Why don't production companies make more bolstered designs?

[The cow]

Bolsters are cosmetic. Have a bolster with too much gap, people will complain about it. So you have to spent more time hand fitting each one. That costs more money that few probably don't want to pay for. Then to boot, knife makers right now seem to want to do as little as possible and still charge top dollar for it.

 

[Yalius]

I find it amusing that in the last couple days, we've had, simultaneously, one thread asking why companies are only churning out boring utilitarian designs, and another thread asking why knife companies are only producing art knives that can't be used for real work. Seems like producers must be doing something right if people are complaining from both ends of the spectrum.

 

[Rich S]

I'm almost certain it's a cost vs. profit issue. Mass-produced means much lower profit margins per piece sold, means as low production costs as possible. I have seen custom scale makers do bolstered/combo designs here on the forums that don't cost that much more, than their regular pieces, I have also seen some that cost up to 50% more. That says to me that it is easier and effective for some workflows and not others.

As to manufacturers, we're talking about increasing the cost of the knife anywhere from $50-(maybe even)$150 per piece (I'm really just pulling that figure out of the air, but it feels like it's reasonable), and that is significant enough to change the class of knife that they are selling, thus reducing the number of knives they can expect to sell, yada yada yada.

With due respect, I disagree with your last statement. Rough Rider, Colt, Marbles and others manage to produce good usable knives with well fitting bolsters for only a few bucks. Obviously it is a matter of cost of production. But given the cheap labor in China, it is not a surprise that the better Chinese made knives sell for much, much less than domestically made ones. Bolsters or not, it's all a matter of what sells to the public. As mentioned, some like bolsters, some don't - just a matter of personal taste. Both types seem to be selling well. I see no problem either way.

Rich

 

[CornSyrup]

Good posts, with respect to adding rigidity/etc agreed that adding bolsters doesn't help functionally. It is definitely an aesthetic touch. But look at the Spyderco Nirvana... an integral design doesn't add much (if any) extra functionality either, yet Spyderco did it, charges a huge premium for it, and has sold tons of them to great fanfare. So why this design choice when just adding a titanium bolster to a CF or G10 scale requires little to no additional work?

I agree with your post PURPLEDC. Production companies nowadays are just trying to churn out the next "hot" design without doing much extra work. It's usually a titanium framelock flipper with some gimmick added or maker's name slapped on it. I also see knife companies no longer focusing on elegant or "gentleman's" type designs which is really where my taste is. That isn't terribly surprising I guess because the market as a whole has been demanding the "overbuilt" aesthetic for years now.

An integral design likely has more functional consequence and market appeal. Given the uncommonness of integral production folders it is a big draw especially when prepared with a popular company such as Spyderco. In addition, the elimination of several points in which slight variations of tension and fit can cause changes in the behavior of a framelock or linerlock (pocket clip, pocket clip screws, standoff screws, etc) provides the potential for greater consistency in action over the long term. (Time will tell whether, in the case of the Spyderco Nirvana in particular, this will be the case.)

 

[Danke42]

Good posts, with respect to adding rigidity/etc agreed that adding bolsters doesn't help functionally. It is definitely an aesthetic touch. But look at the Spyderco Nirvana... an integral design doesn't add much (if any) extra functionality either, yet Spyderco did it, charges a huge premium for it, and has sold tons of them to great fanfare. So why this design choice when just adding a titanium bolster to a CF or G10 scale requires little to no additional work?

I agree with your post PURPLEDC. Production companies nowadays are just trying to churn out the next "hot" design without doing much extra work. It's usually a titanium framelock flipper with some gimmick added or maker's name slapped on it. I also see knife companies no longer focusing on elegant or "gentleman's" type designs which is really where my taste is. That isn't terribly surprising I guess because the market as a whole has been demanding the "overbuilt" aesthetic for years now.

The Nirvana is expensive because milling the one piece handle is very very difficult.

 

[traumkommode]

With due respect, I disagree with your last statement. Rough Rider, Colt, Marbles and others manage to produce good usable knives with well fitting bolsters for only a few bucks. Obviously it is a matter of cost of production. But given the cheap labor in China, it is not a surprise that the better Chinese made knives sell for much, much less than domestically made ones. Bolsters or not, it's all a matter of what sells to the public. As mentioned, some like bolsters, some don't - just a matter of personal taste. Both types seem to be selling well. I see no problem either way.

Rich

Correct. And I appreciate your courtesy. But you're referencing traditional knife companies, who make knives of which a bolstered pivot is just part and parcel of the design, and is thus part of the tooling, much of which has been around and not reinvented for a very long time. Colt and Rough Rider make knives with materials that are comparable to Case. So we're talking $15 for one of the overseas knives vs. $35-$70 for a USA made version by Case.

The OP is talking about modern production companies, who make modern production knives, of which bolstered pivots are generally not an integral part of the design (integral in this case meaning crucial), and who are tasked with making something new and innovative on a regular basis. Take a look at two companies who have made bolstered versions: Benchmade and Spyderco. Benchmade's 580 Barrage (standard handle) clocks in around $130, and the 581 (bolstered) is around $190. But maybe that's a bad example, you say, because there's a difference in steel (I'm pretty sure Benchmade's profit margin on knives like the base model Barrage and Griptilian are wayyyyy beyond the difference in price of steel upgrade, but that's another discussion.)

The Spyderco Caly 3 - standard version that came with carbon fiber and laminated ZDP-189 blade was around $130. The sprint run, which had a VG-10 "damascus" blade, cost about $240. That VG-10 Damascus probably is cost-wise similar to the ZDP, and I'm basing that on the fact that Kershaw can make a Damascus Skyline, a USA knife, for $45 bucks.

The modern, not traditional, but modern production companies are oriented around making knives without bolstered pivots. Their tooling isn't set up to produce them, designers aren't in the mindset of "needing" them, and aside from the segment of the market that wants a bolstered knife because of the look, I don't think people are going to pay that kind of price difference for something that doesn't change the durability of the knife.

Now, when it comes to traditional companies, the price difference in a Case and a RR/Colt is a lot lower than what I'm talking about. Companies like GEC cost more because their knives are built to much better tolerances and fit and finish, hence the higher cost, kinda like with CRK.

 

[insta9ves]

Benchmade got some nice bolstered designed, like the Crooked River.
IMO it's purely aesthetic which i have no preference for. If it's adding extra cost to the knife without adding function, i would rather take the cheaper design.
I have something better to look at, like my cars or my kids. To me my knives are just tools and i dont need them to look good.

 

[stabman]

I find it amusing that in the last couple days, we've had, simultaneously, one thread asking why companies are only churning out boring utilitarian designs, and another thread asking why knife companies are only producing art knives that can't be used for real work.

Since both those complaints cancel each other out, there is only one logical conclusion: no one is producing any knives anymore!