Hen and Rooster

Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Messages
9,375
For quite a few years now I have read A.G. Russell’s descriptions Hen and Rooster knives made prior to a change of company ownership in 1980. So I finally bought one, a small two blade congress in ivory rucarta. Lo and behold, AG was right. I have never seen a production knife this sweet. OK, maybe CRK or William Henry or something like that but you guys know what I mean. Half stops, a bit of a swedge, centered, blades don't touch each other or liners when closed, perfectly fitted scales, the whole nine yards. Twenty year old Hen and Rooster. Go figure. Anyone else have any experience with these?
 
Hi Thomason. I don't have a Hen and Rooster brand knife yet. Where did you get yours from?
 
A little pricey? Geez, those knives are like buying a bar of gold. No way those knives are worth what's being charged. Maybe half what they are charging.
 
I own a few and they might just be the finest factory multiblades produced in the last 40 years or so. Glad I picked them up a lot earlier on. :D.
 
Queen is probably making the finest mass produced slip joint line at the present time. There is still lot of room for improvement. The only problem is, if these improvements are made the prices will rise drastically.
WH and CRK already have these refinements in place. The latest high tech materials and the workmanship and QC to back it up. Slip joints would be a very nice addition to their lines.
The price being charged for the pre-1980 Hen & Roosters is, IMO, very high for the materials being offered. We need someone to give us that kind of quality with more up to date materials. I can't justify that kind of money for a knife that will rust in my pocket.

Paul
 
Thomason: "...A little pricey but money spent on quality knives is what it's all about, right?" I agree. Other hobbies can be just as expensive. I know people who have dropped big, big bucks in Vegas yet are unwilling to pay more than $30 for a knife. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
 
PWork,I would be interested in learning about the kinds of improvements that you would want in Queen knives.

One "improvement" that Queen offered at one time was ATS-34 blade steel. The dropping of ATS-34 was unfortunate, no doubt about it, but it is somewhat understandable given their rather antiquated blade blanking facility. I guess that the improved steel was inflicting undesirable wear on the machinery. However, their relatively new D-2 blade steel cuts at least as well as ATS-34 and it is not all that more prone to rust than it's relatively stain-prone predecessor. About the only real disadvantage of D-2 over the "real" stainless steels that Queen has used is that it does not polish up as "pretty". (I could wish, though, that the Schatt & Morgan line of Queen knives would be made with a blade steel that is "classier" than 420HS. It just seems to me that these fine knives deserve blade steel that would make them superior "users" as well as superior "lookers".)

In terms of "high tech" when it comes to slipjoints, call me a Luddite, if you like, but I am not convinced that "high tech" offers all that many advantages. "Quality" in slipjoints ultimately results from an artistic interaction beween materials and human hands and eyes. To try to make technology a substitute for human workmanship can result in products like today's Smith & Wesson handguns; less expensive to make, perhaps a bit more serviceable (though that claim can be argued, as a general rule), but more "refined" and of higher quality? Maybe not!

You mentioned QC. I admit that Queen QC may have been spotty for a while, a few years ago. I understand that this situation has turned around with a new management team.
 
Queens are solid. Fit is excellent. Finish, well that's another story. Just look inside and around the tang. Granted, Queen has come a very long way since the '80s.
As far as "high tech" materials go, it would be nice to see stainless used for more than just blades. Titanium could be used for bolsters and liners but bushings would most likely need to be to keep the blade from galding with the liners. It could be done, but it wouldn't be cheap.
I'm not knocking Queen. I just picked up a #41 Copperhead with carved bone stag scales. I love it. Queen is putting forth a solid effort at improving. I just hope it doesn't go stagnant.

Paul
 
Paul,

I can't claim to have a crystal ball or any "inside info" on Queen but, that said, I don't think that we can expect a lot of "stagnation" from Queen any time soon. In fact, based on current and promised new Queen and Schatt & Morgan offerings, it may be fair to say that we may be seeing the beginnings of a Renaissance of this little bitty knife factory in the hills of Western Pennsylvania. Even QC is better though, as you say, some of the "little things" could improve even more. I expect that the new president of Queen, Bob Breton, and his boss at Ontario and Servotronics, Nick Trbovich, Jr., are on the case. Bob is a "knife guy" who has a long history in the production end of the business and is has been encouraging to see how quickly Nick has gotten with the knife program, too. This situation stands in marked contrast to just a few years ago, when Ontario and Queen were being run by a top management whose knowledge of, and commitment to, the making of high quality knives was, to be charitable, a bit "uneven".

I guess that I am not as taken with the prospect of "technology" in slipjoints as you seem to be. However, there may well be room for some innovations in materials and technology that might offer some advantages in what might otherwise be considered a "mature technology".

Titanium frames would be nice ( and light) but, as you indicate, they also may pose technological and cost problems. Queen now makes their their inexpensive Barlows with aluminum frames. (What kind of aluminum, I don't know.) If one goes along with Dick's assessment in his book on folding knives, it may be that aircraft grade aluminum might offer about the same strength and other advantages as titanium but at less cost and with fewer technological hassles. (This is just a guess. While I admit to being a bit of a "steel snob" I am by no means a materials expert.) That said, it might be very nice to be able to carry some of the bigger slipjoint patterns without having to wear both suspenders and a belt. I would love to see their new "sleeveboard" sunfish offered with a strong but light weight frame in a wood or Delrin handled working grade knife. What a neat and practical knife that would be!

Your thoughts on bushings got me to thinking, too. Ontario/Queen has title to the Robeson name, too. Before Robeson went out of business, its president, who I believe was Emerson Case, came out with some really innovative ideas. One, "Frozen Heat", was cryoquenching long before it has since become trendy. Another, "Mastercraft", used self-lubricating brass strips on the springs under the tangs to help to make these knives easy to open. (A real advantage on heavily sprung big slipjoint patterns that seem to require two men and a boy to open them!) A third, "Pocket-eze", stressed enclosed bolsters on patterns other than the usual pen knives to reduce pocket wear. (The last name was reintroduced, a few years ago, but on knives that were to be similar to Case's "pocket worn" knives. It seems that the person in charge of the operation had not done his homework. Not uncommon, then. Much less common, now, it seems.) So it seems that Queen can still be pretty creative and still produce knives that are, by all accounts, "traditional", as well.
 
Yep, the folks in Titusville do a heckuva job considering they are using antiquated equipment, some that dates back to 1893. There is new equipment used, of course,grinders, shield cutters, but a lot of it is OLD.
 
John,

I hope things keep progressing at Queen. Who knows, maybe it will force some other outfits to put more effort into their "traditional" lines. The slip joint market has been lacking in quality for far too long. It's good to see at least one coming back.

Paul
 
Back
Top