Is it just me, or...

[JustinFournier]

I just took mine apart, and there is no sloppy machine marks in the spring cutout at all.

There is a cut into the lockbar cutout towards the pivot, and I have no idea what it's for.

But it's not the same thing as the machine marks on the spring cutout on the Xm.

So why is this sloppy? I'm looking through pictures and scanning videos, and they are all the same way, in line with the longest length cutout for the lockbar facing the pivot. The Xm's go 2 different ways.

It's blatantly clear.

 

[au5t3n5]

Hahahahahaha, I am not mad at all. In fact I was just laughing and having a good time. It is funny that you are willing to call Hinderers "sloppy" when CRK's aren't perfect either.

Seriously though... take yours apart and see. Or do I need to take apart all of mine and post pictures?

I could care less how you treat your sebenza and how you clean it, the fact of the matter is:

Yes the Hinderer has machining marks
Yes the CRK has grooves from the cutout.

I don't care what you think of those statements and how much you value one over the other... but at the end of the day, neither are perfect.

I don't care about being Mr. Right or Mrs. Wrong, I just would like for you to acknowledge and see for yourself the grooves in the Sebenza and then maybe you can reassess the Hinderer in a more gentle light.

I just took mine apart, and there is no sloppy machine marks in the spring cutout at all.

There is a cut into the lockbar cutout towards the pivot, and I have no idea what it's for.

But it's not the same thing as the machine marks on the spring cutout on the Xm.

So why is this sloppy? I'm looking through pictures and scanning videos, and they are all the same way, in line with the longest length cutout for the lockbar facing the pivot. The Xm's go 2 different ways.

It's blatantly clear.

Edit: Not all the cutouts are made the same. If you have multiple Sebenzas check them. In that sense they are sloppy. If they are all 100% identical... then they would not be "sloppy" so to speak.

 

[JustinFournier]

Did you read what I said about the Hinderer? I want to love it. I really do. Here I will quote myself.

I want to like the Xm-18 so bad. I love the stonewash finish, I love the way you can customize the knife, I really want to try Duratech 20CV. I like how you can change the scales, I like the look of the knife and I would love to try the flipper on them as they are apparently some of the best at executing the design. The ergonomics look great, I really really want to love this knife.

I would gladly paw through a pile of Xms and look for one that is machined just right, that doesn't have a weak detent at the $380ish they sell direct for, and more than likely love it. But will I have the opportunity to do that?

Clearly not. I have confidence that when I buy the CRK, it's going to be machined the way I have come to expect, and any other issue will be handled within warranty. I can't send the Xm back and say hey I don't like the machine marks in the spring cutout do it again.

I maintain that it's not machined as well as the CRK. I openly acknowledge the cutouts on the inside of the Sebenza. I see them clearly here, I only have 2 small and 2 large, so I don't have a large enough sample to compare as I do the Xms.

But they are all going the same way, and there is 1 cut per lockside. The Xm has 2 and they go different ways. The Xm has machine marks in the latest spring cutout, the Sebbys all look fine.

The sloppy part is the machine marks in the spring cutout, visible on the outside of the knife. This doesn't exist on a Sebby.

The part that I am calling sloppy is the lockbar has inconsistent machining. Some have large indents, some have small, some go one way, another knife has it going another. They are not consistent. So which way will mine be when I get it? It's not just the simple existence of them, it's their inconsistency.

 

[Exeter354]

Well guys, I certainly didn't intend for the thread to go in this direction. Please don't be upset with each other. There isn't a wrong answer here, it's an individual perception of other knives in relation to CRK, that's all. Whereas one might perceive Hinderer on par with CRK, another might perceive it differently. Nothing wrong with that - my original post was about how each person individually judges one brand by comparison to another and how that impacts decision making. Personally I like Hinderer XM's and I never noticed those flaws in the machining before, but I'm not educated enough in this area to look for those sorts of things. But I greatly appreciate that others can spot stuff like that and I love this forum because I learn from them. Had I known of these flaws, it likely wouldn't have impacted my personal feelings on Hinderer at all because I appreciate other qualities of the XM, such as certain design characteristics. But I can also understand why these flaws may negatively impact others in their decision making and purchase philosophies. It's all good guys. Thanks for the responses.

