Large Regular Sebenza Review

[R.A.T.]

All I know is I'm headed to the local quick mart and load up on those <$5 folders to replace all that useless expensive stuff I have.

 

[Megalobyte]

I am like a moth, which can't seem to avoid the flame...

Cliff, what about the fact that 99% of all production companies, with CRK being that lone 1%, consider disassembling the knife for maintainance, voiding the warrantee? Wow, they must not be capable of hard use, since I consider repeatedly disassembling and reassembling a knife to be hard use, much like you think the ability to flick is somehow the same thing as hard use and makes a knife capable of hard use. Personally, if I have to choose between flicking and being able to properly maintain a knife, that's a no brainer.

Chris Reeve believes long term, hard flicking is bad for knives, I agree, a lot of people do. He strikes me as a stubborn man, a lot of engineers are, especially very successful ones, the fact that he disagrees with flicking as a philosophy and therefore does not feel it should be covered does not mean the Sebenza is inferior in this regard, it will handle flicking as well or better than most knives, and, I would bet that many of the makers who claim that their stop pin(s) don't deform at all after repeated, hard flicking are not being completely honest. All they are really saying is, they have tried to minimize the damage with a special design, and, they'll cover it if anything happens over time, which is not the same thing as their knives containing magic metal that doesn't deform from repeated, metal to metal impacts.

The fact that CR does not allow flicking does not mean the knife is not capable of hard use, unless your ultimate criteria for hard use, is flicking, which is pretty silly if you ask me. I'd love to see you put your wonderful $5 knife through some really tough tests, tests that actually do determine if a knife is robust and capable of long term hard use, something besides simply flicking. The fact that any company or maker says his knife can be flicked or is prepared to fix any damage that results, does not automatically make that a hard use knife, now does it.

CR chooses to not allow you to open his knife in a way he doesn't approve of, that is his right, as he designed it, you may not like this, but, it does not mean his knives are inferior to crap knives with unlimited warrantees, to say so is a little silly.

Because, if you break down what you are repeatedly saying here, it goes like this:

A $10 knife, made of low quality materials is capable of hard use if the maker doesn't prohibit flicking, and a higher quality knife, with top quality materials is automatically not capable of hard use simply because the maker chooses to prohibit flicking. Now, doesn't this seem, on its face, a little silly? What if there was a hypothetical knife that absolutely was not the least bit damaged no matter how hard, or how often you flicked it, and, then, the maker decided for whatever reason, like, he thinks flicking is dumb, to prohibit it in the warrantee, has this hard use knife, somehow become less capable because some words on a piece of paper changed?

And, exactly how does designing a knife to be opened with a thumbstud and not proscribing flicking as a desirable opening method make the knife not capable of hard use? I don't know about you but when I think of hard use knives, and using knives hard, it isn't flicking that first pops into my mind, in fact, truth be told, flicking never enters the equation, because I think it is unimportant, like for example far less important than the overall quality and abilities of the knife, yes, there are things knives are called upon to do besides flicking. To argue that a company that makes cheap, garbage knives, that allows flicking with their warrantee, makes a knife more capable of hard use than a much higher quality knife whose maker doesn't agree with and therefore doesn't allow flicking, is plain silly. A crap knife can have an unlimited warrantee and a great knife can have a slightly limited one, but to continually propose that whether a warrantee says flicking is OK or not, determines whether the knife is capable of hard use, without regard to the actual quality or abilities of the knives themselves, is really a very weak, tired argument.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

I am like a moth, which can't seem to avoid the flame...

A most appropriate analogy.

 

[Steelhed]

I could see a new Kliff Stump story coming out of this - something like Kliffy meets the warranty man wherein our intrepid hero compares how Knife Maker A's warranty produces cleaner paper cuts than Knife Maker B's warranty. Afterall, if the warranty is more important than the knife, then why do we not test warranties instead of knives? In fact, Kliff says he's gonna stop carrying knives altogether and start carrying the warranty. He can fold it just like a folding knife, and whip it out of his pocket when he needs to cut something like an apple, or in Kliffy's case, a crow bar. All he'd need to do is wave that superior warranty over the apple and it would fall into bite size pieces out sheer respect for such great coverage. Or he could immobolize a mugger by simply reading from the paragraph that says spine whacking is not considered abuse. I'm sure the mugger would be so impressed he'd pass out from fright.

