Fixed the Pioneer X page for you.
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Pioneer+X
You made it a bit too complicated with the code. No need for most of the extras. Text and a img code now and then to make it look better.
.......
Top right corner of the Edit page, there is a Pencil icon, and when you hover above it, it says Switch Editor (wiki or WYSIWYG) .....
.......
Hope this helps. :salute:
Wow that's a lot of work. Thanks for letting us know about these updates
You know, we need editors for the Multitool Encyclopedia too :whistle:
You know, we need editors for the Multitool Encyclopedia too :whistle:
This is very true and would love if we could get the MT Wiki updated as good as the SAKwiki :dd: as I have used it several times as well but no to the extent the SAKwiki is used because the SAKwiki is more complete :tu:
Don't know if this is the right thread to share pics, but just in case.
The horn scaled 84mm is my friend's knife I was talking about earlier. It has the same tool configuration as the 91mm Grand Prix.
Would love to know more about this if anyone has info. Thanks.
Thanks for the info Enki...Don't know if this is the right thread to share pics, but just in case.
The horn scaled 84mm is my friend's knife I was talking about earlier. It has the same tool configuration as the 91mm Grand Prix.
Would love to know more about this if anyone has info. Thanks.
Maybe better for a separate thread, but jazzbass calls the regular cellidor scaled one 135kmaU or the Small Grand Prix, pics are broken though.
http://forum.multitool.org/index.php?topic=21659.0
Hi all
One of the reasons I signed up to MTO was to offer to do a bit of tidying on SAK Wiki, which I've found to be a fascinating read while thinking about what I want in my next SAK. As a part of that research I pulled down all of the Victorinox 84mm and 91mm knife pages, and found a few things that complicated my efforts to clearly understand which knifes had which tools that offered which functions. For example, the can opener tool seems to be described in all these ways:
.......... long inconsistent list !! ........ :o
What I thought might be nice is to tidy up all of the entries so that they and more consistent, and also use that new streamlined list to refresh SAK Selector with equivalent information. Using the knife-to-tool data that has been gather in the reverse direction could also build a tool-to-knife section on each tool page. Finally, the tables of which knife has which features on the Layer N pages could possibly be updated to show all tool combinations, or similar.
Thoughts and guidance welcome. I haven't register yet >:D.
Red arrow marks the spot
WIKI editor:
.......
WYSIWYG editor:
.........
Hey Little Tinker (nice name BTW!!),
Welcome to the forum and thanks for the offer of help
That can opener list is amazing - And funny - I guess the result of multiple authors over a long time, and a tool with several functions
- As you may know - for these items there is a hyperlink underneath and some display text which the author can edit
For those in the know, I guess it is pretty obvious what the tool is - But for someone unfamiliar - these sorts of inconsistencies are confusing
- It sounds like a lot of work to clean up - Is there a clever automated way to do that? or is it just grunt.
The tool to knife and knife to tool links would be great too.
Detron on this forum created a spreadsheet like that and as you say there is the Selector..
I am just a novice editor (as you can tell) - But maybe enki or one of the other Wiki-meisters will be along soon!!
:cheers:
(BTW you sound even more OCD than me!!)
I registered on SAKWiki, so just need editing rights set up to start trialling some of the above.
My current ideas are:
- Tool page (eg Phillips Screwdriver Back Tool (http://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Screwdriver-Phillips): Provide link to knives that have the tool, with indication of how many layers that knife has to give you a sense of whether it's likely to be what you're after.
- Size / layer pages (eg Victorinox 91mm 3 layer (http://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+91mm+3+Layer+Models)): Expand table to have a column for each differentiating layer / back tool (probably not scale tools - too much noise)
Done.
As I suspected - or hoped!! (I did not think I was that blind or dumb) - we must have different authorisations - As no little pencil for me :(
Here is what my editor screen looks like..
You know, we need editors for the Multitool Encyclopedia too :whistle:
I'm thinking of using TikiWiki's PluginInclude capability to build a pair of master page of all the new tables and then pull in the right table for each tool or knife.
Has that been tried elsewhere in the Wiki with success or failure?
Whoa, respect :tu:Mostly we need new articles written, and proofreading of current articles. There is a link to the "How To" page for the wiki in my signature, and if you want to make edits and make new pages, I can send you the passcode needed to register.You know, we need editors for the Multitool Encyclopedia too :whistle:
What kind of work is needed, exactly?
I have a couple of suggestions on the tables.
<SNIP>
Agreed, looks excellent. And having worked with and created a few fancytables on the wiki, I know how tricky they can be.
As for the vertical text for the tools, might I suggest making it ALL CAPS? It is much more readable, at least to my eyes, less adjustment.
For instance:F
l
a
s
h
l
i
g
h
t
vrsF
L
A
S
H
L
I
G
H
T
I think that's very illuminating ;). I'll put it in the next round of work.
EDIT2: ...it would be good to group by layer then back then scale tools too. I have a spready that does this let me know if you want me to send it to you for a quick gander
This maybe a stupid question but has anyone thought about doing a partnership with a company that edit hardcover books to print the content of the wiki on a yearly basis for instance?Books have been brought up several times over the years ( I believe J-Sews and Grant both have made plans for one), but there's just not enough support for them. Printers are expensive, and since the information is already free online, who would be willing to shell out the money to cover the book cost?
I would buy it and this could be a way to support this forum and the wiki contributors while having good info from SAK speSmurfpillsts.
I know there are companies which do that for blogs for instance, and even for your Facebook publications. I believe they take a small fee but maybe a poll would give an idea of the number of people willing to buy such a great encyclopedia
Anyway just a thought
</Gee via Tapatalk>
EDIT2: ...it would be good to group by layer then back then scale tools too. I have a spready that does this let me know if you want me to send it to you for a quick ganderI initially read this to mean you have a chart of which layer each tool is in, so we could put L1 to indicate the blades are in the first layer, then L2 for scissors and L3 for openers on a Climber for example. I think could be handy for anyone who wanted to custom build discontinued items, or build Franken-knives while using the original orders on similar knives to potentially avoid "hiding" nail-nicks, etc. And SOOOO OCD - what's not to like ::).
Or did you just mean a simple list of whether each tool is layer / scale / back? If so then I think we have that covered now (Phillis and fine screwdriver being a bit special because they appear in multiple places...), but let me know if you think the grouping / ordering should be changed.
And there is one more model that could go in the 6 layer table - It is a Handyman variation - Which the Wiki says is a SABI version, but I think could be an older version - So it could be known as Handyman (old) - Anyway the Fish Scaler replaces the pliers.
I could even try this myself - I think adding a row would be easy enough!! Moving column around - No way!!!
As for my changes
- I have updated the Cybertool headings to mention S,M,L (thereby messing up the links in the first para) - Can any body help - I think it does not like the brackets in the headings ??? I tried a slash too this also did not work :(
<h2 class="showhide_heading" id="CyberTool_29_S_">CyberTool 29 (S)</h2>
[#Cybertool_29_S_|Cybertool 29 (S)],
as the Wiki code seems to work.Might I suggest adding an index somewhere at the beginning of the page that explains the abbreviations used? Or did I miss it? I understand that L means the tool is found as inside the SAK, aka a layered tool, S stands for scale tool, B stands for back layer tool, but the occasional browser of SAKwiki might not know that.
Just a thought :D
I'll address the sakselektor question when I'm a bit more awake. ;)
And there is one more model that could go in the 6 layer table - It is a Handyman variation - Which the Wiki says is a SABI version, but I think could be an older version - So it could be known as Handyman (old) - Anyway the Fish Scaler replaces the pliers.Lots of good ideas in there that I'll think about.
I could even try this myself - I think adding a row would be easy enough!! Moving column around - No way!!!
Be careful with small edits to the tables since a bulk update (more will be coming to fix the ~hs~, etc...) of the tables will trample on any local edit there, so if knives are missing then adding them to the Wiki pages is the way to go ……….
Would it be at all useful to put this in the Wiki somewhere, which shows how you can move from Spartan to SwissChamp adding one tool layer at a time amongst the knives in the Victorinox 2015 catalogue? Or maybe an expanded version showing discontinued knives as well (which could get messy!)?
I'm not averse to that, just prioritising other stuff :P. I'll revise it again and we can gather views afterwards.
My preference is still the sequence I discuss above (all L,B,S together and within that Spartan, Champ, others) - But that's just me. If you do leave it as it is now - One change I would make is to swap the position of the CS and Phillips - So that all the L's and B's are together in that section
The hyperlinks to Champions and Cybertools don't work - That probably was me - Sorry :(No, probably me. The multi-knife pages expose a few quirks in the way I built the data. I'm planning to address it :salute:.
The hyperlinks to mainblade and awl and small blade don't workWell spotted. That's me tangling up simple names and page names :oops:.
The list of 'common to all' tools would be better with commas - This is really OCD :twak: !!!Good idea. I also don't like the simple string of names :tu:.
