Is Benchmade losing their edge?

[rifon2]

If its ownership is pleased with its "numbers", and the way things
are going in general over there, they'll probably keep running the
company as they have.

Perhaps they don't feel the "competition" - as much as we do -
between themselves and other knife companies.

 

[thombrogan]

And it's only recently that Kershaw has stepped it up a notch.
They still put out 440A, 420HC, and AUS-8 knives that
make up the majority. So if you compare Kershaw's
average steel to BM or Spyderco's it's still behind in that category...but
may be catching up fast.

Kershaw's switching out all of their 440A with Sandvik 13C26 this year. And Thomas W mentioned a sprint run this year featuring SG-2 in the Kershaw News thread. For a company whose main customers will never be us, their offerings for freaks like us have taken a radical upswing. Plus, their KAI Shun knives are just unfreakingbelievable. My father-in-law's Shun Classic santoku cuts everything; including him; with no perceptible effort. Now if they could only build more ambi-clipped lockbacks....

Joe Talmadge,

I really enjoyed reading your comments and assessments. I fall into the other category in that I liked Spyderco as a company before I had their knives. Doesn't hurt that their knives absolutely rule, though.

Despite my gripes, the 550HG Griptillians look totally awesome, so no Grip gripes from me.

 

[Thomas W]

And it's only recently that Kershaw has stepped it up a notch.
They still put out 440A, 420HC, and AUS-8 knives that
make up the majority.

As Thom says we have/are turning all of our 440A models into 13C26 which we feel is a big upgrade. 13C26 will be our primary steel. We utilize 420HC on 2 models, and AUS-8 is in a few models, one model of which turns any volume.

We do use S30V regularly. Have used S60V, CPM154, 154CM, 3V, 440C MIM, ZDP189, VG10, Clad VG10, ATS-34, and D2. Just an FYI. Oh, and there will be that SG2 project soon to arrive, thanks Thom.

So if you compare Kershaw's
average steel to BM or Spyderco's it's still behind in that category

We are not in the same category as Spy. and BM, so I'm not sure the comparison has value. What I mean by that, is that we sell to the masses, and do the high end projects for fun.
Higher end is not our primary goal, well unless your talking about ZT or Shun.

 

[goldie]

I completely agree with j davey,except for the 2 rukus models,which i have, theres "nothing new under the sun":yawn: as the saying goes. i dont like the use of the spyder hole ,either(except on the afck series)it seems too much like copying than coming out with something else.they should have revamped & improved the afck's,as mentioned above, they have the great axis lock at their disposal,why not use it more? i'd like to see them come out with a carnivore type model with an axis lock or their version of the rolling lock, u.s. made, of course.even an axis leopard with double thumb studs or an axis spike would be a unique offering.i also dont know why they gave up on the 780 model. they should have just added liners to make it easier to produce,better than scrapping it completely.....

 

[HoB]

Benchmade used H-1 for a long while in their river rescue knife. In fact it was discontinued in that steel about a year before Spyderco used it in their Salt Series. Foretunately Spyderco put it to better use and ultimately still stands as a favorite production knife company.

Ummmmmh, we did you get that information? The Salt I was released during 2003 even though it was first advertised in the 2004 catalog. The BM river knive was first advertised in 2003 I and believe it was not released any earlier. So granted, they were both released within months of each other. But considering that the Salt I is a folder (which has hardware that also needs rustproofing), I wouldn't be surprised if Spyderco hadn't played with H-1 for a whole lot longer. This has happened before with VG-10 for example. The first knife to be released with VG-10 was from Fallkniven, even though Spdyerco was the first to play around with this steel and actually turned Fallkniven onto VG-10.

If you match steel for steel It's probably about even.

Before, you were talking about innovation, not matching steel for steel. D2 is a common toolsteel that is known for decades and so is M2, S30V was pioneered by CRK and 154CM by Loveless. So were is the innovation? But I will retract my statement at least partially because of their use of H-1 and X-15. However, BMs commitment to these innovations is small: 1 knife. If you compare that to an entire Salt line which is still growing, the growing number of ZDP-189 models out there and how mainstream VG-10 now is....to me that is innovation that has lead to progress in the entire knife industry. It has made an impact.

And the sprint runs: It is true that BM has come out with some sprintruns, I guess my dismissal is in part due to my lack of excitement over their latest sprint runs, but my main point, which still stands, was the lack of sprint runs of *DISCONTINUED* models, such as Spyderco has offered on mulitple occasions (just take a look at the Caly Jr. in ZDP).

I am surprised how little the Axis lock is mentioned which I think is undisputably the most important piece of innovation that BM can be cited for, but the question remains: Where are the innovations of the past 2-3 years? I mean, just take a look at the new Lum. I agree they look very nice...no surprise, they look like a typical Spyderco blade (leafshape+hole) with a Seki-Cut handle.....

