knifeswapper
Knife Peddler
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,301
Mostly, I agree with you and knifeswapper, but there's an inherent problem with this way of looking at it-and it's based on diminishing returns. OK if we assume that Queen and other Traditional cutlery companies largely use very old and thus worn /temperemental equipment, the argument that they 'can't' really risk striking out & machining more modern (and interesting steels) like D2, 154, 440c, Sandvik 14 etc etc as it takes a toll on elderly machinery, ultimately leads to extinction. Not everybody wants or is satisfied by the mantra that a 'real' traditional pocket knife must be only in good old 1095. Moreover, sooner or later, the said machinery will also be unable to produce 1095 at acceptable levels of quality. But as pointed out by another poster, the idea of being wise like GEC and not risking their machinery on hard stuff steels does NOT explain Queen's recent abysmal build quality and suicidal price ascents. Hopefully GEC will be able to invest in newer more efficient machinery as all companies must do to remain viable.
People may like to quote the rather lazy adage of a bad workman always blames his tools, but you just try and make anything half decent consistently with worn out unreliable equipment. Try a long car journey in a worn out old banger and see if you can expect faultless performance, safety and comfort....uh uh.
I respect you, but you have somehow converted older equipment that was not made to work with very hard steels economically into "wore out equipment". And turned a business that is selling every knife they can make and making more knives each year into your example for "diminishing returns".