 

[Megalobyte]

I could see a new Kliff Stump story coming out of this - something like Kliffy meets the warranty man wherein our intrepid hero compares how Knife Maker A's warranty produces cleaner paper cuts than Knife Maker B's warranty. Afterall, if the warranty is more important than the knife, then why do we not test warranties instead of knives? In fact, Kliff says he's gonna stop carrying knives altogether and start carrying the warranty. He can fold it just like a folding knife, and whip it out of his pocket when he needs to cut something like an apple, or in Kliffy's case, a crow bar. All he'd need to do is wave that superior warranty over the apple and it would fall into bite size pieces out sheer respect for such great coverage. Or he could immobolize a mugger by simply reading from the paragraph that says spine whacking is not considered abuse. I'm sure the mugger would be so impressed he'd pass out from fright.

That's funny, and I see where you're going with it, but, trouble is, as far as I know, a warrantee can't be flicked open, so... Well, actually, paper items can be flicked, like baseball cards when you were a kid, or is that flipped, not sure, I'll have to consult some warrantees and get back to you.

I will say this though, Cliff is entitled to his opinion and despite some relatively heated debate, of which I may be slightly guilty , he has not resorted to personal attacks, that's admirable. And on that issue I am not joking, I pretty much never get personal, and I might have done so in this thread, because frankly, after seeing this stuff for a looooong time, and feeling it is absurd, and unfair to a company I greatly admire, well, I lost my temper, and for that, I'm sorry, what I do not apologize for, or take back one iota, are my arguments as to why Cliff's and BS's arguments are fallacious and potentially, irritating.

See, I understand if Cliff and BS don't like the fact that CR doesn't approve of, nor allow flicking, hell, of course I'd prefer the warrantee not prohibit it, even though I never, ever seem to have a need to do it, but, what I do completely disagree with is the notion that because CR, for whatever reason, disagrees with and prohibits flicking, his knives cannot be considered hard use knives. You don't need to be a genius to see that argument is flawed, do you?

Something else just occurred to me, I recently traded into a NIB Extrema Ratio Nemesis folder, if ever there was a hard use knife, this is it, this is the mother of all lockbacks, and would give any hard use knife some extremely stiff competition, but, guess what, it's a lockback, with a strong backspring, so, ummm, it cannot be flicked open! So, according to Cliff and BS's logic, it can't be considered a hard use knife because its design doesn't allow for it to be safely flicked! I'd love to hear Cliff and BS explain this one away.

PS. Still waiting for BS to tell us the myriad of inexpensive production folders that are superior to the Sebenza in workmanship, materials, F&F and overall quality.

Beuller? Brownshoe?

 

[Steelhed]

Megalobyte - I'm just kidding. Cliff always comports himself well in these discussions, I just like to poke fun sometimes because he never does breakdown and lose it. He is wrong this time though. Not even Cliff Stamp can be correct every time. Warranties are warranties and knive are knives. The best warranty in the world won't make a poor knife any better, and a bad warranty will not detract one bit from the performance of a good one. You can buy knives because of the warranty or because of the quality. When the warranty and the knife are both good, then heaven and earth abide.

 

[thombrogan]

it's a lockback, with a strong backspring, so, ummm, it cannot be flicked open!

It can, too. You just Brownie-Pop it instead of touching the external kicks (they can't be thumbstuds because thumbstuds suck). Also, Extrema Ratio's warrantee over what is and what isn't covered is intentionally vague, so most any warrantee which outlines that which actually is covered is a knife with a superior warrantee.

I think that Mr. Stamp's point about the Sebenza is that it's marketed as a hard-use knife and, while the customer service is top-notch, the warrantee is written as though the manufacturer lacks total faith in the product.

For folding knives, though, this is common. Strider no longer covers "I've taken it apart, but can't put it back together" and Swamp Rat is revising the warrantee on their folding knife to make it more akin to CRK's warrantees than to Busse's. Even there, since Busse doesn't cover intentional abuse and Mr. Reeve considers flicking and spinewhacking (outside of his watchful eye, how can he tell if you gave the knife a sharp rap on a padded surface or beat it like it owes you money?) to be abuse, they may already have more in common than one may assume.

