Thanks liamstrain at least I'm not crazy. J_Curd the only reason I asked was for some kind of clarification, if there was some kind of historic or traditional reason why the trapperlock wasn't accepted in this category. I'm not a troll I don't jab at people. I checked the stickys and didn't find anything. Sorry you took offense to my question. If it is going to cause trouble the moderators can close the thread if they wish.
-
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 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.
Why is the Case Trapperlock not considered a traditional?
- Thread starter Nic S.
- Start date
I'd like to know more about the history of the pattern, at a glance it strikes me as Neo-traditional. But it's really out in cold, seeing as it's too modern for the traditional section, and too traditional to garner much attention from the General knife discussion. I never cared for the pattern, but it's at a disadvantage. Boker makes a similar knife called the Trapperliner. These sorts of knives have been around for some time, but I'm not exactly sure, I know Case started making them in 2008, that's pretty new in the scheme of things. You have to draw a line somewhere, but traditional styling is pretty subjective, I understand where you are coming from.
Modoc ED
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 13,793
You said you checked the stickys? Go back to traditional and you'll see this sticky.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...ional-Folders-amp-Fixed-Blades-quot-Sub-Forum
In that sticky, you'll find a "General Guidelines" section. That should answer your question/s.
Modoc ED it says Discussion of classic Hunters, Trappers, Lockbacks, Slipjoints, Skinners and other classic "traditional" designs... and I thought a trapperlock was a traditional design because it was based off of the trapper. And like I said I am trying to learn about traditionals so when I was told it wasn't I was just curious. Again I don't know why people take it so personally and get all upset over it? I am not trying to stir the pot just learn more about my hobby. I didnt think it was that absurd of a question, its not like I was bringing up a cold steel rajah in the traditional forum.
- Joined
- May 7, 2013
- Messages
- 2,072
I just bought a very cool knife, a Kershaw Double Cross. Similar in many ways to the Trapperlock.
I have been concentrating on traditional knives of late, but this one just appealed to me and it seems to straddle the line between modern and traditional. But I certainly wouldn't consider it traditional. Handle material is ebony pakkawood. So a wooden handle - traditional. Two blades, a clip point and a wharncliffe - again, traditional. Nail nicks on each blade - traditional. Brass liners - traditional. Traditionally shaped bolsters and general handle design.
So why wouldn't I (or presumably the forum) consider this very cool knife traditional?
Well, in addition to the nail nicks it has thumb studs and a cut out for easy access to them. It also has liner locks for each blade and does not use friction to hold the blade in place. But in my opinion, that is kinda minor. To me a traditional knife (and I am admittedly new to collecting trads) is one that might have been made in traditional times. This knife would not have been made then. I see it just that simply. Instead of breaking down the components, just consider the knife and if something like that was made then. If the answer is no, then it is unlikely that the knife is considered traditional. Or, more specifically, knives like those found in "Levine's Guide to Knives and Their Values" as mentioned in the forum guidelines. The Double Cross wouldn't be found there.
But aside from where you post about it, what difference does it really make? If you like the knife, buy it and if you don't - don't. Then post in General. If you don't get much response, it is because there isn't that much interest in that style knife. It happens. Simple enough.
[Edit: BTW, I really like this knife, and would probably like the Trapperlock as well.]
The Kershaw Double Cross:
I have been concentrating on traditional knives of late, but this one just appealed to me and it seems to straddle the line between modern and traditional. But I certainly wouldn't consider it traditional. Handle material is ebony pakkawood. So a wooden handle - traditional. Two blades, a clip point and a wharncliffe - again, traditional. Nail nicks on each blade - traditional. Brass liners - traditional. Traditionally shaped bolsters and general handle design.
So why wouldn't I (or presumably the forum) consider this very cool knife traditional?
Well, in addition to the nail nicks it has thumb studs and a cut out for easy access to them. It also has liner locks for each blade and does not use friction to hold the blade in place. But in my opinion, that is kinda minor. To me a traditional knife (and I am admittedly new to collecting trads) is one that might have been made in traditional times. This knife would not have been made then. I see it just that simply. Instead of breaking down the components, just consider the knife and if something like that was made then. If the answer is no, then it is unlikely that the knife is considered traditional. Or, more specifically, knives like those found in "Levine's Guide to Knives and Their Values" as mentioned in the forum guidelines. The Double Cross wouldn't be found there.
But aside from where you post about it, what difference does it really make? If you like the knife, buy it and if you don't - don't. Then post in General. If you don't get much response, it is because there isn't that much interest in that style knife. It happens. Simple enough.
[Edit: BTW, I really like this knife, and would probably like the Trapperlock as well.]
