The latest Ganzo Firebird D2 knives

[Houlahound]

Where else on the internet can you find passionate, comprehensive, detailed technical debates spanning economics, philosophy, high-tech manufacturing, intellectual theft, ethics and metallurgy that 99.9999999% of all humans that have ever lived don't give half of zero fucks about?

Hint: nowhere

 

[Chronovore]

There is no soft, mist-covered soil here. ... They get a pass on IP theft and counterfeiting... 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.

This is part of why I've been bothering here. I see people taking a very strong position on ground that isn't entirely solid. I see some of those people not worrying at all if they are mistaken, don't know something, are ignoring something, or are making false claims while in the pursuit of that position. That's not just standing on shaky ground. That's adding an oil slick.

For instance, you've claimed that their business is "criminal" and "illegal". Under which laws? How are these illegal products available at a major retailer like Amazon?

Also, Ganzo is guilty of copying, not "counterfeiting". There are plenty of real counterfeiters out there making actual counterfeits. Could we agree that counterfeiting is a worse offense?

Lastly, you claim: "... I carry a few of their knives, just not the ones made by crooks." That's a bold statement. How do you know that it's true? (I've already taken the time to illustrate why you might not. Please do me the courtesy of considering those points before you reply.)

 

[Ebenvoila]

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 ,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.

The initial goal was to reproduce what I did with the Sanrenmu 7073LUX, these do have a frame lock, and I got them for less than 10 € (I bought 5 of them). This was several years ago.
Now that I better know what I like, I was looking for one with:
- flipper
- frame or liner lock
- ball bearings
- a little bit robust
- nice action
- drop point blade
- good edge retention
- weight less than 100g, 80g would be even better
- for less than 15 €

But... hummm... this doesn't exist!

I'm happy with my 3 Kershaw Dividend (Aluminium grey, GFN and Composite), but each one costs over 50 €.

I also found this for 15 €:

But... well... Just a knife with a back lock. You cannot disassemble it.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

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.

An unreliable source that's not doing blind testing calls all data that they're producing into question, in part because we don't know why their data was bad and those reasons can, and likely will since the testing isn't blind, include any number of biases. That's a methodological issue with literally any test they perform.

You keep saying this isn't a clinical environment and you're right, that is, in fact, a huge part of why their testing means so little and is so incredibly suspect.

 

[tltt]

Gerber Remiz maybe....?

Yes, the Gerber Remix or the older Gerber USA Chameleon from around 20 years ago, which I think is the start of the giant finger hole folders.

 

[Hackenslash]

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?

I do doubt their XRF test results. I used to run a materials laboratory and performed XRF testing via consoles and hand held units. I had no expertise in metallurgy; I used the XRF on petroleum products. XRF results are only as good as the quality of the calibration and the accuracy of the assumptions made in programming the blanks. You must have operators and programmers familiar with the particular materials. An XRF unit at a university or materials lab will not be set up to accurately measure metal compositions to the type of resolution needed to distinguish between, say, 8Cr and 9Cr.

A few years ago I bought a range of off-brand knives that advertised steel ranging from AUS8 to M390. I tried to test them myself on my lab's equipment, but it required me to make assumptions that I wasn't comfortable making. I turned to experts at Niagara and Crucible to provide backup, and in some cases they obtained different results than mine. To validate their XRF testing, Crucible smelted down part of the blade of one of the inconclusive knives to calibrate/validate the XRF results. It took destructive testing to let them feel confident in the non-destructive testing.

I have little faith that a YouTube interviewer will have the technical expertise to consistently provide data that is accurate and un-biased. The times they've gotten it right; well, even a blind squirrel can find a nut. I appreciate anyone who attempts to add to the knowledge pool available for us Knife Knuts, but LTK results absolutely MUST be taken with a grain of salt and a sense of doubt. Further, the hand held units that most of these apprentice testers are using are typically used for "go", "no go" testing on materials in a QC environment.