Richard Sommer,

Thanks for the great review.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

... maybe they ought to get themselves a fixed blade.

Or any of the *many* folding knives that can withstand it.

When the temperature drops to about -30 you can't have unexposed skin for very long, frost bite can set in immediately at -40 and below its almost instant. You have to wear very thick mitts (no gloves) which make manipulating blades open via studs next to impossible. Spyderco's large blade holes are functional for longer than most, but even they stop being practical at some point. However you can always do a quick wrist snap.

Knives as well as anything else should be judged what they are designed to do...

No they need to be judged against the competition just like any other product. When you buy something, from a toaster to a new car, do you actually just go by what the dealer says about the product, or look at what is offered from other toasters and cars and compare abilities / product support etc. .

So if I understand Cliff's argument, a $2000 Warenski , which costs 50 times more then a $40 CRKT, should have no trouble standing up to some spine whacks and flicking and what not? That's a perfectly valid thing to do then?

If said knives are promoted for similar tasks, or the tasks for the Warenski superset the CRKT then yes. If the Warenski is only capable of a subset of tasks then you would expect both to have radically different abuse determinations.

For example I have a high end custom from 1095 at 66 HRC, what is abusive to it would not even cosmetically effect a Howling Rat. However I have a high end custom out of 5160 differential temper which I expect to have at *least* as good a scope of work as the Camp Tramp, as its made to do similar tasks and is significantly more expensive.

Cliff, what about the fact that 99% of all production companies, with CRK being that lone 1%, consider disassembling the knife for maintainance, voiding the warrantee?

They have inferior warrenty coverage in that regard, its one of the high point of his knives along with consistency of product, initial edge performance, etc. .

Chris Reeve believes long term, hard flicking is bad for knives, I agree, a lot of people do.

It only takes one maker to say otherwise and thus redefine the standard for abuse, again benchmarks are not defined by individuals but groups.

... unless your ultimate criteria for hard use, is flicking, which is pretty silly if you ask me.

No it is minimal, as noted the stress is really light. For folders it depends on the type, I think I'll pick up a multi-blade this year, I am thinking M2 at 66 HRC, maybe S90v at 63+. Hard use for it will be chiseling plastic, or carving hard woods - carefully. Now if you take something which is promoted with lock strengths in the 1000 in.lbs range, very thick 3/16" blades, lots of steel in the handle - unless it has a very wide scope of work all of that is wasted potential, you are better off with the slipjoint. The reason that you put all that metal in the knife is to allow it to handle harder work.

I'd love to see you put your wonderful $5 knife through some really tough tests, tests that actually do determine if a knife is robust and capable of long term hard use

No problem, just let me know what you were interested in. Its kind of a funny knife in that the initial sharpness, cutting ability, ergonomics etc. are higher than many other knives I have used. The liner lock has a common problem with all such knives in that its a white knuckle problem (dremel would fix that). I suspect long term that the lock will move across the bar quickly and then get sloppy, but I'll see. It also doesn't have a ball detent so there are concerns about accidently opening.

The fact that any company or maker says his knife can be flicked or is prepared to fix any damage that results, does not automatically make that a hard use knife, now does it.

No, its a minimum. However the negative is true. Just like for example if I said you have to be at least 18 to go on this ride. If you are under 18 you don't go, however if you are over 18 it doesn't mean you always go as they can be other clauses (you need money, can't be impaired etc.).

...it does not mean his knives are inferior to crap knives with unlimited warrantees, to say so is a little silly.

It means they are inferior in that respect, as per the defination of the word. Overall superiority would need to look at all criteria and then assign some sort of value and then sum, lots of room for subjective assessement there obviously.

For example is edge retention more or less important than ergonomics - depends on the individual. However this doesn't mean you can't determine superiority, you just first have to define the criteria to give it meaning and of course different people can define different ones.

