Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chris Reeve Knives' started by HikingIsLife, Mar 16, 2020.
To me it's the romance of one man's design executed by that man's company.
Definetly a streamlining of production and improving of production costs/time.
Not a big fan of this, I was going to sell of my 21's to be ready for a 31, but I think I'll hold on to them now. Also pretty dissapointed when I learned they wont be supporting us with 21 blades anymore.. Kind of ruin the illusion of the "one knife for life" vibe they had going for them.
This has also made me look back on the 100$ + - folder segment as a better option now when I feel CRK is letting these things slip, like a Delica.
They won't be replacing 21 blades if they need it? Has this been an official statement from CRK? That's pretty huge...
My understanding was they would under warranty only. Not because you’d like to buy an extra blade.
Someone correct me if wrong.
Ok. That makes more sense to me.
FWIW, I just received my 31 (small micarta w/dual silver thumbstuds), and its as solid as a, well, CRK.
There’s zero play, zero lock-rock... Doesn’t matter what I do to it, when it’s open it ain’t closing unless I move the lockbar.
Crk needs to chime in here before this gets out of hand. They will lose business if they don't. This is very concerning for me, I'm sure others as well.
I agree...the silent treatment isnt working for me either.
Im very concerned, and as someone with a few 31’s on order, Im a little puzzled.
Im not sure why they had to change to the ceramic detent. Yes, it is smooth, but why change something that doesnt need fixed?
The new inlays are super comfortable, but the original lock interface was solid!!
Hope this gets worked out, and I’m happy for my decent 21 collection.
There seems to be a lot of variation to what people are seeing, some none others a little and then a lot.
that’s quite a bit of inconsistency coming from CRK.
I’ve got a few Inkosis which is the same style lock and those have no play whatsoever.
so I seriously question the initial response from CRK that it’s due to the lock design.
Here is the response that I just received from CRK.
I hope all is well! The feeling you have described is completely normal on the new Sebenza due to the technology we included on this model. The Sebenza models have the same lock arm design, where the thickness is the same all the way through. Because the ceramic ball was added to the top of the lock arm, the flat part of the back of the blade can flex or pull the lock arm over. You will not feel this on the Inkosi or Umnumzaan models because the thickness of the lock arms changes, which compensates for this flex or pull.
This is a common question about the Sebenza 31 but please be assured that this is a design feature and there is nothing wrong with the way your knife feels. Please let me know if you have additional questions.
I’ve replied to see about they giving additional details on the inconsistencies and improvements over time.
The letter basically says it all and states this “lock rock” is normal. I find that concerning, especially when having other folders that have lock rock and ultimately fail. What people Can do if this is a concern is choose not to buy and just pass on the 31. CRK doesn’t care if some people buy or not, they have more than enough who will. Most who are probably not even on this forum...I would also not expect a CRK response on here as they have been very very few in all the years I have had them, going all the way back to when Chris was in charge. I was excited when I saw the one piece inlays, but was a deal killer when I seen the ceramic ball lockup as I have had issues with them in the past on CRK. That’s just a personal choice. I have enough 21’s to last me multiple lifetimes and then some. So I am good.
I dont think we should be calling it lockrock anymore. The blade tang isn't rocking against the lockbar. Call it lockbar flex, or something like that. I would love to see a destruction test like Cold Steel did years ago testing the different lock types. The 21 never did very well in the test, from what I recall.
I believe that CRK will make it right. It might not be a real issue. But, if enough people don't like it, they should figure out how to stop it from happening. Or go back to ti on steel.
I am going to guess that terminology is the big problem here. They need to explain better what is happening, how it will effect performance and why it is no big deal to them. We here on BF are a bit of the forgotten child, so we may not hear directly, but from what I understand they(including Tim) do interact with some of the social media groups. Hopefully someone on there can transfer the answers here.
I am perfectly happy with my Classic MM and 21's, so this won't matter directly to me, but I respect and admire the company and would hate to see that tarnished-especially needlessly. Looking forward to a clearer answer.
This seems like something that should have been discussed when the knife was announced and the ceramic ball was introduced into the knife. It makes it seem as if they hoped no one would notice but as stated before the CRK buyers are typically going to notice any little detail because they trust CRK to handle every little detail.
It may not be lock rock but movement within a blade that cost this much money is a little unnerving. It will be up for each individual buyer to decide if that's a problem for them though so for many it will be and for many it won't. It's sad that the 31 is just now hitting shelves and there's already a potential issue with it even if it was designed this way that wasn't communicated at all.
I agree with @bmilleker and @Peter Hartwig; it doesn’t sound like lock rock in the usual sense.
I don’t quite follow CRK’s response. That said, if the lockbar ball is moving slightly deeper into the tang with pressure (ie more secure lockup?), I guess I could see how someone might describe it as a “feature.”
The "Feature" is the part of the knife being discussed. It's not the movement or non-movement of the part.
I would think the confusion is coming from the people at CRK using technical/clinical terms for a feels like issue.
If I buy a locking knife, I expect it to be fully "locked", as in "no movement of the blade when in the open position". Doubly more so for a knife as scrutinized as a CRK.
Imagine explaining the blade movement to someone. "Nah, it's totally supposed to move like that. Yeah, I know your $70 knife doesn't, but maybe it should! Because...you see...the way the ceramic ball...you know...interfaces with the tang...it messes with the lockbar because of the...uhhhh...uniform thickness of the lock arm? ...yeah! ...so it's cool!"
This reeks of the Benchmade 3V snafu. "We designed it with a flaw, but it's a good flaw!"
Just like Benchmade, I can't see this issue staying in the model for long before it's addressed (secretly).
The ball isn't moving deeper into the tang of the blade. From what I understand, the blade tang and ceramic ball never lose contact or move in anyway. Its the lockbar itself that is flexing in whatever direction it decides to flex. I dont know how a breakin period would fix this. For example, if a ball track developed over so many openings, how would this stop the flexing?
With all this being said, my large 31 micarta should be here tomorrow. I won't be selling any of my 21's either. There is room for all of them .
I think CRK will fix it. They fixed the Impinda after all the hate. I just hope early adopters aren't left in the rain.