Random Thought Thread

bluemax_1 said:
My dilemma is finding scabbard makers vs sheath makers.

Traditional style scabbards for longswords like this Warwick, are leather wrapped wood. I'm not sure how many sheath makers who've mostly worked with leather for smaller sheaths, also have the desire/skills to make sword scabbards.

The Warwick design in particular, is an Oakeshott Type XVIa. If you look at the tip in my photo, vs the tip of the longsword in Al's/azwelke's photo, you can see that the Warwick has significantly more taper. It was designed specifically to be effective for both cut and thrust.

That also means that flex in the sheath/scabbard can easily result in that tip piercing through when sheathing the sword, which is why they're typically a carved/fitted wood core, wrapped in leather, so scabbard makers are both, woodworkers and leathermakers.
Click to expand...
If it was me looking, I would do wood because it works great for protecting the blade and doesn’t flex (and looks great). Katana’s are served well by them, and the ones wrapped in leather look great too.

My father made one for me to fit a Civil War Cavalry sword that had been hidden in the wall of an old house on a ranch. When the house was being torn down, a person using a demo saw found the sword after cutting into the handle. It ended up at a knife-maker and he configured a rosewood slim 2 handed grip for me. Using a table saw and a router to allow for blade fit, then rounding and finishing after lots of time, my father made a great scabbard for it.

Good luck with your search!
 
bluemax_1 said:
My dilemma is finding scabbard makers vs sheath makers.

Traditional style scabbards for longswords like this Warwick, are leather wrapped wood. I'm not sure how many sheath makers who've mostly worked with leather for smaller sheaths, also have the desire/skills to make sword scabbards.

The Warwick design in particular, is an Oakeshott Type XVIa. If you look at the tip in my photo, vs the tip of the longsword in Al's/azwelke's photo, you can see that the Warwick has significantly more taper. It was designed specifically to be effective for both cut and thrust.

That also means that flex in the sheath/scabbard can easily result in that tip piercing through when sheathing the sword, which is why they're typically a carved/fitted wood core, wrapped in leather, so scabbard makers are both, woodworkers and leathermakers.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I didn’t take into consideration the long length of the sword. Is kydex out of the question?
 
I basically don’t make anything BUT safe queens. It’s what I love making. These things are an expression of something, for me, and I need to make them. In the immortal words of John Lee Hooker, ‘it in him, and it got to come out’.

Nonetheles, I go to great lengths to make sure the knives I make will endure the tasks they’re intended to perform - whether that’s to shave your face smoothly and comfortably, or to slice your brisket or dice your garlic. Hell, it might even be so you can cleave that zombie skull.

But that’s not what I‘m talking about. I see shit now using materials that are doomed to fail, but are eye-catching. Handles made of endgrain cut woods. Cross-cut mammoth ivory full of epoxy. Blades with stick tangs and HOLES just fractions of an inch from the ricasso, under the handles. Knives full of stress risers because they look ‘tactical’. Reactive, soft metals forged as layers into knife blades. This shit wouldn’t have flown as short as 15 years ago because the collector base KNEW better.

This isn’t the fault of the younger generations, at least not entirely. Their parents didn’t understand, and now they don’t, either.

There‘s absolutely nothing wrong with doing something because it’s aesthetically pleasing. It’s a crucial part of form. Design without aesthetics is perhaps even worse, because it shows a total disregard for pride in craftsmanship. The reason most of you frequent this subforum is because Nate and Co. attend to all of these things. To diminish these knives to something as basic as ‘functional tools’ would be a tremendous injustice.
 
bluemax_1 said:
My dilemma is finding scabbard makers vs sheath makers.

Traditional style scabbards for longswords like this Warwick, are leather wrapped wood. I'm not sure how many sheath makers who've mostly worked with leather for smaller sheaths, also have the desire/skills to make sword scabbards.

The Warwick design in particular, is an Oakeshott Type XVIa. If you look at the tip in my photo, vs the tip of the longsword in Al's/azwelke's photo, you can see that the Warwick has significantly more taper. It was designed specifically to be effective for both cut and thrust.

That also means that flex in the sheath/scabbard can easily result in that tip piercing through when sheathing the sword, which is why they're typically a carved/fitted wood core, wrapped in leather, so scabbard makers are both, woodworkers and leathermakers.
Click to expand...
This 100%. It is also the dilemma for K20 sheaths to a lesser degree. Swords needs scabbards, not sheaths.
 
bluemax_1 said:
My dilemma is finding scabbard makers vs sheath makers.

Traditional style scabbards for longswords like this Warwick, are leather wrapped wood. I'm not sure how many sheath makers who've mostly worked with leather for smaller sheaths, also have the desire/skills to make sword scabbards.

