Trademark-The Cork Screw

[Andetto]

Hello
I think the cork screw is more of a trademark than a tool. I will always prefer it over a philips driver.
Love to know what all of you think.
Regards

[Echotech]

I also prefer the corkscrew as the mini driver (and now fire ants) are so useful.

The can opener works well enough for most screws and those it doesn’t I’d probably just use a dedicated tool. The back philips can be a bit awkward to use but does give great torque.

It’s still a useful tool and I’m happy to have it, but overall prefer the corkscrew

[ElevenBlade]

I agree that the corkscrew is something of a trademark.  Historically, the second run by Victorinox (the Officer's Knife) had a corkscrew. and as this was available for civilian purchase... it was evidently a game-changer.  So I can imagine that it's an icon in the history of the company.  It's also interesting that no other brand has made a corkscrew that is appreciated by most users.  Leatherman and Gerber have both made corkscrews with lever arms, and none of them have been particularly successful... though one would think it's a significant improvement over the brute force versions. 

That said, I do prefer it over the back Philips.  The can opener has always done the job in a pinch - about three times this past week to be honest.  And I'd rather have the eyeglass SD with me instead of the dedicated Phillips. 

[enki_ck]

I also prefer the corkscrew as the mini driver (and now fire ants) are so useful.

The can opener works well enough for most screws and those it doesn%u2019t I%u2019d probably just use a dedicated tool. The back philips can be a bit awkward to use but does give great torque.

It%u2019s still a useful tool and I%u2019m happy to have it, but overall prefer the corkscrew

I agree, and prefer it to the phillips. I think I have one, maybe two phillips backlayered SAKs in my while collection. For me a SAK has to have a corkscrew to be a SAK, and woukd love to have it in ALOX also. I'd probably carry ALOX SAKs more often if they did.

[Echotech]

.....and woukd love to have it in ALOX also.......

totally would love back tools on my alox

[ElevenBlade]

totally would love back tools on my alox

I'm not sure If I do... Part of what gives Alox its character is the "completeness" of both scales.. no cut out.  Also... even though Victorinox is apparently unique in the way it has front and back tools on the same spring.....
To me, Alox is a different breed - any change in the scales or the springs to accommodate back tools would give Alox less of what makes it special.   

[Echotech]

I'm not sure If I do... Part of what gives Alox its character is the "completeness" of both scales.. no cut out.  Also... even though Victorinox is apparently unique in the way it has front and back tools on the same spring.....
To me, Alox is a different breed - any change in the scales or the springs to accommodate back tools would give Alox less of what makes it special.   

Very good points EB know what you mean about the clean lines particularly.

I suppose what I really mean is it’d be good if a couple of new models were created with them, I recently added some Ti scales to a climber and it feels great having T&T, corkscrew with mini driver etc. on an all metal SAK

The truth is I’ve always got a manager or rambler on me for the tweezers (which I do like having nearby) and I don’t really use the back tools an awful lot …yes think I might need to revise my answer a bit.

What I reckon would really be the business is a custom option, choose the exact tools that suits you, back tools or not and option of alox scales…maybe

[ElevenBlade]

Very good points EB know what you mean about the clean lines particularly.

I suppose what I really mean is it’d be good if a couple of new models were created with them, I recently added some Ti scales to a climber and it feels great having T&T, corkscrew with mini driver etc. on an all metal SAK

The truth is I’ve always got a manager or rambler on me for the tweezers (which I do like having nearby) and I don’t really use the back tools an awful lot …yes think I might need to revise my answer a bit.

What I reckon would really be the business is a custom option, choose the exact tools that suits you, back tools or not and option of alox scales…maybe

And then we'd all be satisfied, and you and I wouldn't have met here and been pals on this forum.  And what fun is that.   

[Echotech]

And then we'd all be satisfied, and you and I wouldn't have met here and been pals on this forum.  And what fun is that.   

mate

[Andetto]

I agree, and prefer it to the phillips. I think I have one, maybe two phillips backlayered SAKs in my while collection. For me a SAK has to have a corkscrew to be a SAK, and woukd love to have it in ALOX also. I'd probably carry ALOX SAKs more often if they did.

For me its, either having back tools with a cork screw , or not having any. That is why I like to think about alox as a different category, infact I wouldnt like alox with a cs, it will defiy the slimness concept. The cellidor scales make a good coverage for the extra width of the cs.
For me a spartan wouldnt be a standard model if it hadnt got a cs. Like wise, the swisschamp wouldnt be a flagship.

[Andetto]

I'm not sure If I do... Part of what gives Alox its character is the "completeness" of both scales.. no cut out.  Also... even though Victorinox is apparently unique in the way it has front and back tools on the same spring.....
To me, Alox is a different breed - any change in the scales or the springs to accommodate back tools would give Alox less of what makes it special.   

Couldnt agree more.