 

[Aidansdaddy17]

I "do" think it's crap for those who do use their military status or civil service status to buy a Hinderer at cost. Then turn around and sell it for twice the amount on here or other forums. Complete BS. Being prior service...I'd love to be able to buy one at cost. It does seem with all of us Sebenza/CRK lovers that we give better deals on our CRK's that we sell to let others enjoy. Almost like having the family dog put up for adoption because of a child's allergy. We want a good home for our knife/kives. Hinderer sales are a complete joke, unless you paid double. JMTS!

 

[Jaytaylor]

Look at the picture in post #9, the far right arrow, The under cut in the frame, where the two tangents meet, not looking to fight with you but come on, that's sloppy, pure and simply.

Same picture far left arrow,(horizontal) that little "round" cut, most certainly SHOULD be there.

Sorry, no pictures of my jeep...

It is not sloppy, it is intentional and the reasons why are outlined in the links from post No.14 which you clearly have still failed to read despite your remarks that I have provided no "evidence" when it been there all along.

Please educate yourself, it will save you from making ignorant posts.

 

[Chris_Himself]

If you're looking for an slim knife like a CRK with great F&F.

Bob Terzuola makes exactly the knife you're after. They're called "tacticals" but I actually prefer to think of them along the lines of gentlemans folders with a bit of attitude.

 

[snowreaper1]

Well this thread has been pretty entertaining. Can't say I've really learned anything worth while but it passed some time. Thanks to the OP for trying to create a positive thread for all of us to enjoy.
How and why Hinderer was brought into it.... who knows. Just remember we all have opinions and they usually differ from others. But when we take our opinions and state them as fact you sometimes
get pointless conversations like this.

 

[Jaytaylor]

I don't think anyone is arguing about what purpose the holes serve.

Really? Your post No.5 highlighting those holes as sloppy machining evidence.

My point was the machining marks around the spring cutout are sloppy machining, thus CRK has machined their product to a higher standard... .

In your opinion.

And that the grade 5 titanium is a relatively brittle alloy making it unsuitable for prying, thus attempting to control fractures in 1 the front of the lockbar cutout is inconsistent with it's practical use and 2 the spring cutout reaches to back of the cutout for the lockbar so if you were to pry with it, it would naturally sheer at that point as the material is much thinner there, making it unnecessary to control the fracture at that point.

Makes no sense?!? A brittle metal is generally more prone to fatigue failure, therefore the need to reduce stress concentration zones increases. The frame is not designed for prying, I’m just confused as to why you mention this.
Sheer forces? How on earth did you get to that conclusion? The forces at play here would lead to plastic deformation of the lock bar – That is why Rick designed the LBS.
Also, w.r.t. the Titanium lock side, you are assuming no heat or work treatment resulting in a less brittle structure.
The hole at the end of the slot is NOT to control a fracture, it is to help prevent the formation of a fracture.

Now if you look back at Gen 1 and 2 Xms, you will notice many spring cutouts with no machine marks, and the lockbar cutouts are actually quite smooth and beveled well with a larger diameter hole in the back of the lockbar cutout. Very much like the Sebenza.

So in the later gen 3 and 4, you see these "features" come up, but no material change to make them appropriate.

Not sure what you mean, material change? The evolution of the design together with real world testing has lead to development of the design, it does not make those features any less appropriate, they still remain to add to the robust nature of the XM.

An appropriate update would have been: People are using my knife to pry and breaking the lockside so I will add sheer points to control the fractures ensuring they break in a controlled fashion and use a material suitable for this task.