-Cliff

 

[Steelhed]

Cliff - Even the best warranties are subjective, and quite frankly designed for reasons other than knife performance - usually to help sell the knives, or to bring customers back for more. Knife performance is objective provided the performance criteria is defined. This can then be tested. Warranties are tested when you send the knife back and the manufacturer decides to honor it or not, depending on their subjective application of that warranty. I will reiterate what I said before - a limited warranty does not make a product inferior to another with an unlimited warranty. Only an objective test of the two knives using the same performance criteria and testing methodology whether one knife is superior to the other. This applies regardless of whether the knives are covered by a warranty or not.

Finally, a knife that costs many times more than a POS would tend to have a more carefully worded warranty. The cost of fixing or replacing it would represent a much greater fiscal liability to the company than a 5 dollar knife stamped out and easily replaced. This has nothing to do with knife performance, but everything to do with business sense. Cliff, you are talking about value here, and not the intrinsic capabilities and performance of a product. Value is highly subjective and therefore not easily quantifiable. Therefore when you talk about warranties and knife performance you are talking apples and oranges.

 

[Scott Dog]

This is the thread that has no end.
It goes on and on my friend.
Somebody bashed the Sebenza so very long ago,
and how this thread will end nobody really knows.

This is the.......

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Knife performance is objective provided the performance criteria is defined. This can then be tested.

And when it is clear than any such testing voids the warrenty, do you really expect anyone to take such performance claims seriously. Assuming you buy for performance, the only meaningfull claims are those supported - anything else is simply hype. If you are selling a product on the ability to do something then it should be able to do it. That's not really much of a leap of logic there.

I will reiterate what I said before - a limited warranty does not make a product inferior to another with an unlimited warranty.

Sure it does, in that regard again by defination of the word. Now of course you can make a superior product and put an inferior warrenty on it and the product could still have superior abilities in many regards. However it it pretty poor logic to expect a customer to belive your claims when you won't support them, or for one user to belive another when the maker won't support the first guy
[*]. So it will be labeled as inferior in all performance regards that are not supported as compared to products for which such performance *is* supported under warrenty.

Obviously if you have used a Sebenza and compared it to a more supported (warrenty wise) blade and found that the Sebenza holds up better under hard use then for you the evidence is clear which one is the superior knife (of course you use the warrenty to check for QC faults). However unless you believe in ESP, unless the maker will support your claims there is no reason to expect anyone else find credibility in your statements with the maker clearly stating they won't guarantee similar performance.

Simply forget about all of this and imagine walking into a makers forge/shop and witnessing some impressive testing. You then order a knife and at the end ask him something like "That was a lot of rope you cut, what is the QC you get on that, how much rope can I expect to cut." The guy answers with "There is no guarantee on performance like that, take what you can get, lots of people like my knives though."

You then go to a second guy and ask the same question. He replies "That's a good question. I have done a lot of testing like that, different knives, you hope to get better with each one but at least as good - so within human variances, you should get just as good as what you have seen here. If I didn't give you that they you got an inferior knife so bring it back and I'll see what went wrong."

Do you really many to say that the second guys comments were not meaningful. Well they say a hell of a lot to me about the quality of his product and his faith in it. It doesn't mean they are true of course. He could be a lier, however if he has been selling user grade knives for a long time, its hard to imagine with that kind of user incentive he could still be like that. People who over hype products are usually extremely tight mouthed about performance guarantees.

There are lots of knives I have used which perform well outside the warrenty range (usually with huge QC problems, some perform execptionally well, some are junk). However I do *NOT* promote those knives or recommend them to people who want knife for such uses because the makers will not support what I have found and thus I have no reasonable guarantee that I could expect to see the same performance again, thus I would not be comfortable making a recommendation based on it. However when a maker does support it then obviously it makes a huge difference.

Finally, a knife that costs many times more than a POS would tend to have a more carefully worded warranty.

Some of the most liberal warrenties in the knife industry are on expensive knives. I have dealt with many makers, custom and production which have 100% faith warrenties and which have existed for a *long* time. Yes cost is an issue, so is promotion. Warrenty claims are usually do to ignorance of the user or overhype of the maker. Both can be solved by the maker being clear what the knife can do and should not do.

You can also of course put an excellent warrenty on a really crappy product. This self-destructs really quickly as people use the products and then quickly after the warrenty which then gets rapidly changed, unless like Sal noted the products are really low end so its trivial to cover the warrenty because in general the percentage of claims is really low.

