Improvements the 25 made to the 21

[joesuburb]

Not so...The 25 is more complicated, has more parts and is less user serviceable and has those horrible finger cutouts that fit some people but not most. OMG it needs locktite...I had a choice and didn't choose the new design

So when the 25 morphs into a big Inkosi with its improvements you think its better than a 21? You are kind of being silly. The Inkosi has all the improvements of the 25, plus fewer parts than the 21.

As far as the pivot goes, we each have our priorities. Yours is the lack of loctite and you seem unable to tighten things at the right torque. Those things are easy for me. I'd prefer a life with a much longer life, better deployment, lockup, and stronger pivot.

 

[blade man]

As far as the much longer life...that's been mentioned a few times. Was that really an issue? as far as I know, there aren't rampant reports of old, worn out Sebenzas. On the contrary, there's a lot of reports of 15-20 year old Sebenzas that are still trucking along, just like they have been...I have a small regular in BG42 that I've had for 10 years now, with zero issues, and there are many forumites with the same experience.

The pivot on the 25 is likely stronger, but again, is this needed? I've never seen a Sebenza that broke at the pivot...and rarely a broken Sebenza.

As far as the washers wearing out and needing replaced...again, is this a thing? I've been on the forums for a number of years and don't remember reading many, if any, reports of this happening.

None of this invalidates anyone who likes what the 25 offers, but c'mon....the 21 (and the regular and classic) are not outdated models that routinely wear out and were in desperate need of a redesign.

 

[joesuburb]

As far as the much longer life...that's been mentioned a few times. Was that really an issue? as far as I know, there aren't rampant reports of old, worn out Sebenzas. On the contrary, there's a lot of reports of 15-20 year old Sebenzas that are still trucking along, just like they have been...I have a small regular in BG42 that I've had for 10 years now, with zero issues, and there are many forumites with the same experience.

As far as the washers wearing out and needing replaced...again, is this a thing? I've been on the forums for a number of years and don't remember reading many, if any, reports of this happening.

None of this invalidates anyone who likes what the 25 offers, but c'mon....the 21 (and the regular and classic) are not outdated models that wear out and were in desperate need of a redesign.

These are some of the best knives in the world. The compromises between them are just design choices. I love both the 21 and the Inkosi, I don't have a 25. But pretty much a small 25. My point is that I think its absolutely silly how people proclaim the 21 is superior. Its not at all. It just had some different design choices with the pivot.

Although, I do think the ceramic ball interface is a nice improvement mostly for the way it feels but it does ad life to the blade theoretically.

 

[JustinFournier]

As far as the much longer life...that's been mentioned a few times. Was that really an issue? as far as I know, there aren't rampant reports of old, worn out Sebenzas. On the contrary, there's a lot of reports of 15-20 year old Sebenzas that are still trucking along, just like they have been...I have a small regular in BG42 that I've had for 10 years now, with zero issues, and there are many forumites with the same experience.

The pivot on the 25 is likely stronger, but again, is this needed? I've never seen a Sebenza that broke at the pivot...and rarely a broken Sebenza.

As far as the washers wearing out and needing replaced...again, is this a thing? I've been on the forums for a number of years and don't remember reading many, if any, reports of this happening.

None of this invalidates anyone who likes what the 25 offers, but c'mon....the 21 (and the regular and classic) are not outdated models that routinely wear out and were in desperate need of a redesign.

None of it is necessary. A Sebenza isn't necessary. My argument had zero to do with necessity. 😉

 

[JustinFournier]

This is quite the lively discussion. Thank you to everyone who participated so far. I'm sure there is more to come.

 

[blade man]

None of it is necessary. A Sebenza isn't necessary. My argument had zero to do with necessity. 😉

Replace 'necessary' with 'better,' and I have the same points.

 

[JustinFournier]

Replace 'necessary' with 'better,' and I have the same points.

I'm not sure if you are serious.

I made a long op that contained an argument consisting of multiple premises that lead to a conclusion.

Are you are saying my argument is invalid because the changes are not improvements because they are not necessary?

I'll leave it at that for now.

