Deluxe Climber with Brass Liners

WoodMan · **on:** January 26, 2013, 04:16:07 PM

A few months ago I purchased a Recruit, Mechanic, and Deluxe Climber at an old tool swap for $5.00 total. The Recruit cleaned up nicely and was put into service, but the blades/tools on the Mechanic and Deluxe Climber could only be pried open despite numerous soakings and cleanings in various substances. I disassembled the Mechanic, cleaned and polished the various parts, reassembled the knife with black plus scales, and now carry it on a regular basis.

The Deluxe Climber was a different story. The liners on this knife were corroded to the point that the aluminum could be flaked off with a fingernail (see photo below) and obviously unusable for reassembly. So, new liners had to be acquired or fabricated. Because the knife, while not rare, seems to be out of production and is somewhat uncommon (only one example on ebay at this writing), I decided it deserved some new liners from a material superior to the originals. Since then, I have been on a quest to digitize the various SAK liners which is detailed in this thread: http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,41081.0.html. My eventual goal is to manufacture the liners through an efficient process like waterjet or laser cutting.

In the meantime, I decided to make a set of liners by hand. The material is C260 Cartridge Brass. The original scales were removed, sanded, polished, and returned to the knife.

papercut · **Reply #1 on:** January 26, 2013, 04:33:42 PM

Very nice. I didn't know that deluxe climbers even existed.

Lynn LeFey · **Reply #2 on:** January 26, 2013, 04:50:24 PM

That's some lovely work.

I think aluminum is better for corrosion resistance, but the brass liners LOOK really fantastic.

What did you use to polish the scales? I've been curious about how to restore the shine on celador.

WoodMan · **Reply #3 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:33:12 PM

Quote from: Lynn LeFey on January 26, 2013, 04:50:24 PM

What did you use to polish the scales? I've been curious about how to restore the shine on celador.

I sand the scales first to remove surface scratches and dings using 400 and 600 grit abrasives.

Then I polish them with the Beall Wood Buff (http://www.bealltool.com/products/buffing/buffer.php) using the Tripoli and White Diamond compounds. The buffing puts a mirror polish on the scales in less than one minute per compound. The Wood Buff is an admittedly expensive solution for polishing scales (I purchased it to polish wood lathe turnings). Any cloth/felt buffing wheel will work, even the tiny Dremel one (although much slower), as long as you have the polishing compounds.

Metropolicity · **Reply #4 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:38:56 PM

Love it!

I prefer the deluxe tinker myself but pretty much deluxe of any model is weapon of choice. Beautiful work, the brass and red are so classic!

nuphoria · **Reply #5 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:42:48 PM

Lovely combination - brass just has that look

WoodMan · **Reply #6 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:46:13 PM

Quote from: Lynn LeFey on January 26, 2013, 04:50:24 PM

I think aluminum is better for corrosion resistance, but the brass liners LOOK really fantastic.

Maybe I'm wrong on this situation, but I thought that brass was superior from a corrosion perspective. After all, SAKs had brass liners for most of their history and I thought that the switch to aluminum liners was made strictly as a cost-saving measure. At the very least, the use of brass liners removes one dissimilar metal from the galvanic corrosion equation (steel blades/tools, aluminum liners, brass pins). Perhaps someone with a strong metals/chemistry background can weigh in on this issue.

WoodMan · **Reply #7 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:51:18 PM

Quote from: Metropolicity on January 26, 2013, 05:38:56 PM

Love it!

I prefer the deluxe tinker myself but pretty much deluxe of any model is weapon of choice. Beautiful work, the brass and red are so classic!

I like the Deluxe Tinker as well. Gotta have the Phillips!

Lynn LeFey · **Reply #8 on:** January 26, 2013, 05:55:50 PM

Quote from: WoodMan on January 26, 2013, 05:46:13 PM

Maybe I'm wrong on this situation, but I thought that brass was superior from a corrosion perspective. After all, SAKs had brass liners for most of their history and I thought that the switch to aluminum liners was made strictly as a cost-saving measure. At the very least, the use of brass liners removes one dissimilar metal from the galvanic corrosion equation (steel blades/tools, aluminum liners, brass pins). Perhaps someone with a strong metals/chemistry background can weigh in on this issue.

