Wenger Canyon and Viking

[brownshoe]

By the way, while they're maybe too slim to whittle with comfortably (I like a fatter knife for whittling), the Wenger Patriot is a small, slim aluminum two blade with the little clip. I've been thinking about one of those too...

I think I read the Patriot will be or is discontinued

 

[John A. Larsen]

Jack Black, I had to laugh at your response about the UK Victorinox rep not wanting to have a comparison. Back in 1995 I had almost the exact same problem, in reverse. I contacted both of the USA reps for Victorinox and Wenger about an article, and got some knives from Victorinox, but never head anything back from Wenger. After the article is published I get a large envelop from Wenger USA starting with a letter saying something like, "If you think Victorinox is the only company making SAK's you are wrong" and a big brochure of their knives. Years later I tried to do an article on the then new Wenger "Ranger: series, and again got lots of words but no knives to test. I too have always preferred Victorinox, going back to my first encounter with a SAK in Vietnam when they were being issued to Recon Teams going across the border. I saw both Victorinox's and Wenger's but preferred the can opener on the Victorinox to the Wenger, and most of our rations still came in cans in those days. I have had a Victorinox in my pocket almost everyday since I bought my first one from Corrado Cutlery in 1971. John

 

[Jack Black]

Jack Black, I had to laugh at your response about the UK Victorinox rep not wanting to have a comparison. Back in 1995 I had almost the exact same problem, in reverse. I contacted both of the USA reps for Victorinox and Wenger about an article, and got some knives from Victorinox, but never head anything back from Wenger. After the article is published I get a large envelop from Wenger USA starting with a letter saying something like, "If you think Victorinox is the only company making SAK's you are wrong" and a big brochure of their knives. Years later I tried to do an article on the then new Wenger "Ranger: series, and again got lots of words but no knives to test. I too have always preferred Victorinox, going back to my first encounter with a SAK in Vietnam when they were being issued to Recon Teams going across the border. I saw both Victorinox's and Wenger's but preferred the can opener on the Victorinox to the Wenger, and most of our rations still came in cans in those days. I have had a Victorinox in my pocket almost everyday since I bought my first one from Corrado Cutlery in 1971. John

That's a great story John I haven't been carrying Victorinox knives as long as you my friend, my first was actually the Mauser Officer's Knife, which I got in 1982, and carried for around 10 years (it still gets carried on my hikes)

My tale was from the early 1990's, and back then Victorinox were handled in the UK by a company who mainly specialised in gardening equipment. As well as Victorinox, they represented Normark, Trezeta boots, and Aztec sleeping bags (not particularly well in my opinion). I generally dealt with a pleasant young woman in middle management, and I had favourably reviewed around 20 items from all their different product categories. I had been told that Victorinox were very interested in the articles I'd written about their knives, and I had suggested that they change the name of the 'Golfer' using the word 'compact' a number of times (they changed it to the 'Compact), and also that they use a curved cutting blade which appeared on the locking 'Hunter' model as the basis for an emergency release knife, which they later did. My relationship with the gardening company ended when, in an article for a climbing magazine, I suggested that Trezeta might use a different sole unit for a particular boot, which I had otherwise positively reviewed. The head honcho from the gardening company rang both me and my editor, and was abusive, accusing me of always running down the products they sold! I decided not to bother having anything to do with them after that, but fortunately, Victorinox dropped them soon after too.