 

[blade man]

I'm not sure if you are serious.

I made a long op that contained an argument consisting of multiple premises that lead to a conclusion.

Are you are saying my argument is invalid because the changes are not improvements because they are not necessary?

I'll leave it at that for now.

Relax bud, I'm just disagreeing with you.

I am serious, and made a post with multiple premises as well.

Your argument isn't invalid, as I've stated. However, just because there are changes, doesn't mean they're improvements.

The 25s I don't buy mean more for you!

 

[91bravo]

I love my 25 and I love my Insingo. I can appreciate both knives for what they offer. They may look like the same knives to the untrained eye, but they are totally different. This does not mean that one is better than the other though. I think it all just boils down to what each person prefers over the other and that's it!

 

[lemmuhj]

I love my 25 and I love my Insingo. I can appreciate both knives for what they offer. They may look like the same knives to the untrained eye, but they are totally different. This does not mean that one is better than the other though. I think it all just boils down to what each person prefers over the other and that's it!

This sums it up pretty well..

 

[blade man]

I love my 25 and I love my Insingo. I can appreciate both knives for what they offer. They may look like the same knives to the untrained eye, but they are totally different. This does not mean that one is better than the other though. I think it all just boils down to what each person prefers over the other and that's it!

Pretty much!

 

[unit]

I guess I just do not understand this thread.

People have preferences. Some prefer the newest offering with all the "improvements" while other seem to prefer the older less improved offerings. I would presume that MOST people really do not agree with the notion that the newest is the most improved...otherwise you would see modern offerings commanding a higher price, and that is clearly not the case (look up a regular, or a classic Sebenza and compare the market value to the 25...and how frequently do we hear about the latest Damascus offerings...).

Futher, I do not believe that all improvements are made for the sake of offering the consumer that best possible product...some are, others, not so much. I am not a conspiracy theorist...I just realize the reality of business is that production costs are something a buisness wants to reduce...and if you can market the changes as improvements (which they are, if they *improve* your profit) and a zealous client base wants to embrace those changes and hear what they want to hear, where is the harm?

Finally, I will point out that "improved" isn't always. Simply put, a lot of us understand physics well enough to know that a thinner blade works better in some situations. By "some situations", I mean all situations where I or my father, or his father drew a pocket knife to preform a task. Sure, some feel a need to have a "stronger" blade, but many of us have gotten along quite well with thinner blades that also seem to work better for our needs.

I am not saying that people that want thicker blades are wrong, but I will flat out laugh at you if you try and prove to me that a thicker blade offers some advantage to me by being stronger, because you are trying to market a solution to a problem I do not have.

I could address a lot of points that were lodged above, but it is a lot easier to say that I know pretty well what works for me, and therefore I know what "improvements" seem to lead to the statement, "they do not make them like they used to".

 

[JustinFournier]

Thanks for the thoughtful response unit.

The thread was originally an argument that the Sebenza was designed as a work knife, and how some of the relevant changes the 25 made to the 21 could be argued to be improvements when the stated goal of the knife is to be used for a wide variety of work related tasks. This was because kidcongo said the changes were not improvements and it could be debated. It was more a debate exercise than anything as well as an opportunity to share some thoughts on one of my favorite knives.

From certain perspectives, some of the changes can be argued as not improvements. For example, I never open the knife left handed, ever. So a double thumb stud is just more weight and added cost. So it cost more, and weighs more for something I don't need. They don't help the knife to perform work related tasks better. Not an improvement to me.

The Mnandi would be much more suitable if ones tasks were opening letters, slicing cheese and meat for lunch, and other similar tasks particularly in an office environment, or perhaps when ones wears a suit.

For my daily use, a 25 is hands down a better knife than the 21. For others, a Mnandi might be better than both. For some people a 25 might even be illegal to carry. Hardly a good option.