The Warwick design in particular, is an Oakeshott Type XVIa. If you look at the tip in my photo, vs the tip of the longsword in Al's/azwelke's photo, you can see that the Warwick has significantly more taper. It was designed specifically to be effective for both cut and thrust.

That also means that flex in the sheath/scabbard can easily result in that tip piercing through when sheathing the sword, which is why they're typically a carved/fitted wood core, wrapped in leather, so scabbard makers are both, woodworkers and leathermakers.
Click to expand...
Yes, I forgot to mention that I made a wooden scabbard and then Claude "just" did the leather covering.
 
carnifex knifeworks said:
There's some irony to be seen here. Everything being said is true, especially if you use the knives you buy.

I'm not disparaging collecting knives. However, if all your blade does is sit in a drawer, functional design doesn't matter. As collecting has become more and more prominent, so has appealing to esthetics at the expense of effective functionality.

In my opinion, knives are first and foremost, tools, just like hammers and axes. Although, if your axe never chops wood, it doesn't really matter that it's made of tinfoil.

CPK...."Performance" is right in the name. It's part of their creed and the basis of their ethos. It definitely shows in their work.
Click to expand...
Small point of contention here.

While technically correct, IMO, there's a difference/distinction.

There are things that are bought and collected solely for their artistic value (and artwork/paintings etc. are exactly that), but there are also people who collect functional tools (even if they never plan on using them).

Technically, all sword buyers/collectors are LARPers, as the primary purpose of a sword, is to kill another person. Even buying and using a sword for HEMA cutting competitions, or Japanese sword arts like iaido/battojutsu/tameshigiri etc., while constituting actually using the swords, still technically don't fall under the primary design/function of a sword.

That doesn't mean there isn't a distinct difference between people who buy functional swords (i.e. properly designed and constructed so they can be used AS swords) vs people who buy wallhangers/SLOs (Sword-Like-Objects) merely for display (although YouTube videos abound, of people who don't understand the difference/distinction, and actually try to use SLOs that were never constructed to be used).

Same goes for knives. There are some amazing looking fantasy knives/swords out there. One look, and I can tell that the designs aren't particularly functional, and someone thinking of actually using one, would have to be pretty unfamiliar with actually using a knife/sword, but most buyers are buying them, because they are works of art, and the buyers are buying them AS works of art.

OTOH, there are folks who buy functional knives/swords/tools BECAUSE they're functional, and that's what they're deliberately looking for when they buy those.
 
Matthew Gregory said:
***snip*** This shit wouldn’t have flown as short as 15 years ago because the collector base KNEW better.

This isn’t the fault of the younger generations, at least not entirely. Their parents didn’t understand, and now they don’t, either.

There‘s absolutely nothing wrong with doing something because it’s aesthetically pleasing. It’s a crucial part of form. Design without aesthetics is perhaps even worse, because it shows a total disregard for pride in craftsmanship. The reason most of you frequent this subforum is because Nate and Co. attend to all of these things. To diminish these knives to something as basic as ‘functional tools’ would be a tremendous injustice.
Click to expand...
Hate to bust your bubble, but there have been examples of wholly non-functional "looks cool" examples for far longer than that.

Anyone on the CPK sub, willing to admit to owning one of those cheap, Made in Taiwan soft pot-metal hollow handled 'Survival knives' back in the 80s after First Blood/Rambo came out? 😅

I never had one, but MANY friends did. They discovered that their kitchen knives and Buck 110 folders were way better constructed.

In a way, I was even worse. I bought the 10x(?) more expensive Buckmaster (still have it somewhere around lol). What a stupid knife. Sure, it held up to chopping through a 2x4, but that thing was a THICK knife. The acute hollow grind, cut decently for about the first 1/2", but by the time you got 3/4" deep in the cut, the blade had thickened so much, cutting any deeper wasn't really happening.

That 'saw' on the back was functionally useless. It didn't saw, it ripped the wood inefficiently. The 3" wood saw on my Victorinox was far more effective. And all that was before getting to the grappling hooks/spikes in the guard 🤣🤣🤣. Talk about, "Whoa... cool". "Well, that's dumb..."

Eh, live and learn. Various Cold Steel Trailmasters served me much better as my Large Camp Knife, until I got the CPK MC.

Nowadays, there's an interesting dichotomy of both; much better informed/educated buyers, AND a much bigger market of both new enthusiasts and makers/designers who aren't terribly familiar with functionality (there have been SO many more new custom/semi custom knifemakers/swordsmiths ever since Forged in Fire debuted. Many of them have mentioned the show as inspiration for delving into the field).
 
Last edited:
2023102711553327-1689765917696128891--X3.jpg
 
bluemax_1 said:
Hate to bust your bubble, but there have been examples of wholly non-functional "looks cool" examples for far longer than that.

