New Hybrid Viper EO Teardrop

Looks to be a modern folder with traditional appearance. Construction with stand offs, and utilizing the ball detent system for blade position management...I think this one is kind of a stretch for being considered a traditional, but what do I know?...
 
sitflyer said:
Looks to be a modern folder with traditional appearance. Construction with stand offs, and utilizing the ball detent system for blade position management...I think this one is kind of a stretch for being considered a traditional, but what do I know?...
Click to expand...
I can see that, but what I can also picture is a guy from the 40's seeing it taken from someone's pocket and him not batting an eye at it, unless he saw the spine.
 
NJBillK said:
I can see that, but what I can also picture is a guy from the 40's seeing it taken from someone's pocket and him not batting an eye at it, unless he saw the spine.
Click to expand...
But does that qualify it as a traditional pocket knife? Me thinks not. :thumbsdown:
 
sitflyer sitflyer
The quote below is from my posting of the rules for the subforum. If they (the mods) deem it good enough for it to fit here due to the description they have offered in the rules for this subforum, I don't see an issue with it. Worthy of reference for my previous post, is the underlined section.

NJBillK said:
"We give leeway on materials of construction. So if you have a nice stockman with G10 covers, it's traditional enough for us. After all, plastics have been used on knife handles since the 1800's. Stainless steel has been used in cutlery since the 1920's, so stainless is considered traditional. And even though PM alloys are new developments, that fella in the mid-1960's would never know the difference if he were looking at the knife, so they are OK, too."
Click to expand...
 
No way no how is this a traditional knife! The method of construction didn't exist in the sixties, seventies, eighties or nineties. There has to be a line drawn in the sand somewhere, and to me this knife just doesn't fit. Sorry if I may come off as offensive, but bringing a modern design into the traditional forum just doesn't sit well with me.

Look, I get the enthusiasm, I have a couple questionable knives that I'd love to show off, but they are definitely not traditional...they have features that just didn't exist in traditional cutlery. They sure mimic the look, but the walk and talk features just don't match up.
If a fella from the sixties took more than a cursory look at this particular example, I'm pretty sure from my own experience he woulda said...what the heck? Is going on here...hey now! That's something new!!! See what I'm getting at?
 
Last edited:
sitflyer said:
No way no how is this a traditional knife! The method of construction didn't exist in the sixties, seventies, eighties or nineties. There has to be a line drawn in the sand somewhere, and to me this knife just doesn't fit. Sorry if I may come off as offensive, but bringing a modern design into the traditional forum just doesn't sit well with me.
Click to expand...
That's understandable, and while you personally may object, I will phrase it another way.

If somehow you were able to go back to one of the time periods you just stated ('60-'90), even better, if you were to go to someone in the '40s and hand them this knife, would they know how to operate it?

I would put money on yes 10 out of 10 times.
Would they look it over, be curious about it? Yes. It would be something different, but they would still recognize the item immediately as a pocket knife and know how to use it safely.

They would not have any issues opening, closing, or operating this knife due to the lack of a back spring. They wouldn't shriek and run away in horror of the new fangled wizardry that you held in front of them...

It is a knife that:
- looks like a traditional pattern (acceptable)
- uses a stainless steel (acceptable)
- uses a screw based slab attachment (acceptable)
- doesn't have a back spring, the only thing visable from the outside hinting at something different is afoot.

If your only issue is with the lack of a backspring, then feel free to voice your opinion with your dollar (or on here). I know how I am going to voice mine. My apologies if I came off as abrasive, it was not my intent.
 
Ball detent mechanisms were not used in the timeframes of what we consider traditional knives, it just was not a thing....like I said, a stretch at best.
 
sitflyer said:
No way no how is this a traditional knife! The method of construction didn't exist in the sixties, seventies, eighties or nineties. There has to be a line drawn in the sand somewhere, and to me this knife just doesn't fit. Sorry if I may come off as offensive, but bringing a modern design into the traditional forum just doesn't sit well with me.

Look, I get the enthusiasm, I have a couple questionable knives that I'd love to show off, but they are definitely not traditional...they have features that just didn't exist in traditional cutlery. They sure mimic the look, but the walk and talk features just don't match up.
If a fella from the sixties took more than a cursory look at this particular example, I'm pretty sure from my own experience he woulda said...what the heck? Is going on here...hey now! That's something new!!! See what I'm getting at?
Click to expand...
 
sitflyer said:
Ball detent mechanisms were not used in the timeframes of what we consider traditional knives, it just was not a thing....
Click to expand...
I understand that, but going by what the rules state, since it isn't visable via the exterior of the knife, it should fall to the same consideration that PM alloys do.

"that fella in the mid-1960's would never know the difference if he were looking at the knife".

Granted, he may be a bit quizzical about what the click is, but the functionality is the same, and wouldn't cause concern nor strife.
 
NJBillK said:
I understand that, but going by what the rules state, since it isn't visable via the exterior of the knife, it should fall to the same consideration that PM alloys do.

"that fella in the mid-1960's would never know the difference if he were looking at the knife".

Granted, he may be a bit quizzical about what the click is, but the functionality is the same, and wouldn't cause concern nor strife.
Click to expand...
I am sensing a certain disconnect on the spirit and interpretation of what is tradition has occurred here, and may the higher powers decide what is the correct course on this particular situation. Happy new year. I mean no disrespect or hard feelings. I can be an outspoken curmudgeon sometimes...
 
sitflyer said:
Look, I get the enthusiasm, I have a couple questionable knives that I'd love to show off, but they are definitely not traditional...they have features that just didn't exist in traditional cutlery. They sure mimic the look, but the walk and talk features just don't match up.
If a fella from the sixties took more than a cursory look at this particular example, I'm pretty sure from my own experience he woulda said...what the heck? Is going on here...hey now! That's something new!!! See what I'm getting at?
Click to expand...
This was edited in as I was typing and I did not get to address it prior to.