The Kershaw Double Cross:
Last edited:
SaintlyBrees That is a good way to think of it,
i just didn't know much about this knife or when the pattern came about. But whetrock did answer that. That's all I was looking for was info on the knife. Thanks for the input. BTW I really like the double cross I have been thinking about picking one up.
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Messages
- 610
I think the mods look down on questioning forum guidelines in this manner. If you POSTED the trapperlock in the "what traditional are you totin" thread, nobody would think twice. If you started a THREAD about trapperlocks in the traditional forum..... it would be moved because of forum guidelines. The mods don't have to justify the guidelines, if they say nono, just try to respect it.
I had a trapperlock and I sold it in the "old timey" sales section and the mods didn't blink. There is a thread in the traditional section called "modern traditionals" and the mods were very skeptical.... and for good reason, they included modern materials on traditional patterns, but we draw the line at thumb studs and pocket clips. A line had to be drawn. A trapperlock is a traditional pattern, with a non-traditional feature (thumbstud).
I didn't care for my Case trapperlock at all, the bone was dyed horribly and I did not care for the thumb stud. I however do like the trapper pattern.
Interesting thread:thumbup:
I had a trapperlock and I sold it in the "old timey" sales section and the mods didn't blink. There is a thread in the traditional section called "modern traditionals" and the mods were very skeptical.... and for good reason, they included modern materials on traditional patterns, but we draw the line at thumb studs and pocket clips. A line had to be drawn. A trapperlock is a traditional pattern, with a non-traditional feature (thumbstud).
I didn't care for my Case trapperlock at all, the bone was dyed horribly and I did not care for the thumb stud. I however do like the trapper pattern.
Interesting thread:thumbup:
Modoc ED
Gold Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 13,793
Instead of underlining Trapper you should have underlined classic.
As to "roninelh" saying; "If you POSTED the trapperlock in the "what traditional are you totin" thread, nobody would think twice.". Don't bet on it.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2013
- Messages
- 8,331
I wanted to get a trapperlock as a halfway point between modern and traditional too.
I posted up a question about it and another forum member sent me a shout out. He had several of the case trapperlocks and experienced a wobbly blade poor detent and other issues on them so I passed.
I immediately went low cost and got a rough rider trapper. Quality on that pattern is excellent stupendously surprised. Its my primary edc.
I then starting enjoying the clickety sound of the blades snappyness on open and close. I think the traditional guys have a term for it walk and talk but I'm not quite comfortable using the terminology. I am sold on traditionals completely though.
I would say jump head in with a vintage case or schrade or go low cost and try out the rough riders. For right now I'm hankering for one of those buck 301, 303, 309 series. They seem very similar to a case peanut.
The thin blade messes with your head and whole idea of what an edc knife is about.
I.e. a mini grip cuts really well. I have one. Need to get another yellow one for my wife. But its thick enough to pry in a pinch. That thickness matters. If you compared it to any sharpened traditional there's a strong chance I'm betting you will like the way the traditional slices better. And if the trapperlock floats your boat, I think they look awesome.
And I loved the idea from the start get one! Maybe its a good gateway to the older style pocket knife for you!
I think in this context there are a set of "arbitrary" rules. I am not using that word as a negative. In other words, there have been a set of charachteristics set as out of bounds for traditionals. Thumb studs, holes in blades, most locking mechanisms, etc.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 3,193
It's crazy the amount of negative responses you got to a seemingly harmless question. Like you stated OP, it was just a question not a "jab at administration".
Man some people...
On topic though, I'd have to agree with the hybrid idea.
GronK
Gold Member
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2001
- Messages
- 19,288
For clarification, the liner lock has been around forever and is considered traditional as a "safety" back up to a slip joint's security, not as the only thing holding the blade open. I'm sending my old standard double cross in for warranty since it's gotten loosey goosey and it lets the blade rattle around when open (vertical play). If it were basically an actual slip joint with a liner lock it would be satisfactory as is.
yeah, seems to be the way it goes in traditional.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 5,713
You are right. I never thought if it that way. I've been warming up to the idea of one lateky.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2009
- Messages
- 3,198
Nic, no one on the traditional subforum (to use your phrase) is "butt hurt". I honestly think you are taking this a bit too personally.
Frank and Gary are probably the most reasonable and even handed moderators on Bladeforums. Other mods would have sent you a warning or maybe an infraction for the "butt hurt" comment alone.
Try a look at it this way and see if this make sense. Somewhere in the thousands of traditional knife designs and their thousands of variations, there has to be a line drawn. "The line" determines what can be discussed in the traditional forum and what cannot. Without that line to determine the stop point, pretty much any knife can be considered any classification that an owner wants it to be.
For example, if your grandfather gave you a nice lockback in the late 60s with synthetic scales, it is not a traditional in the sense of this forum. But for you, it is 50 years old now and you have used it hunting and fishing ever since grandpa gave it to you. To you it is as traditional as it gets.
