Ka-Bar Coppersmith Barlow??

Is the shield pinned or glued?

I really like the looks of this knife but I'm really hesitant to buy another product from CSC. The last 2 CSCs I bought - 2 half moons - 1 made in 2010 & 1 made in 2012 were complete garbage. I'll have to keep an eye on this thread to see if the quality on these is consistent.
 
joeymoey: I attended the Canal Street Cutlery open house this past fall and handled over 100 new, 2013 knives. Based on what I saw, all blades were centered, springs flush in open and closed position, no light or (minimum light) in spring gaps, and the F&F seemed excellent even though the knives I was looking at were labeled as "seconds". I really couldn't tell why they were seconds. I bought two Half-moon Trappers and one Barlow.

I spoke with Jean who was dealing with customers that day. She said that they had retooled and were working bolsters and liners in stainless now, and blades were a variety of desirable steels from 1095 to D2 to 14-4 CroMo among others, depending on the contract. Blades are flat ground, and they are really wearing out belts because of the changes.

From what I handled, the Barlows had heaviest springs--more in line with the current GEC (not the GEC bear-trap snap of a few years ago). I would put the Barlow springs at 6-7 on the pull scale, which is actually more than I prefer. The Half-Moon trappers are stronger than they were in the past, but still softer than the Barlows--maybe a 4 to 4+ which is where I am beginning to like springs.

I'm writing this not to put a soft glow on CSC, but to let you know they have changed their specs and what my observations were, based on the knives I personally handled. Currently, I would put CSC above Case with it's rounded edges, slightly above Queen on a good day (Queen offers great steel, but mostly only 2 kinds), but lower than GEC which offers many more patterns.

I was really impressed with what I handled, especially given that they were seconds, and am seriously thinking about Coppersmith or one of the jade or yellow micarta, which look really nice. With CSC the limiting factor is patterns. I wish they would build more.

joeymoey said:
Is the shield pinned or glued?

I really like the looks of this knife but I'm really hesitant to buy another product from CSC. The last 2 CSCs I bought - 2 half moons - 1 made in 2010 & 1 made in 2012 were complete garbage. I'll have to keep an eye on this thread to see if the quality on these is consistent.
Click to expand...
 
paulhilborn said:
Mine came yesterday but the light disappeared so I wasn't able to take pictures until now.

I am very impressed, no gaps, blades are centered and flush with backsprings when open, no blade play/wobble at all. Smooth edges all around, no over sunk or raised cover pins. Nice jigging, beautiful bone as well, nice blade grinds, workable sharp out of the box and the Copper---WOW!!!

Pardon my lack of knowing what steel this stainless is exactly but it sure took a terrific edge :thumbup:.

Very similar build to my 1983 Schrade USA Heritage Barlow :thumbup:.

Now to watch the patina form ;).

d51v.jpg


Paul
Click to expand...

Very nice photographs.
 
I think the original specs might have called for a wharncliffe blade, but the pen is what wound up as the final product. Not sure why that hasn't been updated.
 
Some updated pics of my Coppersmith Barlow to show off the patina the copper is taking on. This is quickly becoming my favorite knife and I really enjoy how the copper changes almost daily.

IMG_20140523_134544565_HDR_zpswm9mtlhs.jpg
IMG_20140523_134245660_zpsgsuww5yz.jpg
IMG_20140523_134201871_zpstujnfroq.jpg
IMG_20140523_134346361_zpsimv5rdmn.jpg
 
Wow that is getting a really cool patina. I'm going to buy one sooner or later.
 
Any chance of an update on these after a while of use? I haven't picked up any of these yet and I am considering it still. Perhaps one of our members would like to share some details on how they are holding up? Mini review perhaps pointing out any hot spots, slipping of covers, cracks, lockup and F&F after real use? If you have some details to share I sure would be interested in hearing about it.
 
Knowing the history of the folks making these, I am really wanting to try one. Thanks for posting all the pics, you're making it really hard to not pull the trigger.
 
I received a Coppersmith small lockback last night and noticed that the shield is significantly below the level of the scales. I'll try to get pictures tonight, but I was curious if this is normal for this line. Does anyone else have a Coppersmith with this? It's definitely noticeable, probably 1/16" of an inch or so, but probably something I could get over if I decided it was normal. However, if it's not par for the course, it's going to bother me and I'll probably try to see if I can get it exchanged.
 
No mine is pretty flush and most of the pictures I have seen of others are pretty flush. Canal Street hasn't always made the Coppersmith line though and I'm not sure if they built the one you have or not. I have a couple GEC's that have the shield below the bone on one side then sticking above on the other which is pretty annoying. If you bought your's from a reputable dealer they should be more than happy to exchange it for you.
 
I' m back on this thread as I also have a Ka-Bar barlow on my short (:rolleyes:) list, as well as it's CS cousin.
I wonder if it is pure copper as this produces verdigris that is a poison. I hope to hear further from your experience and how it gets its patina.

154CM is the US (Crucible) made answer to japanese ATS-34 , pretty similar except that the later is sintered (#thinner, better edge keeping and higher HRC) and cheaper. It is often confused with CPM-154, that is also sintered, excellent but very expensive.
 
Jolipapa said:
I' m back on this thread as I also have a Ka-Bar barlow on my short (:rolleyes:) list, as well as it's CS cousin.
I wonder if it is pure copper as this produces verdigris that is a poison. I hope to hear further from your experience and how it gets its patina.

154CM is the US (Crucible) made answer to japanese ATS-34 , pretty similar except that the later is sintered (#thinner, better edge keeping and higher HRC) and cheaper. It is often confused with CPM-154, that is also sintered, excellent but very expensive.
Click to expand...


You got that backward. 154CM came first.

Edited to add,
First developed by Climax Molybdenum.
Formula sold to Crucible, who had problems bringing it into production. Had some quality issues with the batches.
Hitachi developed ATS-34 in response to Crucible's problems.
Crucible worked out their problems and the current material is good to go.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top