For the six + layer table I don't think you need the extra text saying how many layers is in the SAK - It's in the table above - So unneccessarily doubles the depth of the tableI'm in two minds about having it. It's got the wrong numbers at the moment anyway, so I'll simply remove for now ;). Shall we keep the upper table, and start filling in more of the info (but remove the Philips / Corkscrew columns :-\?
The tool to model reference is brilliant - I always wanted one of those - I would be tempted not to bother with those tables for the Spartan toolset - As the tables are so big (eg check out the keyring!!) and pretty much all SAKS have the Spartan tool set, but the rest are really, really usefulThey all get generated automatically at the mo. I wasn't planning to put ones that are unhelpfully large onto the tool page, for the reasons that you suggest. I'll take a look at filtering them out of the master table as well, or moving them to the end as a "well, if you really want to know" section :whistle:.
The Cyberbits related SAKs table - Should probably be the Cybertool not the bitsAnother artefact of the way the data was parsed form the current Wiki knife pages. My preference would be to define "Cyber Set A" and "Cyber Set B" for the two sets of 4 bits, and reference these as included to show the differentiation :-\.
Love the family tree too - Really nice - Really useful - That could go somewhere on the tools main page, or better still the page of 91mm (and 84mm) SAKs that does not have the layers ?? Someone else here did one of those with all the models, and as you say it was pretty complex - So I think your curent model one works best - And you can always cross reference a current model to an older model if you willI'll upload the diagram and we can work out where to position it :tu:.
I realize this ain't a "submit errors" thread but here I go again :twak:<--me
Is this supposed to be 100mm?
The SAKWiki is a wonderful thing, but I've not been able to find any way to search it - am I missing something obvious, or is search for some reason not currently implemented?
site:http://www.sakwiki.com climber
to get climber related SAKwiki articles :)sakwiki climber
(which will give you also non sakwiki sites talking about sakwiki and climber
Yes I have had that problem too - And also used M47's 2nd solution
However there is a native serach capability - But only if you logon with your user id
If you logon then a search field becomes available where the logon fields were and it works just like you'd expect it to - even your search term is highlighted in the texts :tu:
Yes I have had that problem too - And also used M47's 2nd solution
However there is a native serach capability - But only if you logon with your user id
If you logon then a search field becomes available where the logon fields were and it works just like you'd expect it to - even your search term is highlighted in the texts :tu:
OK - So you want to get into a 'my way is better than your way' debate
That's fine - I concede - You win - Congratulations :tu:
For me - I was just answering a question that was asked - And Oxford Guy, and anyone else, can make their own decision on what works best/well for them
I just want to take a moment to give a big thank you for all the work that has gone into--and continues to go into--the SAKWiki.
We're fortunate to have such a marvelous resource. I'm sure it will always be a "work in progress," but what a wonderful piece of work it is.
For the models that converted to liner lock
- To keep things more concise, neater and to avoid duplication I would much prefer to add a note the History section of the affected knives stating that in 2017 this model was converted from a side lock to a liner locking blade.
Seems much simpler to me ???
I think this change is like a tool version change or a Champion gaining another layer, or the hook being added to models with scissors.
For the models that converted to liner lock
- To keep things more concise, neater and to avoid duplication I would much prefer to add a note the History section of the affected knives stating that in 2017 this model was converted from a side lock to a liner locking blade.
Seems much simpler to me ???
I think this change is like a tool version change or a Champion gaining another layer, or the hook being added to models with scissors.
For the models that converted to liner lock
- To keep things more concise, neater and to avoid duplication I would much prefer to add a note the History section of the affected knives stating that in 2017 this model was converted from a side lock to a liner locking blade.
Seems much simpler to me ???
I think this change is like a tool version change or a Champion gaining another layer, or the hook being added to models with scissors.
Let's see what we can do on simple example:
Picknicker (0.8853) - changed locking mechanism and became a Picknicker (0.8353)
Nomad (0.8353.3) - no changes. Renamed to Picknicker
Nomad (0.8351.C, 0.8353.MW3, 0.8351.MWC) - discontinued.
Forester (0.8363.3, 0.8361.MWC, 0.8361.C) - discontinued
Rucksack (0.8863) - changed locking mechanism and became a Forester(0.8363)
Forester (0.8361.MC, 0.8361.63) - new models.
Something like this? If yes - let's imagine next situation:
I'm a newbie and I'd like to find something about new Picknicker and new Forester models on SAKWiki..
If we're going just to update pages of existing models - there are no dedicated pages for these models and needed information will be presented in old pages only (Nomad and Rucksack accordingly).
In other words - in order to read about Picknicker I need to know that it's a former Nomad, otherwise - I'll not find anything.
Maybe we can add some links with redirection to the pages with TOC?What do you think?
- Forester
- Forester 2017 -> Rucksack
- Picknicker
- Picknicker 2017 -> Nomad
P.S. Sorry for my English :(
I just want to take a moment to give a big thank you for all the work that has gone into--and continues to go into--the SAKWiki.Hear, hear! :cheers:
We're fortunate to have such a marvelous resource. I'm sure it will always be a "work in progress," but what a wonderful piece of work it is.
I just want to take a moment to give a big thank you for all the work that has gone into--and continues to go into--the SAKWiki.Hear, hear! :cheers:
We're fortunate to have such a marvelous resource. I'm sure it will always be a "work in progress," but what a wonderful piece of work it is.
Good to hear - Thanks guys
There was a power of work that went into setting up the wiki in the early days by the likes of Stressmaster, ICanFixThat, Enki, even the boss - and many others
The design and structure is fantastic and the sheer quantity of great content and photos is incredible.
These days it's more of a maintenance task - I am trying to make all the information a little more user friendly, and Mr LeaF is always adding great photos :tu:
Although every now and again there's a chunk of work to do eg ^^^
One thing that I'd like to discuss - how we're going to reflect in SAKWiki this year's changes (I mean 2017) regarding 111-mm series?There is an Alpineer already.(111mm slide-lock).
Few ideas:
1. All slide-lock models which weren't replaced with the newest liner-lock models (Cowboy, Atlas) should be marked as 'Discontinued'
2. Models, which had changing locking mechanism from slide-lock to liner-lock (Outrider for example) should be added to the appropriate lists as separate models (Outrider 2 or Outrider 2017).
3. Models, which were relisted with new names (Nomad -> Picknicker, Sentinel with corkscrew -> Alpineer) should be marked with the link to the new model.
What do you think about this?
P.S. Few months before I've created an Excel worksheet with changes in 111-mm series (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G3_YVwXo2Hx3rLQQClKZMIqgjjkgxKy574_pFOGhcMw/edit?usp=sharing). Maybe it will be interested for someone.
One thing that I'd like to discuss - how we're going to reflect in SAKWiki this year's changes (I mean 2017) regarding 111-mm series?There is an Alpineer already.(111mm slide-lock).
Few ideas:
1. All slide-lock models which weren't replaced with the newest liner-lock models (Cowboy, Atlas) should be marked as 'Discontinued'
2. Models, which had changing locking mechanism from slide-lock to liner-lock (Outrider for example) should be added to the appropriate lists as separate models (Outrider 2 or Outrider 2017).
3. Models, which were relisted with new names (Nomad -> Picknicker, Sentinel with corkscrew -> Alpineer) should be marked with the link to the new model.
What do you think about this?
P.S. Few months before I've created an Excel worksheet with changes in 111-mm series (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G3_YVwXo2Hx3rLQQClKZMIqgjjkgxKy574_pFOGhcMw/edit?usp=sharing). Maybe it will be interested for someone.
Just spotted some contradictory info relating to the OH GAK...Sorry if I am being thick - Can you be more explicit on the contradiction please ;) ???
For the 58mm page, how are layers counted? Is it based on liners or backsprings?Please see notes here:
... The short list for 2 layer 58mm includes Rambler/Manager, etc. apart from the Classic...
Hi JM - Thanks for the feedbackIn the description box at the top, the trecker is referred as the civilian version of the original OH GAK...Just spotted some contradictory info relating to the OH GAK...Sorry if I am being thick - Can you be more explicit on the contradiction please ;) ???For the 58mm page, how are layers counted? Is it based on liners or backsprings?Please see notes here:
... The short list for 2 layer 58mm includes Rambler/Manager, etc. apart from the Classic...
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+58mm+2+Layer+Models - Bottom of page
These are referred to at the top of every layer page
Is this OK ? Not clear? Need to go somewhere else? ???
Why ya gotta poke Eeyore, J-Man? :pok: :rofl: I'd discovered the layer thing... The more I think about the wiki the more I realize how much work it is and awlso that it kinda depends on point of view as far as including information and saying what other knives are "related" to others...:lol:
I do usually eventually find the answer I'm looking for on there, just might not be the first place I look.... and that's OK. :D
:salute:
In the description box at the top, the trecker is referred as the civilian version of the original OH GAK...
Under variations no.2, OH GAK is described as the civilian version of the original OH GAK... maybe contradictory is not the right word, but rather confusing... any physical differences between OH GAK and OH GAK?
On the layers page, i didn’t notice it was there... thanks for pointing...
