rust on Blackjack II 1-7 blades

[JD Mandrell]

You discuss it with a maker who confirms it is a manufacturing defect. You return them and the vendor confirms it is a known problem and this isn't the first return for the same issues.
-Cliff

Not one of which has actually been established here...all we have is unsubstantiated claims.

Who was the expert witness "knifemaker", what test did he perform to determine the cause of the rust, what are his qualifications to perform this test? Can he document his findings and will he stake his reputation on them?

What nameless "internet vendor" says there are multiple returns for this problem?

Can the person who began this thread, provide any of this?

Some of us require a little more than hearsay.

 

[Gossman Knives]

Protectant on a blade will help but the enviroment the knives are stored in can cause rust even if the is a protectant on the blades. Carbon steel will rust. Etching solution just like flux is very acidic and will cause corrosion even if you think you've got it neutralized and cleaned up. I've had it happen soldering guards on. It may not show up for a couple of weeks. I've had guns wiped down with a protectant only to find a very light coating of rust on them after they've been stored for several months. Face the fact that there is no foolproof way to protect carbon steel knives other then to periodically check them and rewipe them with a protectant.
Scott

 

[Thomas Linton]

. . .
Check for the BRK&T axe which isn't made by them but surely is promoted that way on a regular basis.

Cliff, I am told that BRKT takes a Vaughn axe and modifies it considerably.

I do know that I have an unmodified Vaughn and the BRKT product. There is a large difference in the appearance and the performance.

I also know from personal observation that the knives in question are not sold as a BRKT product. They are sold as Blackjacks - Mr. Warner's company and brand.

Your analogy seems inaccurate.

And I didn't call anyone a troll.

Or simply could have taken the time to clean the knives properly if the etching issue was the problem, note the other carbon and low alloy tools steels didn't rust.

A large "if." And I do not "note" anything because, like you, I have no personal knowledge. In fact, I don't know who etched the blades, much less how etching solution would get all over the blade - except in the area of the etch.

Really, Cliff, you seem to give full credit to any negatives when it comes to Mr. Stewart, whether you have any actual knowledge or not. That seems contrary to your more typical practice. A claim is just that - a claim, not a fact. You have noted that many times -- in other contexts.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Cliff, I am told that BRKT takes a Vaughn axe and modifies it considerably.

And they are sold as BRK&T axes with no mention that they are actually made by Vaughn. Now if someone was to buy said axe and then complain about performance characteristics which are actually inherent to Vaughn would they also have to apologize?

I also know from personal observation that the knives in question are not sold as a BRKT product. They are sold as Blackjacks - Mr. Warner's company and brand.

You don't consider it possible that they were sold to the above user(s) as being from BRK&T or that there was a miscommunication about the level of involvement of Stewart especially considering that he did actually own/run the company in the past? Again did anyone ask them where they got that idea because the blame for the misrepresentation could readilt not be theirs.

...you seem to give full credit to any negatives when it comes to Mr. Stewart, whether you have any actual knowledge or not.

I don't actually give much personal worth to the above issue with corrosion, however the reaction of Stewart to the complaint would direct me in favor of the user. That is also far more important to me than the possibility of some etching media being left on the blade, because that would just be personally burnished off in use and aesthetics are not a huge concern with me anyway.

My main point in the above was simply that it shows a huge bais to demand extreme levels of "evidence" for a critism and absolutely no such demands for praise and again the extreme difference in responce in general towards critism/praise. I have no problems with requesting names/dates and other specifics and in general very high standards for information exchange. However you just don't do this one way and suggesting that critism be private but praise be public should set off air raid level screams of hype.

-Cliff

 

[JD Mandrell]

My main point in the above was simply that it shows a huge bais to demand extreme levels of "evidence"-Cliff

How about an level of "evidence", is that to much to ask?

 

[Phil Brown]

I don't think it's right for this thread to move one more step without a public apology to Mr. Stewart for the disparaging remarks that never should have been aimed at him in the first place! Anyone who has ever had their name dragged through the mud understands why. This goes beyond trolling; this is unsubstantiated slander, and it should only be viewed with contempt until we see evidence and a better attitude from the poster. Regardless of what evidence he does or doesn't have, he needs to apologize before we go any further.

So be a man and say you made a mistake.

​

 

[JD Mandrell]

Well Said Martini!

 

[DarrylS]

..."whitie" is being mostly silent through out the vast majority of these discussions...THAT in itself leads one to assume that the term "troll" most likely might be applicable here. "Trolls" like nothing more than to spread those neat seeds of desent or argument and then sit back to watch the frenzy that accompany their germination. What makes people like this???...Sheeesh...

 

[Thomas Linton]

And they are sold as BRK&T axes with no mention that they are actually made by Vaughn. Now if someone was to buy said axe and then complain about performance characteristics which are actually inherent to Vaughn would they also have to apologize?

I don't know, Cliff. Do you? I know Stewart had acknowledged that the lightness of the axe impacts it's cutting ability, and that is inherent in the fact that the Vaughn is pretty small and BRKT removes some from that. Beyond that, I would be speculating.