You might be right, but I THOUGHT Aluminum was great for non-corrosion. I would also like someone with better metals knowledge to weigh in on this.

I'm actually shocked every time I hear someone who comes across corroded aluminum scales. What the heck does that? An Airstream trailer can sit out in the rain and sun for 30 years without problem. So...

Syph007 · **Reply #9 on:** January 26, 2013, 06:01:50 PM

Quote from: WoodMan on January 26, 2013, 05:46:13 PM

Quote from: Lynn LeFey on January 26, 2013, 04:50:24 PM
I think aluminum is better for corrosion resistance, but the brass liners LOOK really fantastic.

Maybe I'm wrong on this situation, but I thought that brass was superior from a corrosion perspective. After all, SAKs had brass liners for most of their history and I thought that the switch to aluminum liners was made strictly as a cost-saving measure. At the very least, the use of brass liners removes one dissimilar metal from the galvanic corrosion equation (steel blades/tools, aluminum liners, brass pins). Perhaps someone with a strong metals/chemistry background can weigh in on this issue.

Brass is better for sure. Ive taken apart really old alox knives with brass liners, and they were perfect again after a cleaning. That cheap aluminum they use in the regular SAKs will corrode and fall apart as you showed.

Now navel brass is even more corrosion resistant, but thats for a salt water environment and overkill for a SAK liner. I love cartridge brass its nice and solid and takes a high polish too.

Great job btw! One of these days I need to replace the aluminum liners in my EDC cybertool 34 with brass.

Lynn LeFey · **Reply #10 on:** January 26, 2013, 06:03:32 PM

Well... there you go.

WoodMan · **Reply #11 on:** January 27, 2013, 06:08:12 AM

Quote from: Syph007 on January 26, 2013, 06:01:50 PM

Great job btw! One of these days I need to replace the aluminum liners in my EDC cybertool 34 with brass.

Coming from you I consider this high praise, indeed. Your advice and suggestions are what made this mod possible and your own work is a great inspiration.

Heinz Doofenshmirtz · **Reply #12 on:** January 27, 2013, 09:08:23 AM

Beautiful work!

I've experience aluminum corrosion before, building bike wheels with aluminum spoke nipples. They represent a significant weight savings; 2g ea. vs 6g ea. for brass ones. Over the course of an entire 32 spoke wheel, that's a significant 128g you save. But, if you don't put some kind of treatment on the threads of the spokes first, the AL nips eventually will gall and seize up on the stainless spokes. Ti against stainless has the same problem. There's something electrochemical that goes on with stainless and other metals that causes it, but I don't know what it is.

Zed · **Reply #13 on:** January 27, 2013, 09:15:24 AM

Quote from: Heinz Doofenshmirtz on January 27, 2013, 09:08:23 AM

Beautiful work!

I've experience aluminum corrosion before, building bike wheels with aluminum spoke nipples. They represent a significant weight savings; 2g ea. vs 6g ea. for brass ones. Over the course of an entire 32 spoke wheel, that's a significant 128g you save. But, if you don't put some kind of treatment on the threads of the spokes first, the AL nips eventually will gall and seize up on the stainless spokes. Ti against stainless has the same problem. There's something electrochemical that goes on with stainless and other metals that causes it, but I don't know what it is.

yeah I've also had many old alike rims with white surface corrosion although it generally rubs off.

I love the brass

nice work mate

GigaHz · **Reply #14 on:** February 11, 2013, 11:46:59 PM

So who is going to make brass liners for SAKs? I got a CT with trashed liners. I would be willing to buy a bunch from whom ever decided to have them made. I love the looks of the brass with the stainless. The pliers and CT liners are thicker than most. I think the CT would rub or hit the other tools unless it was 1mm thick.

WoodMan · **Reply #15 on:** February 12, 2013, 06:00:08 AM

As I said in the OP, I'm planning to manufacture SAK liners through waterjet (preferred) or perhaps laser cutting. I built this knife with the brass liners mostly to confirm that I could make it work.

