Standardized pull weight scale?

I get where you're coming from, but I thought an "industry standard" pull of 5 was a 93mm Victorinox main blade?

Comparing the main blade of my ALOX Rancher to my 25, the 25 is noticeably stiffer. I would say that if the new 25s are like my spear point 25, a rating of 7 or 8 is warranted. Comparing my Rancher to my Beer Scout or Boys Razor 15 to my ALOX Rancher, they are fairly similar, but I think the GECs are little stiffer.

I would have no problem if someone said, "This knife is about a 7, if compared to a #15." If someone just said, "The pull is a 3." My mind is immediately thinking about a SAK's pull.
 
I like the idea of using s common knife as a point of reference when comparing pull weight, but I have seen the SAK used for this purpose. I think that is a better choice, since it is a more common knife and the tolerances are tighter, so the pull is more standard across knives.
 
93mm SAK (Soldier/Pioneer) is a 5. I doubt anybody would disagree, and it's so ubiquitous that it's the best reference point. Plus it's extremely rare (I've never heard of it) that there's be a fluke 93mm SAK with a different pull than the other millions upon millions made. With a Case or Buck or many other brands examples of the same model might differ between knives, between manufacture dates, etc. Like a new Buck 303 compared to one made by Camillus in the 80's. Or the 2 blades on the same Case Trapper. With a 93mm alox SAK, it'll be the same on every knife.
 
SAK has been the standard "5" around here for some time. It's a great reference point.
To me, the GEC #15s are typically about a half point stronger.
 
SAK has been the standard used in the Traditional forum discussions pretty much as long as I've been here. Likely was even earlier. SAK = 5.
 
I base my conversations about the pull on the SAK! I have had several and they are all the same nice "5" pull:)
 
Nice idea to come up with some sort of reference but, as others have indicated, Victorinox is the reference commonly used here and it seems to work well.

FYI, boys knives aren't called boys knives because of a light pull. The name "boy's knives" is over 100 years old. They were inexpensive and simple knives compared to others and they were small for small hands. They were often regular jacks like GEC's 15. But nothing GEC makes is really simple and cheap! ;)
 
The problem with a "scale" is that those with more ability feel an increase in the scale exponentially less.

To put it in terms of knives:
If a 93mm Victorinox is set as the standard, as it scales up or down relies immediately upon the strength of one's fingers and nails. Only by being how hard it would be to judge other knives.

If a 93mm is a "5" and poses no problem, nor noticeable resistance, what is a "3, 7" or a "9" to this person?

I can understand that it is speaking comparatively to a brand and knife that most of us are familiar with, so I will agree that it is the most "logical" sum we should arrive at. But I am just trying to state that regardless of what my "5" and your "5" are, there will never be an absolute.

This is all further evidenced by the "condition" known as "Hysterical Strength". If an Olympic heavy lifter would have a hard time with a car, how can a small woman lift a 1964 Chevy Imapala?

I know this is a Very far stretch. But considering it comes down strength, physical dexterity and even nail strength, how can one state a true "set scale"?
 
Last edited:
All of that superfluous stuff being said, GEC stated that my two #48s were 8 pulls, as was my 5 #71s and my #85. Each one of these was different (imho).

One of the 71s was a 4, three were 5s, one was a 6.
My 85 was a 4, but that was partially due to the EO notch...

How can everything be an "8" by GEC standards?
How can I notice a measurable difference but they cannot?

Is it that they handle so many knives that they end up going a bit numb?
I would think that I would like that opportunity, but we all know that it would mean that I would own more knives then I can carry, and who wants that...




I do...
 
Last edited:
A single reference point in the middle of a scale is useful. Any other knife is either above, below or equal to that reference point. I've never seen claims that it was absolute. If we want to pick it apart, we could find all sorts of flaws. Everything above and below the reference is purely subjective. Also, nobody measured the force so even the reference is somewhat subjective. And our reference has some variation. But it works well enough for the purpose of internet discussion.
 
Last edited:
knarfeng said:
SAK has been the standard used in the Traditional forum discussions pretty much as long as I've been here. Likely was even earlier. SAK = 5.
Click to expand...


I do like and agree with whatever standard we set, but I was speaking more broadly. As I watch other youtuber's videos, read discussions on FB groups, and Instagram, I tend to scratch my head when I hear others rate pull. Then again, I tend to shy away from a number rating in my videos because I know I have strong hands and nails. So, for example, when people were saying the last run of 54's were 8's or higher, I disagreed, but I know my personal dexterity came into play.
 
In addition to the middling 5 reference of an SAK, the high and low numbers are absolute as well. A 1 being it flops open on it's own, and a 10 being impossible to open without tools. The intermediate numbers reflect a 20% increment to the next absolute. So it isn't really that hard. Even between people of differing strengths of fingers and nails, a 20% difference isn't enough to miss the grading by more than 1 number. So I usually say it's a 6-7, or a 2-3, and that should be understood by nearly everyone.
 
Wow, this is truly a first world problem. Never saw so much thought put into so little. If it doesn't break your nail who cares?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top