Is it just me, or...

[Exeter354]

...does anyone else use CRK as the benchmark by which everything else compares? I’m not saying that there aren’t other great makers out there – the opposite in fact…there are some amazing makers out there. But I find that I only understand CRK-speak…that is, if someone is describing a particular knife to me, I will understand it better if they explain it by comparison to a Sebenza, for example. In almost the same way one talks about another currency in relation to dollars ($39 Euros? Ok, but how much is that in dollars?)…know what I mean?

Anyway, I just think it’s funny that CRK is the only thing I really understand, the only thing that makes perfect sense to me. It’s truly the basis for comparison and CRK has set the bar pretty high in my opinion. Has anyone decided against a particular piece because by comparison to a Sebenza or an Umnumzaan it didn’t quite hold up? Or conversely…it’s not as good as a Sebenza, but at that price point it’s worth the compromise? I feel like most of my purchases must hold up to this scrutiny before I make a decision, even if it's not in the same price range or class.

 

[JustinFournier]

I'm in the EXACT same boat as you.

I just did this exact comparison over the past couple days as a matter of fact.

I thought to myself, if CRK is doing it this folder thing so well, I bet I can find some other production companies or semi custom/custom guys doing as well.

I looked around a bit, and I found a Hinderer XM-18. With the clearly poor machining compared to a Sebenza, I have no idea why people are paying $800+ for a XM-18 that is clearly made to a lower standard than my $350 Sebenza, I certainly wouldn't even pay $400 for a knife with such poor machining when I can have a Sebenza for that price.

CRK truly set the standard in the folder category with the Sebenza.

 

[김원진]

hey justin, have you held an xm 18? The xm 18 is very well machined. Fit and finish on the xm's would give Crk a run for the award if it wasn't in the custom department. The secondary market is just stupid though how people will buy them at retail and then go right around and sell them for $800-$900. But what can you do. Hinderers are great knives. Supply/demand.

As of now from what I've held, I've yet to see anything come close to CRK and Hinderer, but I haven't touched customs.yet These are my 2 benchmarks.

 

[RiverRat84]

As of now from what I've held, I've yet to see anything come close to CRK and Hinderer, but I haven't touched customs.yet

I have. Alot, before and a few after CRK. They still don't touch CRK:thumbup:

 

[JustinFournier]

hey justin, have you held an xm 18? The xm 18 is very well machined. Fit and finish on the xm's would give Crk a run for the award if it wasn't in the custom department. The secondary market is just stupid though how people will buy them at retail and then go right around and sell them for $800-$900. But what can you do. Hinderers are great knives. Supply/demand.

As of now from what I've held, I've yet to see anything come close to CRK and Hinderer, but I haven't touched customs.yet These are my 2 benchmarks.

I beg to differ! I would have got fired from my last job for putting out something as sloppy as this...

Evidence!!!

 

[dinokay]

I love Chris Reeve knives and they are my passion but I will say that there are a lot of beautiful knives out there.

 

[Biginboca]

Hi Justin,

Seeing that pic and having owned a few xm18's, yes you are correct. They are not as flawlessly machined as the Chris Reeve products. I don't feel you get more bang for your buck anywhere else than Chris Reeve when you start looking closely.

This is the reason that most custom knifemakers and machinist that I have known who are into knives own at least one, or even collect, Chris Reeve folders. The standard is very high and sets a benchmark for everyone else. (Machinists have a keen eye that will spot issues you pointed out, most laymen collectors would not notice those machining marks and wouldn't know the difference.)

I have found no matter what I spend I cannot purchase a better made knife than a CRK. Better materials, possibly, but not a better made and put together knife.

 

[김원진]

do you still have that? if so please sell it to me curious as to what may have caused it. and it is a gen 3 or earlier. Will say though the two hinderers I've managed to finagle are both exceptional and together under the price of one ridiculous secondary price.

CRK's definitely set a standard, but I still would love to find others that are comparable or better. Help round out the collection of sorts

I beg to differ! I would have got fired from my last job for putting out something as sloppy as this...

Evidence!!!

 

[Jaytaylor]

I beg to differ! I would have got fired from my last job for putting out something as sloppy as this...

Evidence!!!

There are machine marks there but I'm surprised you failed to spot some features and indicate them as machine marks when they are intentional engineering features. You should have paid more attention in your last job.

 

[Biginboca]

There are machine marks there but I'm surprised you failed to spot some features and indicate them as machine marks when they are intentional engineering features. You should have paid more attention in your last job.

Can you please be less vague and point out the features he indicated as machine marks? You have aroused my curiosity! Thanks.

(I presume you might be talking about the radiuses in the end and corner of the lockbar cuts?)

 

[Jaytaylor]

(I presume you might be talking about the radiuses in the end and corner of the lockbar cuts?)

Indeed.

 

[JustinFournier]

There are machine marks there but I'm surprised you failed to spot some features and indicate them as machine marks when they are intentional engineering features. You should have paid more attention in your last job.

Would you call it an engineering feature if the explanation was "I cut too deep to make sure I went all the way through?

Even if the sloppiness around the lockbar cutouts were intentional as in the mill end started there, they are not necessary, and they are definitely sloppy and clearly look like a lower quality product. There are NO valid reasons to have the machine marks in the notch that forms the spring. Period. Even low price Chinese/Taiwan manufactured pieces can be found without this kind of sloppy work.

I pointed out clear evidence, you talk in vague meaningless defensive possibilities. There are no meaningful necessary reasons I can fathom for any of the machine marks I pointed out. I don't think you can either, which is why you haven't.