[Steelej1976]

I think the OP is right.  The corkscrew is a trademark, historic, iconic, and classic.  I like the corkscrew on my outdoor SAKs (Camper, Huntsman) but for urban carry I go with the Phillips (Tinker, Super Tinker).

When I think of a SAK it is from my Boy Scout days and having a Spartan.  I also think of MacGyver and always wanting the Phillips (Tinker)  It is hard but at this point I think they are both great and indelible in my mind if what a SAK is.  Maybe I am not helping and I am not trying to start a Corkscrew/Phillips flame war.  So to sum up I think the Corkscrew is what people think of when they think of a SAK as the OP suggested.

[Helvetica Bold]

I think the corkscrew and the mini sD are probably my
preferred combo for the back tools but aesthetically I mich prefer the Philips! I made a stainless toothpick that has a mini screwdriver at the end to get around this. Sorted.

[pfrsantos]

I think the corkscrew and the mini sD are probably my
preferred combo for the back tools but aesthetically I mich prefer the Philips! I made a stainless toothpick that has a mini screwdriver at the end to get around this. Sorted.

 

[Helvetica Bold]

There you go. Not pretty but does the job nicely ;0)

[pfrsantos]

There you go. Not pretty but does the job nicely ;0)

Well done! I was expecting the mini SD at the top part of it.

 

[Sawl Goodman]

I agree that the corkscrew is a classic, defining feature of back tooled SAKs. It's also a useful tool for me, much more so than the Phillips. It loosens knots and I've used it to open a stuck cupboard door that had no handle, just the hole. I remember when a CS was essential for opening wine bottles.

I've found limited use for the mini SD and mostly carry it in the CS to reduce hot spots on my thumb. And, well, you never know when it'll come in handy! My boss likes it for clearing blockages in small irrigation spitters.

I've only preferred the back Phillips on the Trailmaster, and then only for handling comfort. Most of the time the can opener tip works well enough for Phillips screws.

[Simon_Templar]

Ah, the Philips vs Corkscrew evergreen emerges once more 

Until I got back into SAKs last year, I hadn't even noticed that Celidor SAKs without the CS existed. Somehow I managed to consistently overlook this detail when watching the Macgyver show - weird, isn't it? So for me the case is clear, the CS is the defining feature of a SAK.

However, it's a fact that Macgyver mostly carried Philips SAKs, as did the Space Shuttle astronauts. So there's no question that Philips SAKs have impeccable credentials too. They aren't just as iconic as the CS SAKs in my opinion.

And unlike the CS, the backside Philips is a weak link. You can easily apply enough torque to break the knife, so you have to handle it with care at all times. For me, that is the crucial argument against it: I feel uncomfortable with this idea and cannot get it out of my head. Whenever I tried to get accustomed to the Deluxe Tinker (which in theory should be a perfect EDC for me), the thought of the weak Philips kept creeping into my mind and gave me the feeling that this was a SAK which I might not be able rely on in certain circumstances. This is not how a SAK should feel like in my opinion. You should just slip it into your pocket and forget about it until you need it, and then you should be able to put it to use without thinking twice. A quality tool that takes care of you, not the other way round.

[Sawl Goodman]

However, it's a fact that Macgyver mostly carried Philips SAKs, as did the Space Shuttle astronauts. So there's no question that Philips SAKs have impeccable credentials as well. They aren't just as iconic as the CS SAKs in my opinion.

Perhaps the back Phillips is more of a US thing than in much of the rest of the world. While models with the Phillips are available in my country, the great majority of SAKs with back tools that I see in real life have the corkscrew.

[nolongerlurking27]

Ah, the Philips vs Corkscrew evergreen emerges once more 

Until I got back into SAKs last year, I hadn't even noticed that Celidor SAKs without the CS existed. Somehow I managed to consistently overlook this detail when watching the Macgyver show - weird, isn't it? So for me the case is clear, the CS is the defining feature of a SAK.

However, it's a fact that Macgyver mostly carried Philips SAKs, as did the Space Shuttle astronauts. So there's no question that Philips SAKs have impeccable credentials too. They aren't just as iconic as the CS SAKs in my opinion.

And unlike the CS, the backside Philips is a weak link. You can easily apply enough torque to break the knife, so you have to handle it with care at all times. For me, that is the crucial argument against it: I feel uncomfortable with this idea and cannot get it out of my head. Whenever I tried to get accustomed to the Deluxe Tinker (which in theory should be a perfect EDC for me), the thought of the weak Philips kept creeping into my mind and gave me the feeling that this was a SAK which I might not be able rely on in certain circumstances. This is not how a SAK should feel like in my opinion. You should just slip it into your pocket and forget it until you need it, and then you should be able to put it to use without thinking twice. A quality tool that takes care of you, not the other way round.

