This post represents my personal take on the stagnation I see in the knife industry, both in the realm of custom knifemakers and production knives. These thoughts are based on what is ultimately a very limited worldview informed by aspects of the knife industry that I have a personal interest in, and so may not take all or even most important information into account. I welcome any and all disagreement with my opinions as disagreement often helps me to see viewpoints that I had not considered before or information I had neglected to factor into my observations.
Specific examples are here used neither to endorse nor to oppose these knives, manufacturers, or their enthusiasts.
In my view, the main culprit is Lateral Improvement and the encroachment of the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking. At first this may seem like a knee-jerk reaction, and after these explanations this may still very well be. However, I believe the lack of enthusiasm for both recent production and custom offerings and the proliferation of knives which seem to merely be visual variants on a theme can be attributed to this phenomenon.
---
In the earlier days of modern knife history, advancements in materials and technology were undertaken with an attitude that I will call "innovation based improvement". That is to say, unprecedented uses of technologies and materials, and sometimes technologies and materials specifically born out of the desire for their implementation in knives, resulted in features which fundamentally changed both the capabilities of knives and the way the end user interfaced with them. Some notable examples that come to mind are:
An important thing to note is that these innovators were also knifemakers of a very high level in their time. With the possible exception of Sal Glesser, all of the above were capable of producing sole-authored custom knives ranging from the practical to the tactical to the true art showpiece. They were custom knifemakers through and through- not inventors. However, as evidenced by their forward-thinking innovations, they all focused at least in part on this "innovation based improvement".
In recent years, however, came the prominence of the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking. This is knifemaking characterized by three major factors:
1. The new recognition of knives as status symbols, decorative ornaments, displays of wealth or of ingratiation with knifemakers. Enabled by the proliferation of image sharing via forums, Facebook and Instagram, this new recognition placed a newfound priority on the visual impact a knife would have on an audience.
2. Knives as metaphors for identity. "This is a knife to give as an heirloom to my children." (i.e. I am the type of person who thinks about the future- not only do I have material possessions to pass on to my children, but I also have intangibles such as work ethic, morals, manners, to pass on as well). "This is a knife capable of penetrating body armor or causing massive internal bleeding." (i.e. I am the type of person who has a prepared mind and is unafraid to defend myself, my family or my country from threats using the tools at my disposal). This secondary purpose for knives necessitated extensive feats of branding - in some cases the establishment of a whole subculture - to support these identities.
3. Knives as toys. As the ease of accessibility increased for folding knives, so too did their potential to be used as toys. Unlike fixed blades and vintage traditional folders, these knives provided tactile as well as aural stimulation that many consumers found irresistible. Knives produced for these consumers must therefore be capable of providing this function.
These newfound realities meant not only a change in the custom knives which were produced but in the improvements the custom knifemakers chose to pursue. These improvements I will call "Lateral improvement". These "lateral improvements" concerned changes that primarily affected one of the three factors outlined above - visual impact, branding and toy purpose, with little impact in the way of performance or usability by metrics which characterized innovation based improvement. With this in mind, let us take a look at the most notable recent innovations in custom knifemaking:
You may notice that these innovations follow a pattern of appealing to visual impact, branding and toy purpose, with little in the way of improvements in performance or usability. While these are not inherently negative or positive things, their audience is limited to a small subsector of the overall luxury goods market - an audience with plenty of disposable income, with the wait time of what can be 10+ years waiting for a custom ordered build, and who are willing to demonstrate their wealth and their savvy to an extremely small segment of the population (You can show off to more admirers with a Rolex than you can with a Zero Tolerance. Furthermore, you can show off to more admirers with a Zero Tolerance than with a Peter Carey custom.)
You may also notice I have left out talented, forward-thinking innovators such as Grant and Gavin Hawk and Stan Wilson. These makers show commitment to innovation based improvement with their designs and ideas. However, consider that their current competition is in fact the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking; consider also that compared to their competition, their designs have an even narrower audience and appeal.
The unfortunate reality is that the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking is propped by what could be described as a serious speculative bubble. Dealers and collectors alike have inflated prices on custom knives immensely, and this inevitably results in significant inertia. If you look at trends on the secondary market, you will notice that inflated prices are beholden to the fickle tastes of Instagram and the forums. As an illustration of how much value may be lost over a small span of time, here are some average price decreases on once popular & commonly exchanged knife models, calculated from pricing data obtained from sale posts on forums and dealer websites. I began collecting this data in 2015 and while it is not all-encompassing nor completely accurate as some sales may have been completed for less than advertised asking price, I believe it demonstrates the trends in question well.