You don't consider it possible that they were sold to the above user(s) as being from BRK&T or that there was a miscommunication about the level of involvement of Stewart especially considering that he did actually own/run the company in the past?

Anything is "possible," Cliff, but I try to stick to what is actual, or at least probable. What do you know? Did the actual vendor (never identified) misrepresent the product?

In my experience, Mr. Stewart is pretty careful to communicate that he is no longer with Blackjack, that it is Mr. Warner's company and brand, and that Mr. Warner calls the shots on Blackjack work done by BRKT as a contractor. In fact, the lengthy thread on the new 1-7's at KF makes that point clearly.

Again did anyone ask them where they got that idea because the blame for the misrepresentation could readilt not be theirs.

Again, Cliff, I don't know, and no one has said so. What do you know? How do you or I know there was any misrepresentation by anyone as to who made the blades?

I don't actually give much personal worth to the above issue with corrosion, however the reaction of Stewart to the complaint would direct me in favor of the user.

Stewart has not appeared here, so you must be referring to the thread on KF where a differernt person appeared just to call the Blackjack's "junk." That poster did not engage in any real give-and-take. He made his attack and left. He did not identify himself as a user, just a buyer. Any here can read that thread. (Beeeeeeeeeeeep: The National Weather Service warns that a cross-forum cold front may be approaching.)
. . .

My main point in the above was simply that it shows a huge bais to demand extreme levels of "evidence" for a critism and absolutely no such demands for praise and again the extreme difference in responce in general towards critism/praise. I have no problems with requesting names/dates and other specifics and in general very high standards for information exchange. However you just don't do this one way and suggesting that critism be private but praise be public should set off air raid level screams of hype.
-Cliff

Cliff, I already agreed with you to the extent that I see praise as more common than accusations of "junk." However, the "junk" comment directed at a man's livlihood is understandably more likely to create controversy since the "all the chlidren are above average" stuff is heavily discounted by adults. We can see here that you, for one, are giving lots of weight to unsubstantiated accusations. So such acusations ought to be a serious matter, made with care and with due attention to accuracy.

Here, whatever the cause of the claimed rust, BRKT apparently did not make the blades. Do you know otherwise? If not, why is this BRKT's problem?

 

[HoB]

I am with DaveH here, I don't really understand why we are even discussing this? If it were a stainless steel, fine, but 1095??? And what knifenut really needs the reminder to check their HC blades for rust on a regular basis?

This is all very strange to say it politely.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I know Stewart had acknowledged that the lightness of the axe impacts it's cutting ability, and that is inherent in the fact that the Vaughn is pretty small and BRKT removes some from that.

It is promoted in many places on line as being a direct BRK&T product not simply a modified Vaughn. So if a user buys said product is he out of line for complaining of BRK&T if the heat treatment is off even though that is likely an issue with Vaughn? Obviously not.

How do you or I know there was any misrepresentation by anyone as to who made the blades?

We don't, that is the issue. So clarification would be in order before assigning blame, especially since as noted with issues like the above axe promotion and the past connection between Stewart and Blackjack.

Stewart has not appeared here, so you must be referring to the thread on KF ...

Yes.

That poster did not engage in any real give-and-take.

Well calling someone a troll and a liar and telling them to make such comments in private and not on a public discussion forum hardly encourages such obviously. Simply because someone is out of line doesn't support return behavior and obviously makes critism of such problematic at best.

However, the "junk" comment directed at a man's livlihood is understandably more likely to create controversy since the "all the chlidren are above average" stuff is heavily discounted by adults.

Well yes, it is harsh label, but lets assume that what was described was in fact true. The user had confirmation by two independent sources aside from his own personal verification on *multiple* samples. I would ask again, in general how many people would not seek to form a conclusion in similar circumstances in general? Certainly this isn't the case for praise which speaks readily of bais and quickly leads to cultism. Anyway, we have then what appears to be a significant manufacturing defect which could readily lead to significant monetary loss.

Personally I know that such a practice would get in fact far more harsh treatment in various other trades. If I participated in making a wooden deck for someone and didn't properly use pressure treated wood then you would expect a far more extreme description of said practices from any experienced carpenter. The excuse of all wood rots would hardly be valid either. Some people of course have higher standards than others. I would assume someone like Clements would call an awful lot of sheaths "junk" as his standards are relatively extreme.

We can see here that you, for one, are giving lots of weight to unsubstantiated accusations.

I don't as noted. It is one person describing a complaint, this doesn't lead to a pupulation inference in general. I would look for repeatition especially from someone I personally know/trust, and as well public confirmation/refutation from the maker on expected performance and as well general reaction to the critism.

If not, why is this BRKT's problem?

It isn't since Stewart publically noted he had no part in that step of the manufacturing. However the origional poster(s) don't seem to have been so aware.

-Cliff

 

[Thomas Linton]

It is promoted in many places on line as being a direct BRK&T product not simply a modified Vaughn. So if a user buys said product is he out of line for complaining of BRK&T if the heat treatment is off even though that is likely an issue with Vaughn? Obviously not.

Agreed. It is a BRKT product. Same is true of Blackjack here IF there is a problem. When a seller places a product in commerce, the seller is legally responsible for all the constituent parts and processes. (And the axe might rust too, being carbon steel.)

