'match strike' nail nicks/long pulls, has RR taken the uniqueness away?

PocketKnifeJimmy

PocketKnifeJimmy

Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
3,989
fxbcxy.jpg


Up until RR came into the game and placed match strikes on so many of their knives, the match strike seemed limited in use by most traditional knife makers. Now, with sooo many RR knives having the match strike incorporated in their design, it seems to have taken the uniqueness out of what the match strike had become. Also, with the RR being classed as a very inexpensive brand, the old school name brands may feel that using the match strike is less desirable for them now, they likely not wanting to add features that only make them at a glance look like the much less expensive Rough Riders. Swedges, long pulls, and other nice subtle touches that had become signs of premier models, are now commonly found on RR knives costing 8 to 15 dollars... So I wonder how much bling has been removed from the bling? Know what I mean? I personally now own about 70 knives, and only my recent Schatt & Morgan purchase has a match strike... and though I like the difference it adds in my collection, the common RR use of the match strike, takes away from the once unique match strike, (at least for me, anyway).
 
I don't like the match strike on Rough Riders. To me it takes away from the traditional look. In my opinion, the half moon nick would look better. Match strikes look better on straight, long pull nail nicks.
 
Not sure I'm getting the point of your complaint. Any manufacturer can choose to use any feature / embellishment / stylistic element on their knives. I kind of like to see the work that RR has been producing. It can get other, bigger name manufacturers to step up their game a bit, if it catches on in the marketplace.

Are you advocating some kind of forced rarity for certain features? I know I've seen other Case collectors gripe when Case re-introduces or ups production a pattern that was somewhat rare and hence more desirable, because the new ones diluted the value / rarity of their collection.

If you like matchstrike pulls, be happy that there's a manufacturer that's producing them.
 
Not a complaint... more of an observation. As for value of a collection... my collecting is not to sell and make money on them. I do believe that the uniqueness some of these once seen as "extra" features, is now not so much, that's all.
 
Like all brands, some features look good, some don't. IMO, RR is the best way to promote slip joints to new buyers, a cheap GOOD knife that allows a person to try out 10 patterns for the price of one. I prefer the patterns that relate closest to the old patterns. I dislike the "fancy" stuff they put out.

Best regards

Robin
 
I have seen alot of older knives with the "fancy stuff"... grooved and/or pinched bolsters, blade etchings, long pulls, blade swedges, nickel silver liners/pins, and match strike pulls/nicks, all seem to have their foundations in old school knives. So, it all is fine with me :) I simply believe that some of those once unique bells and whistles that were not so common on traditionals made today, are now common... and not so much because they are found on Gec's higher end line (Northfield), or Queen's (Schatt & Morgan)... but because they can now be easily found on Rough Rider's 10 dollar knife. Unique bells and whistles.... nah, no longer (imo).
 
Last edited:
With the Schatt & Morgan knife I recently purchased, they added two bells and whistles that actually detract from an otherwise beautifully made and thought out knife. This S&M dogleg whittler has the match strike nail nick, which by itself is very attractive on this MOP/and Abalone handled knife. BUT... they also placed that match strike nail nick within a blade swedge. Not a production flaw, not a defect... more of a design flaw, because it detracts from the function by making the nail nick more shallow. Maybe companies like S&M (Queen) are looking to add something different to a market that now is making the usually unique things, not so unique anymore. I just hope that common sense does not go out the window in their search to continue some uniqueness, lol! ;)
3307bpz.jpg


Here again on another one of my favorite S&M knives (the top toothpick in the photo)... having a nail nick within a blade swedge. Not a deal breaker, but not as practical because of the detraction from functionality, even though I forgive easier, being a collector ;)

25jy4hx.jpg
 
Last edited:
I personally dont care for the matchstrike on Rough Rider nail nicks. But I dont think it has any relevance to the desireability of other knives.

The bottom line for me is that Rough Rider uses cheap stainless steel, so I consider them novelty knives. No matter what else they include in the price, as someone I respect once said,

The Steel IS the Knife.
 
