Regarding the demise of Schrade (I bought two last night before they disappeared forever) and some of the comments appearing about them essentially not keeping up with the times in new designs, I'm curious.
How far can you go in constantly producing new knife/blade designs that are:
Really new
Really needed
Really an improvement
Really beneficial
Really worth buying over somebody else's new design
Not just new for the sake of saying "We got something new!"
The search for a stronger folder lock I can see, although I think there's only going to be a very limited number of real improvements there. We have several basic blade styles and configurations (clip point, drop point, etc.) that each work well for specific tasks, and I doubt we're going to see any real improvement there.
The search for better steels is justifiable, but slow.
I don't go to the blade shows, but I do go to the SHOT Show, where I see literally thousands of knives from several importers and makers. What I mostly see coming out now is a lot of cheap imported junk (and I do mean a LOT!), and what I'd characterize as "gimmick" knives whose existence seems to me to be solely based on trying to catch the eye of potential buyers who really don't know what they're doing or what really works well in looking for a new knife.
My own taste in knives is admittedly very conservative, and I like traditional styles. Basically, I can find a knife that will do most of what I need a blade for in any of the designs that were available 20 years ago. I do like the newer steels, and I'm getting pretty fond of this Desert Rat, which is a newer product, but it's still a pretty basic no-frills knife, just using better materials rather than a flashy new profile.
I view the latest "tactical knife" with total disinterest. I'm no longer in the business of having to potentially use a blade on people at work, and when I was I carried five knives every day on duty- a Cold Steel push dagger, a Cold Steel Culloden boot knife, an old switchblade in the shirt pocket, a Bowen belt buckle knife, and a Swiss Army knife in the pants pocket. With the exception of the SWAK, the knives were carried as last-ditch tools, and I felt very comfortable with them in that role despite the fact that none was labeled "tactical" anything.
Most real beneficial innovation seems to come from some of the smaller companies like Swamp Rat, Busse and so on. Once a company gets itself up & running, like Spyderco for example, with something unique and workable, how far can that company go with a proprietary line without losing the lineage, how far should you expect them to go, and is it wrong to just leave them alone in producing a core line of products that may show an occasional real improvement in materials or lockwork? Or, is it right to expect that company to keep on cranking out new versions that really don't offer anything but "new"? NOT saying Spyderco does this, just using them as an example of a readily identifiable blade style.
Should Schrade have gone belly up for producing what may have been essentially the same core line of knives for decades without continually coming out with new stuff? If that core line was a quality line, and a respected line?
Personally, I can't carry a standard carbon steel pocket knife. The last one I tried was a nice little Schrade about 22 years ago. It rusted in my pocket, which I don't blame on the knife. But, if I could carry a carbon steel stockman style traditional pocket knife, it would be Schrade first and probably Case second. If I wanted that type of knife to carry & use, that's where I'd go. Other people who can carry one have felt the same way for 100 years. A dedicated core market is usually what keeps a company in business to experiment a little with an occasional new design. But, my feeling is that the new design should offer a real improvement in at least some area beyond just looking different, radical, or flashy.
I'm interested in hearing other thoughts. How far do you think the knife industry can go with new variations of older designs & styles, and is it reasonable to expect it to be constantly producing something new, whether it's needed or not?
I realize there are many individual preferences for exotic handle materials and collectors & so on, but these are not the major share of the knife industry's market, and that's not what I'm talking about. For actual consumers (users), what do you think?
Denis
How far can you go in constantly producing new knife/blade designs that are:
Really new
Really needed
Really an improvement
Really beneficial
Really worth buying over somebody else's new design
Not just new for the sake of saying "We got something new!"
The search for a stronger folder lock I can see, although I think there's only going to be a very limited number of real improvements there. We have several basic blade styles and configurations (clip point, drop point, etc.) that each work well for specific tasks, and I doubt we're going to see any real improvement there.
The search for better steels is justifiable, but slow.
I don't go to the blade shows, but I do go to the SHOT Show, where I see literally thousands of knives from several importers and makers. What I mostly see coming out now is a lot of cheap imported junk (and I do mean a LOT!), and what I'd characterize as "gimmick" knives whose existence seems to me to be solely based on trying to catch the eye of potential buyers who really don't know what they're doing or what really works well in looking for a new knife.
My own taste in knives is admittedly very conservative, and I like traditional styles. Basically, I can find a knife that will do most of what I need a blade for in any of the designs that were available 20 years ago. I do like the newer steels, and I'm getting pretty fond of this Desert Rat, which is a newer product, but it's still a pretty basic no-frills knife, just using better materials rather than a flashy new profile.
I view the latest "tactical knife" with total disinterest. I'm no longer in the business of having to potentially use a blade on people at work, and when I was I carried five knives every day on duty- a Cold Steel push dagger, a Cold Steel Culloden boot knife, an old switchblade in the shirt pocket, a Bowen belt buckle knife, and a Swiss Army knife in the pants pocket. With the exception of the SWAK, the knives were carried as last-ditch tools, and I felt very comfortable with them in that role despite the fact that none was labeled "tactical" anything.
Most real beneficial innovation seems to come from some of the smaller companies like Swamp Rat, Busse and so on. Once a company gets itself up & running, like Spyderco for example, with something unique and workable, how far can that company go with a proprietary line without losing the lineage, how far should you expect them to go, and is it wrong to just leave them alone in producing a core line of products that may show an occasional real improvement in materials or lockwork? Or, is it right to expect that company to keep on cranking out new versions that really don't offer anything but "new"? NOT saying Spyderco does this, just using them as an example of a readily identifiable blade style.
Should Schrade have gone belly up for producing what may have been essentially the same core line of knives for decades without continually coming out with new stuff? If that core line was a quality line, and a respected line?
Personally, I can't carry a standard carbon steel pocket knife. The last one I tried was a nice little Schrade about 22 years ago. It rusted in my pocket, which I don't blame on the knife. But, if I could carry a carbon steel stockman style traditional pocket knife, it would be Schrade first and probably Case second. If I wanted that type of knife to carry & use, that's where I'd go. Other people who can carry one have felt the same way for 100 years. A dedicated core market is usually what keeps a company in business to experiment a little with an occasional new design. But, my feeling is that the new design should offer a real improvement in at least some area beyond just looking different, radical, or flashy.
I'm interested in hearing other thoughts. How far do you think the knife industry can go with new variations of older designs & styles, and is it reasonable to expect it to be constantly producing something new, whether it's needed or not?
I realize there are many individual preferences for exotic handle materials and collectors & so on, but these are not the major share of the knife industry's market, and that's not what I'm talking about. For actual consumers (users), what do you think?
Denis