 

[thombrogan]

Oh, and there will be that SG2 project soon to arrive, thanks Thom.

What's with all of this winking crap?

Right here at Bladeforums.com, you said Kershaw Knives is working on a SG2 laminate project later this summer.

Hmmm...working on a SG2 laminate project for later in the summer.

And you weren't even punching anyone when you said it.

 

[thombrogan]

Ummmmmh, we did you get that information?

I believe Sal himself said Benchmade beat them to the punch with H1 with their 100H2O dive knife.

 

[Joe Talmadge]

The problem with knife geeks like us is that we take a truly interesting topic, like innovation among the leading knife companies, and reduce it to a much-less-interesting argument about (what else?) steel. You could take Spyderco's entire line and make every single knife VG-10, and I'd still be saying that overall innovation wise, I think Spyderco is in the lead.

 

[J.Davey]

The problem with knife geeks like us is that we take a truly interesting topic, like innovation among the leading knife companies, and reduce it to a much-less-interesting argument about (what else?) steel.

Amen to this, Joe! I was just seeing if I was alone in my opinion. I think BM makes an excellent product. I also love Kershaw knives and Spyderco knives. But there is no denying that both of those companies (Kershaw and Spyderco) seem to be more willing to experiment with new ideas and designs. If Benchmade had their current (perceived) attitude a few years ago, would we even be seeing AXIS locks on their knives? Just an uninformed opinion on my part.

 

[HoB]

I believe Sal himself said Benchmade beat them to the punch with H1 with their 100H2O dive knife.

Thanks, Thom, good to know. But as I mentioned this must have been by months, not by years and BM most certainly did not change to X15 before the Salt I was released.

Yes, Joe, Davey, agreed. I begin to wonder whether part of the agreement between BM and Spyderco is that BM will not make a Model with a Spyderhole that features an AXIS lock. Otherwise, why wouldn't they put an AXIS lock on the new Lum?

 

[Boats]

Innovation?

That's a curious word to use for chasing flavor of the month steels.

Maybe the innovation is in using MIM, which is nothing I want in a knife to rely upon? BTW, wasn't Kershaw there first?

Maybe the innovation is using a magnet as a locking mechanism? I guess that is an innovation for sheeple.

Ridiculously small "spyderholes" in fixed blade knives designed in solely to boost a dubious trademark replacement for an expired patent on the hole for folders? Well that is innovative lawyering anyways.

The next Calypso looks evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and all of the folders still look mostly like riffs on humpbacked blade--hole--FRN handle. Yawn.

Innovation in the tried and true formula of "pointy end forward, edge sharpened, provide a safe place to grip," is awfully hard to come by. In any case, "innovation" is hardly a word to be bandied about for line-up facelifts and the introduction of dubious features.

Give me a shout out when somebody really comes up with the evolutionary leap in locking mechanisms, carry and/or methods of opening, or maybe introduces a new grip material that exceeds what is used today.

Please note that it was not my intent to slam Spyderco, only the really loose standards some people have for the term "innovative."

 

[HoB]

Wow, someone is jaded.

Well, let's see, hence by your definition, the term "innovation" is completely misplaced in the entire cutlery industry, because there is not a single company or maker out there that would qualify by your definition.

You seem to be one of those guys who think that research is pointless if you can not solve the main problems of mankind, such as sufficient energy for everyone for free without any pollutants or curing of all diseases with one pill. At least it is not innovative.

Yet, somehow, we went from ZERO available stainless steels available for knives to a good selection of well performing stainless steels in less than 50 years. Only it happened not in one big leap so clearly this was really not innovative according to you.
Furthermore, we went from locking folders that you could force shut with bare hands without much effort from the lock position to locks that will test the strength of even the strongest man....and amazingly with the same locking concept. CLEARLY, no innovation here.
But most amazing of all, we when from practically ZERO folders that can be opened with one hand to.....well to practically status quo, and that in less than 30 years. But since it didn't happen overnight....clearly no innovation anywhere in sight...

Hell, I think it is a whole lot better than the automotive industry. They have been using the same damn engine concept for 120 years! Nothing, absolutely nothing has happened to the basic concept of the Otto-engine. Clearly there has been no innovation AT ALL if you compare an Otto-engine from a Ford model T with the V-10 in the current Viper. They both use pistons and cranks....even run on the same number of cycles! The only real innovation in automotion is the Wankel (Rotary-) and Diesel engines and those are over 80 years old! You can call me, when they invent cars that don't use tires anymore and run on an engine that uses sewage.

What a limit view of progress and innovation .

 

[Boats]

Yep, GUILTY!

I am jaded to marketing getting passed off as innovation.