Also, Ganzo is guilty of copying, not "counterfeiting". There are plenty of real counterfeiters out there making actual counterfeits. Could we agree that counterfeiting is a worse offense?

No, I don't agree to that at all. Both are wrong, both hurt legitimate manufacturers and designers. The only difference between a clone and a counterfeiter is the counterfeiter defrauds BOTH the maker and the consumer. I could argue the point, for a knife enthusiast, it hurts more to defraud the maker. Some could say that the consumer who buys a clone has simply failed to perform due diligence and has been complicit in their own defrauding. Per Sal, counterfeit knives AND clone knives almost did irreparable damage to Spyderco. You can try to paint these fouls with a broad brush in 50 shades of gray, but in truth the scope of damage can only be considered from the perspective of the victim.

The initial goal was to reproduce what I did with the Sanrenmu 7073LUX, these do have a frame lock, and I got them for less than 10 € (I bought 5 of them). This was several years ago.
Now that I better know what I like, I was looking for one with:
- flipper
- frame or liner lock
- ball bearings
- a little bit robust
- nice action
- drop point blade
- good edge retention
- weight less than 100g, 80g would be even better
- for less than 15 €

But... hummm... this doesn't exist!

I don't think you're looking that hard. I just filtered BladeHQ to bring up knives that have a 3-4" blade, Flipper, weight less than 3.5 ounces and price less than $100 USD (that's their lowest price range...hmmm...makes you think .) All have better steel than 8Cr.

I got 65 options. All are from companies that are more reputable than Ganzo. In fact, reputable vendors don't even offer Ganzo as a choice.

Here's the link to the search...

https://www.bladehq.com/cat--Manual-Knives-
-45#/filterrice:*:100/filter:blade_length:3:3.49/filter:blade_length:3.5:4/filterpener:Flipper/filter:blade_material2/sortrice_sort_asc:asc/filter:weight:1.5:3.5/filter:blade_stylerop$2520Point/filter:blade_material:14C28N/filter:blade_material:Bohler$2520N690/filter:blade_material:Acuto$252B/filter:blade_material:CPM-S35VN

There are some compelling knives there...
Things like the Steel Will Intrigue:

CIVIVI Little Fiend:

CIVIVI Wyvern:

Kershaw Bareknuckle:

These are just a few that meet your general specs but are infinitely better choices for a responsible knife buyer.

Yes, many of these cost a few dollars more than a Firebird, but you may find yourself having to make a more expensive choice. Good luck on your knife journey. If you decide to go on and purchase a Ganzo, I, for one, don't want to hear about it.

 

[Quiet]

LOL Another Ganzo thread? Ganzos are trash, buy something better with your money. I just wanted to get that out there, can't wait to see the usual bleating from the usual apologists.

 

[craytab]

LOL Another Ganzo thread? Ganzos are trash, buy something better with your money.

We could have used this on page 1! Could have saved a lot of time. Thanks a lot.....

 

[Quiet]

Nothing to be shameful about. Lots of folks end up with these knives for various reasons, mostly when new and not knowing any better. That's why it is important for us here to teach those that don't know, the truly destructive nature of the cloners. I started with a few ganzos. Bladeforums.com, with its knowledgeable members and moderators (plus the HPIC), was instrumental in setting me on the right path to enjoying this hobby in an honest way.

Where there is shame, is knowing the truth and still supporting cloners.

Or worse, making excuses for them, or attacking people for not liking or respecting them (which the usual defender drones have done).

I love JD's question "Why the fear? "

Here's my retort: "Why the fear at not wanting to spend a few more dollars and get something from a reputable company instead?"

 

[Hackenslash]

LOL Another Ganzo thread? Ganzos are trash, buy something better with your money. I just wanted to get that out there, can't wait to see the usual bleating from the usual apologists.

We could have used this on page 1! Could have saved a lot of time. Thanks a lot.....

Sometimes...someone just needs to cut to the chase, lol.

