... But after doing at least 100 tear downs on a Sebenza, the washer vs bearing thing turned out to be a non-issue for me.
It turns out that I actually prefer the bearing knives.
Remember taking care not to pinch a washer is quite nerve wracking for some, and knives are returned to CRK for this reason regularly.
So while you prefer CRK for serviceability, I count it’s design as a strike against it, and washers in general.
Should I lose a Shiro bearing, the knife will function perfectly fine without it, and a suitable replacement can be dropped in at a later date. So no return to factory. No down time.
If you find a few dozen loose steel bearings (that are too small to pick up with fingers) easier to handle than two pb washers, then I suspect you are in a definite minority. Me, I have an easier time with the washers, plus the piece of mind that there are no openings between the blade tang and the pivot bearing material - bearings create a wide open window for debris as the contact points are vastly smaller than the openings.
My question was about objective criteria, where as your preferences are subjective but that is fine.
Sebenza does mean “work”, but that speaks to what Chris intended it for. Nothing else. It was pretty awesome and revolutionary in the 90s.
Using objective criteria, like cutting performance, weight, action, serviceability are more objective criteria.
Things like degree of skill used in it’s creation, ergonomics and the like are more subjective.
Are you suggesting the design goal isn't "objective criteria"? You go on to say
"Sebenza does mean “work”, but that speaks to what Chris intended it for. Nothing else. It was pretty awesome and revolutionary in the 90s." Well guess what, it is still pretty awesome now. If the goal is to build the highest possible production knife, for the purpose of using, not to impress knife nuts or to be a fidget toy, I suggest that CRK has fairly uniquely adhered to providing that product, subjectively and objectively. Additionally, I would have to disagree with you assertion that "degree of skill used in creation" is subjective, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.
In the universe of knife enthusiasts I don’t think you will find any general consensus that S35VN is superior to M390, S90V or Vanax 37, or even Elmax really. I also don’t think you will find people generally say heavier is better.
^^^ Subjective points, unless a design goal/purpose is established. In any of the modern steels you list, there are characteristics of each that ultimately involve trade off's, which you surely understand. Corrosion resistance, edge retention, edge stability, ease of sharpening, etc, etc. And I think CRK is correct in their choice of S35VN for their intended purpose; similarly Shiro often uses well matched steels, even with S30V.
Weight? Within a range of acceptability, I have at times
subjectively preferred a more substantial heft.
Kershaw, Spyderco, BM etc make a fine knife. While CRK is better in some areas, many will argue that it’s not worth the price increase. That same argument will work for Shiro vs CRK. The difference is CRK isn’t using anything that out performs a Shiro. Period. Other cheaper mid tech makers use better steel than CRK.
Finally, the pricing also supports the notion that CRK is better than Kershaw. Pricing in the secondary market and the MSRP proves it. Apply that standard to Shiro. The market illustrates a general consensus.
Thanks for your post, I enjoyed it.
^^^ I categorically disagree with the
emboldened underlined assertions above. I do agree that there could reasonably be made a Shiro/Kershaw correlation made, as both attempt similar product designs albeit aimed at radically different markets obviously. However, to make the Shiro/CRK comparison either CRK would need to do a bearing/flipper/ultra-modern design or Shiro would have to do a worker/sebenza design. As evidenced by the success of CRK, there are many that do follow the sage philosophy that the design is best when there's nothing left to remove.
Here is another way to look at it. My daughter's fiance is an amazingly successful, completely self-made young man. One of his companies alone is worth in excess of eighty million dollars. He can afford to drive virtually any car on the market. Every two years he buys a new white Toyota Land Cruiser, trading in the previous one. He feels it is of premium quality functionally, it doesn't scream "look at me", and he can get the next one sight unseen, as he has great reason for confidence in the know entity that is that product. He has no interest in being a knife nut, but does carry and use a knife, and appreciates quality. The Sebenza is much more a fit for a guy like him than a Shirogorov. That doesn't make one better than the other overall, but for a specific set of needs/wants, that is a different story.
mfm22
, if you can find a Shiro you like in nice condition on the Exchange for a decent price, you ought to give it a try--you can pretty much get your money back if you decide to unload it. That's what I figured going in, but I still have all five I bought.
