Is it traditional or something else?

[KnifeHead]

I have some questions but, bear with me while I give you a backdrop for them.

When I started learning about traditional folding knives, one of the hurdles I had to clear was the fact that there are names for everything. I know that sounds stupid but geesh, we have stockmans, jacks, trappers, whittlers, clips, pens, half-stop, sheep foot, lamb foot, nail nick, nail pull, French pull, matchstick pull, long pull etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. You can get lost in the names!

Along with learning(and still learning) that knives and knife parts have names and sometimes multiple names, another hurdle was that there are PATTERNS! What the heck... PATTERNS?! I was amazed that there was something called a stockman pattern and, for the most part, a stockman is a stockman whether someone made it 100 years ago or 100 minutes ago. They have a specific shape and generally a certain blade set with slight variations, but still a stockman is a stockman. If you know what you are looking at when you see one, you know you are looking at a stockman regardless of who made it because, duh...it's a stockman, silly! There are even standard sizes for some patterns and that is interesting to me.

One of the things that you hear in "our world" that can easily go unnoticed is the interesting phrase, "This is (insert a manufacturer's or knifemaker's name here) take on a(insert knife name)." It's natural for us to employ our artistic expression to make something a little different and to experiment with traditional patterns, but when does it stop becoming a stockman?

It happened in a thread a while back where there was some discussion about the GEC Barlows. Some said that they are Barlows because that's what GEC calls them. Others said they are not Barlows because they don't look like Barlows. Can both parties be correct?

Here's my questions:

1. When does traditional "pattern X" cross the line and become something that should be renamed?

2. What constitutes a traditional knife? (ie, materials used?, shape of blade(s)?, number of blades?, shape of handle?, etc.)

I know that the answers to these questions may be mostly opinion and therefore, there may not be any definitive answers because our hobby seems to have a lot of experts , but I'd like to see what others are thinking anyway.

Besides, it's fun and I need to move my post count along so I can do a 3000th post giveaway. It's a tradition.

 

[d.parker]

Going back to where original patterns originated, in shape of frame, blade shapes, true to dimensions and materials, that would constitute a traditional pattern. If a maker followed these original truths in his reproduction of the pattern, they have a reproduction of a traditional pattern. If not you have a modern rendition of a original pattern.

You know if she looks like a Duck, walks like Duck and quacks, it's probably a Duck. If not she ain't no Duck.... Just my opinion.....

 

[VCM3]

Going back to where original patterns originated, in shape of frame, blade shapes, true to dimensions and materials, that would constitute a traditional pattern. If a maker followed these original truths in his reproduction of the pattern, they have a reproduction of a traditional pattern. If not you have a modern rendition of a original pattern.

You know if she looks like a Duck, walks like Duck and quacks, it's probably a Duck. If not she ain't no Duck.... Just my opinion.....

d.parker,You said that good :thumbup:

I think a slipojoint,or lockback,that has no liners & is made with modern synthetic frame(handle) materials,IMO,is not a traditional knife,rather a rendition,like D. says
-Vince

 

[VCM3]

Kerry,
I reread your post & d.parkers & mine....This is a bit complicated.
Traditional folders cover a lot of range
Vintage,Early American vintage,pre WW11,etc.They have evolved & Co.'s have fooled around with a lot of styles,mechanics,etc
I was going to say certain lock mechanisms,but looking back through history,there was a lot of invented lock mechanisms.
This is a good thread & will be interesting to read the posts
I myself,am now more intrigued (did I spell that OK ?) about your giveaway,this,is the second time I heard you recently mention it
It is a distraction,lol. But a good thread.
In the case of the GEC thread,all it took was a cutler involved in the Barlows design,to shorten the bolster & U gotta Barlow thats a jack!
I like what I said,linerless folders with modern day synthetics,I think,are renditions of Trad knives,and I realize my answer does not really answer you Wow what a ramble,forgive me
-Vince

 

[Blues]

Paraphrasing former Associate Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart:

A Traditional Knife may be hard to define but I know one when I see it.

 

[IVANKERLEY]

Paraphrasing former Associate Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart:

A Traditional Knife may be hard to define but I know one when I see it.

its funny cause i view my buck alpha dorado as a traditional even though it has one of those techno fancy liner lock thingies
who am i kidding i only carry it in case i run across an apple that the yeller stockman cant handle... i suppose its undercover tacti-cool
ivan

 

[Getahl]

I think Blues hit it on the head. Traditionals can be slippies, linerlocks, backlocks, etc, come in a variety of colors, handle materials, steels, et al. You generally won't get the more modern, super steels, but they are used. Same with, say, G-10. Case has a line of G-10 patterns. Heck, you can even find thumb studs on some I've seen, though I've yet to see a thumb-hole.

 

[jackknife]

If your great granddaddy would recognize it, it's a traditional pocket knife!

 

[xbxb]

I think the Duck thing works for me.

 

[6.0stroker]

If your great granddaddy would recognize it, it's a traditional pocket knife!

Thats a good one BUT some GREAT GRANDDADS these days are fairly young:foot: now I don't mean no harm by that statement!?.

Just state'n a FACT.