I had difficulty understanding the rules when I first started lurking there about 5 - 6 years ago. I couldn't for the life of me understand how a Swiss Army knife was considered a "traditional" knife. Red plastic handles with a little painted shield on them, tweezers, magnifying glasses and built in plastic toothpicks were traditional patterns? And a nail file? Really? When I first saw them I thought they were a joke, a lady's knife. I couldn't imagine taking one hunting, camping, or to my construction job. And I never saw many SAKs at all until about 40 years ago when they started showing up on key rings. Yet they are sacred on the traditional subforum.
Likewise, the Opinel. Another knife that was made and designed overseas, and not that popular here in the USA until about the last 20 years. Certainly a traditional pattern for Europe and carried by untold millions every day, but I don't know of another manufacturer that makes that pattern. So it is a one trick poney (granted, a talented one!) that was not widely available here until probably about 35 years ago. The only time I saw them back then was hanging on a card in the camping section of the sporting goods stores with the other cheap gear. They were NEVER in with the CASE, Schrade or Puma knives and NEVER had their own display case. So to me, I see a knife that is designed and made overseas, not widely sold here until a few decades ago, certainly not widely used by people other than those on this forum that love them. But again, in the sub forum it is a loved and respected pattern, one of a kind ring lock and all.
I agree that understanding the rules can be a bit difficult when you first start over there, but roll with it and you will be fine. Your knife straddles the fence, and it may be right on the line, but in this case that type of knife has been argued before, and the argument lost. If you really do want to learn more about traditional knives and patterns, you can certainly carry and use anything you want and still enjoy the discussions. There is probably more knowledge on traditional knives in that sub forum than anywhere else on the planet, so that is the place to be for learning and enjoying.
Just gotta loosen up a bit...
Robert
Frank and Gary are probably the most reasonable and even handed moderators on Bladeforums. Other mods would have sent you a warning or maybe an infraction for the "butt hurt" comment alone.
Try a look at it this way and see if this make sense. Somewhere in the thousands of traditional knife designs and their thousands of variations, there has to be a line drawn. "The line" determines what can be discussed in the traditional forum and what cannot. Without that line to determine the stop point, pretty much any knife can be considered any classification that an owner wants it to be.
For example, if your grandfather gave you a nice lockback in the late 60s with synthetic scales, it is not a traditional in the sense of this forum. But for you, it is 50 years old now and you have used it hunting and fishing ever since grandpa gave it to you. To you it is as traditional as it gets.
I had difficulty understanding the rules when I first started lurking there about 5 - 6 years ago. I couldn't for the life of me understand how a Swiss Army knife was considered a "traditional" knife. Red plastic handles with a little painted shield on them, tweezers, magnifying glasses and built in plastic toothpicks were traditional patterns? And a nail file? Really? When I first saw them I thought they were a joke, a lady's knife. I couldn't imagine taking one hunting, camping, or to my construction job. And I never saw many SAKs at all until about 40 years ago when they started showing up on key rings. Yet they are sacred on the traditional subforum.
Likewise, the Opinel. Another knife that was made and designed overseas, and not that popular here in the USA until about the last 20 years. Certainly a traditional pattern for Europe and carried by untold millions every day, but I don't know of another manufacturer that makes that pattern. So it is a one trick poney (granted, a talented one!) that was not widely available here until probably about 35 years ago. The only time I saw them back then was hanging on a card in the camping section of the sporting goods stores with the other cheap gear. They were NEVER in with the CASE, Schrade or Puma knives and NEVER had their own display case. So to me, I see a knife that is designed and made overseas, not widely sold here until a few decades ago, certainly not widely used by people other than those on this forum that love them. But again, in the sub forum it is a loved and respected pattern, one of a kind ring lock and all.
I agree that understanding the rules can be a bit difficult when you first start over there, but roll with it and you will be fine. Your knife straddles the fence, and it may be right on the line, but in this case that type of knife has been argued before, and the argument lost. If you really do want to learn more about traditional knives and patterns, you can certainly carry and use anything you want and still enjoy the discussions. There is probably more knowledge on traditional knives in that sub forum than anywhere else on the planet, so that is the place to be for learning and enjoying.
Just gotta loosen up a bit...
Robert
Last edited:
midnight flyer thanks for your reply. I posted a reply on a pic of one in another thread and thats where my question came up. Like I said eariler I wasnt being a smart butt or what ever I really didnt know the difference like I said I was new into these patterns and wanted to know. When I asked I have been accussed of trolling and such and thats not the case. Maybe I am taking it to personal, but there was some negativity thrown my way like, "just look at the sticky" which dosn't mention the trapperlock. We were all new once I was just looking for some info. But you did do a good job explaining it, Thanks for the reply.