The latest Ganzo Firebird D2 knives

Status
Not open for further replies.
Houlahound said:
I really like the Ganzo folder with the big ass finger hole in the pivot.

Can someone point out an online retailer that sells the equivalent new in stock knife in another brand so I can support a more ethical company.

I have tried this myself but can't find an alternative retailer.
Click to expand...
Big ass finger holes are all the rage nowadays. The hard stuff is to find a knife without a stupid hole in the blade.
 
herisson said:
Big ass finger holes are all the rage nowadays. The hard stuff is to find a knife without a stupid hole in the blade.
Click to expand...

Please read people's comments before replying to their comments - it's basic manners.

I asked specifically about a big ass hole in the pivot not a hole in the blade.
 
Eli Chaps Eli Chaps , my analysis of the extent of our influence and general comments on economics stand. Our influence is limited. The hardline boycott of Ganzo won't do anything to stop Ganzo but it might discourage their investment in original designs.

Now, you mention the things we don't know going on behind the scenes in Chinese manufacturing. The fact is, Ganzo could have simply changed their name and you wouldn't even know about it. This whole firestorm only exists because they kept "Ganzo" attached to their Firebird knives. A point that has yet to be adequately addressed is that we really don't know much about Chinese manufacturing. We usually don't know which companies make knives for which other companies; who has deals with who or what is involved in those deals; which employees, managers, investors, facilities or other capital have been shared by which brands; etc.

Kevin Cleary made an excellent point on this topic. For all we know, some of the people taking a hard line against Ganzo own Chinese-made knives that were made by Ganzo. As I've pointed out, other Chinese companies that some of us like might have more in common with Ganzo than we know. In @Danke42 's language, they might share the same roots as Ganzo and we would have no idea. Forgive me but it seems odd to take such a bold, zealous, and uncompromising stance on such soft and mist-covered soil.
 
not2sharp said:
So absent proof to the contrary, you chose to believe a pack of thieves.

I can’t argue with that kind of logic. :confused::confused: Let me know if you want to buy a bridge.

n2s
Click to expand...

It's hard to argue with logic when you haven't bothered to read or understand it. I said "In the absence of other independent testing, they are..." I was specifically discussing the independent XRF testing that has already been done.
 
Chronovore said:
Eli Chaps Eli Chaps , my analysis of the extent of our influence and general comments on economics stand. Our influence is limited. The hardline boycott of Ganzo won't do anything to stop Ganzo but it might discourage their investment in original designs.

Now, you mention the things we don't know going on behind the scenes in Chinese manufacturing. The fact is, Ganzo could have simply changed their name and you wouldn't even know about it. This whole firestorm only exists because they kept "Ganzo" attached to their Firebird knives. A point that has yet to be adequately addressed is that we really don't know much about Chinese manufacturing. We usually don't know which companies make knives for which other companies; who has deals with who or what is involved in those deals; which employees, managers, investors, facilities or other capital have been shared by which brands; etc.

Kevin Cleary made an excellent point on this topic. For all we know, some of the people taking a hard line against Ganzo own Chinese-made knives that were made by Ganzo. As I've pointed out, other Chinese companies that some of us like might have more in common with Ganzo than we know. In @Danke42 's language, they might share the same roots as Ganzo and we would have no idea. Forgive me but it seems odd to take such a bold, zealous, and uncompromising stance on such soft and mist-covered soil.
Click to expand...

None of that changes anything I posted. I can't go diving into all the nuances of scrutinizing all the details of every little thing I buy, but when I know for a fact that a brand is built on thievery and disrespect, especially to people whom I respect, well then I can just draw that line and not cross it.

Kevin Cleary, Luv Them Knives, Super Steel Steve, blah, blah, blah. I don't care. In this cloudy, chaotic world, when I do get the increasingly rare opportunity to see blatant right and wrong, I'm gonna take it. And that feels pretty good to me.
 
I would hate to apply these ethics to other consumer products either at the whole product or the component level.

Pretty much everything you buy at best might be made in your own country but it is almost 100% certain it contains ad least components or material either fully or in part manufactured in China.

This ethical position altho noble is effectively naive and moot when generally applied to any random shit you buy.

Maintaining it for knives seems like cherry picking.... but each can spend their money any way they choose.
 
Houlahound said:
I would hate to apply these ethics to other consumer products either at the whole product or the component level.

Pretty much everything you buy at best might be made in your own country but it is almost 100% certain it contains ad least components or material either fully or in part manufactured in China.

This ethical position altho noble is effectively naive and moot when generally applied to any random shit you buy.

Maintaining it for knives seems like cherry picking.... but each can spend their money any way they choose.
Click to expand...

Sigh...

It's not about China.
 
Chronovore said:
Not at all. LuvThemKnives is basically a review channel. There is a whole spectrum of reviewers out there doing different things. Generally, producing information about products for public consumption can be helpful. Some reviewers are more "scientific" than others. Cut testing with relative control, such as what we see from Pete, Outpost76, Super Steel Steve, etc. has value for comparing different blades in different steels. Two specific parameters that were not being widely tested were steel identity and hardness.

So LuvThemKnives stepped up. The guy is not a professional scientist. He is just a YouTube reviewer who stepped up. He got some testing going for things that otherwise weren't being independently tested. For whatever failings or mistakes, show me some other sources. Who else is doing that? You call those tests "a single data point" but in most cases, it is the ONLY data point.

