Modern vs traditionnal knives

P

poussin

Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
95
Hello everybody.

I wish to speak from a european point of view, and all I say is just personnal opinion. Debate is welcome. First let's begin with some examples as an introduction :

- Opinels have been there for over 100 years, but they are just the youngest type of traditionnal folders in France, only being different because they are massively produced and sold. Many regional designs date back to immemorial ages, up to 1000 years ago. They have undergone almost no change and are still very appreciated.

- Scandinavian fixed blade designs (puukos, leukos, Mora knives etc...) are hard to date. They were probably already used by the Vikings in their present form.

- I'm sure the world is full of other old proven designs...


Those old blades, though not being made of the most modern materials, benefit of a close to perfect design honed by centuries of terrain experience. Since then, the industrial era allowed two major improvements :

- Modern steels, and maybe very soon other metallic and non-metallic materials which will be as practical as steel. Modern steels are (sometimes) harder, tougher, chemically more resistant... or supposed to be. There are now so many steels, the choice is just a question of taste, cost, and top of all, TREND ! Don't be fooled. After all, good old high-carbon blades do very well in almost any situation, except in salt-water. On the same kind of idea, handle-materials evolve, and many types of polymers or composite materials allow to have a functionnal, classy handle for a reasonnable price. But wood still does it, if properly combined with metal liners. Handle is more a question of taste, sometimes functionnality.

- Locking mechansims. Modern mechanics allows a wide variety of locks. But let me express they are almost always of no use. If you need hard use you get a fixed blade, which will endure things a locking folder would never accept. If you need a folder, then a slipjoint has never fooled anyone. The only field in which I see locks be useful is self-defense.

So what ?

Old designs cost ridiculous prices compared to modern high-tech trendy knives, and often do much much better.
I must always smile when I see people rejoice about their very new BM, spydie or whatever. Please, realize that many of these knives do not reach half the level of quality that you get with traditionnal designs. They often do not cut as well, are sometimes uncomfortable in hands, sometimes difficult to sharpen, etc... I owned a Spyderco Endura and HATED it. But for the money I had put in it I forced myself to use it, thinking that one day maybe I would learn to appreciate it. Mistaken. One day my girlfriend lost it on a mediterranean beach; well done, thank you honey.

I am not an opponent to progress, at the opposite. But I'm an opponent to regression in quality standards. I own a SR Camp Tramp and really enjoy it, in tasks for which it was made. Everyone is free to buy the knife he likes, but PLEASE try out at least once a GOOD OLD PROVEN knife design; after that day you will have the right to compare and comment. I know many people here have owned one or several carbon steel opinels. I ask them : isn't it the sharpest knife you've ever owned. Was there another one easier to sharpen ? What about the bladeshape ?



I would be pleased to know everybody's opinion about knife evolution.



Best greetings,

Mathias
 
I think alot has to do with ergonomics and the constant quest by both buyer and manufacture for the perfect knife.Also if man's didnt keep changing and updating designes,we would be bored and still use the knife we bought years ago.And dont forget the most important factor...the Neat factor!
 
Yes, I think this too : the neat factor is important. Then, it's not the same thing which is neat for everyone. I must say I am biased by the fact I like things which have an history. That's neat to me :) But in terms of functionnality, I've only seen very few modern knives which are as pleasant to carry and use as the old ones.
 
Great post, but...
poussin said:
- Locking mechansims. Modern mechanics allows a wide variety of locks. But let me express they are almost always of no use. If you need hard use you get a fixed blade, which will endure things a locking folder would never accept. If you need a folder, then a slipjoint has never fooled anyone. The only field in which I see locks be useful is self-defense.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree here. It's often on soft, "easy" to cut stuff where a slipjoint can be dangerous. Like cardboard. If you get it in a bind, you've got to wiggle it out, and that's a invitation to stitches on your index finger. You might argue that as long as you know how to use a slipjoint (or rather, how not to use it), it's perfectly safe. But I disagree. It's almost always the unexpected, unpredictable things that turn into serious accidents. The chance of these accidents decreases with a reliable lock. Locks have come a long way, and a quality knife will have the blade or handle material fail before the lock does.

You are right that a fixed blade is better than a folder, but it isn't convenient. I don't know the carry laws in France, but many states in the US don't allow carry of fixed blade knives (concealed or not). Nor are they discreet. And most importantly, they don't fit in your pocket easily. A 7" long knife is much easier to carry when it folds into 3".

Of course, there's the perfect comprimise: the balisong. But legality across the US (and much of the world) is spotty at best.
 
Maybe you've seen people experience accidents with slipjoints. I have not but of course this is a good point for the locks.

About carrying a fixed blade, of course I will never have a bowie riding on the hip in the streets; anyway it would be of no use there. Ease of carrying is of course the reason folders exist. But outdoors or in the garden/workshop you're often happy to have a heavy fixed one.
 