 

[kidcongo]

I wonder if Chris Reeve knew the can of worms he would open up calling, what is, in my opinion, a different model of knife the "sebenza" 25? It may be the marketing genius move of the century!! How much press has been made, how many forum posts filled, how many youtube videos that go on and on comparing the 21 and the 25? How many knife enthusiasts bought both to compare the difference? If he had called the knife the "Gemsbok" (south african animal) we would probably all have accepted it face value, rather than what we have today, which is an endless debate about which is better. There is, of course, no answer, because we are comparing different knives, that only share a common name. There is no such thing as bad press they say.

What I do see though, thinking on it, that flies in the face of Justin's theory of "improvements", is that CRK never discontinued the 21. If the 25 was, in Chris Reeve's mind, an improved 21, there would be no reason to carry the old lesser model. He strikes me as the sort who would only offer the 'improved' knife if the old one had become inadequate in the face of new knowledge and manufacturing technology. However, most of us agree that the Sebenza 25 is not an improved Sebenza 21, it is a very different offering, which is why, all these years later, both models are still current to the catalogue. I still believe we will see the 25 discontinued before the end of the 21. The Large Inkosi will take it's rightful place in the catalogue as a different model, and maybe we can look forward to a Sebenza 29 or something that is a truly an 'improved 21'.

 

[blade man]

Unit, kid, great posts. :thumbup:

 

[BMCGear]

I guess I just do not understand this thread.

People have preferences. Some prefer the newest offering with all the "improvements" while other seem to prefer the older less improved offerings. I would presume that MOST people really do not agree with the notion that the newest is the most improved...otherwise you would see modern offerings commanding a higher price, and that is clearly not the case (look up a regular, or a classic Sebenza and compare the market value to the 25...and how frequently do we hear about the latest Damascus offerings...).

Futher, I do not believe that all improvements are made for the sake of offering the consumer that best possible product...some are, others, not so much. I am not a conspiracy theorist...I just realize the reality of business is that production costs are something a buisness wants to reduce...and if you can market the changes as improvements (which they are, if they *improve* your profit) and a zealous client base wants to embrace those changes and hear what they want to hear, where is the harm?

Finally, I will point out that "improved" isn't always. Simply put, a lot of us understand physics well enough to know that a thinner blade works better in some situations. By "some situations", I mean all situations where I or my father, or his father drew a pocket knife to preform a task. Sure, some feel a need to have a "stronger" blade, but many of us have gotten along quite well with thinner blades that also seem to work better for our needs.

I am not saying that people that want thicker blades are wrong, but I will flat out laugh at you if you try and prove to me that a thicker blade offers some advantage to me by being stronger, because you are trying to market a solution to a problem I do not have.

I could address a lot of points that were lodged above, but it is a lot easier to say that I know pretty well what works for me, and therefore I know what "improvements" seem to lead to the statement, "they do not make them like they used to".

Agreed.

From certain perspectives, some of the changes can be argued as not improvements. For example, I never open the knife left handed, ever. So a double thumb stud is just more weight and added cost. So it cost more, and weighs more for something I don't need. They don't help the knife to perform work related tasks better. Not an improvement to me.

All of the changes can be argued as "not improvements." It depends on your outlook. The change to a double lug wasn't an improvement to me either but for many it was. Some people want a double lug and many lefties can utilize a right handed framelockbut need a double stud on the blade to open it.

I wonder if Chris Reeve knew the can of worms he would open up calling, what is, in my opinion, a different model of knife the "sebenza" 25? It may be the marketing genius move of the century!! How much press has been made, how many forum posts filled, how many youtube videos that go on and on comparing the 21 and the 25? How many knife enthusiasts bought both to compare the difference? If he had called the knife the "Gemsbok" (south african animal) we would probably all have accepted it face value, rather than what we have today, which is an endless debate about which is better. There is, of course, no answer, because we are comparing different knives, that only share a common name. There is no such thing as bad press they say.

What I do see though, thinking on it, that flies in the face of Justin's theory of "improvements", is that CRK never discontinued the 21. If the 25 was, in Chris Reeve's mind, an improved 21, there would be no reason to carry the old lesser model. He strikes me as the sort who would only offer the 'improved' knife if the old one had become inadequate in the face of new knowledge and manufacturing technology. However, most of us agree that the Sebenza 25 is not an improved Sebenza 21, it is a very different offering, which is why, all these years later, both models are still current to the catalogue. I still believe we will see the 25 discontinued before the end of the 21. The Large Inkosi will take it's rightful place in the catalogue as a different model, and maybe we can look forward to a Sebenza 29 or something that is a truly an 'improved 21'.