Unless anyone else wants to do XRF testing on these knives, I'm inclined to believe those tests. The results have been very interesting. Especially with new or unknown brands, it's great to have some scientific confirmation on their claimed steel content. For instance, we can stop wondering (or assuming) whether Ganzo is telling the truth about their D2. In the absence of other independent testing, they are. Meanwhile, other companies such as Eagengrow have been exposed for putting D2 stamps on cheaper steel.
Click to expand...
You're functionally arguing that the lack of additional testing makes this testing, which has already proven suspect, more valid and, frankly, that's a purely emotional argument rather than a scientific one. You're believing your one data point simply because there's only one data point and that's an absolutely terrible approach as has already been proven by the Lionsteel fiasco.

To be frank, it sounds like your admiration of this YouTuber is playing more of a role in your decision making than any actual analysis of the testing that's been done.
 
Last edited:
Houlahound said:
True, but it's about intellectual theft right?

China and intellectual theft in manufacturing & design have a pretty tight correlation I would suggest.
Click to expand...

I work in Hi-Tech manufacturing with a massive Asian customer base. I very much understand China and intellectual theft.

Again, my issue with Ganzo is not about "China".
 
Chronovore said:
Eli Chaps Eli Chaps , my analysis of the extent of our influence and general comments on economics stand. Our influence is limited. The hardline boycott of Ganzo won't do anything to stop Ganzo but it might discourage their investment in original designs.

Now, you mention the things we don't know going on behind the scenes in Chinese manufacturing. The fact is, Ganzo could have simply changed their name and you wouldn't even know about it. This whole firestorm only exists because they kept "Ganzo" attached to their Firebird knives. A point that has yet to be adequately addressed is that we really don't know much about Chinese manufacturing. We usually don't know which companies make knives for which other companies; who has deals with who or what is involved in those deals; which employees, managers, investors, facilities or other capital have been shared by which brands; etc.

Kevin Cleary made an excellent point on this topic. For all we know, some of the people taking a hard line against Ganzo own Chinese-made knives that were made by Ganzo. As I've pointed out, other Chinese companies that some of us like might have more in common with Ganzo than we know. In @Danke42 's language, they might share the same roots as Ganzo and we would have no idea. Forgive me but it seems odd to take such a bold, zealous, and uncompromising stance on such soft and mist-covered soil.
Click to expand...

There is no soft, mist-covered soil here. At all. Should we applaud thieves because they don't hide their identities? They get a pass on IP theft and counterfeiting because they MIGHT produce legitimate knives for other companies? By all means let them produce their own original designs, that's what they should have been doing from the beginning. But they are simultaneously continuing their unethical practices against companies who have no way to get legal satisfaction due to the vagaries of Chinese law. Why would we think Ganzo would stop it's tried and true business practices if they finally developed their own house brand?

Your argument boils down to, "we can't know for certain they are all bad, and they might improve." The counter argument is, "they have been getting away with criminal business practices since the beginning, and they show no sign of stopping." I doubt either side of the Ganzo divide could see the other's point with a telescope, but if we take out all the "might, maybe, possibly" and just look at facts, Ganzo makes cheap knockoffs. It's illegal. Supporting Ganzo original designs means you support the crappy side of the company too. I have no problem with Chinese companies, I carry a few of their knives, just not the ones made by crooks.
 
Houlahound said:
What this??

Educate us noobs plz.
Click to expand...
They botched the testing on multiple Lionsteel slipjoints and misreported the HRC of the M390 in the blades. This caused a respected dealer to lose quite a bit of business and it was later demonstrated that the numbers they had claimed were badly off and the M390 was, in fact, hardened within the advertised range.
 
I will entertain the argument that we should support Ganzo’s legit/original designs when they have sold no knock-offs for 5 years.

That would be a start.

Until then, there are many budget knife makers from all over the world that have not committed theft. Ebenvoila Ebenvoila ,we’ll be happy to offer suggestion if you’re willing to accept them.

H Houlahound , the Kershaw Flythrough has a hole in the pivot.
 
Last edited:
MolokaiRider said:
Gerber Remiz maybe....?
Click to expand...

That's it, with an "x" tho. I have a knock off version I made a thread about some time ago.

This design was imo wrongly dismissed by the knife community as poor design.

I love the desogn, it could have evolved into something great with some development and refinement but alas it was not meant to be.

I don't buy Gerber as a rule but I will make an exception if I find this one new.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
You're functionally arguing that the lack of additional testing makes this testing, which has already proven suspect, more valid and, frankly, that's a purely emotional argument rather than a scientific one. You're believing your one data point simply because there's only one data point and that's an absolutely terrible approach as has already been proven by the Lionsteel fiasco.

To be frank, it sounds like your admiration of this YouTuber is playing more of a role in your decision making than any actual analysis of the testing that's been done.
Click to expand...

You're arguing that due to an issue with one kind of test, we should disregard any testing of any kind with which those individuals were involved. Tell me, how much of that opinion is science or logic versus emotion or bias?

Look, XRF is a different kind of test. I don't see a good reason to doubt their XRF results. Their XRF results have positively confirmed steel identities from several reputable companies. They've also exposed false steel claims on the part of other companies such as Eagengrow. So in the absence of both any evidence to suggest that there is a methodological problem with their XRF testing in particular, or any other XRF tests showing different results for the chemical make-up of Ganzo's FH knives; why should I doubt their confirmation of Ganzo's D2?

Sure, from a clinical perspective, one data source might not be ideal. However, this is not a clinical environment. Nobody else is providing data points. It's all we've got. The only "admiration" I have for LTK is that he bothered to get us a data point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top