Yet, somehow, we went from ZERO available stainless steels available for knives to a good selection of well performing stainless steels in less than 50 years. Only it happened not in one big leap so clearly this was really not innovative according to you.

Well, stainless generally sucks, but the Nth variation of a stainless steel used in a knife is NOT innovative. The first example of using stainless in a sort of useable package WAS innovative.

Furthermore, we went from locking folders that you could force shut with bare hands without much effort from the lock position to locks that will test the strength of even the strongest man....and amazingly with the same locking concept. CLEARLY, no innovation here.

A magnetic lock that could be forced closed as readily as a simple Douk Douk is not innovative. The lock back was innovative, the twist lock, the liner, the frame lock, the axis and all of its rip-offs were innovative. Having a knife magnetically close upon its user's fingers is only innovative as an amusing new story for ER attendants.

But most amazing of all, we when from practically ZERO folders that can be opened with one hand to.....well to practically status quo, and that in less than 30 years. But since it didn't happen overnight....clearly no innovation anywhere

And three times you missed the point. It was innovative the first time it was done, not the hundredth. The first pocket clip was innovative. All of the interpretations of it since have been evolutionary. Perhaps an innovation in knife carry would be the subdermal implantation of magnets in the underside of the forearm, allowing one to discretely carry in one's sleeve. I don't know, but that would be innovative as opposed to yet another sheath. Would it be an innovation that captures any market share? I don't care, I am not a knife designer.

But words have meaning and innovation is not the introduction of yet another variation of the same old archetype. MIM doesn't make a knife innovative, it makes it swoopy and more prone to lateral breakage. MIM is just a fancy casting, and castings are not highly prized as knife blades to my way of thinking.

Hell, I think it is a whole lot better than the automotive industry. They have been using the same damn engine concept for 120 years! Nothing, absolutely nothing has happened to the basic concept of the Otto-engine. Clearly there has been no innovation AT ALL if you compare an Otto-engine from a Ford model T with the V-10 in the current Viper. They both use pistons and cranks....even run on the same number of cycles! The only real innovation in automotion is the Wankel (Rotary-) and Diesel engines and those are over 80 years old!

When refinement of existing concepts is equated to innovation, the word is meaningless. Several innovations, have been made around the essential concept of the otto cycle, the diesel, and even the wankel, but yes, there has essentially been no innovation in the basic concept of the IC engine and its principles in over 80 years, only refinements to the various components surrounding the basic ignition of a fuel air mixture to perform work.

Evolutionary work is not innovative work, innovation should be a paradigm shift.

 

[Joe Talmadge]

One can phrase almost anything to make it appear insignificant. I have a friend who didn't want to take his vacation in Hawaii despite his wife's request: "What, I sit on the beach during the day and then later eat pork? What's the big deal?"

Boats, as you yourself point out, no one is going to invent a new place to put a point or an edge, so innovation is of a different sort. It becomes very difficult to define any industry as having any innovation at all under your definition, because your definition is so narrow as to be useless.

And, maybe going along with the narrow-minded theme, your focus is only on components ("locking mechanisms, carry and/or methods of opening, or maybe introduces a new grip material") rather than the whole. With absolutely no new materials at all, isn't the P'kal innovative, uniquely and elegantly solving a problem that no other folder until now did. Admittedly, it's for a niche, but out of the innovative overall design comes the next evolution in the ball lock, another nice innovation.

Joe

 

[Boats]

No. A reverse grip knife is not innovative.

I am not being narrow. I am being precise.

A cast iron block in an IC engine was once the standard. Now, it is cast aluminum. That is a material refinement, but it is not truly an innovation. It's still a metal block.

A plastic or ceramic block that had equal endurance and performance at lower weight and price point would be an innovative material use, but it wouldn't change the basic precepts of the IC motor.

So, by the same token, the ceramic bladed knife was sort of a material innovation for knives, but it didn't change the world.

So I apply the same strictures to componentry. The use of stainless was innovative, THE FIRST TIME, a secure lock was novel, ONCE. Now, there is nothing new under the sun on either the use of stainless or the development of secure locking systems. Certainly, innovations may occur in the componentry, but nothing about those developments makes for a revolutionary knife.

Something like the common light saber or a reliable and long duty cycle laser scapel for the masses would be revolutionary. Until then, all knives are variations on a theme. There is nothing innovative about using CPM, ZDP, or the next big thing in stainless. It might be daring from a marketing standpoint, but not much at all on the scale of innovative knife developments.

 

[Joe Talmadge]

No. A reverse grip knife is not innovative.

I am not being narrow. I am being precise.