Hmmm, the Original Vagabond is 4 layers, where as the SwissBianco Vagabond would be 3 layers... right?
such a good, long and time consuming work that you've done for us, and the world
I thank you for that! :salute:
Hmmmm OKForgot to mention... been really busy yesterday... Yes, its better now... Thanks...
And how would that apply to the 58s - with their two - full, front and back layers of tools ???
... And tools that have either one or two springs ???
Just about all the others have a 1:1 relationship from spring to tool to layer :think:
Re Trekker - Is it .... better? (http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Trekker) now
(...)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
@ Everyone
I named the Delemont pages eg "Delémont Evolution 17" - Or such like - ie: "Delémont xxx nnn"
I just noticed that, in a Google search, the Wiki pages do not come up near the top of the list if you search for eg "Victorinox Evolution 17"
They do if you search for "Delémont Evolution 17"
Do you think we need to rename all the pages to "Victorinox Delémont xxx nnn" - So that they come up in searches !! ???
Any comments? Does this work for you? Alles clar?
LeaFy - I know you put a lot of thought into this !
Hey -That excel that you shared is great BTW :tu:
We had some very detailed discussion about what to do about the switch to 100% liner locking models for the 111mm range at the top of the previous page.
Well I had a go at updating the Forester and Rucksack models with those changes, - along the lines of my suggestions, of course: :o ;)
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Forester+Victorinox
Any comments? Does this work for you? Alles clar?
LeaFy - I know you put a lot of thought into this !
Hey -That excel that you shared is great BTW :tu:
By the way, I did some minor updates here:
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=VSAKCS+-+Anniversary+Knife+Series
Please check if everything is ok (we still don't have picture for VSAKCS 2001 model :ahhh )
Ja wohl, Alles klar! :D :salute:Entschuldigung, und vielen dank, mein Freund :D :salute:
I think it looks better now - Is it OK?No, it's just beautiful :D
Thanks for that JM - The missing pic has been uploaded - So we are now 100%
In 2017 Vic completely revised their 111mm product line - Many, many models were retired, renamed, or converted
Well all the changes are now reflected in the Wiki and I think I can say that every single 111mm page has been updated in some way or other
Thanks to Leaf for letting us know about the changes and doing all the legwork around what had happened.
And for providing so many great pictures as always
Let us know of any feedback, comments, omissions, errors etc
Hey and can anyone tell us please when the 111mm family first came on the market? ???
I am thinking the 70s or 80s - We should really have that date in the Wiki
I like it. :tu: Looks OK on a mobile screen too. How does it look on the 91mm SAK page?
I will make the change fully for the 91mm: all, 1 and 3 layer pages in the next 24hrs or so - To see how it looks - We can always revert if we don't like it or it does not work !! I will pop a quick note here when I have done itDONE !!
Another related knife is the Victorinox Artisan, which is nearly exact.
It's not linked in the related knives though.
Could anyone update it ?? :tu:Yes ;)
Could anyone update it ?? :tu:Yes ;)
Sending PMThank you very much, Sir Huntsman!
DAK2010 is DuapPro X, not Nomad.. ;)I stand corrected... In my reply, somehow the 1993 DAK stuck in my mind :facepalm:
Previous version of DAK - 1993 was based on Centurion
OK -DAK 2010 is still being supplied. At least I haven’t seen any announcements on a new DAK model...
So the first version of the DAK was based on the Centurion
The second on the Dual Pro
The Centurion is now known as a Adventurer
The Nomad is now known as a Picnicker
And the DP does not appear in the latest catalogue - So I am assuming it is retired!
Confusing - Deffo - But I think we have all this in the Wiki
So question still is: Is the Dual Pro version of the DAK still current? - I guess that means being supplied to the Dutch army?
I just need to know whether to also mark it as retired or not!!
A small note, there is a slight difference between the DAK 2010 and the Dual Pro X... DAK 2010 has a combo edge on main blade while the Dual Pro X has a plain edged main blade...
Many thanks for all your hard work, much appreciated :salute:
Dear Knights,
I created some SAK Series-related pages in SAKWiki...
Great work!Thanks, LeaF! :salute:
I've changed all (seems all) wrong names, but I have no idea how to rename existing page as well.Maybe just create a new page with the correct name and redirect all existing links to it?
I reconfigured the pictures you put there (which are great BTW!! :) ), and added an existing shot of the Pioneer - Hope that is OK? ???Sure, thank you very much! :salute: :cheers:
Oh - That is clever - It automatically updated all the links when I renamed the page :tu:
(And I had written down the list of 12 pages to update! :facepalm: )
:like:
The Classic 16 is not listed on the 85mm 3 layer page :)Fixed.
It might also help to list it on the "related to" section for the traveler, as it is a traveler with the corkscrew replaced by a phillips screwdriver.Listed. :salute:
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=First+Mage+HogwartsNo I heard this model was/is actually available from a small gear shop on a street in London somewhere near Kings Cross station
I just saw online a climber model 1.3703.T88, 2016 Golden limited edition for the Olympic Games. It seems to not be listed in the climber wiki page.Fixed.
Are you still logged in? Session expires after 2 hours.Logged in to what? Do I need to log into something to access such stuff on SAKWiki?
Are you still logged in? Session expires after 2 hours.Logged in to what? Do I need to log into something to access such stuff on SAKWiki?
Thanks. I thought that SAKWiki was supposed to be world-readable. If some content is intentionally restricted (why?), I think that it would be a good idea to clarify it. Right now it looks to me like it's broken.Are you still logged in? Session expires after 2 hours.Logged in to what? Do I need to log into something to access such stuff on SAKWiki?
I'm not sure, I can't check the permissions right now, but maybe another admin can. I think file galleries and file downloads are disabled for anonymous users. I don't know if that is correct.
Thanks a lot for all the great work on the Wiki!
I'm having the following problem: I cannot access any of the links to PDF catalogs on SAKWiki. If I click any of them, I get the message
"Error Permission denied"
These links all have the form:
http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=n
where n is a number. The two numbers 1 and 19 correspond to Victorinox catalogs and the 14 numbers in the range 4-17 correspond to Wenger catalogs. I'm consistently getting the "Permission denied" response to all of them. Can this be fixed?
Thanks. I thought that SAKWiki was supposed to be world-readable. If some content is intentionally restricted (why?), I think that it would be a good idea to clarify it. Right now it looks to me like it's broken.
anyone can apply for a user IDOut of the 33,000 page views per day that you recently reported, how many come from logged in users? To become a registered SAKWiki user looks to me like a very big deal. One cannot just register, but needs to send a written application in order to hopefully be able to open an account at some unknown point in the future. I can fully understand why such a procedure may be beneficial for giving people some sort of writing access, but I don't see how it benefits anyone to require all this in order for someone to be able to view a PDF catalog.
Also not brokenMaybe "broken" is not the best word, but I think that the current behavior of the system is certainly very confusing. If some content is only available to logged in users, the relevant error message should say so. An example of a well behaved system, in this respect, is the MTo forum. If one clicks a link that is restricted to logged in users, one gets the message "Only registered members are allowed to access this section. Please login below or register an account with Multitool.org" (along with the relevant login form).
maybe a perms thing that changed in an update... floodgate openGreat! :woohoo: Now everything works as expected (by me, at least). Thanks a lot! :salute:
- Create a page for the new Skipper Pro – And update links / reference pages
Victorinox FASS 90 and Wenger STGW 90 have been added. Not a lot of info yet. Also, does anybody know their official names?Thanks a lot!
Great videoVictorinox FASS 90 and Wenger STGW 90 have been added. Not a lot of info yet. Also, does anybody know their official names?Thanks a lot!
AFAIK, FASS (Fr.) == STGW (Ge.); it’s an acronym for the “Assault rifle”. So, the name reflect the language used in the region of Switzerland there this SAK was on sale.
And the SAK listed in the SAKWiki as "Victorinox FASS 90" is also known as “Victorinox Korrekturmesser für Stgw 90” (listed at armeeshop.ch (https://www.armeeshop.ch/messer-werkzeuge/124-victorinox-korrekturmesser-fuer-stgw-90.html) with the reference number 03.610 and at gunworld.ch (http://www.gunworld.ch/gun-multi-tools.html) with the reference number G16.7102).
There is a very interesting thread at MTO (https://forum.multitool.org/index.php?topic=60020.0;nowap) about this SAK.
Also there is a related movie on YouTube:
Victorinox Korrekturmesser für Stgw 90 (SIG 550) (https://youtu.be/-dh6TiW4Mx0)
Great video
Thanks for the info Nick4!
Added mini screwdriver variations : http://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Screwdriver-MiniThere's a white one now which came with the Christmas 2018 Edition.
I didn't play much with formatting and ... have no idea of the precise periods for each variation (apart from what is written here, but I don't want to paste data I am not 100% sure of... : http://victorinox.metodi.me/91mmtools.php#miniscrewdriver)
(http://www.sakwiki.com/show_image.php?id=3889)
Hi SerenaPerfect!!!
This information was on this page in the Wiki (Reinier put it there over the weekend)
However I have reformatted the page (with headings etc) to make it all a bit clearer
There's a white one now which came with the Christmas 2018 Edition.