Shear points? What are you on about? Again, the features in question are to help PREVENT the formation of fractures by reducing the stress at those locations.
They do not control permanent deformation or failure.

An inappropriate update is, People die when they crash the helicopters I make, and ejection seats save lives in fighter jets, so I will add a fighter jet ejection seat to my helicopter.

Huh!?!?

Thus, my Sebenza is the standard to which I measure all other folders, and so far from what I have seen which I readily admit is only a small % of the custom makers out there, is IMO unsurpassed in machining tolerances, design and the melding of form and function.

Good for you, IMO.

 

[Jaytaylor]

I just took mine apart, and there is no sloppy machine marks in the spring cutout at all.

There is a cut into the lockbar cutout towards the pivot, and I have no idea what it's for.

It is not for anything, it is the result of cutting the lock bar, a machining mark left over from manufacture, much like the machine marks in the XM lock bar cut-out.

So why is this sloppy? I'm looking through pictures and scanning videos, and they are all the same way, in line with the longest length cutout for the lockbar facing the pivot. The Xm's go 2 different ways.

It's blatantly clear.

Well, by your logic machining process marks = sloppy workmanship, therefore sloppy by your own standard -

Or by your logic if I put a sticker over it, to say keep it out of sight it will make the product higher quality.

 

[김원진]

ditto on breaking it down all the way to get some lubricant on the screws(high humidity area).

I think the issue with the xm's weak detent is on par with the sebs lockface. I haven't seen detent issues at all, though there are those that have had them(whether factory or what not).

-snowreaper, I had brought up hinderers because after receiving mine I felt they were comparable in quality, but then came along a debunct attempt. I still feel they're just as good, but debunking came along

 

[MostMenAreRuthless]

I really like Sebenzas. I like the older "regular" models. I like the "21's". I am sure I will like the "25". I can't help but use the Sebenza as my measuring stick against all other knives I have or consider. However, that doesn't stop me from buying other knives as long as I feel they are a good value. There are some CRK's I bought and sold because I didn't care for them as much as I like the Sebenza--the PS and Mnandi for example. I sold them to buy another Sebenza and a custom.

 

[Myker]

It is not sloppy, it is intentional and the reasons why are outlined in the links from post No.14 which you clearly have still failed to read despite your remarks that I have provided no "evidence" when it been there all along.

Please educate yourself, it will save you from making ignorant posts.

Your link still fails to explain the undercut in the frame as I stated before.

You do know what the frame is right?

Said I didn't want to argue but you just had to put that ignorant remark in there, says a lot there pal.

 

[Jaytaylor]

Your link still fails to explain the undercut in the frame as I stated before.

Really?

The first link takes you to a page where the very first paragraph explains the issues and the third paragraph prevention.

I'll just spell it out for you.

The apex of the lock bar cut-out close to the pivot is a stress concentration area - for instance when performing push cuts the forces generated between the pivot and the thumb stud rests on the frame will localise at the cut-out apex under the pivot resulting in a focused stress at the apex - this can lead to the formation of a crack which, over time can propagate resulting in failure of the frame.

Putting a hole or larger radius at the apex reduces the concentraton of stress.

You do know what the frame is right?

M'mmm not sure....is it this bit?

Said I didn't want to argue but you just had to put that ignorant remark in there, says a lot there pal

Irony eh?

 

[Myker]

Sure thing, you win.

Thanks for spelling it out.

 

[Jaytaylor]

Sure thing, you win.

Thanks for spelling it out.

I was trying to reply and stuffed it up and lost the lot, you've since edited your post.

The photo you posted utilises the same design principal.

I suspect the radius has been shifted away from the apex on the XM to put it further away from the pivot. Moving a sress area away from the pivot makes sense.


As for the skull, I'm trying to like it but prefer the plain old tab filler.

 

[김원진]

jay, if you don't want your skull, I may. just a thought