I’ll interject some wisdom. The pins are surely bent. You need some sort of jig for assembly. If you can’t make one use a stack of liners taped together. The pins need to be longer than the finished knife. The springs are also slightly wider than the tools so they will work. Here’s my advice. Hard to explain but I’ll try. Put pins in jig first. Outer liner first, then the tool spring, followed by the tools but don’t force them in just yet. Do the non corkscrew or backside philips layer last not this layer. One side of the tools will go in and one side won’t. That’s what you need in order for this to work. Add a liner and push it down tight as you can. Then use and small pin punch and load the other tool. This will support the pins as you assemble. After all is together all the tools should still be in the open position. Hold it tight or tape the knife up so it don’t blow apart, not fun if it does. Then pin the outer pins first, then one with the tools. Don’t hammer them closed just yet, just enough to hold the knife together for nowNext donthe center pivot pin. Then the backside tool pin. This should hold the knife together. Now you can check to see if the tools work correctly and that the pins aren’t bent. Don’t let them snap shut as they can damage the liners After that’s done and everything looks good. Start pinning it tools side first. They should be very slightly loose. That’s normal. Then do the backside tool pin. After that the middle pin. This is the tricky one. It’s only purpose is to help support the springs. It should be tight enough to barley spin. Then check snap on each tool separately one at a time. They should all fall correctly in place. That should correct any issues you have. Hope this all makes sense and is helpful. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh... and it wouldn't help to replace the aluminum liners with brass, because then the stainless steel would be less noble than the brass, and the corrosion would most likely affect the stainless steel. So...
But the clever SAK modders on here might have better advice
This is interesting to follow. Quote from: Lynn LeFey on March 28, 2018, 10:24:37 PMOh... and it wouldn't help to replace the aluminum liners with brass, because then the stainless steel would be less noble than the brass, and the corrosion would most likely affect the stainless steel. So... Brass contains significant amounts of zinc, so chances are that the zinc in the brass would be eaten away first. Hence the general rule to avoid using brass submerged in seawater. (As opposed to some bronzes which are very good for just that). With galvanic corrosion the relative surface sizes of the metals matter a lot too in practical terms. So you can for instance use stainless steel nuts and bolts to hold together aluminium constructions, but the other way around would be bad.
I have an idea for peening, and want to throw it out there to see if it sounds reasonable. What i think I'm going to do on the first peens is the clamp the pin stock between two pieces of wood, then put an old spacer (probably one already broken) on top of the wood, then an old bushing. Then, peen the head into shape, and file flat. The wood 'should' hold the pin from slipping down. The old spacer is just there to support the bushing, and the bushing acts as the form into which the head is peened. If I break the bushing, meh. Get another used one. This should end with a pin head that is peened to the shape of the concave portion of the bushing. If anyone sees anything ludicrously wrong with this, please let me know. I'm really kind of winging it here. The pin in the pic below is not shown actually against the bushing, which is where it would be when shaping. Imagine this is after forming, and the pin has been raised.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion#Galvanic_series, brass has a lower anodic index than aluminium so the aluminium will corrode more/faster. I believe that the liners on older knives were not anodised, which would mean they're more susceptible to corrosion too. There may also be differences in the composition of the alloy.
Quote from: Vidar on March 29, 2018, 09:51:19 AMThis is interesting to follow. Quote from: Lynn LeFey on March 28, 2018, 10:24:37 PMOh... and it wouldn't help to replace the aluminum liners with brass, because then the stainless steel would be less noble than the brass, and the corrosion would most likely affect the stainless steel. So... Brass contains significant amounts of zinc, so chances are that the zinc in the brass would be eaten away first. Hence the general rule to avoid using brass submerged in seawater. (As opposed to some bronzes which are very good for just that). With galvanic corrosion the relative surface sizes of the metals matter a lot too in practical terms. So you can for instance use stainless steel nuts and bolts to hold together aluminium constructions, but the other way around would be bad.According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion#Galvanic_series, brass has a lower anodic index than aluminium so the aluminium will corrode more/faster. I believe that the liners on older knives were not anodised, which would mean they're more susceptible to corrosion too. There may also be differences in the composition of the alloy.
This is my first real post here on the MTO forum. I collect SAKs and I'm very interested in their evolution. I know this place for quite a few years and I learned a lot from reading posts here. Although I usually prefer to just read and learn, this thread touches something that I researched a little bit (by observing the SAKs in my collection), so it seems appropriate to point out what I know.Quote from: Syph007 on January 22, 2018, 08:01:13 PMWhile we are on the subject, I used to think that none of the liners on a standard cellidor were anodized, but the liner adjacent to the blade for sure is clear anodized (you can tell with conductivity test). No other liners are, but why did they do just that one liner and still do it currently? All current cellidor blade liners are indeed alox.According to my observations, it's indeed true that recent (since some point in the late 1980's) regular-line 91mm Victorinox SAKs have exactly one anodized liner as Syph007 describes. It's the internal liner of the blades layer (namely, the central liner on a Spartan). The full picture, however, is more complex and is part the SAK evolution.Victorinox used to anodize all aluminum liners of their 91mm and 84mm SAKs since around their official switch to aluminum liners in the very early 1950's (I'm not sure what was before then) to some point in the early 1970's (1973?). Then they completely stopped anodizing the liners of SAKs in the Elinox/Economy/Ecoline line. This change may have coincided (at least roughly) with the other changes that were made to this line around that time (change of tang stamps from big ELINOX over a crossbow to small ELINOX-SWITZERLAND-STAINLESS-ROSTFREI, change of corkscrew to a special economy version, change to polished openers, etc.). It persists to this day, so that except for the use of nylon scales, current ecoline/II versions of 91mm Victorinox SAKs differ from their regular-line versions also by lacking the anodized liner.Anodizing of all liners persisted for regular-line SAKs until sometime in the late 1980's (1988-89?), at which time Victorinox stopped anodizing all of their liners except for the above mentioned single liner that still gets anodized on regular-line 91mm SAKs.The next change involved only 84mm knives. They stopped anodizing all liners on all 84mm knives, so that current 84mm SAKs have no anodized liners at all. I don't really know when this happened. Possibly 2005, but for all I know it may have been several years earlier or later (I simply don't have enough 84mm SAKs to determine this at present).As far as I can tell, Wenger never anodized any liners in their SAKs. This seems to persist for the Victorinox Delemont line.I have no idea what happens with other sizes (like 111mm) of Victorinox knives that have some aluminum liners.Finally, while I don't really know why they keep anodizing the particular single liner that they do on 91mm SAKs, my personal theory is that this is due to this liner having an exposed portion (next to the corkscrew/Phillips SD) that is visible and also tends to get easily scratched. Anodizing the corresponding liner usually helps to make this exposed portion look a bit nicer on used SAKs.
While we are on the subject, I used to think that none of the liners on a standard cellidor were anodized, but the liner adjacent to the blade for sure is clear anodized (you can tell with conductivity test). No other liners are, but why did they do just that one liner and still do it currently? All current cellidor blade liners are indeed alox.
Donations
Community Links
