-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
New Case Yellow Large CV Stockman Issues
- Thread starter Gabriel Velasco
- Start date
Glad you didnt try bending the blade! And the proper term is "crink". The middle blade is crinked over. There are 2 main ways of making a 3 blade stockman. One way, the way Buck and others do it, is 3 separate backsprings. The other way is 2 backsprings like Case and some other makers.
3 backsprings is interesting because it isnt necessary to crink a blade, and you also dont need any cut liners between the layers of blades and springs. Cut liners are not needed since no two adjacent blades pivot on the same end of the knife. Typically, the blades will usually all be 1/16" or so thick.
2 backsprings is interesting because you can have a thicker master blade. For example, you can have a 3/32" master blade on its own 3/32" spring, and two 1/16" blades on a 1/16" double backspring. However, one of the small blades has to be adjacent to the master blade and will also pivot on the same end, so you need a cut liner between them. The cut liner serves a second purpose though. Since the two small blades are the same thickness as the backspring, and are too thin to have half their thickness ground away, they cannot both be closed. So what you have to do is crink one blade over. The cut liner provides space that the crinked blade can fill, and combined with a slight distal taper on the master blade can fit without excessive grinding off the thickness of the small blades.
Having 3 backsprings at 1/16" each and no cut liners is 3/16" thickness plus handle thickness. Having 2 backsprings, one 3/32" and one 1/16", with a 1/32" cut liner between again makes 3/16" thickness plus handle thickness. So the two methods produce a knife the same thickness, but with 2 backsprings you get a thicker master blade and a crinked small blade which may lead to blade rubbing. So it is viewed as a trade off.
3 backsprings is interesting because it isnt necessary to crink a blade, and you also dont need any cut liners between the layers of blades and springs. Cut liners are not needed since no two adjacent blades pivot on the same end of the knife. Typically, the blades will usually all be 1/16" or so thick.
2 backsprings is interesting because you can have a thicker master blade. For example, you can have a 3/32" master blade on its own 3/32" spring, and two 1/16" blades on a 1/16" double backspring. However, one of the small blades has to be adjacent to the master blade and will also pivot on the same end, so you need a cut liner between them. The cut liner serves a second purpose though. Since the two small blades are the same thickness as the backspring, and are too thin to have half their thickness ground away, they cannot both be closed. So what you have to do is crink one blade over. The cut liner provides space that the crinked blade can fill, and combined with a slight distal taper on the master blade can fit without excessive grinding off the thickness of the small blades.
Having 3 backsprings at 1/16" each and no cut liners is 3/16" thickness plus handle thickness. Having 2 backsprings, one 3/32" and one 1/16", with a 1/32" cut liner between again makes 3/16" thickness plus handle thickness. So the two methods produce a knife the same thickness, but with 2 backsprings you get a thicker master blade and a crinked small blade which may lead to blade rubbing. So it is viewed as a trade off.
- Joined
- May 2, 2018
- Messages
- 70
And research these forums first!
Modoc ED
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 14,039
A third way, which allows the use of just two springs is to lay two liners side by side as GEC did with their #66 Stockman Calf Ropers.
Note what appears to be a thick brass liner on the right as you look at the picture. That is actually two liners laid side by side to provide enough space so that krinking/crinking of the blades is not required. All three methods work nicely.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 2, 2018
- Messages
- 70
This is fantastic information. I was actually thinking of starting a new thread to ask this question, but you have answered it. I was wondering if a 2 backspring stockman was generally considered somehow inferior to a 3 backspring stockman. I have a Buck medium stockman with three backsprings and a this Case large stockman with two backsprings, but the Case isn't inferior in quality, so I was thinking they didn't decide to use only two backsprings to save time or money. In fact it seemed to me that it would be more difficult to construct and finish with a crinked (I didn't know the term at the time.) blade. I thought maybe it produced a thinner knife which might be more desirable for a large stockman. Now, I understand the tradeoffs and I appreciate the engineering and workmanship of these great knives much more. Thank you.
Last edited:
A lot of knife factories dont crink blades because it is harder in mass production. Crinking introduces internal stress in the steel which when heat treated can change the angle of the bend slightly. Especially with stainless steels, which are somewhat more prone to warping in heat treat, it is difficult to do a plate or air quench without the bend angle changing. Custom makers will typically discard really bad blades after heat treat, and the passable ones can be ground thinner or have swedges to allow the blades to pass each other. So custom makers can adapt a bit, but a company like Case needs to make every knife as similar as possible and so if it technically works it will go on down the line.