Knife performance/reviews VS Looks..

Interesting question, and I think your musings are on target. I think, for most people, looks have more to do with the sale than anything else.

With that said, since finding out about BF, I always run some searches & reading here and elsewere before plunking down my money. And I think that's served me well.

Some of the knives I've bought ... and am well satisfied with ... after poking around for info include the KaBar Dozier folding hunter, the 2 Ritters, Bradley Alias II, Swamp Rat Howling Rat, and Spyderco Kopa (w/cocoboloa grips). Next up for me on my wish list are a Spyderco Moran and one of the D2 KaBar Dozier folders that A.G. Russell is selling.

So, I don't know if I like "utility" looks or the idea of getting good value for my buck, but I guess I'd have to say I do read the reviews here and elsewhere, and they do influence my buying decisions.

Besides actual knives, you pick up good, useful info here. I've sharpened every blade I own with my Sharpmaker, which I learned about here & consider a dandy tool for not a lot of money, and Joe T's sticky re steels opened my eyes to getting the most out of an SV 30 blade.
 
Interesting topic and some good responses...

To my mind, there are at least a couple different ways that a knife can "look" good, bad, or ugly.

A particular design can look good because from my experience I'm pretty sure it'll feel good in hand and so has a good chance of working well. Spydercos fall heavily into this category, how else can you explain that even a single Dodo was sold? It's just an incredible utility knife. I know some like it for MBC as well. I don't think Spydercos are ugly, but that's probably because when I look at them I see their function first. However, even a die-hard fan like me has to wonder about the Polliwog, that is one fugly futhermuckin' knife. But I haven't laid hands on one so I'll reserve final judgement.

Some knives don't look any more functional than a basic pen knife, but they can have the eye candy thing going on, with nice scale materials that fit well into polished bolsters. I'd include here knives that are just put together really well, so they feel/look/sound solid.

So, looks like I'm hung up mainly on quality. There are some styles I'm not so crazy about, but the one thing that consistenly says "ugly" to me are knives made from cheap materials that are poorly put together. There's enough crap in the world already.
 
Looks are very important to me. That is why I will buy a benchmade before a Spydie. I don't have a whole lot of money so I spend it on good knives but, they must look good.
One day I might own a spydie but as of now I don't have money to spend on knives that don't look good.

TBG
 
thebladeguy said:
Looks are very important to me. That is why I will buy a benchmade before a Spydie. I don't have a whole lot of money so I spend it on good knives but, they must look good.
One day I might own a spydie but as of now I don't have money to spend on knives that don't look good.

TBG
Click to expand...

So when your financial situation improves you're going to actually buy knives that you find unattractive?
 
I don't know if most folks buy on looks or on reputation.

I think that once a company has established a good reputation, then the people will buy them.

Look at Case slip-joints: everybody I know, who is'nt a Blade-forum member, thinks that Case uses the best blade-steel around.
They just have that reputation "if you want a good pocket-knife, then get a Case".

I don't think that Victorinox Swiss Army knives are all that attractive, but they work just fine, and they have an awesome reputation--and people buy them.

Allen.
 
Spyderco to me is like a woman who isn't that attractive but is great in the sack. Sorry for the chauvinistic simile but it works.
Click to expand...
Great analogy, Laceration. I still like all the + comments about Spydies being incredibly sharp out of the box, and I might consider one of the custom ones I see being made in Sedona with some upgraded scales....
 
Thanks everyone, this is very interesting to me........ :D

So the "LOOKS" of the knife seem to be the reason for choosing rather than reviews and history, is this correct ?

In other words,

Reasons for choosing a knife are,

1. Looks
2. Company reputation.
3. review history etc. (?)


Robbie Roberson ;)
 
Robbie Roberson said:
So the "LOOKS" of the knife seem to be the reason for choosing rather than reviews and history, is this correct ?
Click to expand...

For a lot of us I think materials are pretty important too. For example some can't abide FRN and/or aluminum, and there's a fair degree of steel snobbery around this place.
 