Anyone on the CPK sub, willing to admit to owning one of those cheap, Made in Taiwan soft pot-metal hollow handled 'Survival knives' back in the 80s after First Blood/Rambo came out? 😅

I never had one, but MANY friends did. They discovered that their kitchen knives and Buck 110 folders were way better constructed.

In a way, I was even worse. I bought the 10x(?) more expensive Buckmaster (still have it somewhere around lol). What a stupid knife. Sure, it held up to chopping through a 2x4, but that thing was a THICK knife. The acute hollow grind, cut decently for about the first 1/2", but by the time you got 3/4" deep in the cut, the blade had thickened so much, cutting any deeper wasn't really happening.

That 'saw' on the back was functionally useless. It didn't saw, it ripped the wood inefficiently. The 3" wood saw on my Victorinox was far more effective. And all that was before getting to the grappling hooks/spikes in the guard 🤣🤣🤣. Talk about, "Whoa... cool". "Well, that's dumb..."

Eh, live and learn. Various Cold Steel Trailmasters served me much better as my Large Camp Knife, until I got the CPK MC.

Nowadays, there's an interesting dichotomy of both; much better informed/educated buyers, AND a much bigger market of both new enthusiasts and makers/designers who aren't terribly familiar with functionality (there have been SO many more new custom/semi custom knifemakers/swordsmiths ever since Forged in Fire debuted. Many of them have mentioned the show as inspiration for delving into the field).
Click to expand...
My first hollow handled knife was a Bianchi and I still have it. I stabbed a feral hog with a Buckmaster and had a heck of a time getting the knife back out as it was thrashing with the worthless saw-back lodged against ribs. That was my deciding time of never wanting sawbacks on any sort of combat/hog knife.🤣
 
bluemax_1 said:
Hate to bust your bubble, but there have been examples of wholly non-functional "looks cool" examples for far longer than that.

Anyone on the CPK sub, willing to admit to owning one of those cheap, Made in Taiwan soft pot-metal hollow handled 'Survival knives' back in the 80s after First Blood/Rambo came out? 😅

I never had one, but MANY friends did. They discovered that their kitchen knives and Buck 110 folders were way better constructed.

In a way, I was even worse. I bought the 10x(?) more expensive Buckmaster (still have it somewhere around lol). What a stupid knife. Sure, it held up to chopping through a 2x4, but that thing was a THICK knife. The acute hollow grind, cut decently for about the first 1/2", but by the time you got 3/4" deep in the cut, the blade had thickened so much, cutting any deeper wasn't really happening.

That 'saw' on the back was functionally useless. It didn't saw, it ripped the wood inefficiently. The 3" wood saw on my Victorinox was far more effective. And all that was before getting to the grappling hooks/spikes in the guard 🤣🤣🤣. Talk about, "Whoa... cool". "Well, that's dumb..."

Eh, live and learn. Various Cold Steel Trailmasters served me much better as my Large Camp Knife, until I got the CPK MC.

Nowadays, there's an interesting dichotomy of both; much better informed/educated buyers, AND a much bigger market of both new enthusiasts and makers/designers who aren't terribly familiar with functionality (there have been SO many more new custom/semi custom knifemakers/swordsmiths ever since Forged in Fire debuted. Many of them have mentioned the show as inspiration for delving into the field).
Click to expand...


No bubble-bursting, here. I’m in agreement with you, in some respects. I never said there wasn’t garbage. There’s ALWAYS been garbage, and there always WILL be garbage. But, in an era where there is SO much information which is truly effortless to acquire, there is also exponentially more bad work produced than ever before. It’s not even a close comparison. That’s my biggest point, I think. Knifemakers today have access to more and better materials, processes, machines, information and services than ever before, and yet so many get into the little echo chambers they find in social media and ignore all of these things…
 
bluemax_1 said:
Small point of contention here.

While technically correct, IMO, there's a difference/distinction.

There are things that are bought and collected solely for their artistic value (and artwork/paintings etc. are exactly that), but there are also people who collect functional tools (even if they never plan on using them).

Technically, all sword buyers/collectors are LARPers, as the primary purpose of a sword, is to kill another person. Even buying and using a sword for HEMA cutting competitions, or Japanese sword arts like iaido/battojutsu/tameshigiri etc., while constituting actually using the swords, still technically don't fall under the primary design/function of a sword.

That doesn't mean there isn't a distinct difference between people who buy functional swords (i.e. properly designed and constructed so they can be used AS swords) vs people who buy wallhangers/SLOs (Sword-Like-Objects) merely for display (although YouTube videos abound, of people who don't understand the difference/distinction, and actually try to use SLOs that were never constructed to be used).

Same goes for knives. There are some amazing looking fantasy knives/swords out there. One look, and I can tell that the designs aren't particularly functional, and someone thinking of actually using one, would have to be pretty unfamiliar with actually using a knife/sword, but most buyers are buying them, because they are works of art, and the buyers are buying them AS works of art.