I don't think you are ... while I think you're making a number of mistakes, in this particular case you're looking at overly-narrow features and completely missing the whole as a result. The P'kal isn't inovative because it can be held in reverse grip. It's innovative because it's the first folder designed to open automatically out of the pocket into reverse grip with the edge in, while also having an ideal edge geometry and angle for use in that grip (the point is not placed where it is by accident, but no one who doesn't understand it will realize why), and the right ergonomics. There is no other folder in the world that does this, and there has never been another folder in the world that has done this -- it's a brand new invention (if you disagree, just mention another). If inventing something that no one has ever done before is not innovative, I'm not sure what is. But it's easy to miss this if you break a knife down into components, and judge it just by materials, locks, grip type, etc.

Even here, though, you can point out that many of the features are evolutionary, not revolutionary, which is true. A waved endura has some of the features you need, with the wave being an invention of someone else. A hawkbill has some of the features you need. Etc. But that's not where the industry is. One can innovate without introducing completely new technologies like light sabres!

 

[HoB]

Evolutionary work is not innovative work, innovation should be a paradigm shift.

Well, there are a lot of paradigm shifts that you are overlooking. One paradigm shift that is quite noticable in the automotive industry is that a car that doesn't get better milage than 20 mi/gallon is view as essentially a waste, while 30 years earlier sub 10 mi/gallon was the norm.

Another large paradim shift is one you stumbled over in your own post. Locking folders are taken for granted while during the time when slipjoints were the norm, few would have looked at the magnetic lock with as much dismay as you just did. Your own paradigm has shifted without you even noticing it.

Another paradigm shift you stumble across on this forum almost every other day, when there is yet another thread about a locking mechanism being defeated in one way of another. Locks have become so reliable and strong that some people begin to think they are as strong as a fixed blade and are surprised when they fail. 30 years ago, a lock would have been viewed only as an added security and would have been expected to be easily defeated.

Actually I wasn't missing your point but you were missing mine. In most cases paradigms do not shift overnight but over a long periods of time. And innovation rarely takes place in one earth shattering occurance but in many small steps one at a time. Many steps themselves may seem insignificant but if you look at the combined progress over a long period of time only then you see how much innovation has taken place. I would suspect that you are quite alone in your view that no innovation has taken place between an engine from the turn of the century and a modern day engine. I would also wager a guess that you prefer that surgery would be performed by an autoclaved scalpel (standard form of sterilization), which requires a stainless steel, just to give you one example.

Lastly, you are not being precise, if you go back to the very meaning of the word as according to the Webster, you are simply wrong. The meaning of the word "innovation" does not require any paradigm shift. It simply means the "introduction of something new". It makes no requirement of impact that the novelty has on mankind or the field where it makes its entry. Its one of those case where one shouldn't use a word if one doesn't know what it means. But I agree with you that it is usually used in order to indicate the implemention of something new for the sake of progress. I also agree with you that the term has been grossly abused by advertisment.

 

[cdf]

Benchmade has a lot of new neat stuff , especially if ya count the HK line . The DajaVoo is clever as all hell , and will appeal to Spydie freaks who are unhappy about Lums being discontinued . Given that Benchmade must be doing a lot of military bussiness , they really have launched a lot of civillian sector models .

In no way am I dissing Spyderco , but things like the Pakal are not over significant , and will more than likley get discontinued . ( like it's brothers the Gunting and Yojimbo ) . The Morpho is truly ground breaking in production balis .

A lot of Spydie stuff , as has previously been said is evolutionary , not revoultionary . ( Ie: the Caly 3 , and BG42/CF Millie - very nice upgrades but not a revolution . )

Chris

 

[bubinga]

Just imagine if they would offer a sprint run of AFCKs with CF handles for example.

Your prayers have been answered, but I don't think I can identify the dealer who snapped up a small sprint run of these without being flagged for spam. Seek and you shall find (maybe)!

 

[msiley]

Innovation does not equal Invention.

Improving a new lock is Innovation.
Creating a new lock is Invention.

Innovation can be incremental improvements.

This thread was orignailly about BM not being innovative because
they didn't have a lot of offerings that appealed to the original poster.

Not having appealing products does not mean no innovation.
It just means they don't appeal to you (or someone).

Innovation can be in many forms. From increased QC to
a more efficient and less costly mfg. process to, yes, a new blade steel.

I actually find most of BMs new line appealing.
Totally personal opinion but true.

Do I think BM has been innovative and will be innovative in the future?
Yes I do. It's hard to follow up a grand slam like the Axis lock.
So not everything will be as noticable.

If you look at the price of the Lum line they are less costly
then comparable models and use premium matrials namely Titanium,
S30V, phosphor bronze washers and G10. So maybe they are being innovative by bringing a very premium product to a lower price point?

The big lum is $160, compared to $195 for a 940 series.
(BM's site prices)

I think Benchmade, Kershaw and Spyderco are all innovative.
All of them feed off each other to create new and interesting
products that will appeal to Knife Knuts and the other people.

That's capitalistic competition, that's innovation, and that is why
we love them.