Wishing you a pleasant Sunday

Jack

 

[brownshoe]

Jack Black, I had to laugh at your response about the UK Victorinox rep not wanting to have a comparison. Back in 1995 I had almost the exact same problem, in reverse. I contacted both of the USA reps for Victorinox and Wenger about an article, and got some knives from Victorinox, but never head anything back from Wenger. After the article is published I get a large envelop from Wenger USA starting with a letter saying something like, "If you think Victorinox is the only company making SAK's you are wrong" and a big brochure of their knives. Years later I tried to do an article on the then new Wenger "Ranger: series, and again got lots of words but no knives to test. I too have always preferred Victorinox, going back to my first encounter with a SAK in Vietnam when they were being issued to Recon Teams going across the border. I saw both Victorinox's and Wenger's but preferred the can opener on the Victorinox to the Wenger, and most of our rations still came in cans in those days. I have had a Victorinox in my pocket almost everyday since I bought my first one from Corrado Cutlery in 1971. John

Why would you expect free knives from Wegner (or Victorinox) for your review? If you do receive free knives, wouldn't it bias your review?

 

[Jack Black]

...

 

[John A. Larsen]

When you do the articles you tell them up front that if they want the knives back, then they will get them back. Victronix said they wanted them back, and when the article was done I shipped them back with tracking to insure they got them, which they did. No problem with Wenger, as I never got any knives from them. You bring up a semi sore point in that some readers seemed to expect you to buy knives, no matter how expensive, better yet, buy two knives and test one to destruction. When you figure in your time spent actually testing a knife, photo costs, shipping costs sending the knife/knives back to the company or maker, then the $350 per article does not represent a lot of money in your pocket. Even with SAK's two or three from each of the then two companies and you have already spend over $100 minimum, further cutting into any profit you would make. To answer your question, No I would like to think that whether or not I got to keep the knife did not influence my review. I can say that if I wrote it in one of my article, I did whatever testings I said I did, and the results were accurately given in the article. John

 

[Jack Black]

When you figure in your time spent actually testing a knife, photo costs, shipping costs sending the knife/knives back to the company or maker, then the $350 per article does not represent a lot of money in your pocket.

When I was reviewing outdoor equipment professionally, there were probably about a dozen mainstream outdoor publications, plus a few more which primarily covered guns, and some knives, in the UK. Of all the people who reviewed equipment for those publications, maybe only three of us did it full-time. For the others it was just a part-time job, which means they didn't have time to thoroughly test all the equipment they were sent for review. None of us who do it for it for a living, make a great deal of money out of an article, compared to the amount of time we put into it, and my position was that the only people I owed anything to was the readers of the magazines I wrote for, not the magazine editors, and certainly not the manufacturers. I have absolutely slated the products of some very powerful manufacturers. Integrity and independence are everything to most professional reviewers, without it they'd soon fall, and it certainly isn't for sale for the price of a couple of knives. When I did this job, I was sent stuff for testing, I reviewed it honestly, and often very critically, and if the manufacturer wanted a half-trashed rucsac or a used knife back, they'd get it back. Some wanted that, most didn't, but when you're reviewing equipment full-time, it's not like you really want the stuff, I used to give gear away to my postman because I had so much of it. In the case of Wenger and Victorinox, Wenger approached me to do a comparative review, and supplied a knife. Because Victorinox didn't want to know, Wenger supplied the Victorinox knife also. Yet, I preferred the Victorinox knife. Wenger were happy with that, and there was clearly no bias.

 

[brownshoe]

When you do the articles you tell them up front that if they want the knives back, then they will get them back. Victronix said they wanted them back, and when the article was done I shipped them back with tracking to insure they got them, which they did. No problem with Wenger, as I never got any knives from them. You bring up a semi sore point in that some readers seemed to expect you to buy knives, no matter how expensive, better yet, buy two knives and test one to destruction. When you figure in your time spent actually testing a knife, photo costs, shipping costs sending the knife/knives back to the company or maker, then the $350 per article does not represent a lot of money in your pocket. Even with SAK's two or three from each of the then two companies and you have already spend over $100 minimum, further cutting into any profit you would make. To answer your question, No I would like to think that whether or not I got to keep the knife did not influence my review. I can say that if I wrote it in one of my article, I did whatever testings I said I did, and the results were accurately given in the article. John

Thanks for explaining the way it works. Gives me a better perspective. Good to know I still have some naïveté left . I thought the magazine bought the products.