PS: does not apply to yours truley as My dad on back have crossed the GREAT DIVIDE!:grumpy:






Now to the OP lots of materials seem newer BUT Plastic derivates have been around for a LONG time, Delrin 60ish,prior to that celluloids Etc. Frame shape now there is where the rubber meets the road IMHO.

 

[Absintheur]

I have some questions but, bear with me while I give you a backdrop for them.

When I started learning about traditional folding knives, one of the hurdles I had to clear was the fact that there are names for everything.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but it actually can get worse... With so many custom makers plying their trade you can end up with patterns that don't have a name at all yet are still traditional knives. If you saw my post on my new custom from Ken Coats you will understand. Slip joints are almost always going to be traditional knives as will friction folders. It gets a bit sticky when it comes to lockblades. I consider my Case Sharktooth to be a traditional but not my Cold Steel Endura. While they are both lockbacks the Endura is obviously a modern knife design. Obviously a modern knife design....

Does this mean we can decide on on whether or not it is a traditional knife based solely on looks? Afraid not...as pointed out traditionals are being made with all sorts of non-traditional materials yet still fall into the traditional class. I think d.parker said it best...

You know if she looks like a Duck, walks like Duck, and quacks like a Duck, it's probably a Duck.

unless of course it is a decoy...

 

[4ever3]

"This is (insert a manufacturer's or knifemaker's name here) take on a(insert knife name)."

That depends on what your definition of is, is

IMO, a "Traditional" knife must have traditional scales, blade configuration, and frame profile, other wise it's just a slip joint (not that theres anything wrong with that), blade and spring material don't have anything to do with it. Just because someone calls a slip joint a "traditional" or a traditional name doesn't make it one.

It's kinda like someone buying a "Knife Maker" membership and then asking how to peen pins...What? Just because a guy rides a Vespa doesn't make him a biker either, to me "Knife Maker" is a title that is earned, not purchased, but I digress.

 

[dalee100]

Hi,

I'm with Blues, I know one when I see it. I do tend to believe that a knife should follow a certain style to fall within a pattern. Simply because I expect to see certain features. For example, a stockman needs three blades to be a stockman. A single blade isn't a stockman to me.

I pretty sure though as time passes from one generation to the next. The definition of what is traditional or not will change.

dalee

 

[JatMat]

Blues hit it on the head! I am not articulate enough to define one, but I sure as heck knows one when I see one.

 

[John T Wylie Jr]

d.parker,You said that good :thumbup:

I think a slipojoint,or lockback,that has no liners & is made with modern synthetic frame(handle) materials,IMO,is not a traditional knife,rather a rendition,like D. says
-Vince

Then we could take it further and say those with integral liner / bolsters are not traditional as well , or those that don't use brass liners.

Traditional....is it a pattern or construction method or materials ?

 

[JatMat]

So is this traditional or not?

 

[KnifeHead]

Muskrat: a slim, serpentine, equal-end frame with slim, clip blades pivoting out of each end.

This is a muskrat:

This is NOT a muskrat, unless, of course, you subscribe to the idea that if you call it "X", that's what it is. If that's the case, you probably think you can pick up a turd by the clean end too.

[/QUOTE]

If enough people start thinking this is a muskrat, then all the new noobs will be saying the REAL MUSKRAT is not a muskrat....discuss.

 

[Blues]

Kerry, you're preaching to the choir...at least in my case.

Realizing that language is a living thing, there still comes a point where you have to draw the line. Calling a "cat" a "dog" doesn't make it so but if you repeat it enough times some folks will invariably adopt the new moniker. (Look at how "facts" become accepted when they're regurgitated ad nauseum on television broadcasts.)

Case in point: I've tried for the past few years to explain the difference between a "bullhead" and a "moose". However, most folks (here and elsewhere) are bullheaded enough that they'd rather just call a "bullhead" a "moose" and let the chips fall where they may. They really just don't care and are too lazy to call the pattern by its proper name.

The same thing is evident with stock and cattle knives.

In the end, those who care to understand and know the difference will make the effort.

Those who don't, won't.

 

[Core Knife Co.]

This one is more consistent with the Muskrat however it's called the Mink. I like the serpentine feel so I purchased this one.

How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
Abraham Lincoln

 

[tomcrx]

1. When does traditional "pattern X" cross the line and become something that should be renamed?

That's tough. To me a lot of names were derived by collectors. When you look at old catalogs Jacks were called Jacks no matter if it were serpentine, dogleg, swell center or had blades on both ends. Some cattle knives were called stockman or cowboy knives etc.
So it is a question that really can't be answered. Collectors will categorize it how they want based on their own bias and whatever reference they say supports it. The names and categorization were a language developed by collectors to facilitate communication in the hobby.

My great uncle Durph only ever used 3 names to describe pocket knives. Jack, pen or stockman for every knife he had.

2. What constitutes a traditional knife? (ie, materials used?, shape of blade(s)?, number of blades?, shape of handle?, etc.)

Traditional to me is pinned construction, slipjoint, and nickel silver or iron bolsters (if bolsters are used). For handle materials and pattern that is open. Some say natural but that leaves out the derlin, celluloid etc. Vintage knife makers used manmades when they were available so they can't be ruled out. I guess that when I think traditional I tend to think the closer to vintage in pattern, materials and construction the better.