Nutnfancy Reviewed the Sebenza. Hmm...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I fixed it. Good on ya for taking care of bidness and not in the clubs. :thumbup:
 
I've been called a "douche-bag" before, though never just a douche. So it was sort of exciting to be called something new. But it isn't he calling himself, in a way, a douche? I mean, who else has a 49 minute video on a Sebenza...

Regardless, I've never met anyone that knew what a Sebenza is. So I feel pretty comfortable using my knife in front of people that potentially could think I'm a douche.
 
I don't have anything personally against the guy. He loves knives has a great family and shoots guns, hunts and fishes on a daily basis. Pretty sweet life. When I first got into knives he was the go to guy. After spending time on the forum and being introduced to the sebenza there was no need to watch anymore of his videos. But again nothing against the guy.
 
As long as you don't call it the best value knife in the world you can own as many of them as you want! Because every one knows the best value knife in the world is one that you buy at WalMart that's made in China. I had to leave some DOUCHE comments on his YouTube vid...:rolleyes:
 
Maprik said:
As long as you don't call it the best value knife in the world you can own as many of them as you want! Because every one knows the best value knife in the world is one that you buy at WalMart that's made in China.
Click to expand...

I thought the best value knife was one you made yourself out of a rock.;)
Now THAT'S tactical!
 
why are guys so upset that he calls it a tactical knife? are you guys saying it is too weak to be used in a law enforcement/military role? even if it isn't built as a tactical knife, it can still be used as one.
 
Daft Slice 1986 said:
why are guys so upset that he calls it a tactical knife? isn't built as a tactical knife, it can still be used as one.
Click to expand...

So can one made out of a rock.:)

The thing is his whining about it's supposed inadequacies as a tactical knife when it isn't billed as one.
Besides, who made the guy the arbiter of what constitutes a good "tactical" anything, for that matter?
 
I liked the video and completely agree with Nutnfancy on this one. This is large part because his thesis comports with what I have been saying for a good while: that - if utility is the measure - these spendy knives like the Sebenza are not objectively worth the price. But also that loving the knife for its coolness, design, etc. is a perfectly valid reason for buying one.

Here's what I said when comparing the Spyderco Techno to the Kershaw Cryo: "Is the Techno "worth" 6-7x the price of the Cryo? If utility is the sole measure of "worth", I would say absolutely not. I have long advocated the notion that a $440 (shipped) Umzumnaan, for example, and which I own, does not vivisect a cardboard box 9 times better than does a Delica. In fact, quite the opposite is true. In my view, spendy knives do not earn their keep by being better than the pack when it comes to utility. What the spendy knives - including the Techno - do excel at is pride of ownership, the pleasure of having a piece of knife in your pocket that has 'better' design, materials and manufacturing than the knives of everyone you encounter during the day, and the good vibes that those factors impart on your life."

The same is true with the Sebenza and it siblings. But what really gripes me - and this happens often - is when someone loves a spendy knife for its coolness, and then attempts to justify the cost by arguing that its utility surpasses everything else, and that I just don't get it. This just isn't true, and we have to distinguish between real, objective utility and the cool factor, because they are not the same. Nutnfancy made that distinction, and made it well.

Many of you are taking issue with Nutfancy's characterization of the Sebenza as a so-called "tactical" knife. Maybe I'm the only one who actually watched the video, because he spent about 20 seconds with this characterization, and it was in the context of describing its other uses like EDC.

And he's no hater of the Sebenza either, as some have described him. He concluded with, "I am pretty much in love with the knife overall." He takes issue with the cost, and with good reason. And the cost seems to me to be a marketing strategy and not a factor of materials and workmanship. Its fine to have that marketing strategy, just like Busse has created its own unique and successful strategy, but Nutnfancy's characterization of it was spot on. These are just accurate assessments in my view.

I've owned a carried often a Sebenza Classic for probably 10 years, and bought an Umnumzaan about a month ago. But I'll probably unload the latter, just because it doesn't float my boat. Its cool if everyone else here digs it, and I think its fun to see people really enjoy their knives or anything else for that matter. But when someone like Nutnfancy (or me for that matter) does not find the Umnumzaan or Sebenza to be the greatest thing ever, its because its coolness factor does not justify (to us) the $400+ price tag. Its not because I "don't get it". Its because, instead of the Umnum, I'd rather have a Para 2, Delica FFG, and Case Peanut Chestut Bone in CV with $100 left over.

I liked Nutnfancy's review for the same reason that conservatives like to listen to Rush Limbaugh: you like to hear your views advocated by others. For me, the CR knives just aren't worth the cost, so I liked hearing that view advocated. If you think the Sebenza is the coolest knife ever, then you're going to draw a different conclusion.
 
TL; DR
Noodle, you just love the TNP no matter what. Hardly onjective in any respect. Sometimes people just overthink things to the point of near death, and take the fun out of even the most enjoyable hobby. :thumbdn:
 
powernoodle said:
I liked the video and completely agree with Nutnfancy on this one. This is large part because his thesis comports with what I have been saying for a good while: that - if utility is the measure - these spendy knives like the Sebenza are not objectively worth the price. But also that loving the knife for its coolness, design, etc. is a perfectly valid reason for buying one.

Here's what I said when comparing the Spyderco Techno to the Kershaw Cryo: "Is the Techno "worth" 6-7x the price of the Cryo? If utility is the sole measure of "worth", I would say absolutely not. I have long advocated the notion that a $440 (shipped) Umzumnaan, for example, and which I own, does not vivisect a cardboard box 9 times better than does a Delica. In fact, quite the opposite is true. In my view, spendy knives do not earn their keep by being better than the pack when it comes to utility. What the spendy knives - including the Techno - do excel at is pride of ownership, the pleasure of having a piece of knife in your pocket that has 'better' design, materials and manufacturing than the knives of everyone you encounter during the day, and the good vibes that those factors impart on your life."

The same is true with the Sebenza and it siblings. But what really gripes me - and this happens often - is when someone loves a spendy knife for its coolness, and then attempts to justify the cost by arguing that its utility surpasses everything else, and that I just don't get it. This just isn't true, and we have to distinguish between real, objective utility and the cool factor, because they are not the same. Nutnfancy made that distinction, and made it well.

Many of you are taking issue with Nutfancy's characterization of the Sebenza as a so-called "tactical" knife. Maybe I'm the only one who actually watched the video, because he spent about 20 seconds with this characterization, and it was in the context of describing its other uses like EDC.

And he's no hater of the Sebenza either, as some have described him. He concluded with, "I am pretty much in love with the knife overall." He takes issue with the cost, and with good reason. And the cost seems to me to be a marketing strategy and not a factor of materials and workmanship. Its fine to have that marketing strategy, just like Busse has created its own unique and successful strategy, but Nutnfancy's characterization of it was spot on. These are just accurate assessments in my view.

I've owned a carried often a Sebenza Classic for probably 10 years, and bought an Umnumzaan about a month ago. But I'll probably unload the latter, just because it doesn't float my boat. Its cool if everyone else here digs it, and I think its fun to see people really enjoy their knives or anything else for that matter. But when someone like Nutnfancy (or me for that matter) does not find the Umnumzaan or Sebenza to be the greatest thing ever, its because its coolness factor does not justify (to us) the $400+ price tag. Its not because I "don't get it". Its because, instead of the Umnum, I'd rather have a Para 2, Delica FFG, and Case Peanut Chestut Bone in CV with $100 left over.

I liked Nutnfancy's review for the same reason that conservatives like to listen to Rush Limbaugh: you like to hear your views advocated by others. For me, the CR knives just aren't worth the cost, so I liked hearing that view advocated. If you think the Sebenza is the coolest knife ever, then you're going to draw a different conclusion.
Click to expand...

What most people have a problem with is why he never talks about the higher cost associated with tighter tolerances? Tighter tolerance = more money. Fellow knifemakers like Sal or Dozier and they have already agreed with this and think CRK charges a fair price. He ignores the one point that actually somewhat validates the price point at which CRKs are at. His views on just about everything he said on the Sebenza from a functional standpoint are spot on but that does NOT give him the right to characterize the Sebenza as purely a douche/cool knife. WTF? Take what he says with a grain of salt and remember that 99% of his followers think anything over $30 is overpriced.
 
RevDevil said:
you just love the TNP no matter what. Hardly onjective
Click to expand...

Thats unfair, and a copout really, because what you are doing is dismissing my conclusion without demonstrating why it is wrong. So tell me why I'm wrong. My belief is that 1) $400+ folders - the Sebenza included - are not objectively worth the cost if utility is the sole measure of value, but 2) these folders are worth the cost to those who derive $400 worth of enjoyment from their subjective view that the knife is cool, fun to own, opens like butter, impresses your buddies, and so forth. We need to distinguish between objective utility and subjective coolness. This view wasn't invented by either me or Nutnfancy, but its the essence of his 49 minute video distilled down to 15 seconds. So tell me why that conclusion is wrong please, instead of dismissing it as fanboy talk.

I love seeing someone enjoy their spendy knife, whether its a Sebenza, Hinderer, Microtech or whatever, because its contagious and its fun to hang out with someone who has a joie de vivre. But lets be honest about why they do it. Its not utility, or because that spendy knife opens a box better than my Tenacious. Its the fun and the good vibes that a spendy knife gives them.
 
kawr said:
What most people have a problem with is why he never talks about the higher cost associated with tighter tolerances? Tighter tolerance = more money. Fellow knifemakers like Sal or Dozier and they have already agreed with this and think CRK charges a fair price. He ignores the one point that actually somewhat validates the price point at which CRKs are at. His views on just about everything he said on the Sebenza from a functional standpoint are spot on but that does NOT give him the right to characterize the Sebenza as purely a douche/cool knife. WTF? Take what he says with a grain of salt and remember that 99% of his followers think anything over $30 is overpriced.
Click to expand...


Unless, of course, it is painted and has his name scratched into the finish. Then, they will pay anything, even 5 times the cost of a budget Chinese folder.
 
powernoodle said:
Thats unfair, and a copout really, because what you are doing is dismissing my conclusion without demonstrating why it is wrong. So tell me why I'm wrong. My belief is that 1) $400+ folders - the Sebenza included - are not objectively worth the cost if utility is the sole measure of value, but 2) these folders are worth the cost to those who derive $400 worth of enjoyment from their subjective view that the knife is cool, fun to own, opens like butter, impresses your buddies, and so forth. We need to distinguish between objective utility and subjective coolness. This view wasn't invented by either me or Nutnfancy, but its the essence of his 49 minute video distilled down to 15 seconds. So tell me why that conclusion is wrong please, instead of dismissing it as fanboy talk.

I love seeing someone enjoy their spendy knife, whether its a Sebenza, Hinderer, Microtech or whatever, because its contagious and its fun to hang out with someone who has a joie de vivre. But lets be honest about why they do it. Its not utility, or because that spendy knife opens a box better than my Tenacious. Its the fun and the good vibes that a spendy knife gives them.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you. You make very valid points, but the people in the CR forums will never validate what you say or even care for that matter, if you say anything "so called" negative about the sebenzas cost.
This subforums mentality is if you have something negative your not allowed to say it but if you have something positive they will all join in and play nice.
Idk just my honest opinion.

I have to say that the sebenza is like a Ferrari, your paying for performance yes, but your mainly paying for the name and theres alot of other cars out there that can do the same thing for less.
 
Tripton said:
Unless, of course, it is painted and has his name scratched into the finish. Then, they will pay anything, even 5 times the cost of a budget Chinese folder.
Click to expand...

That takes away his ability to call anything overpriced IMO. I've had more expensive knives with lower fit and finish and cheaper knives with lower fit and finish than the Sebenza. I buy the Sebenza and another and another etc because I want to and its my f@$*&#g money so I can. Regardless of my reasons, nor who may agree or disagree or be pissed because they want one, but can't justify it so they trash it..etc.

There are options, a whole wide world of em. $5-$2,000+ knives. I like what I like and if people can't dig it that's no skin off my ass.

Are they worth it? To me and many others, yes.

If they aren't to others, cool, no problem.

No need to sh*t bricks trying to credit or discredit them though. They cut, most knives do. Pick one, go crazy over it, type like mad about it and stare at it often. I can use a SAK for 100% of my cutting needs and I really would only need the one.

If I want a drawer full of higher end knives then cool, if you like what I like then let's start a sub section in an internet discussion forum and shoot the sh*t and show some pics and...oh yea, that's why we're all here.
 
As much as I love my Sebenza I couldn't agree more with Powernoodle. As we all know with knives past, say the 50-100 Dollar mark there comes a point of drastically diminishing returns and that I could do 100% of my daily EDC task with my old, well worn Delica and probably for all practical purposes have no "need"for a Sebenza or more exquisite knife. But the unnecessary level of F&F and construction is what gives me the most enjoyment. It is a hobby after all. All in all the way I see it is that most days I could make it without a knife let alone a decent or serviceable one. I feel a lot of us take our hobby much too seriously in that we are divided by brands and styles of knives forgetting that we all enjoy and use knives. My Sebenza makes me happy and it is going nowhere soon regardless of how much somebody despises or loathes it. I like it and that's all I'm worried about. We should all try to diversify our collections and EDC rotations IMO. Collecting and using knives isn't a competition ( except for blade sports ). What does it hurt to own a Sebenza if you can afford and enjoy it. I also use and EDC a lot less expensive knives as well as traditionals.
 
wolf5391 said:
I have to agree with you. You make very valid points, but the people in the CR forums will never validate what you say or even care for that matter, if you say anything "so called" negative about the sebenzas cost.
This subforums mentality is if you have something negative your not allowed to say it but if you have something positive they will all join in and play nice.
Idk just my honest opinion.

I have to say that the sebenza is like a Ferrari, your paying for performance yes, but your mainly paying for the name and theres alot of other cars out there that can do the same thing for less.
Click to expand...

Alright, alright, as a huge gear head, that is a terrible analogy. Call me a Ferrari "fanboy" (more like a dreamer), but there is a lot more difference between a four door sedar and a carbon fiber, 620 hp screaming V12, finest leather, greater sound and so on than a $10 SS Sanrenmu 710 and a $400 Ti small Sebenza. Now performance wise you can match a Ferrari with say a $70,000 Corvette or a $90,000 GTR, but there is a lot more difference in the cost of materials that go into those cars than the difference in cost of materials of those two mentioned knives. Plus the R&D that Ferrari puts into its cars (first hand learned F1 technology) also warrants a higher price. There just is not that much in knife making. It is no where near as complex as vehicle engineering. Sure, higher tolerances on your machines and tighter quality control, but CR is not pushing the boundaries every year with new technology or improved this and that off the charts. I know the 25 has some improvements, but most improvements come in the steel category which does not have a whole lot to do with knife manufactures. Now, you are paying for the name some, you are paying for the heritage, prestige, and history, but not a fair comparison in my book. Sorry for the rant, and off-topic nature, you crossed into my other passion!

I do agree with Powernoodle and your general assestment of the sub-forum, but the Ferrari analogy crossed the line!:D
 
powernoodle said:
1) $400+ folders - the Sebenza included - are not objectively worth the cost if utility is the sole measure of value, but

2) these folders are worth the cost to those who derive $400 worth of enjoyment from their subjective view that the knife is cool, fun to own, opens like butter, impresses your buddies, and so forth. We need to distinguish between objective utility and subjective coolness. This view wasn't invented by either me or Nutnfancy, but its the essence of his 49 minute video distilled down to 15 seconds. So tell me why that conclusion is wrong please, instead of dismissing it as fanboy talk.
Click to expand...

I would have to say "Somewhat Agree" to both of these points.

Regarding point A, one could potentially factor opportunity cost into the utility value of a knife depending on its tolerances and F&F i.e. The Sebenza is easy to take apart, clean and reassemble without worry of lock-up, centering, blade-play, or warranty issues; the CRK is less likely to come with a defect and therefore less likely to have to go through a warranty claim. Plus there are people who've owned a Sebenza with no issue for >15 years I believe and I'm not sure what other knives that can be said for, just something to think about. Frankly it would be almost impossible to evaluate the utility factor scientifically and in any case i doubt one could find $300.00 worth of room in there.

My main point is:

To refer to what makes CRK knives subjectively desirable as "coolness factor" is somewhat diminutive in my opinion. There is an exquisite level of attention to detail, craftsmanship, and workmanship put into a CRK (and other high-end, high-tag blades) that may not add to how well it breaks down a cardboard box, but is more than just "cool".

People think differently and have different measures of value, the world needs to get over that. To say one group's opinion is "cool" but that your own is an objective fact is not good for anybody.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top