I have to say I prefer old designs also. When looking for a new blade, which is not very often, I still find myself looking for the older designs (i.e. blade shape, high carbon steel, wood/stag handle, etc.) I have to agree with poussin, the old designs from my prespective just work better. Even though I carry a CRKT folder so I don't have some sheeple crap their pants when I take it out, when it comes down to the wire I'll always reach for the most reliable blade I've ever owned; a old fashioned fixed blade hunter. You have to give our ancestors credit, they knew what the heck they were doing!
 
Right Tool for the right job, you could use a sharpened butter knife to skin a deer, and if that's all you have than you use it, you could use a rock to hammer a nail, but a hammer works better.

Some knives are utility knives and try to fit many needs, and some are task specific and work best for their intended design.

The job at hand will always be easier when you use the right tool, we all don't just cut bread and cheese, or open wine bottles,(no offense intended).

Therefore we all have different needs and expectations of our knives, and with the diverse designs, and materials available it's nice to be able to make an educated choice between new and old designs.
 
we all don't just cut bread and cheese, or open wine bottles
Click to expand...

Neither do I, although I do it a lot, for sure :)
And neither did our ancestors. Be sure that the ancients did not spend all their time drinking and eating. The classical designs I quoted in the initial post tend towards utility (or hunting) purposes, which were no different from those today, and fit them much better than those new utility knifes for which the trend is to have a thick blade and a squarish handle. That's the kind of things I was meaning.

What do you usually expect from a small or medium utility knife ? TO CUT ! And to cut for long without resharping, and also to be comfortable, practical and relatively solid. I judge on these criteria.

Of course the ability to make a choice is fundamental in a liberal economy (though it is often not respected : phone, energy, software etc...)
 
MY.... ancestors frittered away their time running back and forth to the "writing rock" to post their latest find of a new, improved flint. Then obsidian came on the market and some fool put a HOLE in it and cornered the market.

:D
 
I carry a slip-joint, and it's replaced my BM 943 as my EDC (kind of). You really can't beat the utility of a slip joint and a fixed blade, and I don't really like locks because it's like a fixed blade, except with compromises. And, scandi knives are sweeeeeet :-D

However, one thing is certain...modern tac-folders sure are a bit more convenient for hard-use tasks than slipjoints. Each type of knife has it's place.
 
I would have to agree that the older designs of fixed blades are better than the more modern designs for a user!
 
Actually, I don't think there really is a "traditional vs modern" issue since nearly every modern design is just a variation of a traditional design.
It can be argued that the Endura is basically variation a Buck 110--only thinner, with different handle material, a thumb-hole, and a pocket-clip.

Knives have always evolved (and usually for the better I believe). Even the Opinel had to evolve from something different. After all, the first "knives" were certainly fixed-blades.
I'm sure someone somewhere once thought that the folding knife was stupid and would never catch on.

As for locks:
I think locks are great and very useful. It's a wise man who used either a fixed blade or a locking folder.
Sure, if you use a slip-joint correctly and are very careful then you think you don't need a lock--but the same can be said about the safety on firearms, right?
Let's face the facts, humans are not perfect and accidents will happen. Locking knives are just more tolerant to our mistakes.

Allen.
 
Not to be meanspirited or anything, but you are welcome to your Opinels and puukos and other age old designs. Heck, go buy a reproduced flint knapped Neanderthal hand axe for all I care. What I find going backpacking or hunting in the mountains of the Pacific Northwest is that "traditional knives" are not tough enough for what I sometimes use them for.

I'll take my American designed Bowies, clip bladed knives, western tantos, and yes, even my too modern by half Benchmade AFCK D2 Axis and strange but useful Wyoming Knife. I have an "ancient" stick tanged Ka-Bar with leather spacers and a 1095 steel blade, that I'd put up against a lot of other knives ever made, and my next knives are Swamp Rats designed and made in Ohio featuring a form of high end carbon steel. If I want something old and tried and true I go buy a Case XX.

I guess I am just one of those insufferable Americans. I value tradition where it deserves respect and I value innovation and competition very highly too, and often, and sometimes contradictorally, at the same time. My preference is for non-stainless steels on most of my knives, which makes me something of a "traditionalist." However, I like my carbon steels to be state of the art and featuring modern geometry that draws on the best features present in the knives produced over the centuries, no matter where the influence is from.

Therefore, I also find I can love both the quintessentially American Leatherman and the tres European Swiss Army Knife rather equally, since they both have their flaws and their virtues. My idea of a great European knife company is Fallkniven: Formed in 1984, designed and tested in Sweden, produced in Japan using state of the art laminated steel. Fallkniven is not hidebound by looks or history and so almost an American style maker.

BTW, I have never handled a Spyderco I have liked, so I am with you there.

Just because something works "well enough" doesn't mean I stop looking for something "better."
 
Very nice post topic. :) I find myself torn.

I prefer traditional handle materials on fixed blades. Having nature as a part of my fixed blade knife is very important to me, it's almost a spiritual thing. Through the years humans have tested all types of material to find what was the most grippy and attractive. Turns out that leather is very grippy and comfy, and mother of pearl is very attractive. Neither of those materials hold up that well after years of use though. So we find those great compromises like wood and stag bone. They are beautiful, while at the same time durable! ;) We can come out with materials that offer better grip and better durability, but having nature as a part of my tool is vital for me. I will take the best nature has to offer and not want for more.