I am not sure what steel... for that matter, I don't know if anybody, except the RR people, know the exact steel and it's treatments. That said, it seems that alot of the reviews lean towards their steel being comparable to the basic performance of steels used by some well known name brands. So, I don't know for sure if their steel automatically qualifies them as totally inferior... but again, I really don't know. But, surely something one has to consider in the equation when purchasing (or not purchasing). My current aim in this thread are the bells and whistles... but nothing wrong with any and all discussion, sir :-)

I know the three steels that are used in the three Queens/S&M knives I have pictured in this thread. The Schatt with the pearl/abalone has 420hc blades... the Schatt toothpick with the worm groove bone has ATS34 blades... and the Queen toothpick has D2 steel. Many don't see the 420hc as being that great, but is believed to be similar to what Case uses. Also, Buck uses it with decent results as well. Then there is RR, which many believe to be using 440a, and yet many feel it has been performing pretty on par with Case' stainless. Again, all discussion is healthy, imo, as long as respect is held for others opinions.... simply all is good... imo :)
 
Last edited:
Three of my 440a RRs out cut three brand new Case knives out of the box. There is nothing wrong with well heat treated 440a IMO.

Best regards

Robin
 
From reading this thread, it sounds like S&M are devaluing the bells & whistles, through poor execution.

Quality should shine through, I think. If RR can "devalue" a feature, it just means they are doing it very well. Otherwise, there would be no comparison.
 
As I mentioned before above, S&M/Queen do great with execution, but maybe the ideas need some re-thinking. They really can, and do produce a nice knives. Putting a nail nick in a blade, then removing a good amount of metal to make a swedge around it's location... not a good idea, imo. But then again, it's just imo :)
 
Maybe those bells and whistles are just not sought by many people. I personally do not like match strikes but I'm just one guy :)
 
My personal feeling is that RR has not taken anything away for those of us that are purists. This is me and not speaking for anyone else but they put so many added features on their knives, without considering whether or not it fits with the knife's historical match. Course they're not selling to the purists, they're just selling knives and lots of 'em IMO.
 
IMHO the ubiquitous use of these features by RR hasn’t taken away their “uniqueness”.
These features were quite common in the first half of the 20th Century, they became unique, because the post WWII knife industry rarely used them (at least on the mass-produced knives) and there are fewer surviving old knives now.
I never liked the match strike nail nicks. The ones on some high priced Bulldog knives chewed up my nails, when I tried them, and were nothing but a source of irritation.
That said, I have to admit, that the RR ones are nicely finished, and they do work without attacking my nails. Even so, if I could choose, I would go with the plain nail nick: it is functional, and it does not distract the eye from the shape of the blade, plus it is easier to clean, especially if you use the blade to cut foodstuff.

Personally, I think “bells and whistles” like swedges and long pulls do not belong on every knife.
There are some patterns and blade types, which benefit from them, but on others they are not only ugly, but also not very practical.
E.g. almost all stockman knives with swedges would have been better off without them. The swedge improves penetration of less pointy blade tips, like the spear point, but weakens the points of the clip point and the sheepfoot blades.
Also, most long pulls on recently manufactured knives are placed way back on the blades, which makes them difficult to open: clearly the person who designed it, did it on paper or a computer screen, not thinking through the functional aspects. Even on old knives, not every permutation was really useful. A feature, which might be elegant, functional in one pattern and given sizes, might have been useless, unless as a decorative element on blades of another pattern and different sizes. Clearly even then marketing and eye appeal was trumping common sense. 20th Century cutlery companies wanted to make money first of all, making functional knives was just a by-product. If there was a market for “bells and whistles”, they added it. I think the cornucopia of different patterns offered then was a way to test the market for a few decades and it is not accidental, that most patterns did not survive beyond the 1930’s.

Today, most traditional knives with "bells and whistles” are bought by folks, who only collect them, and rarely, if ever use them, so for them it does not matter if these are truly functional pocketknives, ore just knife-like objects.
There is a reason, why GEC is successful: it produces limited number of high quality “bells and whistles” knives, which are not only collectible, but, at lest for the most part, also quite functional. Even so, some of their pull designs are also more of an eye candy, than a truly useful feature to open the knife.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top