I'm in agreement and could see this happening.

 

[JustinFournier]

I wonder if Chris Reeve knew the can of worms he would open up calling, what is, in my opinion, a different model of knife the "sebenza" 25? It may be the marketing genius move of the century!! How much press has been made, how many forum posts filled, how many youtube videos that go on and on comparing the 21 and the 25? How many knife enthusiasts bought both to compare the difference? If he had called the knife the "Gemsbok" (south african animal) we would probably all have accepted it face value, rather than what we have today, which is an endless debate about which is better. There is, of course, no answer, because we are comparing different knives, that only share a common name. There is no such thing as bad press they say.

What I do see though, thinking on it, that flies in the face of Justin's theory of "improvements", is that CRK never discontinued the 21. If the 25 was, in Chris Reeve's mind, an improved 21, there would be no reason to carry the old lesser model. He strikes me as the sort who would only offer the 'improved' knife if the old one had become inadequate in the face of new knowledge and manufacturing technology. However, most of us agree that the Sebenza 25 is not an improved Sebenza 21, it is a very different offering, which is why, all these years later, both models are still current to the catalogue. I still believe we will see the 25 discontinued before the end of the 21. The Large Inkosi will take it's rightful place in the catalogue as a different model, and maybe we can look forward to a Sebenza 29 or something that is a truly an 'improved 21'.

If you look at the history of model offerings there was never an immediate discontinuing of the current Sebenza model when a newer model was offered.

In my mind the Sebenza moved towards an art knife while still being capable. It would be tough to argue how the coated Damascus blades with fragile inlays were made as a work knife.

I know the 21 continues to be the bigger seller and that will be the case so long as there are as many offerings are there are. How many people buy a wood inlay and leave it in the box vs a PJ.

CRKs offerings over the recent years have moved back towards a work knife. The damascus is no longer coated, it is now stainless steel. The amazing regular annuals are no more. The latest models are all focused more towards work and less towards fancy art pieces.

If by ones "logic" they say subjectively these are not improvements because one doesn't like them, the opposite is true.

I argued that if the point of a Sebenza is to have the specific goal of a working knife, and a change was made that enhanced a specific feature of the knife, such as longevity, then that change was an improvement because it made the knife better at its specific stated goal.

 

[kidcongo]

If you look at the history of model offerings there was never an immediate discontinuing of the current Sebenza model when a newer model was offered.

In my mind the Sebenza moved towards an art knife while still being capable. It would be tough to argue how the coated Damascus blades with fragile inlays were made as a work knife.

I know the 21 continues to be the bigger seller and that will be the case so long as there are as many offerings are there are. How many people buy a wood inlay and leave it in the box vs a PJ.

CRKs offerings over the recent years have moved back towards a work knife. The damascus is no longer coated, it is now stainless steel. The amazing regular annuals are no more. The latest models are all focused more towards work and less towards fancy art pieces.

If by ones "logic" they say subjectively these are not improvements because one doesn't like them, the opposite is true.

I argued that if the point of a Sebenza is to have the specific goal of a working knife, and a change was made that enhanced a specific feature of the knife, such as longevity, then that change was an improvement because it made the knife better at its specific stated goal.

You completely missed my point, but that's fine. More press for both great models! Chris' plan continues to work to great success!

 

[JustinFournier]

Cody,

I think I get your point, that Chris was motivated by marketing?

 

[blade man]

I argued that if the point of a Sebenza is to have the specific goal of a working knife, and a change was made that enhanced a specific feature of the knife, such as longevity, then that change was an improvement because it made the knife better at its specific stated goal.

However, you've failed to demonstrate that the change has actually enhanced a specific feature of the knife, such as longevity.

We get it, you like the 25 better and consider the 21 (even in plain format?) an art knife. That's cool, but not everyone agrees with you.