Personally, I can't help wondering if they shouldn't have a series of grades that get different levels of fit/finish and q/a they'd all need to pass the same basic geometric and functional q/a, but have differing levels of tolerance and finish available at different price-points and cost grades. "Safe queen" grade (perfect, full custom setup), "field grade premium" (some blems allowed, broad configuration options), "field grade" (some blems allowed, only shelf-stock configurations), "ugly betty" (barebones finish, q/a, and accoutrements). Each sequentially lower grade would also be sequentially more available due to less labour input required to produce the knife.
I'd happily buy an as-ground (or stonewashed) b-grade (actual b-grade, not "looks-perfect" b-grade) with a normal (unpolished, but sharp) edge cruforge blade, with no customizations, no cerakote (maybe something simpler/cheaper like the caswell coating Winkler uses), and none of the included accessories. My new CFV 2nd is going to be a beater knife for general house and camping chores, and it's sure not going to look unblemished for very long. I'm sure a lot of other users just don't need to see the ultra-perfectionist-grade QA level applied on their user knives, and I wonder if the option to forego some processes would help speed up overall shop throughput over at SK!
I'm sure the SK! folks are thinking in more or less the same direction (the ambiguous SK series, I'd wager, is probably coming from some of the same thinking as above). Ultimately, there's a big available niche they could fill in between the "holy hell it's perfect" level of the current GSOs, and the "my god, this thing is a great value" level of something like a Becker. The middle-ground, I imagine, is the "top materials, top heat treat, top design, but user finish". IE. GSO level design + materials, but Becker level finish. Reckon they'd sell like hotcakes and ship faster too...
Yeah,
really curious to see who they pick (or who makes the best bid) to produce the SK line at a more cost-effective price, and where they cut corners to achieve it.
The Benchmade "Steep Mountain" is (spec-wise) a close comparison to the GSO-3.5, but has S30V steel and a 'santoprene' handle and very basic kydex sheath + loop, and it'll run you $100. Slap some G10 scales on it like the "Saddle Mountain Skinner" and your now paying $132. Now that's certainly more affordable than the GSO 'first' at $184, but with a factory second priced at ~$165 or whatever, or compared to an "Ugly Betty" 4.7 priced at just $125
??? Sorry, no, the Benchmade just ain't worth it. S30V is nice, but isn't Delta3V or 20CV, and that benchmade sheath is trash compared to what S!K provides with their knives, and those two things right there are worth well more than $30-40 difference.
Ontario just released the "Cerberus" that compares to the GSO-4.7, featuring D2 steel, G10 scales, and a kydex sheath (with a weird cord+loop thing), priced at ~$150 at KC right now, and the geometry is not going to be able to cut it alongside a 4.7 (pun intended)... But they have made knvies for other companies before.
The closest thing that Buck has to compare may be the 245 "Matt Would Go" - pretty decent looking kydex sheath, micarta scales, 5160 steel that is just ground and coated and sharpened... priced at ~$145, and again it won't have the cutting geomety of a GSO... Buck also has the "Endeavor" that is 420HC with their standard sort of look (satin-ground, hollow to a none-too-thin edge), comes with a china-made nylon sheath and has nylon scales, and that is <$50 - very low for US-made.
Gerber has a US factory but is now owned by Fiskars and doesn't seem to sport the QC level that Guy would demand even for a production-line entirely out of his hands. Though something that impresses me about the Gerber Strongarm and LMFII is that those two knives are well built, USA-made, and feature pretty decent injection-molded sheaths. Gerber used nylon and rubber on the handles, that saved some costs, and isn't too picky about how even their workers grind the final edge bevels (mine was alright but some are
terrible uneven), but they're pretty nice considering the price, I'd pick either one over most Beckers (excluding the BK16 - that's a really well-made inexpensive knife).
Becker keeps building knives in their standard 1095CV rough-ground and coated, with 'grivory' scales and a sad china/mexico-made nylon sheath... I really don't understand that, what consumer wouldn't be willing to pay $15 more and get an
excellent US-made kydex sheath from S!K's supplier??? Anyway, Becker does seem like a nice option for enhanced affordability. Even the Ritter Mk2 is <$130. But the Mk2 is made by Rowen, and would Becker/Kabar really care to make knives for another company? Have they ever done that before?
TOPS knives - the HOG 4.5 may be their nicest but skips the kydex sheath, BOB is pretty popular but is a brick compared to S!K's geometry, and both feature basic rough-ground and traction-coated 1095 and price ~$140... Also made by Rowen? Not sure...
ESEE knives are made by Rowen Mfg in Idaho Falls (just down the road from S!K in Kellogg) and are similar to TOPS in regard to materials and manufacture although they only recently started shaping their handles a little better (the 'HM' models?), that was evidently a way that they saved on costs... the Izula and Candiru are <$100 but the 3 is right there and larger models are more. If Guy and Rowen were able to strike a deal, I'd be VERY interested to see the result :thumbup:
So what I am seeing is, companies scrimp on the
sheath, on the
handle material, on the
steel, and on the
surface finish in order to get down to $100, and only Becker-Buck-Gerber succeed. The rest are somewhere between Becker and S!K in price, upgrading handle materials and
maybe other aspects as well.
Anyway, sorry for the long ramble, also just thinking 'out loud'