 

[Chronovore]

I do doubt their XRF test results. I used to run a materials laboratory and performed XRF testing via consoles and hand held units. I had no expertise in metallurgy; I used the XRF on petroleum products. XRF results are only as good as the quality of the calibration and the accuracy of the assumptions made in programming the blanks. You must have operators and programmers familiar with the particular materials. An XRF unit at a university or materials lab will not be set up to accurately measure metal compositions to the type of resolution needed to distinguish between, say, 8Cr and 9Cr.

A few years ago I bought a range of off-brand knives that advertised steel ranging from AUS8 to M390. I tried to test them myself on my lab's equipment, but it required me to make assumptions that I wasn't comfortable making. I turned to experts at Niagara and Crucible to provide backup, and in some cases they obtained different results than mine. To validate their XRF testing, Crucible smelted down part of the blade of one of the inconclusive knives to calibrate/validate the XRF results. It took destructive testing to let them feel confident in the non-destructive testing.

I have little faith that a YouTube interviewer will have the technical expertise to consistently provide data that is accurate and un-biased. The times they've gotten it right; well, even a blind squirrel can find a nut. I appreciate anyone who attempts to add to the knowledge pool available for us Knife Knuts, but LTK results absolutely MUST be taken with a grain of salt and a sense of doubt. Further, the hand held units that most of these apprentice testers are using are typically used for "go", "no go" testing on materials in a QC environment.



No, I don't agree to that at all. Both are wrong, both hurt legitimate manufacturers and designers. The only difference between a clone and a counterfeiter is the counterfeiter defrauds BOTH the maker and the consumer. I could argue the point, for a knife enthusiast, it hurts more to defraud the maker. Some could say that the consumer who buys a clone has simply failed to perform due diligence and has been complicit in their own defrauding. Per Sal, counterfeit knives AND clone knives almost did irreparable damage to Spyderco. You can try to paint these fouls with a broad brush in 50 shades of gray, but in truth the scope of damage can only be considered from the perspective of the victim.


I don't think you're looking that hard. I just filtered BladeHQ to bring up knives that have a 3-4" blade, Flipper, weight less than 3.5 ounces and price less than $100 USD (that's their lowest price range...hmmm...makes you think .) All have better steel than 8Cr.

I got 65 options. All are from companies that are more reputable than Ganzo. In fact, reputable vendors don't even offer Ganzo as a choice.

Here's the link to the search...

https://www.bladehq.com/cat--Manual-Knives-
-45#/filterrice:*:100/filter:blade_length:3:3.49/filter:blade_length:3.5:4/filterpener:Flipper/filter:blade_material2/sortrice_sort_asc:asc/filter:weight:1.5:3.5/filter:blade_stylerop$2520Point/filter:blade_material:14C28N/filter:blade_material:Bohler$2520N690/filter:blade_material:Acuto$252B/filter:blade_material:CPM-S35VN

There are some compelling knives there...
Things like the Steel Will Intrigue:

CIVIVI Little Fiend:

CIVIVI Wyvern:

Kershaw Bareknuckle:

These are just a few that meet your general specs but are infinitely better choices for a responsible knife buyer.

Yes, many of these cost a few dollars more than a Firebird, but you may find yourself having to make a more expensive choice. Good luck on your knife journey. If you decide to go on and purchase a Ganzo, I, for one, don't want to hear about it.

Thanks for taking the time to actually answer some of the points and questions that have been presented in this thread. Now I'm interested in exploring LTK's methods. He's had something like a hundred knives tested for material identification. A big reason that I trusted his results is that they're mostly what we'd expect. Statistically, methodological problems should present outliers or incorrect results beyond Ganzo's FH line.

In case anyone is interested, here is a relatively recent version of his data sheet:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OepNr_D4lqbdTFqdqWl1rmAd4bOzPzJe6J0iEWrdJGU

 

[Quiet]

As I said in my initial post on this here, I think your opinion is reasonable. I just think it's narrow and that it ignores some facts about the world. (Those facts are discussed in my first post.)