Well, I'm always slow on the trigger when it comes to knives. I'm not wealthy, and even if I were I wouldn't want to spend my hard-earned money on crap. Did that once, and haven't liked it since. I'm also an obsessive researcher when it comes to products I'm planning on buying. That said, I don't want to carry an ugly knife either. One knife I bought, though I wasn't sure I'd like it, was the Buck/Mayo TNT. I'm not a big fan of holes- though Tom's work always looks good. I ended up getting the knife and really liking it. If pushed, though, I will ALWAYS take performance over looks.

-Anthony
 
For me, appearance matters but it is affected by function. If I think a knife looks ugly, then play with it and start to like how it works, I begin to think of it as a good-looking knife. The Spyderco Poliwog is a good example. I saw it in the sales flyer and I thought it was ugly as heck. But when I played with one and held it, I started to view it from a different angle (both literally and figuratively) and It's such a great knife I think it looks great now.

Very few knives are so ugly that I can't learn to like them if they are also functional. A few knives look so nice that I ignore function. But most of my knives have to be functional AND good looking. There are way to many beautiful knives out there to settle for something that works well but is ugly for no reason.
 
Ritt said:
So when your financial situation improves you're going to actually buy knives that you find unattractive?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think spydercos are exellent knives as are benchmades. I just like the latter better.

TBG :thumbup:
 
Spydies had never appealed to me, either, but the absolute love the Spyderco fans display here practically made me get one to see what the fuss was about.

Well, now I know ... the Spyderco people certainly know how to build a knife, and that's the sharpest edge I've ever seen come out of a box.

And my Sharpmaker doesn't do anything but what Sal says it will in the video, and pretty easily at that.

Getting what you pay for ... what a concept. :thumbup:
 
MGF said:
Spydies had never appealed to me, either, but the absolute love the Spyderco fans display here practically made me get one to see what the fuss was about.

Well, now I know ... the Spyderco people certainly know how to build a knife, and that's the sharpest edge I've ever seen come out of a box.

And my Sharpmaker doesn't do anything but what Sal says it will in the video, and pretty easily at that.

Getting what you pay for ... what a concept. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Spyderco sure does live up to their reputation. Aside from just generally good stuff, I think people like Spyderco because they have a much better walk:talk ratio than some other manufacturers. :)
 
A knife gets my attention by the way it looks first. It it does not appeal to my eye, then I won't look into it any further.
 
Spyderco is Function over Form, completely. Spyderco really does listen to the people who use knives and react accordingly. For that reason alone they have gained a tremendous amount of respect from me. Benchmade is more of a Form follows Function approach. Their knives have alot of visual appeal but tend to get complaints about how they perform (mostly do to their thick grinds) but still have a good following. If you have any doubts about Spyderco, please take part in the Passarounds we have here. After handling several of their knives, I have no doubt about why they are so well regarded and why I would want to buy them regardless of the looks. Spyderco builds knives that perform...once you put them to use you'll see. After awhile, you might just start taking a second glance at that girl at the end of the bar with the weird nose.
 
The first serious knife I bought was when I went into the military; I had wanted a good knife but was not into computers and had not heard of the internet, so I read knife magazines. Lucky for me I saw a review for a lower end but to me then expensive knife called an Aristocrat Wraith. A good review and I thought it looked great, so I bought it and it did everything I needed to do for the next 4 years with very little maintenance. The leather sheath even held up even though modified some. So for me the knife has to look good and perform. If it’s the best looking knife in the world and its junk I won’t by it, if it’s built like a tank but ugly, then maybe. I will do my homework though before buying. But I don’t buy stuff to collect so I still have my Wraith for a field knife, for a back up a Strider Mark 1.
 
For me Looks usually get me interested in in the knife at first, then i research it and see the reviews. I usually cant bring myself to buy an ugly knife that i do like whether good or bad reputation because everyday i will have to look at the knife and I want a pretty thing to look at (call me shallow if you will :D ). It was the same for my first spydercro...I heard so many grat things about them that i went onto their sight and looked through all of their knives until i found the one that appealed to me in looks and bought it. I will not buy a bad quality knife if it looks good but i havent been able to buy a good functioning knife that looks bad. So to me you have to have an equal balance to receive my purchase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top