So when considering a warrenty you need to take into account lifetime. A maker who offers a very strong warrenty but is just selling knives obviously doesn't have as strong a warrenty as someone who has been selling knives for 10 years. Quite simply the first guys warrenty could fold the first time its every used. With the second guy its likely that the warrenty has been actually applied and it still there years later which means its actually a meaningful statement and the product can probably do exactly what is claimed.


[*] Unless of course you know the guy, and can make based on this knowledge a strong judgement that he isn't just making up things to promote the knife. There are lots of people on Bladeforums for which I take performance statements just as strongly as if I had done them myself. There are also lots of others which are highly exaggerating the abilities and many times I have emailed makers and asked if they would actually support any of the claims made and the answer is always no. Thus why would anyone take those claims seriously, the maker just told you that you can't expect the same performance.

-Cliff

 

[Steelhed]

Cliff - In the context in which you place warranties, you have a point, but that point is not actually germaine to the intrinsic performance of the knives themselves. As I said, you can have a good knife and poor warranty, and vice versa. You always have a bone to pick about manufacturer hype, and I agree with you in that regard, but hype is another category. You can hype and POS from here to Sunday but it will still be a POS, and you can hype a great knife and it will still be a great knife (but then is it hype?). In most situations, products are made by engineers, and warranties are made by lawyers and PR departments. Sometimes the engineers laugh at the warranties the companies place on their products, sometimes lawyers cry when the warranty is better than the product. Two worlds and two different issues. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Quy4n8]

Cliff, with all due respect, I believe we are talking in circles here. You believe that because CRK’s warranty doesn’t cover flicking, it makes the product inferior. Some others and myself believe that warranties and product although related are different issues. I realize that you do some very in depth testing of knives and edges, but with the possible exception of Spyderco, I doubt most other knife companies have done near the testing required to back up the claims of superiority often made. If someone knows better for a fact, please post it here, but I would like to know whether Benchmade, CRKT, CRK or Spyderco have ever actually created a test that flicked a knife repeatedly and then looked at the damage done. Warrenties aren’t written the way they are because Company X tested the product in these circumstances and therefore we know it will hold up to this so then we will write the warranty to reflect that. As I have said and others have repeated, warranties aren’t written based on evidence or thorough testing, they are written as marketing tools. As such, they don’t reflect on the quality knife directly, they reflect on the manufacturer.

As to the stresses induced by flicking versus impact on the edge, such as chopping, they are not the same. Flicking is going to concentrate all the stress at the stop pin and pivot pin/bushing. It will be an impact stress over a very small area. Chopping is going to induce its major impact stress at the edge. The stop pin and pivot will see force, but not impact force since they are already in contact. After reading all of the posts on this thread I can understand why flicking could be important to some. And Cliff, I have been out in 40 below weather and you are correct, manipulating a folder is quite a task, so I will concede, flicking might be important to some. But…

As I said earlier, if we set up a test and flick a Sebenza until failure, I see no design, engineering or physics reason that it would fail any sooner than any other folder in its class, or most any other class for that matter. I agree that their warranty could be written differently, but I am still looking for a scientific reason why the Sebenza is inferior; i.e., the stop pin is to soft, the geometry of the pivot, stop and lock is wrong, etc. If you can show an empirical reason for Sebenza’s inferiority, please do. If it is simply that the warranty is not satisfactory, then say that. Respectfully,

Richard Sommer

 

[DCK]

Cliff,

When the temperature drops to about -30 you can't have unexposed skin for very long, frost bite can set in immediately at -40 and below its almost instant. You have to wear very thick mitts (no gloves) which make manipulating blades open via studs next to impossible. Spyderco's large blade holes are functional for longer than most, but even they stop being practical at some point.

You don't live in the only area of the world with cold weather.... I personally have spent many many days outside working (pouring concrete and related tasks) at or around -30 F. I also used a slipjoint pocket knife for many tasks under severe temperature conditions of -30. Guess what? I never got frostbite from doing it, and I worked in a cheap pair of cotton gloves for most of the day. But then maybe you were referencing temperatures on the celcius scale which would actually make it 4.4444 degrees colder than what I have experienced. One quick question about functionality of flicking a knife at those extreme temperatures... Doesn't the lube on the knife make the action too stiff to flick it open anyway? And while I'm at it, just exactly how many times have you flicked open a Sebenza or any other superior knife at the temperatures that you mentioned. Don't ignore this question, I'm sure I'm not the only one here that want's data to back up your comments.