I'm really not interested in defending clones. However, I am interested in Ganzo's original designs and I'd like to see their company continue to move in a positive direction. I'm taking a stand here because when I see this cascade of hate on the hobby's premier forum, I see a barrier to that happening. I see people taking a hard, zealous, black-and-white position based on a limited view of the situation and for what purpose? What is the goal here?

So we have a company that got big making clones; not outright counterfeits with fake stamps but clones and mashups of existing designs. We have the benefit of knowing some of their history, which we rarely do as far as Chinese manufacturing goes. So now they are investing in making "legitimate", original knives. Should those efforts be punished and to what end? The justification seems fuzzy and the action seems counterproductive.

This is poor logic. "I am interested in this trash cloner company's original designs, and want people to stop hating on them." No one is stopping you from buying all the Ganzos you want. However, this is a trash company who made money from designs stolen from better, superior companies. That fact is not in question. YOU might be good with giving scumbag thieves a pass...

But we aren't. So, stop trying to paint this as "People need to stop being haters, poor Ganzo, they've moved on, they're better now. This guy who murdered 14 people in the 80s, he's done his time, I'd totally let him watch my kid now."

That's you. Good luck with it. Ganzos are trash, and people who buy their products are supporting trash.

 

[Quiet]

The ganzo part.

Not going to lie, I spluttered coffee a bit. LOL

 

[soc_monki]

I'm surprised no one has brought up ganzos new "upscale" brand, adimanti. It still says Ganzo on it. I still won't touch it. Actually have been getting away from buying any Chinese knives, not because of the country or whatever, but because I no longer want to give money to their government. But that is a whole different discussion!

I did however just buy a Kershaw injection 3.5 because I've been wanting one and finally pulled the trigger. My Chinese Kershaws and spydercos have always served me well, no complaints. However I think Kershaws Chinese knives are getting a bit ambitious in their prices, especially when you can get their American made knives for the same or even less!

I digress. Just say no to Ganzo, Firebird, and Adimanti. They ripped off the axis lock before the patent ran out. They butchered the pm2 by putting an axis lock on it. Multiple other benchmade copies. I want no part of their business. But I did buy a Native Chief the other day, thanks Sal Glesser!

 

[Quiet]

Thank you for clarifying. Now let me help you out. Ganzo will exist regardless of your maximum effectiveness on this goal. The total combined influence of Blade Forums is unlikely to curb the global clone market. However, I do think Blade Forums holds a little influence over the portion of the market where Ganzo's originals are trying to exist.

So, thinking about areas where we do have influence, should we punish Ganzo for its investment in legitimate products and original designs? Boycotts work by influencing behavior. Sap the rewards for investing in this segment of the market and you will simply discourage investments in this segment of the market. Given that Ganzo will continue to exist and will continue to invest somewhere, where and on what kinds of products would you like them to be focusing their investments: clones or original designs?

Again with this appeal to emotion concerning Ganzo. Let me be very clear, and also understand that I am not claiming to speak for others (though I'm fairly sure a lot of folks would agree with me): I absolutely do not care if our posts here mean less sales for Ganzo. I would love to hear that Ganzo went out of business. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest. However, that won't happen because for every member of BF here who knows better than to support a cloner trash company, there are ten people who have twenty bucks and don't know any better. It is what it is.

Also, to clarify, my stance is entirely irrespective of where Ganzo is from, though candidly, their actions were never a surprise given that country's lack of respect for our IP laws.

Lastly, Ganzo is most likely a small appendage of a much larger manufacturing concern over there. Those dudes aren't going to be missing meals anytime soon if Bladeforums is a "No Respect for Ganzo" Zone.

 

[Lee D]

I always get the feeling on these threads that some members are defending their collection/purchases more than they are Ganzo.

 

[Chronovore]

LOL Another Ganzo thread? Ganzos are trash, buy something better with your money. I just wanted to get that out there, can't wait to see the usual bleating from the usual apologists.

Setting aside the IP issues, are Ganzo's FH knives really "trash"?