Asked Victorinox Nederland where to get one. Hope te receive an answer tomorrow.
Hi Serena
This information was on this page in the Wiki (Reinier put it there over the weekend)
However I have reformatted the page (with headings etc) to make it all a bit clearer
Feel free to use (if needed) (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181129/c6a7e593c1a1c3222638ca22a03af34a.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181129/d9e83b0a88b0847312e07017660d6649.jpg)
Feel free to use (if needed)
I also added one tiny bit on that new style nail file. It is new, right?Yep..
And there's your white mini screwdriver!!! Maybe a close-up?
can you please make a picture of that white baby along with the standard (recent) grey one please?
I also added one tiny bit on that new style nail file. It is new, right?Yep..And there's your white mini screwdriver!!! Maybe a close-up?can you please make a picture of that white baby along with the standard (recent) grey one please?
Sure, but not today, sorry :)
You should look better :whistle:
Sort of off topic but it is 91mm and SAKWiki related - Is it possible to get separate pages for the Cybertools?
It’s slightly odd when things like the SwissChamp page references the 41/L but the link goes to the page for all Cybertools.
Sorry I know this would create a bit of work clearing up the related links.
We have had some debate on this ^^^ in the pastYou know my opinion
For me - The pages where there are multiple models to a page are great ! :D :tu:
As you get to compare and contrast different models all on one page - Saving visits to multiple pages :)
And if a link takes you to such a page (eg in your example above Simyo) - You get to see the all info you want/expect - And more
What do you all think? ??? :think:
This depends on your definition of "minor difference". Keyring yes or no, scale material, presence or absence of T&T, regular or plus scales?Amount of layers, different tools - they cannot be characterized as 'minor difference' or they do?
This depends on your definition of "minor difference". Keyring yes or no, scale material, presence or absence of T&T, regular or plus scales?Amount of layers, different tools - they cannot be characterized as 'minor difference' or they do?
This depends on your definition of "minor difference". Keyring yes or no, scale material, presence or absence of T&T, regular or plus scales?Amount of layers, different tools - they cannot be characterized as 'minor difference' or they do?
No, not in my opinion. But Climber versus Original Traveller... Same model as far as I'm concerned.
I think the part about the white screwdriver can be removed now. Agreed?Sure. I can do it later or if you prefer to do it.. :hatsoff:
Feel free to use (if needed) (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181129/c6a7e593c1a1c3222638ca22a03af34a.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181129/d9e83b0a88b0847312e07017660d6649.jpg)
oops I thought I used a current backup of the database... is it possible it got edited during the move? Hopefully you can redo the edit, sorry.
Thanks for the info Antti - Page updatedGood to see that you putted info there, i didnt also notices first but played little with my newly aquored Fly Fisherman an i noticed that there were tweezer but no toothpick. Not actually sure does all versions have tweezers
It seems that scale tools were not always present - eg see spec main image on page - so I commented thus
I also juggled the page around a little
Let me know if it is OK
Sort of off topic but it is 91mm and SAKWiki related - Is it possible to get separate pages for the Cybertools?I did not split the pages
It’s slightly odd when things like the SwissChamp page references the 41/L but the link goes to the page for all Cybertools.
Sorry I know this would create a bit of work clearing up the related links.
Huntsman, you are doing a huge work in SAKWiki, no doubt, but please, don't make such extreme deletingYep I am often beavering away trying to make the Wiki:
Huntsman, you are doing a huge work in SAKWiki, no doubt, but please, don't make such extreme deletingBut don't worry - no information ever, ever, ever gets deleted :salute:
Maybe this pic can be interesting for the wiki?
Swisstool X, Mercedes edition incl unique leather pouch with Mercedes logo.
It's not a great photo
^^^ Thank you - Corrected !!No apologies needed H.!
Re the photo - Apologies I did not mean to be rude and I guessed that was the reason ie Showroom shot - maybe with glass in the way etc etc
Funny re the receptionist ...... and the crazy things we do to get MT shots
- Once I tried to take a photo of a cop with a LM on his belt - He was not too keen !!
Dear Knights,
I have created a Victorinox Christmas Series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Christmas+Series) page in the SAKWiki.
If somebody with a native English knowledge could check it for mistakes, I would be very grateful.
Any corrections and additions are welcome too.
Thank you in advance! :salute:
“...Since 2015 Victorinox every year produces a special edition of knives forShame on me! :(theChristmas.WhereThere are two sub-series...”
Dear Knights,
I have created a Victorinox Christmas Series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Christmas+Series) page in the SAKWiki.
If somebody with a native English knowledge could check it for mistakes, I would be very grateful.
Any corrections and additions are welcome too.
Thank you in advance!
Let me know if the changes are OK or not:tu: Thank you very much, Sir Huntsman! :hatsoff: :cheers:
Had another idea for this page - I think you are going to like it :DI am sure. :tu:
No pics yet of the MTO PX on the Pioneer X page? :pok: :twak:Don't know what you are talking about !! :D
I thought I’d chime in with a suggested edit for the Pioneer page, as some models are missing from the list. These are the South African-specific models that were a limited edition production run:Many thanks! Identifiers have been added.
Seeing a few SAKWiki admins here, :whistle:
I thought I’d chime in with a suggested edit for the Pioneer page, as some models are missing from the list. These are the South African-specific models that were a limited edition production run:
..........
Pics below. Tried to get the colors accurate. Pretty close, just the red a little too saturated.
I was checking out my favorite tool, the Pocket Toolchest on the wiki, and I followed the link to the Reamer page. No 65mm Reamer/awl on that page.Huntsman, could you add the 65mm awl/reamer to the Reamer page on SAKWiki?
Hi SmilerThanks, I tried to match the two existing photos.
- Thanks for the heads up on this omission - and the great piccie (that matches the others - cudos)
Just a question to soldier knives experts... Any reason why there is no model 1908 listed?
Soldier 1890 page mentions that same model with some variations continued on until 1951...
Whilst, LCSAS has a separate listing for 1908... the page even has a blue print for model 1908...
http://www.couteaux-du-soldat-suisse.ch/J01/index.php/en/les-couteaux-du-soldat
http://www.couteaux-du-soldat-suisse.ch/J01/images/photos_site/modeles/1908/1908.pdf
I can understand model 1901 isn’t there as some experts considered this to be the same as model 1890 except for the scales...
Maybe interesting for the Wiki: Wenger Porsche including paperwork
The confusion arises because the SAK collecting community - the American community in particular - over the years has come up with what I call "collector's names" to refer to certain models. In almost all cases, this is done when the model either didn't have an official name (as was typical prior to the mid 1970s) or where it's official name was subsequently recycled onto another knife. These names are typically derived from either their 91mm equivalents (e.g. Huntsman Small) or from names found in catalogs from other countries. The SIMCO Canadian catalogs especially have contributed several "collector's names".
The knife we call the "Artisan" (136k, aka 84mm Fieldmaster) was sold in the US as the "Craftsman" almost exclusively. We use the Artisan name (French for Craftsman, btw) from the SIMCO to avoid confusion with the 91mm models of the same name. I have a several of these NIB - the boxes all say "Craftsman".
^^^ Great find KK - I think most of us acknowledge that JB is the highest of the higher authorities !! ;)I gotta agree. Just wish I read this earlier instead of having to figure it out (mostly) on my own! :facepalm:
Also I think SAKWiki editors have also been guilty of inventing a name every now and again !
I gotta admit I am finding this name re-using; different names for the same models; different names in different markets; and 'made up names' thing to be getting more than a little frustrating. :pok:
I know I shouldn't as the situation has evolved over many decades and has only come about as the world is shrinking and we now have collectors interested in SAKs from years ago that were only ever conceived as working tools/pocket knives for sale in a certain geography!
That is a really interesting theory about the NASA Craftsmen though - So you reckon NASA bought and sent up the six layer model that we now call the Craftsman
For sure ..... In the 76 dealer catalogue the six layer one is indeed called the Master Craftsman - And then you look at the 1982 catalogue and its called the Craftsman ....... Grrrrrr - see what I mean !
However I am a little sceptical of this theory as the model that ended up as the "Space Shuttle'' model - For sure is five layers and I would have thought that model matched the one NASA bought? ??? - Thoughts :think:
Anyway updating the Craftsmen pages is probably bubbled to the top of the Wiki do list. Will put a post here when it's done.
Also I am due one of my big Wiki update posts now as a lot has happened since the last one!
Not handled this sample yet (on reserve for me), but here’s a Master Craftsman with chisel back tool but no hook, so it appears there are early versions with this configuration. Hook was introduced around 1991 but not sure when the chisel was introduced. :dunno:
I have a theory that the actual 50 Master Craftsman knives ordered by NASA in '78 were the fish scaler version. #5044 (US) referenced in the NASA letter may cross reference the 1.47 93 version.The book by Derek Jackson (pages 183-185 in the third edition (https://books.google.co.il/books?id=N5R2DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA183); other pages in older editions) has a nice story about one of these SAKs getting used on a 1983 mission. It includes the attached image of the actual SAK.
