Sebenza 25... Go Figure...

A lot of people complain about no more bushing, but I read an interview with Chris Reeve where he said that the 25 is the best Sebenza he's made. That might just be marketing, but given the quality of my 21 I have no doubt that the 25 will be as exceptional a knife as any he has made.
 
To me, Sebenza = pivot bushing. Remove the bushing, and it is no longer a Sebenza. Therefore, I feel the 25 should not be called a Sebenza. That doesn't mean it is not a fine knife though.
 
pvicenzi said:
To me, Sebenza = pivot bushing. Remove the bushing, and it is no longer a Sebenza. Therefore, I feel the 25 should not be called a Sebenza. That doesn't mean it is not a fine knife though.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. One other thing is that now the Sebenza is very similar to the Umnumzaan. Same blade steel, same handle material, same pivot, same ceramic ball lockbar. There are a few differences like blade and handle shapes, but the knives are too close in my opinion.
 
calypso699 said:


I totally agree. One other thing is that now the Sebenza is very similar to the Umnumzaan. Same blade steel, same handle material, same pivot, same ceramic ball lockbar. There are a few differences like blade and handle shapes, but the knives are too close in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Same here. While I can see why CRK is trying to make production faster, easier etc by incorporating same parts ,materials, I do not see what will make the umnumzaan and the 25 different?

Would be nice to see one handle design with different releases of blade shapes, kind of like the Insingo , with different steel runs etc
 
pvicenzi said:
To me, Sebenza = pivot bushing. Remove the bushing, and it is no longer a Sebenza. Therefore, I feel the 25 should not be called a Sebenza. That doesn't mean it is not a fine knife though.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. It seems like an Umnumzaan, to me or some variation of it. I really hope that the 21 isn't discontinued, or that they keep it as a "classic."
 
Interesting, the 25 that was released was just a prototype right? Could the production change any do you think?
 
dasknife said:
Interesting, the 25 that was released was just a prototype right? Could the production change any do you think?
Click to expand...
I doubt it'll change that much. The Umnumzaan prototype was very similar to the final one, except for the milled Umnumzaan text, the extra ceramic ball, and extra milling on the lockbar.
 
I'm still looking forward to the 25 and kind of dig the closeness in design to the new Umnumzaan. I will be getting both.

I can also see the other side, as in what's the point?

However, there will always be 21's, Regulars, and other Sebenza variations floating around. No worries:thumbup:
 
I have no question that CRK know what they are doing regarding the pivot, as long as its on par / better than the 21 I don't see a problem and who cares what strider are doing.

I would like to know who if anyone has the rights / patents to the lock bar disk / stabilizer. I noticed on the CRK site write up of the umnumzaan they have a whole paragraph crediting and thanking the innovator of using some cruddy o-rings on the stop pin, yet no one is credited for the lock bar stop disk, in fact they don't even mention it as a feature of the knife.
Which leads me to believe that they either don't have permission from the creator and are bitching out on a technicality, have made a modification to the original patent, or no one actually owns a patent for that feature. Some clarification would be nice on that one..

edit to add* I often see Hinderer credited for the lock bar stabilizer, from Strider in particular, but I know Kershaw have used similar devices also..
 
Last edited:
Videl,

That's because because they're using an overtravel disk, not a lockbar stabilizer. The LBS is Hinderer's and I have no doubt that if they were using it, they would credit him. However, I'm not aware that an overtravel disk is any one person's creation to be credited. A bit of research should show that CRK isn't "bitching out on a technicality," which is just ignorant. What reputable high end company does that? Like you said, they credit Grant and Gavin Hawk for the o-rings on the Umnumzaan, don't you think they'd do the same if the disk was someone else's concept?
 
While they look similar, they're functionally different.

The Hinderer LBS prevents over travel and also stabilizes the lockbar preventing it from movement when gripped.

The disk is just an over travel stop. Been done tons of times.

Even with the LBS, there is some evidence for prior art as Bob Terzuola used to use his emblem as something of the sort, though his intent was slightly different. It was to give the hand somewhere to rest that wasn't putting pressure on the bar during opening.
 
blade man said:
Videl,

That's because because they're using an overtravel disk, not a lockbar stabilizer. The LBS is Hinderer's and I have no doubt that if they were using it, they would credit him. However, I'm not aware that an overtravel disk is any one person's creation to be credited. A bit of research should show that CRK isn't "bitching out on a technicality," which is just ignorant. What reputable high end company does that? Like you said, they credit Grant and Gavin Hawk for the o-rings on the Umnumzaan, don't you think they'd do the same if the disk was someone else's concept?
Click to expand...

Sorry I know the difference between the two, but what I'm getting at is that someone, at some point, had the idea to put an over travel disk on a knife. There seems to be no debate that this was done well before CRK started implementing them on the umnumzaan, so yes you would think that they would do the same for the over travel as the o-rings, yet they don't, hence my question. I didn't mean they should credit hinderer, but the innovator of the over travel.
Just because no one can remember who came up with it or there is no patent does that mean that there is no credit due, is CRK just going to claim its their innovation?
Oh and please point me in the direction of this research where I can see my ignorance, because I can't find it. I know how and why they implemented them, which I also feel was a cop out, I think a note in the box and being more up front with customers could have solved the problem, but not my business.
 
We're talking about the web pages for knives, not the transcript of an awards' banquet acceptance speech. Grant and Gavin Hawk are collaborated with Chris Reeve to create the tri-lock, so crediting them for part of the Umnumzaan's design is a chance to boost their profile and make everyone look good.

CRK doesn't credit anyone for the pocket clip, either, and we know where that came from. Who was the first to use thumb studs for one-handed opening? What was the first knife to popularize titanium handle slabs? But really, I'm not concerned about any of that; it's certainly not CRK's job to tell me.

Personally, I'm going to be interested in a small 25 when/if they happen. I trust that Chris Reeve knows how he wants his knives built, and when he's putting his name on the results the technical details don't concern me very much.
 
videl said:
Sorry I know the difference between the two, but what I'm getting at is that someone, at some point, had the idea to put an over travel disk on a knife. There seems to be no debate that this was done well before CRK started implementing them on the umnumzaan, so yes you would think that they would do the same for the over travel as the o-rings, yet they don't, hence my question. I didn't mean they should credit hinderer, but the innovator of the over travel.
Just because no one can remember who came up with it or there is no patent does that mean that there is no credit due, is CRK just going to claim its their innovation?
Oh and please point me in the direction of this research where I can see my ignorance, because I can't find it. I know how and why they implemented them, which I also feel was a cop out, I think a note in the box and being more up front with customers could have solved the problem, but not my business.
Click to expand...

Seriously? The overtravel stop has been done in so many ways by so many people that it's not an issue. The handle slab on a liner lock? Guess what? It's an overtravel stop. As far as I know, nobody has "claimed" invention and ownership of a device to prevent overextension of a liner/frame lock.
 
Ok so the general consensus is that if a feature is so old and overdone we can forget the innovator, like pocket clips, thumb studs, opening holes, over travel mechanisms? Will the Reeve integral lock succumb to the title of FRAME LOCK? Why credit anyone for anything if that's the attitude, is financial gain / advertising the only motivator for giving credit? Of course its highly impractical to credit every creator of every part of a knife, but if the norm is to promote new innovations why one and not another? Why not call it the "reeve overtravel disk" rather than silently applying them half way through a batch of knives. Why give such praise to an application of an O-ring without a whisper of Niels Christensen the inventor of the O-ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top