- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,024
A knife is only as good as the company behind it, and microtech has spent a lot of time and effort crafting a reputation for terrible customer service topped with unethical scumbaggery.
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details:
https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is $300 $250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Both companies make knives that I think are ugly and stupid, so I could care less about their little schoolyard squabble.
And please tell us what you don't find ugly and stupid?
Buck 110, hatchets, anything in 1095. Everything else is superfluous poppycock.![]()
Most knives that weren't designed for looks before simply making a cutting tool are what I don't find ugly and stupid . These knives may or not work well, but they have too much going on.And please tell us what you don't find ugly and stupid?
weak would be a bit over the top considering what a buck 110 can and has handled. howd we get here from people picking on microtech?Buck 110, is weak with it's tiny threadless pivot pin.
Congratulations. You just quoted someone who managed to get banned from here by the Moderators...
Most knives that weren't designed for looks before simply making a cutting tool are what I don't find ugly and stupid . These knives may or not work well, but they have too much going on.
I've seen a Buck 110 fall apart with easy use. It's pinned like a slip joint and far weaker than modern locking folders.weak would be a bit over the top considering what a buck 110 can and has handled. howd we get here from people picking on microtech?![]()
yep. ive seen them handle massive tasks without falling apart. i still say weak is an exaggeration. so be it.I've seen a Buck 110 fall apart with easy use. It's pinned like a slip joint and far weaker than modern locking folders.
I'm not the one brought up the 110.yep. ive seen them handle massive tasks without falling apart. i still say weak is an exaggeration. so be it.
still stick to this is a people hating microtech for whatever reasons.....we all getting way off topic.......
yeah. neither did i or call it weak.......I'm not the one brought up the 110.
It is weak compared to lighter modern folders. It's blade pivots on a tiny threadless pin. Modern locking folders have much bigger, threaded pivots.yeah. neither did i or call it weak.......
He didn't threaten to sue, as far as I understood it, he actually filed suit and as part of the settlement Tony S. had to publish a retraction AND do 700 hours of pro-bono work over the next 4 years. That's a good bit more than printing a retraction after getting to know the guy.
Microtech, as stated above, has admitted to stealing the design, but gave a middle schoolers excuse as to why they did it. They've also stolen Mikov's auto design in the past, claiming it's just a classic European auto design. By that same argument we need to quit complaining about PM2 clones because they're just a classic American folder design.
Their warranty service is absolutely horrendous. If they don't refuse to service it entirely due to basic maintenance being performed by the customer or lose it you'll be waiting for a number of months for it to return.
If Chevrolet made a blatant copy of a Rolls Royce Phantom and a Ferrari Daytona, claiming a dare for one and traditional European design for the other, refused warranty service if you changed the oil or tires yourself and then took 6 months to fix your car if they did decide to warranty the service, would you buy one of their cars?
Play the apologist if you want, but they won't be getting any of my business. I might've been able to overlook the IP issues, but when coupled with the other issues I can't do business with them.
Buck 110, hatchets, anything in 1095. Everything else is superfluous poppycock.![]()