Thanks for the nicely summarized feedback on this topic kamakiri :hatsoff:
I may do that when it arrives. I’ve found with a gentle warming I can pop of the scales without damaging the bosses. :hatsoff:
You should never damage a boss, it's bad for your career.:facepalm:
In case anyone can get some more dating info from this:
- Boxed as an "Astronaut",
- "82" stamped on bottom of the box.
- all tools opened, so no chisel or hook
- VICTORINOX tang stamp (all letters same height)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190629/1144745ca135b3d679c38e7f2c4c6414.jpg)
You should never damage a boss, it's bad for your career.:facepalm:
Looks c. late '85/early '86. I don't think I see a bevel on the awl toward the tip, but a shot of the awl closed could confirm. Still the white flocked/felted liner in the box? :facepalm:
The knife commonly known as the 'Artisan', (and also known as the: Fieldmaster - small), was originally named Craftsman and numbered 136ka for decades before the name was reused for the 91mm 6-layer versions circa 1973. It is an 84mm Victorinox knife with 4 tool layers and the same basic tool selection as the larger 91mm Fieldmaster.
The Artisan, (also known as the: Fieldmaster - small), is an 84mm Victorinox knife with 4 tool layers and the same basic tool selection as the larger 91mm Fieldmaster. There is little known about this model, so it may have only been produced in smaller numbers or in specific markets.
Revised the Artisan (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Artisan) page to include the Craftsman and 136ka name/number in the description. I hope this maintains the current use and reference to the name 'Artisan' while respecting the actual historic naming and numbering of this knife.Hi KK (and Knights)
........
The Artisan (old style model number 136ka) is a four-layer 84mm Victorinox knife with and the same basic tool selection as the larger 91mm Fieldmaster, and is also known as the Fieldmaster – Small.
Name Disambiguation:
The French word ‘artisan’ when translated into English is ‘craftsman’ and this name was historically used for this model, at least in the US market (see this catalogue).
In approximately 1973 the Craftsman name was re-used for the six-layer 91mm Craftsman.
This naming may also explain why the Master Craftsman is smaller than the current Craftsman – As it is larger (size and layers) than this model..
The back spring Phillips came out in 52 - Right? The six layer Craftsman came out in 73 -
So if we assume that the 84mm Phillips came out at the the same time as the 91mm Phillips - The maximum it can have been is 21 years - I make that two decades !
Please can you explain what point is the name disambiguation section missing - I am not clear on thisThat the 136ka was ever called Craftsman.
Also - Are you sure that back in the day - the 136ka was called a 'Craftsman' in the German/French speaking country of Switzerland - It's just the English translation of the name .... right??
Also back in those days the numeric numbers were the main identifier - Correct ?
I don't think we should be re-organising the Wiki around English translations of Swiss names - or US catalogues - When we know importers/dealers quite often mucked around with the names ! At least for info before the names got stanardised mid 70s
I think like you said in the Craftsman thread - It would be really good to see a catalogue of the 136ka with another name - eg Artisan !!
Also please can you tell me to which JB post you are referring :tu:
The confusion arises because the SAK collecting community - the American community in particular - over the years has come up with what I call "collector's names" to refer to certain models. In almost all cases, this is done when the model either didn't have an official name (as was typical prior to the mid 1970s) or where it's official name was subsequently recycled onto another knife. These names are typically derived from either their 91mm equivalents (e.g. Huntsman Small) or from names found in catalogs from other countries. The SIMCO Canadian catalogs especially have contributed several "collector's names".
The knife we call the "Artisan" (136k, aka 84mm Fieldmaster) was sold in the US as the "Craftsman" almost exclusively. We use the Artisan name (French for Craftsman, btw) from the SIMCO to avoid confusion with the 91mm models of the same name. I have a several of these NIB - the boxes all say "Craftsman".
New page for the annual limited edition Alox models - Yay !! :tu::salute:
And great photos ..... :drool:
Thanks Nick4 :salute:
If needed, here’s a pic showing all the colors released to date...Great photo, jaya_man! :hatsoff:
I read somewhere that there was some official protest on Vic’s LE2019 name choice... And now the official color is now just Gold instead of Champagne Gold...
The champagne-gold-hued Alox scales characterize this year’s collection.
Very nice pic Jaya:iagree: :like:
We'll put this in the gallery - And probably on the pagePlease feel free to make any modifications. :cheers:
As I can see from the Victoriniox website page, they describe this colour now as 'champagne-gold-hued':
Does that mean we know have to call the classic Swiss Army Knife scales 'red-hued' and the other common colour 'black-hued' :pok: :rofl::rofl: For my Russian ears, it sounds obscene.
This model became available in the 1950s when it would have been known as a model 136kma, and later as 136kmaU, prior to names being used by Victorinox. Hoffritz versions were produced into the mid-1970s.
We owe a massive, massive vote of thanks and gratitude to one of our newer editors Nick4, as he created nearly all these pages for us. :tu:My pleasure. :salute: :hatsoff: And without your great help, this would not have been possible. :tu: :cheers:
New page created "Victorinox Ukraine Edition".It looks great! :like: :tu:
It looks great! :like: :tu:
Wow - Amazing - I never knew about those - And so many :o
Thanks Ivo :hatsoff: :D
I added a link to your new page in the Victorinox Series Page (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Series+and+Special+Editions)
And created a new sub-gallery gallery for the images which is in the Series Gallery (and moved the images)
EDIT: PS Come to think of it I had seen a couple of the black city models on the bay - But none of the others
Thanks for correcting my error with the galleries.No problem - They needed a new gallery anyway - And I think only admins can create new gelleries
I need to get to work on thisDo it man - Be good to have you on board :tu: :salute:
And I have like...
Uhm...
A camera...
And... Uhm... An account
:facepalm:
Good morning , feeling great , finally sunshine :ahhh :tu: :hatsoff:Haha. True enough. Last night was brutal here... And the morning is just as calm :dd:
I am also really happy as this now means our Wenger Series page is now complete – It had had missing links till this week!!Not at all.;) A page for the Sterling series still required. :pok:
Not at all.;) A page for the Sterling series still required. :pok:
BTW, there is a new page for the Wenger Blackout series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Wenger+Blackout+Series).
And totally impressed by the wonderful work of Ivo, just created the Russian series 2017 (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Russian+Edition) page. :salute:
Renier, like Mechanical explained , go to the home page and in the right column you see all the knife sizes , behind every size is a symbol, select what you need and click on the symbol, now you are in correct gallerie and you can upload your picture(s). :hatsoff:
I like you new page also, I did not know that they also have there own knives. :tu: :like:Thank you, Ivo! :hatsoff: :cheers:
Thanks Ivo, I'm aware of that route.
I was just wondering why Editors cannot browse the galleries: https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-galleries.php
You do have the link in the Wiki menu but you get a permission error.
Yes I do , Huntsman told me this link points to a gallerie where only admins have right for. :hatsoff:
To me it looks good, I would remove the headers with no text and upload a smaller picture, when you click on the picture it is much bigger than the screen.
Do you have also a pic from the back with the BP logo ? :hatsoff:
What is our naming convention for page names? Grand Prix Small or Victorinox Grand Prix small? I prefer the latter.
Oh, and good job Nick. Nice photos too.I copied the page from another model since I have no understanding of the coding yet. So I think I just migrated those extra spaces from the other page :whistle:
I see some additional trailing spaces in the headers, but I'm nitpicking now. Those are found on dozens of pages :)
.... just created the Russian series 2017 (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Russian+Edition) page. :salute:Another beauty - I adjusted the table format for you (see history) - Hope it's OK - If the piccies are too big pls make them smaller :tu:
.... go to the home page and in the right column you see all the knife sizes , behind every size is a symbol, select what you need and click on the symbol, now you are in correct gallerie and you can upload your picture(s).:Yes please use this route for uploading images - Please don't forget the series galleries and also all the various sub-galleries - More about this in update No.3
I was just wondering why Editors cannot browse the galleries: https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-galleries.phpNot sure about that one myself - However all galleries should be accessible via the other route
You do have the link in the Wiki menu but you get a permission error.
..... I would remove the headers with no text and upload a smaller picture, when you click on the picture it is much bigger than the screen.Thanks - Yes please remove all empty sections - More about this in upcoming editor's guide.
Yes I do , Huntsman told me this link points to a gallery where only admins have right for.I think here we were referring to the so called file galleries not the image galleries (it's bit confusing) - Editors definitely don't have access to the file galleries - But the image galleries are what you need for piccies - See above!
What is our naming convention for page names? Grand Prix Small or Victorinox Grand Prix small? I prefer the latter.Hmm - We don't really have naming conventions - I think it has all been a bit haphazard over the years with all the different editors
I also noticed the "Victorinox" prefix but found no way of getting rid of it :(Yes - You cannot change page names - Although I think admins can - But we should avoid this!
After editing a page or 2 and creating 1, all I can say is that it's much more work than one would think.
All I can say is :hatsoff: to you all and I'm glad I can contribute.
If anyone wants to check on the "Grand Prix Small" page for me, it'd be greatly appreciated.