The keystone in this dilemma is the fact that knifemakers, on average, still charge reasonable prices for their custom order knives, even when the secondary prices are inflated. However, an increase in practices such as bidding auctions, lotteries, and the sale of accessories (beads, tags, shirts, etc.) means that the knifemaker's income may still be appropriately supplemented if interest in his knives is high. This creates significant inertia among the owners of that knifemaker's knives, as they do not want to lose money on knives they purchased at inflated rates, and for the knifemaker themselves, who must produce something identical to or similar to the product which created that interest in the first place.
How does this inertia trickle to production knives? Knives are a durable good, and indeed one of their key selling points is their durability. A lack of innovation in durable goods for a significant length of time can create a very specific type of market saturation - one in which not only similar items with small variations are constantly being offered for sale, but the items which were bought in the previous season are still around. In other words, the new product with a small variation must not only compete with other offerings available today but must also compete with the extant offerings which were purchased yesterday and are still around.
Ultimately, this approach to innovation which emphasizes lateral improvement- improvement relating primarily to visual appeal, branding and toy use- results in insignificant, unremarkable differences between individual products in the context of production knife economies of scale and target demographic. The lack of innovation based improvement in many of today's custom knifemakers corresponds to a general lack of these improvements in production knives, reducing interest for the non-collecting, non-specialized audience of production knives.
Specific examples are here used neither to endorse nor to oppose these knives, manufacturers, or their enthusiasts.
In my view, the main culprit is Lateral Improvement and the encroachment of the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking. At first this may seem like a knee-jerk reaction, and after these explanations this may still very well be. However, I believe the lack of enthusiasm for both recent production and custom offerings and the proliferation of knives which seem to merely be visual variants on a theme can be attributed to this phenomenon.
---
In the earlier days of modern knife history, advancements in materials and technology were undertaken with an attitude that I will call "innovation based improvement". That is to say, unprecedented uses of technologies and materials, and sometimes technologies and materials specifically born out of the desire for their implementation in knives, resulted in features which fundamentally changed both the capabilities of knives and the way the end user interfaced with them. Some notable examples that come to mind are:
- R.W. Loveless's use of ATS 34 steel in knives.
- Chris Reeve's development of the titanium framelock as a variation of Michael Walker's liner lock.
- Bill McHenry and Jason Williams' invention of the Axis Lock.
- Robert Dalton's single-action OTF button lock design.
- Sal Glesser's pocket clip and opening hole innovations which became the basis for Spyderco knives.
- Andrew Demko's invention of the Tri-Ad lock.
- Ken Onion's invention of the Speedsafe assisted opening mechanism.
- The development of powder metallurgy steels optimized for knifemaking use by outfits such as Crucible Industries and Carpenter Technology Corporation.
- Tom Mayo's substitution of materials such as Talonite and Stellite for ferrous steel in folding and fixed blade knives.
- Ernest Emerson's discovery of the Wave Feature and the feature's subsequent implementation into folding knives.
- Kit Carson's invention of the flipper opening mechanism.
An important thing to note is that these innovators were also knifemakers of a very high level in their time. With the possible exception of Sal Glesser, all of the above were capable of producing sole-authored custom knives ranging from the practical to the tactical to the true art showpiece. They were custom knifemakers through and through- not inventors. However, as evidenced by their forward-thinking innovations, they all focused at least in part on this "innovation based improvement".
In recent years, however, came the prominence of the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking. This is knifemaking characterized by three major factors:
1. The new recognition of knives as status symbols, decorative ornaments, displays of wealth or of ingratiation with knifemakers. Enabled by the proliferation of image sharing via forums, Facebook and Instagram, this new recognition placed a newfound priority on the visual impact a knife would have on an audience.
2. Knives as metaphors for identity. "This is a knife to give as an heirloom to my children." (i.e. I am the type of person who thinks about the future- not only do I have material possessions to pass on to my children, but I also have intangibles such as work ethic, morals, manners, to pass on as well). "This is a knife capable of penetrating body armor or causing massive internal bleeding." (i.e. I am the type of person who has a prepared mind and is unafraid to defend myself, my family or my country from threats using the tools at my disposal). This secondary purpose for knives necessitated extensive feats of branding - in some cases the establishment of a whole subculture - to support these identities.
3. Knives as toys. As the ease of accessibility increased for folding knives, so too did their potential to be used as toys. Unlike fixed blades and vintage traditional folders, these knives provided tactile as well as aural stimulation that many consumers found irresistible. Knives produced for these consumers must therefore be capable of providing this function.
