to the overwhelming popularity of this brand over the past year or two I think it's only natural that some of the warts are going to be discussed alongside all of the praise.

If there were a scale to weigh the pros vs. the cons posted within the forum the pros would be seen to be much more prevalent.

I look forward to adding some GEC models to my personal collection but (in general) I've been holding out for more svelte patterns or ones that at least are a bit less overbuilt to my eye.

I do have the toothpick and it's a fine knife. I am a big fan of the dogleg frame so I look forward to what they do with this pattern. I also like the equal end stock and cattle knives. So, we shall see.

My point in all this is that I don't think you have to over defend the brand. They are doing fine by what I see here and I think I have a pretty accurate finger on the pulse.

 

[ken erickson]

This is a very interesting exchange, with much to be learned when it comes to under-bladed construction. When I build a knife, new pattern, most times I will draw, design the tang or tangs without the use of an existing pattern. Even when I make a new pattern many times I end up changing things from the well known factory version for this exact reason. I personally do not like my knives to be under-bladed. There are many factors involved, backspring profile, tang dimensions(obviously) and hole placement in frame that determines if a blade will be under-bladed or not. It can be a real balancing act to get all these factors to fall into place. I would speculate that perhaps the factories use the same blade for different patterns, resulting in a under-bladed knife. I would imagine one of the most expensive components to make a mass produced knife is the stamping dies. If a company can make use of one set of dies to produce different patterns, that's money in the bank. With all due respect to GEC and to Knifeswapper I see a few patterns pictured that could have smooth transitions from spring to blade without weakening the knife or causing an overly high run-up.

Ken

 

[knifeswapper]

From $5 knives to $500 knives, there are those which have smooth transitions by design; and those which paid no attention to this particular aesthetic. My point is simply that it is not a defect or design flaw on my Case Tested knives and it is not a defect or design flaw on this knife.

Who wouldn't like to look at the backspring of an opened knife and not even be able to see the interconnect? Perfect snap with no side/side movement? Fine blade swedges and blades with a finish like looking into a mirror? That didn't cost so much you could just afford one a year? That's what makes the heart skip a beat!

If everyone was looking for exactly the same characteristics and had the same opinions; our makers would only be producing one knife.

 

[Rick]

After looking at the old Case, Remington and NYKC, etc. knives in my collection, I've noticed a basic trend: the square-bolstered knives all tend to be more or less flush, while those with a round bolster are often slightly under-bladed (though none as extreme as the new Dogleg), so I think we can cut GEC a bit of slack here, since the bolster on the knife is question is as round as they come. On the other hand, my square-bolstered GECs aren't exactly flush either.

That said, IMO, the Dogleg takes a fairly solid hit in the aesthetics department due to the under-blade transition, though whether that will preclude the pattern for me remains to be seen. I think the transition step could have been minimized by half with a little more time on the drawing board, but I have no doubt that the knife will be a solid performer.

 

[OldSarSwmr]

Mine came in today and overall I'm pretty happy with them.

 

[jazub]

great looking pair of knives there, OldSarSwmr :thumbup:
i think this pattern looks fantastic as-is. if i had some knife funds at the moment, i'd definitely go for one of those in ebony. i just love the knives that this company produces :thumbup:

 

[Modoc ED]

I'd still like to know where the 4th pin is. Looks like I'll have to call GEC one day next week to find out. The 4th pin is a feature that has drawn me to the various GEC knives. If it goes the way of the do-do bird (disappears), I won't buy anymore GECs.

 

[mckgreg]

It could definetly use one. Maybe it's glued ? I do like the pattern tho and would like to see where they go with it from here. We seem to have a resident peddler, maybe he can tell us.
Greg

 

[black mamba]

I totally agree with Vince that the pulls should both be on the mark side. For me this is a deal breaker.
I would be waiting for the Northfield version of this dogleg with my tongue hanging out if it was made this way.

The under-bladed construction to me is simply aesthetic, not functional as the pulls are, therefore not a deal breaker.
I have several of their toothpicks (a great pattern!) and they are all under-bladed somewhat, but it doesn't bother me in the least.

Must be why there are so many different patterns of slippies-- everyone has their likes and dislikes.

 

[robbobus]

The pulls on different sides is somewhat different, I've recently picked up about 4 different knives like this and it took a little getting used to. The nice part is that each blade is easier to pluck as there is only one nick per side. just my .02

 

[TLARbb]

I was watching this from the sidelines. I'm not swooning over this particular model, but the underblade situation is not the issue for me; I just don't really care for the knife pattern as offered here by GEC. I don't see me buying one at this point. Now that fabulous model 48 in single blade, yessirree.

Ed

 

[thawk]

This is a slimmer pattern than most of knife patterns in the GEC stable, which are generally the "husky jeans" of pocket knives. Hence the need for a 4th pin? The GEC toothpicks, slimmmer styled trappers, and melon whittlers all have three pin construction too. I guess the designers felt this one falls into that class.

Ulster made a lot of knives in this pattern/size, in Ebony, Pearl, and Bone back in the day. They used three pins.

I'll bet the thicker handled knife patterns GEC produces will retain the same design. It seems to be working very well for them.

I'd still like to know where the 4th pin is. Looks like I'll have to call GEC one day next week to find out. The 4th pin is a feature that has drawn me to the various GEC knives. If it goes the way of the do-do bird (disappears), I won't buy anymore GECs.