Just trying to get some feedback if I'm doing this right
If anyone wants to check on the "Grand Prix Small" page for me, it'd be greatly appreciated.
Just trying to get some feedback if I'm doing this right :dwts:
Another beauty - I adjusted the table format for you (see history) - Hope it's OK - If the piccies are too big pls make them smaller :tu:Thank you very much! :hatsoff: It's looks definitely better now! :tu: :cheers:
I also created a new sub-gallery for the images in the series gallery and moved the images to that galley
So... regarding galleries... I don't know when or how, but probably during one of the server changes and/or database migration all the picture galleries got migrated to a parent gallery which is a file gallery. .......Right - I was going to mention this via pm/admin
We could probably move the picture galleries to a separate picture parent gallery as it had been for years before the migration, but the tikiwiki is such a fragile software that I'm not sure that would be a safe move and wouldn't cause more problems than good.
So all the editors are able to upload pics to the galleries they need to, but if you have any other formats, like pdf catalogs and such, PM me or email me with the info and files, and I'll upload them to the wiki and provide links.Or me or Reiner :tu:
Naming convention for any and all new pages should be Victorinox "MODEL NAME" so the pages are better indexed by search engines and we get better hits if searched by google and such.
Yes, Admins can change the name of the model/page, but that's not a very good route for older pages as a lot of them are interconnected via page links, and changing the page name would break them and require one to search for all the broken links to correct them, in size and layer indexes, in various similar model pages.... A tedious task :facepalm:
Sounds like a good job for our intern then :)
But no, it would probably also mean that external links and search engine results would point to the wrong (old) page URLs.
Won't that fix itself over time?
Naming convention for any and all new pages should be Victorinox "MODEL NAME" so the pages are better indexed by search engines and we get better hits if searched by google and such.And for Wenger models pages too? ;)
And for Wenger models pages too? ;)
A page for the Sterling series still required. :pok:Fixed (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Wenger+Sterling+Series).
Page | Updates | |
Golf Tool | Reformatted | |
SportRatchet | Reformatted | |
Yeoman Mechanic | New image for the Heuliez version – Thanks Mechanickal | |
Wenger Series | Lots of series pages added – Thanks Nick4 | |
Chinese Zodiac | Latest models added – Thanks Ivo | |
Craftsman/Phillips backspring models | We have had some interesting debates, mainly led by Kamakiri on these models ( Craftsman, Artisan, Grand Prix etc) regarding their naming. These discussions have not fully run their course yet. However, some of the pages have been updated | |
Ueli Steck Models | Various edits | |
Wenger Standard Issue | Major reformat of the page – Inline with the major revisions of the various Victorinox Soldier pages made a couple of years ago. Updates to Wenger 1890 and 1951 pages to follow | |
Skipper | More of PitirM's fantastic nautical in situ images added | |
Alinghi Models | Bit more info on the history of these models. Crew Alinghi model page to be added to Wiki (in plan) | |
Cheese Knife | This page was totally trashed - possibly by a software upgrade. It has been completely reformatted, new sections added, and most recently the Version 2 model added - Note: There’s still a few more pictures and text to add on V2 (in plan) | |
Delémont Updates | Updates to existing Wenger and Delémont pages due to new Delémonts being added – Thanks Max Stone | |
Zodiac Series | Nicer formatting of the page | |
VSAKCS | This page had several missing images and jaya_man and LeaF have found all of the missing images for us. We added the 2018 image from a Facebook colleague. (2019 model will be added shortly). We have also hooked up with the VSAKCS people and added a little information from them (eg contact details) and also some fascinating info about a cock-up on the 2004 Soldier model!! | |
Victorinox Battle Series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Swiss+Alliances+and+Battle+Series) | OK – I have saved the best till last! These are probably my favourite models Victorinox made. All the pages were in a very bad state, with poor formatting and pictures missing. Our wonderful MT.o member Chako has supplied all the missing pictures for the model pages (thankfully I got them before Photofbucket trashed his account). And we have also used his fabulous pictures on a completely remodeled family page. This is the link on the left. I know that everyone is not always happy with the work I do – So I have left the St. Jakob page as it was so you can see the improvements - and hopefully agree that these changes are good. | |
Victorinox Damascus Series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Damascus+Limited+Editions) | Another fantastic series from Victorinox. Nick4 has done a fabulous job designing and adding images to this page, we have also added an amazing Damascus family image from a Facebook colleague from Chile - KiMany Fuentes | |
Wenger United Woods Series (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Wenger+United+Woods+-+2013+Limited+Edition) | We must not forget Wenger either. These are my favourite Wenger models. This page was also totally trashed. I think it might have been work in progress that was never finished. Anyway it looks great now. |
Thanks for the shout out! :cheers::iagree: Thank you very much, Sir Huntsman! :hatsoff: :cheers:
VSAKCS This page had several missing images and jaya_man and LeaF have found all of the missing images for us. ......... . (2019 model will be added shortly).
Just a heads up, routine security update of the tikiwiki software seems to have gone sideways yesterday.Ah, got it.
Looks like there's some heavy corruption in the database, and it has been both problematic to upgrade or roll back.
I am working on it, but have other IRL commitments interfering in between.
True !!!
Has that confused you :pok: :D. :(
- The text on each page is clear about the asterix
The reason for the difference is that the asterisks are fewer that way in both lists!
Ie the * marks the smallest group on each page
Is it possible to push a disc ISO on the wiki?Of course, that would be interesting. But what about the copyright? ;)
I do have dd the "Ueli Steck" DVD into an iso file (about 1.5GB)
It may be interesting for the archives?
Of course, that would be interesting. But what about the copyright? ;)
I don't wanna need to fight with copyright claims :police:Suppose, nobody wanna need. ;)
Hi everyone!
Is it possible to push a disc ISO on the wiki?
I do have dd the "Ueli Steck" DVD into an iso file (about 1.5GB)
It may be interesting for the archives?
We can add files, but only the admins have access to that upload. We mostly use it for catalogs though. Something as big as a DVD iso would be too much even if there was no copyright to fear. Server space and bandwidth cost money, lots of it, and we're short of funds as it is. :(
I'll just leave this here so one of the editors could use and make a page. Attached photo is mine and you can use it in SAKWiki (the shield on my knife knife is slightly worn, I think I've seen a photo of a BNIB one with the box on the forum, just can't remember where and who posted it). Enjoy! :cheers:
Lumberjack Big
The Lumberjack Big is 2 layer Victorinox model that includes the large blade, combo tool and woodsaw. It is enlarged version of 84mm Lumberjack with added corkscrew at the back. This model was not produced in large numbers and is fairly rare.
Discontinued and relatively rare.
Layer Tools
• Large Knife Blade
• Combo Tool - Can-opener/bottle-opener/Screwdriver/Wire stripper
• Wood saw
Back Layer Tools
• Corkscrew
• Keyring/Split-ring attachment point
Scale Tools
• None
Scales
Cellidor Economy, no toothpick or tweezers, with hot stamped silver Swiss shield logo
Variations
In 2007 SwissBianco made 20pcs of Lumberjack Big with plus scales and phillips instead of corkscrew.
History
Lumberjack Big is a collectors name for this model as it's unknown if an official name was ever given to it. This model was produced only in 1986 as 3.3311
Physical Specifications
• Length: 91mm
• Width: 15mm
• Weight: 64.5g
Identifiers
• 3.3311 Red Cellidor with no toothpick or tweezers, hot-stamped 'Economy' shield.
Related Knives
• Compact – Scissors instead of woodsaw, with Plus scales, which include the pin; adds the multipurpose hook
• Camper - Similar features, one layer thicker. Combo tool is replaced by small blade, and separate openers; adds reamer.
In for the updates...took some errors and digging to figure out the image gallery structure.Hope the above helps KK
We can add files, but only the admins have access to that upload. We mostly use it for catalogs though. Something as big as a DVD iso would be too much even if there was no copyright to fear. Server space and bandwidth cost money, lots of it, and we're short of funds as it is. :(
Seems legit !
i'll try to scan the paper doc though ;)
Now there's a question that confuses me,I found a 58mm SAK recently。But I don't know its model. I've never seen any SAK like it
This was a special production for a customer in 2017. At this is really a special production, the knife does not have an article number. The knife has got a blade with a round tip and it includes also a little fork.
Thank you very much, Leaf!I learned new knowledge, but I don't understand the meaning of customization. 58mm round head knife is the first time I saw it. I don't know what work it will be used for. Anyway, the combination of round head blade and golf tool is really strange.
I've asked Victorinox about this 'unusual' model (and several ones by the way) few months before.
Accordingly to their answer:
Thanks Aloha - I'll have a Becks please ;)OK, I wonder if this SAK should be included in the Escort model,I think they are similar in terms of thickness and form.
Re the 58mm - Very interesting
I don't think it should have its own page - especially as it is a custom with no model number.
But if we add it as a variation where do we put it ? - It's such an unusual configuration.
The 'little fork' (Thanks LeaF :tu: ) for sure has been known as the divot tool from the golf models .....
Variation of the Caddy? ??? But that blade is very unusual ... and no scissors!