These newfound realities meant not only a change in the custom knives which were produced but in the improvements the custom knifemakers chose to pursue. These improvements I will call "Lateral improvement". These "lateral improvements" concerned changes that primarily affected one of the three factors outlined above - visual impact, branding and toy purpose, with little impact in the way of performance or usability by metrics which characterized innovation based improvement. With this in mind, let us take a look at the most notable recent innovations in custom knifemaking:
- Tom Ferry's technique of folding of different titanium alloys into layers in a fashion similar to modern pattern-welded steel.
- Flavio Ikoma & Rick Lala's development of the IKBS bearing pivot system.
- Jake Hoback's invention of the Hoback Rolling Detent.
- Kaj Embretsen's development of Damasteel, a pattern-welded steel which has increased stain resistance.
- J.L. William's invention of the Kickstop flipper, a flipper tab which is concealed in the frame following deployment.
- Gus Cecchini's integration of a bottle opener into the flipper tab of a flipper framelock knife.
- Todd Begg's use of an inset ceramic ball bearing in the pocket clips of his folding knives.
- Multiple grind styles of various heights and widths on a single blade, popularized by makers such as Mick Strider.
- R.J. Martin's invention of the "pivotless pivot" visual effect.
- Sergey Shirogorov's development of the Multiple Roller Bearing System pivot.
- Walter Randolph and Peter Carey's use of forged alloys such as Carbo-Quartz and Zircoti in knife handles.
You may notice that these innovations follow a pattern of appealing to visual impact, branding and toy purpose, with little in the way of improvements in performance or usability. While these are not inherently negative or positive things, their audience is limited to a small subsector of the overall luxury goods market - an audience with plenty of disposable income, with the wait time of what can be 10+ years waiting for a custom ordered build, and who are willing to demonstrate their wealth and their savvy to an extremely small segment of the population (You can show off to more admirers with a Rolex than you can with a Zero Tolerance. Furthermore, you can show off to more admirers with a Zero Tolerance than with a Peter Carey custom.)
You may also notice I have left out talented, forward-thinking innovators such as Grant and Gavin Hawk and Stan Wilson. These makers show commitment to innovation based improvement with their designs and ideas. However, consider that their current competition is in fact the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking; consider also that compared to their competition, their designs have an even narrower audience and appeal.
The unfortunate reality is that the Instagram Age of Custom Knifemaking is propped by what could be described as a serious speculative bubble. Dealers and collectors alike have inflated prices on custom knives immensely, and this inevitably results in significant inertia. If you look at trends on the secondary market, you will notice that inflated prices are beholden to the fickle tastes of Instagram and the forums. As an illustration of how much value may be lost over a small span of time, here are some average price decreases on once popular & commonly exchanged knife models, calculated from pricing data obtained from sale posts on forums and dealer websites. I began collecting this data in 2015 and while it is not all-encompassing nor completely accurate as some sales may have been completed for less than advertised asking price, I believe it demonstrates the trends in question well.
- Brad Southard Downing: -$1100
- Tom Mayo TNT: -$550
- Tom Mayo Dr. Death: -$700
- JB Blount (JBB Knives) Arrestor: -$1500
- Peter Carey 50/50 Nitro: -$400
- Emerson Custom CQC13: -$300
- GTC (Gus Cecchini) G-Force II: -$1200
- Tom Krein Alpha: -$600
- Terzuola Titanium A.T.C.F: -$250
- Jeremy Horton Tac 4: -$1200
- Peter Rassenti Snafu: -$450
- Peter Rassenti Druid: -$350
- Deryk Munroe Sigil Mk III: -$500
The keystone in this dilemma is the fact that knifemakers, on average, still charge reasonable prices for their custom order knives, even when the secondary prices are inflated. However, an increase in practices such as bidding auctions, lotteries, and the sale of accessories (beads, tags, shirts, etc.) means that the knifemaker's income may still be appropriately supplemented if interest in his knives is high. This creates significant inertia among the owners of that knifemaker's knives, as they do not want to lose money on knives they purchased at inflated rates, and for the knifemaker themselves, who must produce something identical to or similar to the product which created that interest in the first place.
How does this inertia trickle to production knives? Knives are a durable good, and indeed one of their key selling points is their durability. A lack of innovation in durable goods for a significant length of time can create a very specific type of market saturation - one in which not only similar items with small variations are constantly being offered for sale, but the items which were bought in the previous season are still around. In other words, the new product with a small variation must not only compete with other offerings available today but must also compete with the extant offerings which were purchased yesterday and are still around.
Ultimately, this approach to innovation which emphasizes lateral improvement- improvement relating primarily to visual appeal, branding and toy use- results in insignificant, unremarkable differences between individual products in the context of production knife economies of scale and target demographic. The lack of innovation based improvement in many of today's custom knifemakers corresponds to a general lack of these improvements in production knives, reducing interest for the non-collecting, non-specialized audience of production knives.
Last edited:
