GEC Boys Knife Question

[Jack Black]

That's a very disappointing response from GEC.

 

[jackknife]

I think it's more than disappointing. The knife is made that way????

I admit I'm an old fart, and been around a while, but I've never seen that kind of assembly by any knife manufacturer. And what happens after some years of use, when the blade point gets a little high, and it's time for a swipe or two on the kick to lower the blade? You get a knife that you can't open, that's what.

No, if GEC wants to make this pattern of knife, all nail nicks need to be clear and readily accessible to the user. Anything else is just poor design. Saying the knife is made that way is like denying that there's an "oops" in the manufacture and not manning up and doing the right thing. And the right thing is to recall the knives, and reissue with taller kicks on the main blade or an easy open notch on the pen blade.

My old man told me that there's right and wrong, and by turning your back on doing what's right, you lower yourself. If GEC's answer is "it's made that way", then GEC just lowered themselves in my view.

Carl.

 

[Jack Black]

I fully agree Carl.

Jack

 

[jkulysses]

Did you happen to send them a picture in your email so they could actually see your knife and how bad it is?

 

[midnight flyer]

Wow. Really? It's made that way?

Personally, I think GEC is testing their fan base to see just how much they will take. They turn out a fine product most of the time. But when they don't, their core group of fans diligently defend them and encourage the holder of a poor specimen to "send it in, GEC will take care of it. They have excellent customer service!"

This is a profoundly obvious manufacturing flaw. I think years of accepting and explaining away GEC flaws have led to this. I am silent when I read "well, you can file the kick down on one blade, jack the other blade up with a splinter, cut into the frame/liner/scales assembly to help get this right. After that, you can push down the blade that covers the nail nick and you should be able to get to the main blade more easily." Seriously? These aren't kit knives, right?

It takes an arrogant ego the size of mountain to look at a completely flawed knife design and tell someone that it was designed that way. I know a lot here are happy with "known defects" and even accept them as part of a certain model's charm. But to sell a knife that doesn't operate as a knife out of the box goes far beyond nail breaking pulls, gritty pulls, poor fit, binding blades, etc.

To me, I can't find one single excuse to let that go. As a business owner, I do all my own quality control. There are times that all of us in business have to step back, swallow hard, apologize to the client and do what it takes to make a situation right. If I were GEC, I would be horrified to think that the knife in question is now posted up on the internet. I have too much professional pride in what I do.

Time to man up, GEC.

Robert

 

[jone]

Did you happen to send them a picture in your email so they could actually see your knife and how bad it is?

No, unfortunately I did not. Hindsight - probably should have.

 

[jackknife]

No, unfortunately I did not. Hindsight - probably should have.

I'd email them and tell them to look in on this thread. It doesn't make them look too good to someone maybe considering buying one of their knives. Makes Case look better!

 

[jkulysses]

I just wonder if they would have the same reply if Christine was actually looking at a picture of that knife?

 

[pertinux]

Jone,

Most of all, I'm sorry you're disappointed with your new knife. That's never a good feeling!

As for "it was manufactured that way," barring a defect-- such as with Jack's knife, which shouldn't have made it out the door, and possibly with yours as well-- it was.

Meaning, the spear main Boys Knives shared tooling with the first run of TC barlows which featured the low, mostly-hidden long pulls on the spear mains, with the front-sitting pen blades both swedged at their backside and with some give to allow better access to that long pull. The design decision(s) clearly favored a more streamlined closed-blade profile (and the deliberate use of a long pull vs. nick) as opposed to better access of the main blade.

Right away (with that first barlow, and before the Boys Knife), I encountered a "learning curve" in accessing the main blade, a different and non-intuitive approach (more straight down than from the side). I quickly got used to it, but it's definitely a challenge. I realized that all over again recently when, after not carrying either knife for a time, I struggled to open the main blade on the Boys Knife and had to re-learn that idiosyncratic approach....

Given how difficult it can be to readily access a "perfect" spear main with this design, I can well imagine how much worse it would be if the main is lower or the pen higher, even before arriving at the extreme displayed in Jack's.

So: yes, this is "how they are made." Or rather, how they were made. As noted, the second run (of the barlows, at least-- are there any pen-behind Boys Knives?) placed the pen blade behind the spear main, which I take as evidence of an understanding that it was a non-optimal design decision from the get-go, prone to worse problems with manufacturing variations, and that a course correction was warranted.