How did all of the wonderful patterns come to be? Necessity or aesthetic.

It is likely that the first person to have a pruner blade made, did so after he realized that his worn down blade cut plants better due.to the recurve. And guess what the person working next to him said:
he woulda said...what the heck? Is going on here...hey now! That's something new!!!
sitflyer said:
he woulda said...what the heck? Is going on here...hey now! That's something new!!!
Click to expand...

See what I am getting at? Even traditional patterns had to be new at some point in time. If new patterns, or tweaks on patterns weren't accepted because they we not the norm, then we all wouldn't be here and we all would still have SodBusters (having roots back to the late 1800s, as a folding butchers knife iirc, but likely a bit off on the time, I will be looking into this).
 
sitflyer said:
I am sensing a certain disconnect on the spirit and interpretation of what is tradition has occurred here, and may the higher powers decide what is the correct course on this particular situation. Happy new year. I mean no disrespect or hard feelings. I can be an outspoken curmudgeon sometimes...
Click to expand...
Lol, no worries as I did not feel slighted at all. We are just discussing two sides of some coin (hopefully the same coin).

Enjoy your new year and what ever patterns (old or new) land in your lap.
;)
 
NJBillK said:
Lol, no worries as I did not feel slighted at all. We are just discussing two sides of some coin (hopefully the same coin).

Enjoy your new year and what ever patterns (old or new) land in your lap.
;)
Click to expand...
I like many styles of knives, modern, traditional, especially regional traditional. There is a time and a place for all things, and this place was supposedly set up for traditional cutlery. I have hopes that this is still the case...because this is one of my favorite places on the internets...
 
Certainly an interesting knife, but why not post about it in General, where it would fit in perfectly well, rather than here? It's regrettable, but sooner or later, I think the mods are going to have to rule on these so-called "hybrid" knives, otherwise there are going to be more and more threads here about knives like this, which many posters will certainly not regard as traditional (because there's no possible way they are), and the designation of this sub-forum will become meaningless. Currently, the focus of those threads will inevitably become arguments about the nature of traditional knives, which we have seen time and time again here already. Sad that 2018 starts off like this :(
 
I agree, it is sad to see the year start off with these type of arguments that we have seen time and again. I think the mods have already made the call on whether or not these knives fit in here in traditional. I personally agree with them.
Edit: That sounded harsh when I re-read it. That was not my intention. Good disscussion
 
Last edited:
'Methods of construction' is a very murky area indeed.....it could imply that anything that didn't exist say 'x' years ago is taboo. This is clearly not the case though, SAK uses very precise computer controlled methods of production and by association, methods of construction but they are Traditional. Some people debate the use of micarta as being out of the spirit of Traditional or say if my grandfather wouldn't recognize it, it isn't 'Traditional' very dubious too. Such a mythological grandfather might not have recognized stainless steel as even being fit for knife use etc etc. Well, stainless is part of a method that is regarded as 'traditional' now.

Nor do I see anything regrettable about the year starting with these debates, a Forum is for discussion and sometimes, controversy and the argument has been conducted in a civil and respectful manner on all sides. Personally, I think the OP draws attention to an interesting development, the knife in question aims to look traditional in appearance but does away with a conventional backspring but does not follow the friction folder route - as far as I can see. I'm sure that back in the mists of time some stalwarts denounced the innovation of a backspring as an attack on the spirit of tradition as evoked by the friction folder :D I don't see this knife as a Trojan Horse in the House of Traditional at all;)

Regards, Will
 
I am a fan of the new modern-traditional knives so I put in an ER for a maple burl when these first hit the website. Standby, so we'll see. My favorite steel and I enjoy the Italian designs.
 
Jack Black said:
Certainly an interesting knife, but why not post about it in General, where it would fit in perfectly well, rather than here? It's regrettable, but sooner or later, I think the mods are going to have to rule on these so-called "hybrid" knives, otherwise there are going to be more and more threads here about knives like this, which many posters will certainly not regard as traditional (because there's no possible way they are), and the designation of this sub-forum will become meaningless. Currently, the focus of those threads will inevitably become arguments about the nature of traditional knives, which we have seen time and time again here already. Sad that 2018 starts off like this :(
Click to expand...

I must agree with Jack and Duane here, and the bolded section above says it best for me. When someone tries to change things, the easiest way is incrementally. A lot of little incremental changes add up to a big change. Tradition is about lack of change, keeping things the way they traditionally were. No set of rules devised by man can perfectly anticipate all possible abrogations thereof. So we go by the "if it walks like a duck and looks like a duck, then it's a duck" axiom. This ain't a duck!
 
Sons who ignore their fathers are destined to make the same mistakes. Fathers who make their sons in their own image doom them to the same mistakes.

Without tradition we have no link to our past, or the people whose shoulders we stand upon, but without fresh perspectives and innovations in the spirit of the tradition, the tradition withers and dies.

Not every new take on a traditional folder will survive the test of time, but there must be some that carry the tradition forward so that it doesn't become obsolete, or constrict those who would carry it into the future. Will's example of the modern production methods is a good example. Time and testing will tell if the Viper EO will make the cut. If we cannot debate and discuss in the spirit of keeping good things alive and moving into new areas of good previously undiscovered, then there will be no living tradition to pass on--it will just be the withered fruit falling from a dead vine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top