It's surprising, for me, that they even made it - As it must have required new tooling in the factory
- Has anyone seen a rounded 58mm blade before? :think:
Or maybe we create a new page (by length) for all custom builds we find
Thoughts :pok:
Anyway thanks very much xfile and LeaF for the info on this
It's surprising, for me, that they even made it - As it must have required new tooling in the factory
- Has anyone seen a rounded 58mm blade before? :think:
Thanks Aloha - I'll have a Becks please ;)
Re the 58mm - Very interesting
I don't think it should have its own page - especially as it is a custom with no model number.
But if we add it as a variation where do we put it ? - It's such an unusual configuration.
The 'little fork' (Thanks LeaF :tu: ) for sure has been known as the divot tool from the golf models .....
Divot tools also was available within other form-factors, including 91 and 58mm models as well
https://leaf-vics.com/topics/tools/other-tools/tool-divot-tool
I'll just leave this here so one of the editors could use and make a page. Attached photo is mine and you can use it in SAKWiki (the shield on my knife knife is slightly worn, I think I've seen a photo of a BNIB one with the box on the forum, just can't remember where and who posted it). Enjoy! :cheers:
Lumberjack Big
The Lumberjack Big is 2 layer Victorinox model that includes the large blade, combo tool and woodsaw. It is enlarged version of 84mm Lumberjack with added corkscrew at the back. This model was not produced in large numbers and is fairly rare.
Discontinued and relatively rare.
Layer Tools
• Large Knife Blade
• Combo Tool - Can-opener/bottle-opener/Screwdriver/Wire stripper
• Wood saw
Back Layer Tools
• Corkscrew
• Keyring/Split-ring attachment point
Scale Tools
• None
Scales
Cellidor Economy, no toothpick or tweezers, with hot stamped silver Swiss shield logo
Variations
In 2007 SwissBianco made 20pcs of Lumberjack Big with plus scales and phillips instead of corkscrew.
History
Lumberjack Big is a collectors name for this model as it's unknown if an official name was ever given to it. This model was produced only in 1986 as 3.3311
Physical Specifications
• Length: 91mm
• Width: 15mm
• Weight: 64.5g
Identifiers
• 3.3311 Red Cellidor with no toothpick or tweezers, hot-stamped 'Economy' shield.
Related Knives
• Compact – Scissors instead of woodsaw, with Plus scales, which include the pin; adds the multipurpose hook
• Camper - Similar features, one layer thicker. Combo tool is replaced by small blade, and separate openers; adds reamer.
Probably some other reason. But all links are dead.
...
Attn: wiki editors. I see an entry hasn’t been made for the Lumberjack Big/91 mm yet - why not? :pok:
Yes, fixed, needed to clear the cache.
Now what was it? :pok:
Huntsman: I see several pages with missing images. I thought your changes regarding the gallery structure would have no effect on wiki pages.They didn't ..... All that gallery work was done months ago - It was just written up a few weeks ago.
Attn: wiki editors. I see an entry hasn't been made for the Lumberjack Big/91 mm yet - why not? :pok:
Honestly, I thought it was, with so many editors, it usually comes to a job overlap and everybody thinks the others will do it. All fixed now
Yes, fixed, needed to clear the cache.
Now what was it? :pok:
Images in SAKWiki are still now showing for me. Anything I need to do on my end? (I'm on a MacBook)
Thanks
This .....
And because we have other Wiki (and MT.o) work to do (there is a long backlog); have real lives; other priorities; and don't jump onto every Wiki request instantly. :pok:
But we do try and get round to everything that is requested in the fullness of time. :tu:
Recent image outage is my bad, I toggled the wrong thing, there are too many things... :ahhhIt happens even to the best of us! :tu:
Sorry...
:iagree: No worries, Whoey! Thanks for all the work you do! :tu:
I'm out at the moment, maybe some maintenance routines when I get a minute.Thank you very much! :hatsoff:
I would like to know why there is no Victorinox 1986-1988 and 1994-2000 catalog on SAKWiki? Are they not found? Who can solve my confusion? Thank you very much.I have in my local collection some catalogs / pictures marked as 1996, 1998 and 2000.
I have in my local collection some catalogs / pictures marked as 1996, 1998 and 2000.Thank you very much. I've already PM you。 :climber:
Pm me if interested
To whom it may concern :)
Lumberjack Big page created, thanks NeleDo. :hatsoff:
Thanks for this Nele - All done - Not quite as you prescribed - Just some minor variations!!
That's a pretty major revision - And I think it looks great!!
Thanks for this NeleYes! :like:
Great? It's stunning! :cheers::iagree: :tu:
Yes! :like: :iagree: :tu:
NeleDo, Huntsman
Sirs, thank you very much for your great job! :hatsoff:
It's a unique toolset.
Giving it a "Craftsman" name would make things even more complicated thant they already are. No?
Was just looking at the ‘Artisan’ page ???
I’m not sure what all the fuss is about the Craftsman naming. There’s PROOF that it was. And only very thin hints that it was ever named Artisan.
Please explain the issue. :pok:
And the ‘in certain markets’ aside comments :twak:
We also know that the 4-layer 84mm model was called the Artisan in some markets. This is from catalogues and knife boxes, the Wiki page mentions this and there are some threads in MT.o about it too.
I don’t understand what you mean by “all the fuss is about” - What fuss? - And for me, there are no issues (to explain), although I think you seem to have some issues with the page!
I've seen my own written texts being altered to something I didn't think of.So you won’t mind when I go over the Phillips comments?
In the first instance, it feels... A bit shocking. After reading it through though, I could only admit it turned out better.
Different opinions and personalities tend to crash sometimes, but that doesn't mean an entire battle has to be started over it.
So take a deep breath, take a step back and look at this from a distance...
Is this really worth the tension and harsh discussion??
It's SAKwiki ... Made by people way more knowledgeable than me. I don't know alot about the history of SAKs, and the things I do know have been picked up from there.
But let's make one thing clear:
What a single individual has or has not seen does not make it a fact or a lie.
Please, just listen to each other and try to LEARN from each other instead of trying to figure out who is right. Maybe you both are, maybe none of you are.
But that's for you guys to figure out :D
:hug:
Keep the family together guys!
Just found this on the Master Craftsman Small page. :facepalm:
He guys, I was trying to register for the SAK wiki, but when I try to request a passcode, I get an error message: No route found.
Am I doing something wrong? :think:
(https://scienceblogs.com/files/startswithabang/files/2011/09/duty_calls.png)(https://scienceblogs.com/files/startswithabang/files/2011/09/duty_calls.png)
:whistle:
We first have to do some patch work to keep it in working condition for the time being and do the prep work with installing the new software, doing the move, reuploading everything, ...
Once we have the base work done, we'll make a tutorial for editors to do the code clean up, links checking and fixing, pics, everything.
Yup, it might take months till we can call it done. I know the last time we had to do the manual fixes of the TOC and some other code when I last recruited editors and how long that took. And this will be a much bigger project but it needs to be done.
It's not something we did, that we broke, it's been piling up with every update, and it now came to a point where it's time to say goodbye to the tikiwiki.
Enki, though my coding knowledge is very limited, but given I could understand the new code instruction, I definitely would love to lend my hands to help with the move. Meanwhile, I have planned a few new uploads, but I will wait a little before doing more upload to confuse things further.
I don't think we need to stop edits just yet, I need to line a lot of ducks up first... when the time comes, I will let you know.
It would however, be very helpful if the edits were planned/prepared before actually doing them on the wiki.
One of the big issues is the massive change logs which takes up 2/3 of the whole Sakwiki DB.
I don't have a lot of free time, but if my help is needed then I will do my best to assist where possible.Count me too, please.
Sounds like a huge job indeed :):iagree:
Ik, so Huntsman gets the job...
Point taken :(
:D
FieldmasterNitpicker! :D
Nitpicker! :D
Nitpicker - Isn't that the model with the Tick Tool :pok:
For now, I ask you not to do any more edits to the wiki, uploads or anything as the wiki database is very unstable and will just give us extra work once we do a move.
Thanks for the feedback - Much appreciated :tu:Thanks very much
We'll check out a userid for you ??? :o
Making an account for myself right now! Thanks for the tip, love the wiki thanks for all your work on it, most appreciated
Update. Just tried to create an account bu tells me I need a password from the sys admin, followed the link but got this message:
No route found. Please see http://dev.tiki.org/URL+Rewriting+Revamp
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://web.archive.org/web/20111204101213/http://www.sosakonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=330&Itemid=35
@ Huntsman: I don't know if it's working like this when we see some missing/imprecisions/whatever in the wiki ? Posting here is the right way ?