Clearly there are other possibilities like holes that are necessary for locating later used for other purposes, but we are not talking about that.

So please add something meaningful; it's not only a requirement on most forums, it's the entire purpose of making a post.

Regardless, CRKs are machined better. They set a standard that clearly other manufacturers fail to meet. I've illustrated that here.

 

[RiverRat84]

I think the you should have paid attention at your last job comment sparked a fight.

Let's cool it. This is a fun thread, let's keep it that way:thumbup:

 

[Jaytaylor]

Would you call it an engineering feature if the explanation was "I cut too deep to make sure I went all the way through?

This is really basic engineering 101 - Fracture mechanics and stress risers.

The hole at the end of the lock bar slot & the hole at the apex of the lock bar cut out close to the pivot are intentional, no mistake, not an error, not someone drilling "too deep".


Stress concentration & Fracture mechanics - sorry, linked as I'm too lazy to regurgitate

Even if the sloppiness around the lockbar cutouts were intentional as in the mill end started there, they are not necessary, and they are definitely sloppy and clearly look like a lower quality product. There are NO valid reasons to have the machine marks in the notch that forms the spring. Period. Even low price Chinese/Taiwan manufactured pieces can be found without this kind of sloppy work.

I pointed out clear evidence, you talk in vague meaningless defensive possibilities. There are no meaningful necessary reasons I can fathom for any of the machine marks I pointed out. I don't think you can either, which is why you haven't.

Clearly there are other possibilities like holes that are necessary for locating later used for other purposes, but we are not talking about that.

So please add something meaningful; it's not only a requirement on most forums, it's the entire purpose of making a post.

Regardless, CRKs are machined better. They set a standard that clearly other manufacturers fail to meet. I've illustrated that here.

With respect to Rick Hinderer and the XM, the XM is a high quality tool not an art object, the finish of the lock bar cut out is inconsequential. To label it as sloppy seems rather ignorant as evident as your lack of basic engineering principals.

 

[iamsmiling]

I look at the Hinderer then I look at my Regular Sebbie . . . The Hinderer is simply too busy, all those bumps and bits just seem to me to make it more complex . . . and this takes us back to the original question of the thread . . . yeah, I do tend to use the Sebenza as a benchmark, not just for construction but for design as well.

Three screws hold it all together. The simplicity is deceptive, the Sebenza is IMHO a classic of minimalist design, there just isn't anything there that doesn't absolutely need to be there.

 

[JustinFournier]

This is really basic engineering 101 - Fracture mechanics and stress risers.
With respect to Rick Hinderer and the XM, the XM is a high quality tool not an art object, the finish of the lock bar cut out is inconsequential. To label it as sloppy seems rather ignorant as evident as your lack of basic engineering principals.

You are obviously trolling, as there is no way you have even a remote clue regarding of which you call me ignorant.

Your fracture argument is about as valid, maybe a little less so than this...



I stand by my opinion, that the machining marks, and as you call them "engineered features" are unnecessary, degrade the perceived craftsmanship to which the item was made, and serve only to reduce the perceived quality of the item.

By your same argument, you could justify fitting a jet fighter ejection seat in a helicopter and call it a design feature.

I've had enough time wasting with you; to the ignore list.

For those who care, my thoughts on why CR doesn't attempt to direct stress fractures in the same fashion as Hinderer attempts to is the relatively low ductility of grade 5 titanium alloy which is relatively brittle with a 10% elongation at break and has a relatively low sheer strength. This shows this alloy is terrible at handling the type of forces these "engineered features" attempt to control hence my jet fighter ejection seat in a helicopter comment.

Links for proof:

Hinderer stating the alloy he uses:
http://www.rickhindererknives.com/rick-hinderer-knives/xm-folding-knives/

Properties of said alloy:
http://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=MTP642

If you want a pry bar, use steel.

 

[nyefmaker]

YES, I compare EVERY Other Knife I buy to a CRK. NOTHING I have come across yet compares....! Its CRK all the way for me....As you guys well know....lol.

 

[Myker]

Gonna have to agree with Justin, poor machining practices. There are a couple a definite under cuts which would be hard to explain as engineering features.

Him showing proof or at least a photo helps his side, your argument, (Jay) not so much...

 

[Jaytaylor]

You are obviously trolling, as there is no way you have even a remote clue regarding of which you call me ignorant.

Your fracture argument is about as valid, maybe a little less so than this...

View attachment 289966

I stand by my opinion, that the machining marks, and as you call them "engineered features" are unnecessary, degrade the perceived craftsmanship to which the item was made, and serve only to reduce the perceived quality of the item.

By your same argument, you could justify fitting a jet fighter ejection seat in a helicopter and call it a design feature.

I've had enough time wasting with you; to the ignore list.

Trolling? LMAO. Whatever dude, your ignorance knows no bounds.

As for what I'm "talking about" I do this for a living and have an MEng and CEng via IMechE.

I'm not disputing the fact that machining marks are present on the lock bar cut-out, I am disputing your highlighting of certain features as merely machining marks.

You really should handle an XM, it really isnt sloppy.

Lastly - interesting car, just fits you perfectly.

 

[Jaytaylor]

Gonna have to agree with Justin, poor machining practices. There are a couple a definite under cuts which would be hard to explain as engineering features.

Him showing proof or at least a photo helps his side, your argument, (Jay) not so much...

Read post No.14 try the links.