You may recall that you (GigaHz) and I had an earlier discussion on this very issue in this thread: http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,41081.0.html.

To date I have acquired and digitized all the common SAK liners but have not digitized some of the unusual liners from the Cybertool and Lite models. I do own a CT34 and a Spartan Lite but since they are in excellent condition I'm not ready to break them down at this time.

So, I need a source for the liners from the CT and Lite Models. If anyone has any that they're willing to part with temporarily, I can send a postage-paid mailer.

I may not be able to get fully operational on this project until June, but I am committed to it.

By the way, what would be the proper sub-forum to offer SAK liners for sale on?

WoodMan · **Reply #16 on:** February 12, 2013, 06:08:00 AM

Quote from: GigaHz on February 11, 2013, 11:46:59 PM

The pliers and CT liners are thicker than most. I think the CT would rub or hit the other tools unless it was 1mm thick.

On Syph007's recommendation I used .032" brass for all the liners in this knife. It works fine for the pliers liners. 1mm is .039" so slightly thicker, of course. Again, I need a source of the unusual CT and Lite liners so I can examine and digitize them.

GigaHz · **Reply #17 on:** February 13, 2013, 02:06:42 AM

The top 3 are 84s. Do you have the bottom 3? I will have to open a CT this weekend. I don't have any Lite liners loose.

WiSAKfan · **Reply #18 on:** February 13, 2013, 02:53:21 AM

looks great! excellent work.

WoodMan · **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2013, 03:55:21 AM

Quote from: GigaHz on February 13, 2013, 02:06:42 AM

The top 3 are 84s. Do you have the bottom 3? I will have to open a CT this weekend. I don't have any Lite liners loose.
(Image removed from quote.)

I have the last one (at position #6 from the top): it's the center liner from the Spartan/Tinker and easy to recognize because it has the notch for access to the nail nick on the awl. I've never understood why some knives need this cutout for the awl while most others don't.

I don't have the two at postions #4 and #5. I'm especially interested in #4. The cutout is in the position where the corkscrew/phillips back layer tools are located but it's obviously different. What knife is it from?

All the liners that I've digitized are shown in the OP of this thread: http://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,41081.0.html.

Northern Geek · **Reply #20 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:59:28 AM

Real nice job on that Deluxe Climber.. Got a soft spot for that model..

GigaHz · **Reply #21 on:** February 14, 2013, 11:24:29 AM

Number 4 is from one of these.

WoodMan · **Reply #22 on:** February 15, 2013, 02:06:59 AM

Quote from: GigaHz on February 14, 2013, 11:24:29 AM

Number 4 is from one of these.

(Image removed from quote.)

Obviously a vintage model. Do you know the year of manufacture?

GigaHz · **Reply #23 on:** February 15, 2013, 02:12:00 AM

I think early 60's.

Syph007 · **Reply #24 on:** February 15, 2013, 02:18:52 AM

How many of the 91mm tools actually require those goofy shaped liners though? I mean I have put almost all of the top tools from a 91 on a 93 with one liner shape.

I know the cybertool plastic part needs the liners to rest on (well i think it does), but I think thats the only really special one. So.. shouldn't a front/back scale liner and one style of inner liner be sufficient for building a 91mm SAK with brass liners?

WoodMan · **Reply #25 on:** February 15, 2013, 04:45:29 AM

Quote from: Syph007 on February 15, 2013, 02:18:52 AM

How many of the 91mm tools actually require those goofy shaped liners though? I mean I have put almost all of the top tools from a 91 on a 93 with one liner shape.

I know the cybertool plastic part needs the liners to rest on (well i think it does), but I think thats the only really special one. So.. shouldn't a front/back scale liner and one style of inner liner be sufficient for building a 91mm SAK with brass liners?

The rivet from the pliers seems to rest on its specialized liner but maybe the shape just provides clearance. Other than that, I really haven't figured out why there have to be so many different liner shapes.

Also, and I mentioned this before in this and another thread, I've never really heard a good explanation for why the Spartan/Tinker needs a notch in the liner for awl access but so many other knives don't.