I must admit this echoes my views. I originally got the DofE tool to have the back side Philips and scissors. However I found that the back side Philips felt less solid and I now prefer the cab opener tool for Philips. This is probably the only reason my DofE isn’t my primary EDC.

I suppose what I am saying is as the backside Philips is not as solid as the two inline drivers (Philips or can openers) then I would rather have the corkscrew and mini screwdriver as they have more uses

[nolongerlurking27]

There you go. Not pretty but does the job nicely ;0)

I am a huge fan of this !! Improves utility of toothpick as a poky tool aswell

[ElevenBlade]

I think the OP is right.  The corkscrew is a trademark, historic, iconic, and classic.  I like the corkscrew on my outdoor SAKs (Camper, Huntsman) but for urban carry I go with the Phillips (Tinker, Super Tinker).

When I think of a SAK it is from my Boy Scout days and having a Spartan.  I also think of MacGyver and always wanting the Phillips (Tinker)  It is hard but at this point I think they are both great and indelible in my mind if what a SAK is.  Maybe I am not helping and I am not trying to start a Corkscrew/Phillips flame war.  So to sum up I think the Corkscrew is what people think of when they think of a SAK as the OP suggested.

Funny you mention that

I think I might be just the opposite.  I've always preferred the CS for my EDC SAKs.  It's only my outdoor SAKs (currently only a Trekker after paring down, but the Hiker is up there too) where I tend to prefer the Philips.  My next purchase will probably be an Adventurer. 

Then again, I often have a Champion when I'm going camping... so I do have a CS.

This might be the flip side of the iconography for me - while the CS is a trademark for SAKs... The Phillips is somewhat of a trademark of Working SAKs - Trekker, Hiker, Tinker.... My first SAK was a Tinker small....

I'm a bit backward, I suppose.  Most of the time a SAK is a backup to my bare hands.  In the outdoors, its a tool in and of itself.   

[Storm]

Personally I favour the Phillips as it gives the smooth feel to the handle similar to the alox.  The corkscrew sticks out just enough to really bug me and annoy me in use . Mentally I know the corkscrew is better for me , especially I use the can opener end as my Phillips driver,  and the CS is useful for knot loosening etc . It's a weird deal

[BobbyRsa]

I think the corkscrew and the mini sD are probably my
preferred combo for the back tools but aesthetically I mich prefer the Philips! I made a stainless toothpick that has a mini screwdriver at the end to get around this. Sorted.

I agree with the aesthetic aspect and hand feel. The Phillips driver just feels so nice but I must say after now carrying many different versions of SAKs around the corkscrew is a must. I actually want to upgrade my bantam alox to a waiter just because i miss the corkscrew so often.

[pomsbz]

It is a trademark in that I consider it part of ensuring that I get no problems carrying my SAK, no one seeing that corkscrew could think that it was anything but an innocent SAK and can be ignored. In addition I already use the can opener for phillips screws, it is very successful in the role and as such I would find the rear tool to be redundant for my own needs. I find the corkscrew  to be great for untying knots and pulling up can tabs after I've just cut my nails. I also enjoy using it as a fidget toy. 

[BobbyRsa]

Corkscrew is essential on a SAK. Imagine going to war and not being able open your favourite bottle of Chardonnay or heaven forbid, Shiraz.

Jokes aside after EDC ing many different models with either Phillips or corkscrew i came to the realisation that corkscrew is the only way to go. Usually when i need a philips close to hand i grap a Leatherman (skeletools ,wave, surge). But corkscrew, nothing can replace a corkscrew.

It is ok at opening wine, but the pointy end is actually just so useful. The hand feel is a bit off compared to the philips but i sacrifice thAt for functionality. 

I carry proper folding knives somedays but nothing compares to a SAK with a corkscrew.

My philips (tinker family) still finds a life in certain circumstances. (Ie fly bag, boat grab bag, in a tractor eg.)

So to conclude. If you have to choose 1 buy a model with a corkscrew (alox excluded) but ideally buy any SAK. You will never be disappointed having the most useful lightweight item in your pocket after a credit card.

What was your most useful experience with a sak corkscrew?

[Jothra]

What was your most useful experience with a sak corkscrew?

Probably removing anchor bolt templates.

[Andetto]

It is a trademark in that I consider it part of ensuring that I get no problems carrying my SAK, no one seeing that corkscrew could think that it was anything but an innocent SAK and can be ignored. In addition I already use the can opener for phillips screws, it is very successful in the role and as such I would find the rear tool to be redundant for my own needs. I find the corkscrew  to be great for untying knots and pulling up can tabs after I've just cut my nails. I also enjoy using it as a fidget toy. 

Of course a cs is innocent, unless it is the hands of Robert McCall.

[Andetto]

Although I believe in the wisdom of the "sak gods", I just cant entertain the thought of, making a philips with a tip size and a possibility of applying torque, while the knife structure will not tolerate it.