This brings me to another question/point... You keep saying that the Sebenza is inferior to such and such knife simply because of the implied warrantee of CRK. Precisely what testing have you done that backs up your blanket statements about CRK knives being inferior. Until you post facts in this regard I think that everone should ignore anything you have to say in regards to Sebenza inferiority.

In my previous post I said the following...

Knives as well as anything else should be judged what they are designed to do...

and you replied with this...
No they need to be judged against the competition just like any other product. When you buy something, from a toaster to a new car, do you actually just go by what the dealer says about the product, or look at what is offered from other toasters and cars and compare abilities / product support etc. .
You are correct to a degree, but again you are using just one towel to try and cover a whole beach. If I am buying a Jeep I would never try to campare it to a Toyota Corolla or even a Chevrolet Tahoe, I would compare it to another vehicle from it's same class. Again, where is your Sebenza data so that we can figure out which class we should be comparing it to.

The best warranty in the world won't make a poor knife any better, and a bad warranty will not detract one bit from the performance of a good one. You can buy knives because of the warranty or because of the quality. When the warranty and the knife are both good, then heaven and earth abide.

AMEN Steelhed

 

[Glenn Jones]

Phew, I'm safe! In my part of the world, the only time it ever gets to 30 or 40 degrees centigrade, it's always plus 30 or 40 degrees. My sebenza and I are safe! Do people actually live in places where it drops to -30 or -40 degrees F? Cliff, your crazy, emigrate to Australia. Put a piece of roofing iron out in the sun for a few minutes and you can cook an egg on it. You can't do that where you live.

 

[Megalobyte]

Well, the point has been made I think, that the language of the CRK warrantee and any limitations therein have no actual bearing on whether the Sebenza's stop pin is more easily damaged than those of its competitor's, and whether, therefore, in this regard, the Sebenza is actually inferior, yes, one might draw an inference, as you unwaveringly do, from CR prohibiting flicking, that the Sebenza doesn't handle it as well as other knives, but, that's an assumption, not based on evidence, until you test the Sebenza against these special flick-proof (TM) knives you speak of, specifically for their ability to withstand repeated, hard flicking. I'd bet the Sebenza would make a very admirable showing in such a test, and even end up being SUPerior to some, or many of these special, almost magical flick-proof knives you seem to feel exist, they don't exist until they have been proven to have stop pins that do not deform under repeated, hard flicking, nor locks that end up out of spec because of it.

You choose to assume CR prohibits it because the Sebenza can't handle it as well as its competition, that's fine, but, we are free to assume that CR warrantee limitations are not due to Sebenzas having fragile, easily deformed stop pins, but rather for different reasons, like legal considerations, or, as I believe, an engineer who believes flicking is an incorrect way to open the knife he designed, feels strongly about it and therefore makes a point of steering people to the thumbstuds he put on the knife which he feels is the correct way to open his product.

 

[Kevin Wilkins]

Or any of the *many* folding knives that can withstand it.

For folders it depends on the type, I think I'll pick up a multi-blade this year, I am thinking M2 at 66 HRC, maybe S90v at 63+.

-Cliff

Sporting knives of M2 work better drawn back to 63-64 and certainly if the blade is more than about 40mm.

S90V performs best at 58-59, 63+ is way too hard for that steel.

 

[Buzzbait]

This may sound stupid, but I have a question. Are you Sebenza owners able to flick your knives? I've had my Seb for a few years now, and it has seen quite a bit of use, but still has not loosened up enough to flick. The ball detent is far too strong to allow for flicking, unless I use an EXTREME amount of force to flick it open. Is it only older Sebenzas that are flickable, or did I just get a particularly tight one?

Not that I care. I'm not a flicker. Just curious.

 

[LaBella]

*flicking is BAD! *

some do, some dont- you can adjust the pivot I believe. I just dont flick..

ask KV Collucci..

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Ron! Don't tell me you don't give a flick!