I've only owned a couple of Ganzo's FH knives. I've got extensive long-term use on one of them. Compared to all the other sub-$25 knives I've owned or handled over the years, my FH knives have been pretty good. I might put them a hair below Kizer's Tangram line.

Sure, you could get a much nicer knife from Civivi or Bestech for twice that price. I'd recommend it to anyone who has that option. However, there are a lot of people out there who top out in Ganzo's price range. There are other good choices like Kubey, Ruike, and those Tangrams under $30. Sadly, those are the exception. This part of the market is overwhelmingly full of "junk" knives that make the FH line look incredible by contrast.

Sorry to let you down on the sheep noises or being a "drone".

 

[Quiet]

Setting aside the IP issues, are Ganzo's FH knives really "trash"?

I've only owned a couple of Ganzo's FH knives. I've got extensive long-term use on one of them. Compared to all the other sub-$25 knives I've owned or handled over the years, my FH knives have been pretty good. I might put them a hair below Kizer's Tangram line.

Sure, you could get a much nicer knife from Civivi or Bestech for twice that price. I'd recommend it to anyone who has that option. However, there are a lot of people out there who top out in Ganzo's price range. There are other good choices like Kubey, Ruike, and those Tangrams under $30. Sadly, those are the exception. This part of the market is overwhelmingly full of "junk" knives that make the FH line look incredible by contrast.

Sorry to let you down on the sheep noises or being a "drone".

Yes, they are. I've held one or two in my time, usually when people who find out I'm a knife guy want to share their favorite knife, and twice it's been a Ganzo. I just nod my head, say "Nice", and immediately change the subject so I'm not forced to hurt some feelings. As I am here? I don't have much of a filter in "real life" either. Poorly finished, gritty action, a cheap knife that looked and felt cheap.

Listen, again, you're free to defend this garbage company all you want. You are. However, I have to say that it's a bad look to ask us to care about their financial wellbeing "But...but...if we talk trash, then they won't invest money into original designs..."

Honestly, Ganzo should be "investing" money in reparations paid to those companies whose designs they stole in order to make that money in the first place.

 

[Danke42]

Yes, they are. I've held one or two in my time, usually when people who find out I'm a knife guy want to share their favorite knife, and twice it's been a Ganzo. I just nod my head, say "Nice", and immediately change the subject so I'm not forced to hurt some feelings. As I am here? I don't have much of a filter in "real life" either. Poorly finished, gritty action, a cheap knife that looked and felt cheap.

Listen, again, you're free to defend this garbage company all you want. You are. However, I have to say that it's a bad look to ask us to care about their financial wellbeing "But...but...if we talk trash, then they won't invest money into original designs..."

Honestly, Ganzo should be "investing" money in reparations paid to those companies whose designs they stole in order to make that money in the first place.

Tell you what we can do.

Keep buying knives from the folks Ganzo steals designs from. Make up for any lost sales and keep them stimulated.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

Thanks for taking the time to actually answer some of the points and questions that have been presented in this thread. Now I'm interested in exploring LTK's methods. He's had something like a hundred knives tested for material identification. A big reason that I trusted his results is that they're mostly what we'd expect. Statistically, methodological problems should present outliers or incorrect results beyond Ganzo's FH line.

In case anyone is interested, here is a relatively recent version of his data sheet:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OepNr_D4lqbdTFqdqWl1rmAd4bOzPzJe6J0iEWrdJGU

Results being 'mostly what we expect is a very, very, very bad reason to trust them. It's exactly the kind of cognitive bias that proper testing controls for.

An example using myself, I think of Spyderco as a trustworthy brand, so if results come back that seem to confirm they're using the materials they say, I'm much more inclined to believe those results. That, however, is a giant issue, because those results are no more reliable than any other results from the same test, but I've allowed my preconceptions to color my interpretation of them. And it can work in reverse as well, if I tested a Bark River knife and the results were marginal I would be much more likely to jump to the conclusion that the used a steel other than what was advertised because that has been an issue for them in the past. Proper testing doesn't have a place for those kind of preconceptions and conclusions.