As for overall design on fixed blades... I prefer a newer steel for added edge retention, but if a blade cannot be found with a better steel it won't bother me. Nobody could ever call me a steel snob.

I go with traditional blade shapes over newer ones almost all of the time. Traditional shapes seem to work better then all of the new gimmicky designs and they look a hell of a lot better in my oppinion too.

Handle design is a toss up. As I said above, traditional materials are a must, but I could go with a newer type handle design. As long as it is traditionally good looking and all about function I see no problem with it.

Now onto folders! I love slipjoints and classic lockbacks. They appeal to me so much more then any tac-job on the market today. They cut better too. The only problem with classic lockbacks is the weight and lack of one-hand opening... Some jobs require low wieght and that lightness, and thats where they come into their own. I see a constant market for both, and both are useful. When it comes to EDC though, I think a slipjoint is the way to go. I carry a SAK Soldier every day, and haven't ever wanted for a lock. If I did I would get a small fixed blade for that job. If I needed it to still be a folder that locks becuase of sheeple I would get a classic lockback. If I needed less weight and one-handing ability then I would move onto a tactical, but grudginly.

Now just to address the Spyderco comments quickly. They are ugly, but unless you picked up a lemon I don't understand how you could say their quality is low. Maybe you are just talking out of a dislike for the FRN handles, in which case I agree they look/feel cheap, but Spyderco builds a quality tool. Plus, Spyderco is the only tac-company that attempts to bridge the performance gap between tacs and slipjoints by making thin flat ground blades. I don't know of any other tac-folder companies that care enough about how their knives function to do that.
-Kevin
 
When it comes to folders.. I like not having to worry too much about losing my fingers or rusting my blade. Those are major reasons why I'll take my Spydercos(or whatever) over a slip-joint, any day.
 
Kershaw and Benchmade are two other companies that also make thin, flat ground "tactical" knives, for example the Vapor and the Switchback. However, it is true, that for the most part, "tactical" knives tend to have thick, shallow grinds that won't cut well. Cutting ability is the one way that I feel most traditional knives are superior to most modern knives in, with some exceptions.
 
I think both formats have their advantages and thus I carry both. Most of my menial cutting chores are attended by a slipjoint SAK of some stripe. I consider SAKs traditional knives in that they share many of the same features as old fashioned patterns.

Sometimes though I'm working in a particularly bothersome medium and I use a locking blade like my Dodo. For instance cutting thick zipties at an awkward angle is better attended by my Dodo than my Cybertool. I own and carry and use both sides of the coin. There's no reason not to.
 
To Boat :

First be sure to understand that I never intended to praise european blades against american or others. I just quoted them because they are the only traditionnal ones I really now about and have ever handled. I never had the occasion to feel an real american bowie; closest thing was a Randall #14 with round micarta handle.


Second, I am addicted to wilderness ; "off the trail" backpacking, and on a smaller scale fishing are hobbies on which I spend considerable time. Do not believe I do not put blades into hard action. Actually this is what makes me write the first post with confidence in my beliefs. With the exception of chopping, a properly shaped piece of wood is mostly much more suited than a knife for tasks like digging, intimidating dogs and so on. Thus there is really no obstacle to the usefullness of a good thin blade made of quality material versus of the same blade made thick, with an almost obtuse bevel and a stupid incomfortable but good-looking grip.

As for steel, the best modern steels fall in the category of carbon steel; you talk about swamp rat, they just have 52100 with a wonderful heat treatment. By the way, swamp rats are excellent and useful knives. The point is that SR knives are not designed to show-off; it is as simple. Neither are Fallkniven. I own both a F1 and a Tramp. But since I have the Tramp, the F1 has lost its place as "The robust blade", and since a few days ago Moine offered me a simple Mora (KJ Erikssonn #1) I am convinced the F1 will not breeze fresh air that often anymore; the Mora is a thousand times better for working. That's it. Nevertheless, the F1 is a nice and functionnal compromise, which gave me much satisfaction; it is far away from the kind of cutlery that I am blaming here.


I guess I am just one of those insufferable Americans. I value tradition where it deserves respect and I value innovation and competition very highly too
Click to expand...

Here I think you have the prejudice that europeans have prejudices about american values :)
Actually you're right, we do have. But do not start to believe that Europeans stand against progress, this has no argument to be defended.


Let me stop here for tonight.
Have nice time !

Mat
 
Post scriptum about the spyderco.

The Endura (it was that version with a black plastic handle, no steel, and ATS-55 blade) quickly took play between blade and handle, which was the most dissapointing. Moreover I found that it is quite a strange thing (understand nonsense) to start with a hollow grind and finish with such a thick and obtuse secondary bevel, but here I am responsible for having bought it. Mea culpa. Again my fault, the edge without a single straight portion makes it very very long to sharpen correctly, and finding and keeping the right angle freehand is much more difficult than with a knife which has a straight blade wth a belly at the end..
 
I always have a SAK or slip joint in my pocket. But it's accompanied by a modern tac folder or neck knife. One for light duty detail work and one for the tough stuff. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.

Frank
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top