You missed my point. 31s aren't the first CRK with the ceramic ball lockup but no one seems to complain about Inkosis and Umnumzaans. Zaans have had this lockup for 12 years now. Do they flex? Do they fail? You only see people complain about 31s and needlessly at that. These keyboard warriors really need to STFU.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
Sebenza 31 question
- Thread starter Chris Bruce
- Start date
evilgreg
Why so serious?
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2012
- Messages
- 4,092
No need to be rude. If people are put off by the wobbly lock bar thing with the 31s, I think that's a reasonable objection on a knife at that price point even if I don't share it (see my post earlier in this thread).
subjectively, though, I find the appearance of the 21 wildly better than the 31. The new inlay pattern puts me off completely.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2020
- Messages
- 69
The problem with the new Sebenza is that they altered a design that was a decade old and created a substantial issues within the first production run which created doubt in many serious knife enthusiasts minds including my own. The Inkosi and the Umnumzaan were designed around the ball bearing implementation and still cannot achieve the correct tolerances for a knife of their caliber. Do these knives flex or fail? If they do CRK takes care of it because they have excellent customer service. However that does not take away from the fact that there is an issue. There is a reason hinderer's and other high end brands use steel lock bar inserts when dealing with frame locks. It is because a flat surface meets a flat surface thus creating a reliable lock.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2020
- Messages
- 48
I can’t image ever needing to put the frame on a hard surface and bear down on the spine of the knife to cut something. Has there been even a single report of a 31’s lock actually failing during a cutting task due to the ceramic ball? If not, what is the evidence for the assertions that the redesign has altered the reliability?
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2012
- Messages
- 3,737
Was this change made to reduce lock wear and increase the longevity of the knife? If so, I wonder why CRK didn't just move to the standard steel lockbar insert used by everyone else.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
- Messages
- 13,423
Never known CRK to need a lock bar insert.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2012
- Messages
- 3,737
Nor have I, so why the change to a ceramic ball interface?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2010
- Messages
- 13,423
You got me there , no idea . If it’s not broke ,why fix it .
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,430
I think its because people aspect production knifes from CRK's to be at there best! but I for one never cared for the 31 I'm a 21 sort of guy
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 1,437
You realize that the "issue" of lockbar flex doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the lockup, right? In fact, it means that the lock interface itself is holding stronger than the force needed to bend the titanium lockbar itself. One of the inherent requirements on a framelock knife is the ability for the lockbar to flex, otherwise you can't operate it. What I'm curious about is how the force it takes to flex the lockbar compares to the amount of force it takes to dimple the tang of the knife with the ceramic ball (ceramic bearings have been known to dimple their races if you overtighten the pivot too much).
The main thing is likely to standardize the lock interface across their product line, which simplifies things for CRK. The technical advantage of the "lock ball" compared to a flat surface is that it will always have full engagement with the tang. The contact surface with a normal lockbar (or insert) changes with wear and is highly dependent on the angle of each plane (i.e. the tang and the lock face). A ball will always intersect a plane the exact same way, no matter the angle involved. The cynic in me says this could've been done as a way to decrease the amount of hand fitting that needs to be done to each knife, although CRK's reputation for fanatical attention to tolerances suggests that's probably not the reason.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Messages
- 1,431
I was just ready to post similar thoughts. With the exception of the Mnandi (I assume) everything now has the same interface and assembly and fitting procedure, simplifying the process and skills needed at that step of assembly.
Plenty of buyers have enjoyed the ball interface on the Inkosi and Ummumzaan so why not add it to the 21 and make a 31 with a few other design changes.
Maybe Tim just wants to make something that is more his own than just what his Dad had designed.
I am more traditional and have stayed with the 21, 25, Inkosi and Umnumzaans but can appreciate the new design even if it is unlikely I will buy one
Jsega51
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2015
- Messages
- 9,281
I got a lg 31 and then proceeded to keep researching the “issues”. I started to wonder if I made the right choice but then started using and carrying it. I’ve played with this 31 non stop since I’ve gotten it and it’s defied all the issues it’s supposed to have. I also was noticing that all of the threads about the 31 have the same 5-6 dissenters, some who have never owned a 31 and won’t, simply because of the change to the ball.
I had to see what the big stink was about so I went and bought a lg inlay 21 to compare. Which then caused me to jump on another 21, a large plain Jane. Then I saw a good deal on a large plain Jane 21 with the Insigno blade so I got that as well.
Not sure if it’s because I got the 31 first, but I sure as hell like it more when I compare all 4 knives together. My 31 just feels better in hand. Some of it is because of the inlays, but the tapers of the handle are better and it feels more solid. The action is better and it feel like it locks up more crisp than the 21’s. I wonder if that’s due to their lighter detents? My 31 has no discernible “lock flex”, it locks up solid, there’s no blade play, the screws don’t back out, and I’m sure it will survive any other make believe issue that people want to try and bring up, like the stop pin design.
That’s an issue that makes me scratch my head. To get any sort of failure in that part of the knife, I’m assuming you’d have to really be beating the hell out of it, also known as abusing. The stop pin simply stops the blade, so does a slight change in construction really matter when the force on that part isn’t supposed to be that great to begin with? (Remember, it’s not a flipper and you’re not supposed to “wrist flick” them).
I had to see what the big stink was about so I went and bought a lg inlay 21 to compare. Which then caused me to jump on another 21, a large plain Jane. Then I saw a good deal on a large plain Jane 21 with the Insigno blade so I got that as well.
Not sure if it’s because I got the 31 first, but I sure as hell like it more when I compare all 4 knives together. My 31 just feels better in hand. Some of it is because of the inlays, but the tapers of the handle are better and it feels more solid. The action is better and it feel like it locks up more crisp than the 21’s. I wonder if that’s due to their lighter detents? My 31 has no discernible “lock flex”, it locks up solid, there’s no blade play, the screws don’t back out, and I’m sure it will survive any other make believe issue that people want to try and bring up, like the stop pin design.
That’s an issue that makes me scratch my head. To get any sort of failure in that part of the knife, I’m assuming you’d have to really be beating the hell out of it, also known as abusing. The stop pin simply stops the blade, so does a slight change in construction really matter when the force on that part isn’t supposed to be that great to begin with? (Remember, it’s not a flipper and you’re not supposed to “wrist flick” them).