Spyderco Burch Chubby: Underrated?

S

Sharperthansticks

Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,612
Today I got in the mail a Spyderco Burch Chubby purchased from another forum member. I love both the aesthetic and the feel in the hand. (The one thing I would change is somehow adding carbon fiber to the lock side so that the sides are more symmetric, but assymetry in frame locks is a common complaint of mine that warrants a separate discussion.) Anyway, I rather like this little guy and wonder why few people made a fuss over it. Sometimes I don't understand why the Puhleeeeez Bowie gets so much love while knives like this get the cold shoulder.
 
The original price was somewhere in the $200+ range IIRC. Many would consider that too expensive for such a small knife.
I can definitely see how the casual buyer is not going to understand why that 2" bladed knife costs so much more than something like a Cold Steel with a 4" blade.
 
NorthernSouthpaw said:
The original price was somewhere in the $200+ range IIRC. Many would consider that too expensive for such a small knife.
I can definitely see how the casual buyer is not going to understand why that 2" bladed knife costs so much more than something like a Cold Steel with a 4" blade.
Click to expand...
At a certain point -- whether it's at the $100 price point or a $125 or $150 or some other number -- people are not purchasing knives solely based on their functionality. Whether it's ergonomics or beauty or fall-shuttitude or deployment, people are looking for something more and are willing to pay more, too. Plenty of Technos and Buskers sell, after all, and they are small. Knives like the PM2, Paysan, Techno, Chaparall (in Ti), and Burch Chubby are not marketed to the person that really just wants a box cutter from Home Depot. Somehow this little guy got lost in rhe shuffle.
 
It's a neat little design but I just think the cost + chubby/thickness lessened the appeal of the knife. If someone wanted to carry a small knife, they probably grabbed a Ladybug or Dragonfly 2 instead.

As for the Bowie, at a tad over 3" in blade, it hits a sweet spot for many folks who carry a knife.

I don't like the Bowie myself, not a fan of Ti handles and frame locks (too thin, I have a big hand).
 
89CB89F6-6C45-4E5D-BCA7-ABF58079791D.jpeg 4183FE35-10F8-44B8-88BC-758F1A6CE51F.jpeg E2EC74C8-CA24-42AE-939A-5D42901758D8.jpeg I had one, gave it to a member that passed away last year.
Great little knife!
Also gave away that Hogue......it was like holding a broken bottle.......still have the Cruwear Millie tho!
 
gazz98 said:
It's a neat little design but I just think the cost + chubby/thickness lessened the appeal of the knife. If someone wanted to carry a small knife, they probably grabbed a Ladybug or Dragonfly 2 instead.

As for the Bowie, at a tad over 3" in blade, it hits a sweet spot for many folks who carry a knife.

I don't like the Bowie myself, not a fan of Ti handles and frame locks (too thin, I have a big hand).
Click to expand...

I found the Dragonfly to be too small, but then again, I tried it when I was very new to collecting knives, so maybe I'd like it at this point. But even if I liked the D-fly, it doesn't have the high-end look of the Chubby. Agreed about its thickness, though; I'm going to have to give it a reasonably sharp edge on my KME if it's going to cut well. (Or I'll have to thin out the edge.)

As for the Bowie, when I bought one, I thought it was much ado about nothing, and I wound up selling it. Shabazz talked up the knife as if it was the third coming; if it weren't for him, I think the knife would have had a much more low-key discontinuation. It's not that anything is wrong with the Bowie; it's just that I didn't find anything so great about it, either. Shabazz really fawned over odd details. I was waiting for him to marvel at how one side of the blade cut through things, while the other side was safe for your thumb to push down upon. I got caught up in the hype, too. :-/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top