We don't [know there was misrepresentation as to the maker], that is the issue. So clarification would be in order before assigning blame, especially since as noted with issues like the above axe promotion and the past connection between Stewart and Blackjack.

Agreed. Too bad the authors of the thread here and at the other place didn't make the effort. A simple question, rather than an accusation would have surfaced the issue and shed light. Instead, we got heat.

. . .

Well calling someone a troll and a liar and telling them to make such comments in private and not on a public discussion forum hardly encourages such obviously. Simply because someone is out of line doesn't support return behavior and obviously makes critism of such problematic at best.

The poster at KF was called a troll. I have search the other thread and do not find "liar," although disbelief was pretty clear. As to the first, I don't think name-calling helps, but it is predictable when you accuse someone of making "junk" 'cause 1095 rusts -- without bothering to find out that they didn't make the item. And it's easy for me to advise calmness; it's not my living.

Well yes, it is harsh label, but lets assume that what was described was in fact true. The user had confirmation by two independent sources aside from his own personal verification on *multiple* samples. I would ask again, in general how many people would not seek to form a conclusion in similar circumstances in general? Certainly this isn't the case for praise which speaks readily of bais and quickly leads to cultism. Anyway, we have then what appears to be a significant manufacturing defect which could readily lead to significant monetary loss.

But the "conclusion" was that BRKT made a defective product. There is no confirmation about that claim. In fact, its is apparently 100% incorrect. So "harsh" and erroneous.

 

[JD Mandrell]

but lets assume that what was described was in fact true.-Cliff

Let's not and expect proof...and in the presence of proof of the exact opposite, demand an apology.

Something I still see the originator of this thread hasn't done.

 

[JackFuller]

"But the "conclusion" was that BRKT made a defective product. There is no confirmation about that claim. In fact, its is apparently 100% incorrect. So "harsh" and erroneous." -Thomas Linton

I am fairly sure that the conclusion made in this thread by the person who started this thread was that anyone who has purchased these knives, for resale or other purposes, and has left them in their original packaging should check such knives for rust.


The person who started the thread did not refer to them as garbage, junk, or any other such term in this thread. They also did not specify who was to blame for the problem, but rather just specified the who, to their knowledge, was involved in the production of the product. There were no slanderous claims made by the person who started the thread, but there was considerable slander TOWARDS the person who started this thread. This is getting ridiculous.

 

[JD Mandrell]

There were no slanderous claims made by the person who started the thread,

Your right, it was libel, not slander. Since it was in print, but claiming in print in a public forum that a problem was caused by defective manufacture, even though they offer no proof of it, then blaming it on someone who was not responsible is in fact libelous.

but there was considerable slander TOWARDS the person who started this thread.

Where?.....folks in here have asked for evidence, and asked for a retraction/apology for the erronous statements made, that's not slander.

 

[Bastid]

The orginator of this thead has a proven track record at BF of making off the wall and inaccurate statements and walking away from them.

Each of us has the right and ability to think what we want to think about this thread. I think the whole thing is pretty silly.

1095 does rust easily - duh.

 

[JackFuller]

One of the definitions of slander, according to dictionary.com, is:
A false and malicious statement or report about someone.

Therefore, although the legal term for such act is libel, my use of the word falls within what is considered to be proper English. Had I said that these people had committed slander, that would be a different story.

As for continuing to argue my previous point, the hell with it. I shouldnt have gotten involved - arguing over this crap is a waste of all of our time.

 

[Ken C.]

I am fairly sure that the conclusion made in this thread by the person who started this thread was that anyone who has purchased these knives, for resale or other purposes, and has left them in their original packaging should check such knives for rust.

Hey guys, if any one has purchased a BJ II 1-7 check your knives for rust forming on the blades. Mine where sitting for a bit and they developed some rust in some areas.

Then he should have simply stated that instead of placing blame on someone who had not part in the making of the blade. I also believe that his claim that a "custom knifemaker" has concluded that the knives are rusty due to etching fluid is pure BS. He makes no mention of the said makers name nor has he any proof of that claim. Unless I read it from the maker himself I reserve the right to call BS and even then I would have my doubts.

whitie has stated that BRK&T made the knives. This is a fact. BRK&T only "assembled" the knives. This is fact. BRK&T did not "manufacture" the blades in any shape or form. This too, is a fact. By only mentioning BRK&T he has pretty much concluded that they is responsible for his knives being rusty. He makes no mention of Ken Warner or Blackjack Knives being responsible. This leads me to believe that whitie has an agenda of discrediting Mike Stewart and his company.

 

[JD Mandrell]

As for continuing to argue my previous point, the hell with it. I shouldnt have gotten involved - arguing over this crap is a waste of all of our time.

Guess that's were we'll have to agree to disagree, I don't consider expecting the originator of this thread to back up his false claims and be a man about it and appologise for them a waste of time.

And BTW, ALL the examples of common usage for "slander" at www.dictionary.com contain the phrase "To utter".

 

[Scottz]

Seems to me this thread was started so Cliff could jump on the "I hate BRKT" bandwagon too.