OTOH, there are folks who buy functional knives/swords/tools BECAUSE they're functional, and that's what they're deliberately looking for when they buy those.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to imply that aesthetics are the only reason a knife is "collected". I agree that some people probably collect functional knives, and only functional knives. However, I don't think that I'll ever understand it beyond the reasoning of "it makes me happy". That's totally fine though, I have no qualms with it. It just doesn't make sense to me because I don't have a collector's mindset.

My point was that, in my opinion, poorly designed knives can survive due to them being barely used or purchased as collection pieces. In my uninformed opinion, collecting knives without the intent, ability, need, or knowledge of how to use them is a contributing factor in the proliferation of non-functional/ineffective/improper designs.

In my limited experience, most people only use their knives to open boxes or cut up store bought food. Many poorly designed knives can fulfill those roles well enough, which allows the luxury of picking blades heavily based on aesthetics. I can't tell you how many people I've spoken with that won't consider a spyderco because of the way it looks, even when they acknowledge that the blade/edge geometry is proven to be superior for cutting.

Manufacturers can churn out tacticool blades without negative impact to their bottom line because the design flaws aren't made self evident to their customers through use.

This is probably an unpopular opinion I hold that's tangentially related, but I still believe that if a knife isn't used, it doesn't make much difference how it's designed. It won't ever be tested beyond visual inspection.

If I have a functional, well designed knife sitting in a drawer next to a purely aesthetically designed blade made of inferior materials, it doesn't make much difference. They both just sit there, fulfilling the same purpose of display. The only real difference is in the mind of the collector, if they choose to view it in a particular light.
 
There are automotive collectors with deep pockets who collect amazing automobiles because of the amazing things those automobiles can do and what they represent. Feats of human achievement.

The McLaren F1 for example. There are car collectors who own a McLaren F1 who have barely driven it and it has never gone particularly fast. But the point is, that it can. It would be pretty lame if it couldn't.

The car that looks like a McLaren F1 but was actually just a slow POS wouldn't be very cool. It would actually be kind of sad.

I like to think that people collecting Matt's knives, even if they're not using them, appreciate them for what they are. And what they are is not just what they look like, it is what they are capable of doing, even if they're not used for that.

This is all obvious isn't it?
 
Nathan the Machinist said:
There are automotive collectors with deep pockets who collect amazing automobiles because of the amazing things those automobiles can do and what they represent. Feats of human achievement.

The McLaren F1 for example. There are car collectors who own a McLaren F1 who have barely driven it and it has never gone particularly fast. But the point is, that it can. It would be pretty lame if it couldn't.

The car that looks like a McLaren F1 but was actually just a slow POS wouldn't be very cool. It would actually be kind of sad.

I like to think that people collecting Matt's knives, even if they're not using them, appreciate them for what they are. And what they are is not just what they look like, it is what they are capable of doing, even if they're not used for that.

This is all obvious isn't it?
Click to expand...
Yes. Also, who wouldn't want one of Matt's?!
 
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ford pauses a $12 billion EV investment, after saying electric vehicles are too expensive

Ford has halted billions of dollars in investment in EV manufacturing, warning that customers will not pay a premium for these vehicles.

The auto giant announced in its third-quarter earnings call on Thursday that it would postpone $12 billion in planned spending on electric vehicle production and
d pause some major projects, including the construction of a new battery factory in Kentucky.
 
Murphjd25 said:
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ford pauses a $12 billion EV investment, after saying electric vehicles are too expensive

Ford has halted billions of dollars in investment in EV manufacturing, warning that customers will not pay a premium for these vehicles.

The auto giant announced in its third-quarter earnings call on Thursday that it would postpone $12 billion in planned spending on electric vehicle production and
d pause some major projects, including the construction of a new battery factory in Kentucky.
Click to expand...
some legislation was passed in 2017 in the US which disallowed writing off R&D the year the investment was made, and it just kicked in this year. Instead, R&D has to be amortized over the course of five years. A big player like Ford, especially with EV stuff, was probably counting on writing those expenses off but is now stuck having to pay tax on all their profit. I expect a lot of US manufacturers and tech businesses are in the same boat and rethinking how they'll go about doing their R&D
 
Murphjd25 said:
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ford pauses a $12 billion EV investment, after saying electric vehicles are too expensive

Ford has halted billions of dollars in investment in EV manufacturing, warning that customers will not pay a premium for these vehicles.

The auto giant announced in its third-quarter earnings call on Thursday that it would postpone $12 billion in planned spending on electric vehicle production and
d pause some major projects, including the construction of a new battery factory in Kentucky.
Click to expand...
Interesting they announce that as the UAW was just touting a possible agreement. I know a big concern was decreased staffing needed for EV’s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top