[But, that's just my guess. Some people prefer secondaries on the back side regardless (I'm one of them).]

I hope this is resolved to your satisfaction.

~ P.

 

[Thomason]

Personally, I think GEC is testing their fan base to see just how much they will take.

I doubt if that is the case.

 

[jone]

Jone,

Most of all, I'm sorry you're disappointed with your new knife. That's never a good feeling!

As for "it was manufactured that way," barring a defect-- such as with Jack's knife, which shouldn't have made it out the door, and possibly with yours as well-- it was.

Meaning, the spear main Boys Knives shared tooling with the first run of TC barlows which featured the low, mostly-hidden long pulls on the spear mains, with the front-sitting pen blades both swedged at their backside and with some give to allow better access to that long pull. The design decision(s) clearly favored a more streamlined closed-blade profile (and the deliberate use of a long pull vs. nick) as opposed to better access of the main blade.

Right away (with that first barlow, and before the Boys Knife), I encountered a "learning curve" in accessing the main blade, a different and non-intuitive approach (more straight down than from the side). I quickly got used to it, but it's definitely a challenge. I realized that all over again recently when, after not carrying either knife for a time, I struggled to open the main blade on the Boys Knife and had to re-learn that idiosyncratic approach....

Given how difficult it can be to readily access a "perfect" spear main with this design, I can well imagine how much worse it would be if the main is lower or the pen higher, even before arriving at the extreme displayed in Jack's.

So: yes, this is "how they are made." Or rather, how they were made. As noted, the second run (of the barlows, at least-- are there any pen-behind Boys Knives?) placed the pen blade behind the spear main, which I take as evidence of an understanding that it was a non-optimal design decision from the get-go, prone to worse problems with manufacturing variations, and that a course correction was warranted.

[But, that's just my guess. Some people prefer secondaries on the back side regardless (I'm one of them).]

I hope this is resolved to your satisfaction.

~ P.

Thanks for the information and pictures. Before I order another knife I will certainly do more research. Whether it is considered defective or just "made that way", it is still not what I expected. And next time I will be more careful before making a purchase.
Thanks again.

 

[Double Ott]

Jone,

Most of all, I'm sorry you're disappointed with your new knife. That's never a good feeling!

As for "it was manufactured that way," barring a defect-- such as with Jack's knife, which shouldn't have made it out the door, and possibly with yours as well-- it was.

Meaning, the spear main Boys Knives shared tooling with the first run of TC barlows which featured the low, mostly-hidden long pulls on the spear mains, with the front-sitting pen blades both swedged at their backside and with some give to allow better access to that long pull. The design decision(s) clearly favored a more streamlined closed-blade profile (and the deliberate use of a long pull vs. nick) as opposed to better access of the main blade.

Right away (with that first barlow, and before the Boys Knife), I encountered a "learning curve" in accessing the main blade, a different and non-intuitive approach (more straight down than from the side). I quickly got used to it, but it's definitely a challenge. I realized that all over again recently when, after not carrying either knife for a time, I struggled to open the main blade on the Boys Knife and had to re-learn that idiosyncratic approach....

Given how difficult it can be to readily access a "perfect" spear main with this design, I can well imagine how much worse it would be if the main is lower or the pen higher, even before arriving at the extreme displayed in Jack's.

So: yes, this is "how they are made." Or rather, how they were made. As noted, the second run (of the barlows, at least-- are there any pen-behind Boys Knives?) placed the pen blade behind the spear main, which I take as evidence of an understanding that it was a non-optimal design decision from the get-go, prone to worse problems with manufacturing variations, and that a course correction was warranted.

[But, that's just my guess. Some people prefer secondaries on the back side regardless (I'm one of them).]

I hope this is resolved to your satisfaction.

~ P.

At least the pulls on the main blade on these is visible. Not so on the knife in question here. I'm sorry to here about your defense of this flawed design. Most certainly not the manner to treat a customer who has a legitimate concern. Using.... We made many others that were almost as bad as the one you got just doesn't cut it for me.

I'll sure be lots more careful before I commit to a dealer that I wish to put a knife on hold for me before they are made.

Looks like it's time for GEC to man up.

Tom

 

[pertinux]

At least the pulls on the main blade on these is visible. Not so on the knife in question here.

I don't believe we've seen the knife Jone received? But if it were anything like Jack's, it's clearly a manufacturing defect. Even if not like Jack's, the design (as manufactured) is not to Jone's liking, for understandable reasons.

I'm sorry to here about your defense of this flawed design. Most certainly not the manner to treat a customer who has a legitimate concern.

Oh, I didn't defend it, I just sought to explain. I can make mine work, and appreciate its lines, but for actual use I far prefer the pen-behind barlow I got from the second run.

("Customer"? )

~ P.

 

[jon_slider]

If you buy a knife and you dont like it, just return it. I agree there are reasons to be disappointed if you cant access the main.

I agree it is a design "feature" , of the 2 bladed spear 15's with pen in front. Pen behind is a better design for my taste.

Gec could fix that knife if they had a pile side pen blade blade available, or if they had a Spear blade with a taller kick available, but they might not. Sometimes its just not practical to fix a knife and a return is the easiest option. My choice would be for GEC to cut an EO notch.

IMO, the 2 bladed Spear main begs for an EO notch. I love how close the 15 spear nests into the pocket.

Here is a spear with pen in front that works, it IS possible to build one with good access to the long pull, GEC just did not. FWIW, this Remington pen does NOT squish down the way the pen on the 15's does. The squishy pen bothers me every time I use the main on my 2 blade Sheepfoot Charlow. But Im a single blade lover usually.

 

[knarfeng]

Originally Posted by pertinux

I'm sorry to here about your defense of this flawed design.

Tom

That comment was out of line.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

In Traditional, the rule is to "Post Friendly". Among other things, that means we do not attack other people for voicing what we perceive as an opinion which disagrees with our own.

Next time say, "I disagree."

 

[timberweasel]

My Case/Bose Coffin Jack is very similar to my GEC #15 in many respects, but they got the long pull closer to the spine which makes it a breeze to open. GEC ought to bring theirs up a little and I think it would be just fine...

-Brett

 

[rma100]

I was standing right next Pertinux when Bill Howard explained that the knife WAS made that way and he explained why. I agree 100% per cent with her account of the matter.
I also recall all the chatter from the Forum Regulars requesting wanting this Pattern with a "Pen in Front" Design.
"An educated consumer is our best customer."

 

[Jack Black]

Here is a spear with pen in front that works, it IS possible to build one with good access to the long pull, GEC just did not.

For me, this is the traditional form, which goes back as long as two-bladed Jacks have been around. Thousands and thousands of such knives have been produced by hundreds of cutlers. I doubt the style would have become popular if the main blade had been a struggle to open. Much as I like the Boy's Knife pattern, the problems with the inaccesibility of the pull on the main blade is clearly an issue. I returned my original knife to the UK dealer I obtained it from, and Dan very kindly gifted me a working replacement. But when the UK dealer contacted GEC, the suggestion given was filing the kick, which wouldn't have worked and would have voided the warranty presumably. In the case of my knife, I don't think it should have left the factory in the first place, and I think GEC's response to Joan's complaint is lacking in both foresight and, to some extent, credibility. I would have expected better from them.

 

[Will Power]

Well, all this has caused me to root away in the knife barn to find same side nail nick knives for reference. A few turned up:

GEC 25 Stag, 92 Eureka bone, Queen Cutlery No.2 Jack, Böker Copperhead, Weidmannsheil large locking Copperhead, Queen Equal End Harness Jack, CASE Wharncliffe Mini Trapper, RR Barlow. Some have Longpull/crescent, others crescent and one Matchstrike. None of these knives have obscured nicks on the master, none are difficult to open/access. Conclusion, GEC messed up this version of the Boy's Knife. What's the USE of a knife you have to modify, pad it out with bits & pieces, employ some special handling technique before you can even open it? Then have to put the extent of the warranty to the test? A folding knife means a knife you can open as well, not a perma-fold Not viable, and a production error not design fault as they've managed other side by side patterns. Let's hope the forthcoming Forum Knife is not stricken in this way.....

I'm generally a big fan of their knives, but, GEC should be thinking very carefully and critically at this stage.

 

[panzertroop]

I don't have that issue with mine. Half the nick is exposed and can be opened easily.