Anyway, in the Wenger Forester page, it's missing the indication of early version, with small clip point blade instead of the common nail file
That's absolutely the right way Zanza - Thank you :salute: - It's updated (with a thanks to you in the History!!) :tu:
@ Huntsman: here are pics of the Swiss Identity Huntsman for the wiki as you requested ;)
BTW I can't figure how to create a user in the wiki, it asks for admin's autorisation or something
(https://i50.servimg.com/u/f50/19/13/23/70/swissi11.jpg)
(https://i50.servimg.com/u/f50/19/13/23/70/swissi10.jpg)
Lovely new Swiss Spirit (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Swiss+Spirit+Special+Edition) page Nick - Thanks ... and for all the piccies and related updates !! :tu:My pleasure. :hatsoff:
Is this a catalog page you have or have you downloaded it? Do you have a scanner so we get a better representation of the page than the one taken with a camera?Unfortunately, now I have this poor quality photo only. :( But I will try to get the whole catalog.
Farmer X page? :pok:Done (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Farmer+X) :salute:
Good job Nick!Thank you, Reinier! But it was bad job :( (Huntsman knows ;) ).
Three layers instead of four?Yep. Shame on me! Where were my eyes? :(
Or did you make a huge mistake? :)Oh, that's for sure! :twak: :twak:
Done (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Farmer+X) :salute:
Looks great! :cheers:
Dear Knights,You're right about the identifier for Evo S557 (it should end in "SE"), I accidentally used EvoWood S557's twice :facepalm: I'll correct it as fast as possible...
Just created Delémont Evolution S54 (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Del%C3%A9mont+Evolution+S54) and Delémont Evolution S557 (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Del%C3%A9mont+Evolution+S557) pages.
Could someone with native English check them for possible mistakes, please? :hatsoff:
BTW, it's seems to me, there is a wrong identifier for the Delémont Evolution S557 model in the beautiful poster (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-browse_image.php?imageId=4318) by Sir NeleDo (and Evolution Grip models are missing). :pok: :whistle:
You're right about the identifier for Evo S557 (it should end in "SE"), I accidentally used EvoWood S557's twice :facepalm: I'll correct it as fast as possible...Ok! :cheers:
As for Evolution Grip models, they are not "missing"... They are excluded as I used only basic models (not scales variations except for wood) in almost all of my posters. :tu:
Delemont 85mm poster with corrected Evolution S557 identifier :cheers:Thank you very much! :hatsoff:
I was checking out the 74mm pages (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+74mm) on the Wiki and I noticed that the 75mm models are listed below the 74mm SAKs. How about we move them to a dedicated 75mm page? I know it's basically a discontinued product line but still. They have noting in common with the double sided/floating spring frame (Executive, Ambassador, etc.). This has probably been discussed before :)That sounds reasonable to me.
Also, on the Accountant (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Accountant) page, none of the models with scissors are mentioned. Should they be, being discontinued decades ago?IMHO, should.
The old Accountant-style SAKs in 84mmm are not mentioned on the 84mm page (https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+84mm). Should we add them?IMHO, yes.
I would like to see more old identifiers (like 656 aCr+ for a cellidor "Executive" with shield & cross and T&T) mentioned on the pages of the modern equivalent models. What do you think?It would be great!
Your link goes to the main page. :think:I suppose this refers to the following. ;)
My interpretation is that the "others" page is dedicated to Victorinox products that do not fit into the traditional SAK pocket knife design, so is a catch-all for unusual products, or divergent product lines, like the Hunter and Swisstool.
So I would rather see the 75mm removed from the "others" page and promoted to their rightful place alongside their larger and smaller brothers and sisters. Even if there are only three models, it will help to give them the visibility they deserve (and maybe create more interest for collectors).
Think the 74/75 listing works well, easy to find and considering just the 3 models, having them listed at the bottom as they are seems fine
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Afaik all so far included in this discussion are editors and admins on the wiki. So if you know of or have other 75 or 74mm models that aren't so far listed in the wiki, by all means add them. :2tu:I did it in the past (I mean adding / editing), but stopped this practice because I wasn't happy with changes there.
Thanks Nick.
Perhaps we could split the 84mm page into three distinct pages? Since there are three different versions of the 84mm frame (regular, slim and lobster, right?).
Personally, I don't like that newly added texts or other content immediately gets altered (always by the same editor) or moved to other sections within the page (intro/variations/identifiers). We don't all write in the same way and not all pages follow the same template. So I really don't see the point of correcting other people's contributions. It feels like "thanks for trying, but it's not good enough".
The wiki is not owned by one single person.
On the contrary, I advocate the maximum standardization and use of templates, whenever possible.
At the same time, I do not make a difference between the pages created by me and others. And I don’t worry if someone changes the contributions I made. The wiki is not owned by one single person. :pok:
But, anyway, I don't have time to work on the SAKWiki project right now, so my opinion doesn't matter. :dunno:
P.S. I apologize to everyone who was upset by my edits. :cheers:
Maybe I have not searched well enough, but what exactly is the template for a SAK page?Strange, but I found it (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Knife+Entry+Template) easily. ;) (And if it did not exist, it would have to be created.)
What information do we put in the intro section? Because I sometimes mention some specific variations (because why not?) and it gets moved to the Variations section. And who decides which variations are mentioned there, and which ones only get an entry in the Identifiers section?IMHO, all these issues can (and should) be discussed. :think:
Re. Identifiers: the European and US identifiers are not always listed in the same way. I like the version with headings for the different numbering systems. Maybe we could also add the old model numbers under a separate heading within the section?I do not know. This can also be discussed.
It's also not always clear which variations are actually listed as variations and which ones are under Identifiers only.IMHO, all possible variations should be described in the 'Variations' section.
I think some people sometimes force their opinion onto others. I'm not the only one who thinks that. Maybe I shouldn't make such a big deal out of it.Maybe.
But seriously: one page for all Cybertools? Makes no sense to me. Just one example.And for me, too, it looks rather strange (I somehow missed this moment and was now very unpleasantly surprised). :think:
And merging two model lines with different designs and different sizes into one page? I don't get it.Yes, I agree. In my opinion, the accurate classification is just as important to an encyclopedia (which is SAKWiki) as standardizing design templates.
Your opinion matters! To me anyways :) You are a huge contributor (unlike myself). But even if you were not, your opinion would still matter of course.Thank you very much! :salute: But you are exaggerating my contribution.
I did not mean you in my previous post.Of course! All good friends. :cheers: :drink:
All good friends? :cheers:
Thank you very much for your frank opinion, Reinier!
Strange, but I found it (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Knife+Entry+Template) easily. ;) (And if it did not exist, it would have to be created.)
And, surprisingly:
Last Modification: Friday 04 of January, 2019 19:10:55 MSK by Reinier. :pok:
Good job on the tang stamp page Max :tu::Iagree: thanks very much for this, will be very useful to my collecting :tu: :cheers:
:hatsoff: thanks guys, but maybe 2% done...just playing with the formatting and testing the table design. There is sooo much info on tang stamps, it's a real minefield. For the moment, I will focus on the 91mm main blade stamps only. I will definitely need to tap into the experts that have reference material and images for contribution. We have to be cautious not to step too far into this topic, as it's closely related to the broader topic of dating SAKs, and then we open up a real can of worms wrt other identifiers that we don't have in the Wiki. At some stage, someone may want to take up this challenge (how to date a SAK), but this would be a Wiki all on its own!
Tang Obverse / Reverse Image Date Range Notes (images to follow) 1957 - 1974 VSSR / Victoria OS (images to follow) 1974-1986 VSSR small "V"/ OS + crossbow emblem (images to follow) 1986 - 2005 VSSR large "V"/ OS + crossbow emblem (images to follow) 2005 - 2009 VSS large "V"/ OS (images to follow) 2009 - 2011 VSS larger Swiss Made, large "V"/ OS (images to follow) 2011 - VSS small "V"/ OS |
OK - first pass - won't add to Wiki until I get some comments here :salute: Not sure if the blank reverse was only on Elinox in c. 73-75?
Common Main Blade Tang Stamps of Victorinox 91mm Range
Tang Obverse / Reverse Image Date Range Notes
(images to follow) 1957 - 1974 VSSR / Victoria OS
(images to follow) 1974-1986 VSSR small "V"/ OS + crossbow emblem
(images to follow) 1986 - 2005 VSSR large "V"/ OS + crossbow emblem
(images to follow) 2005 - 2009 VSS large "V"/ OS
(images to follow) 2009 - 2011 VSS larger Swiss Made, large "V"/ OS
(images to follow) 2011 - VSS small "V"/ OS
Notes:
- Tables shows main blade stamps of 91mm range from 1957 onwards
- Production examples can be found outside the date ranges
- Tang stamps for Economy line (Elinox) and Hoffritz SAKs are not listed
- Thinner 2.0mm main blade tang thickness introduced in 2004
Nomenclature:
VSSR (4-lines)
VICTORINOX
SWITZERLAND
STAINLESS
ROSTFRE
VSS (3-lines)
VICTORINOX
SWISS MADE
STAINLESS
OS = OFFICIER SUISSE
No, blank back stamp was also found in the main line, so I would just add:The blank rear stamp in main line is very well correlated to black double scissor spring use. But I do not think late ‘73 or early ‘76 should be excluded. Also pretty sure I have ID’d early OSCB rear stamps from ‘76.
1974-1975 VSSR small "V"/ <no stamp>
1975-1986 VSSR small "V"/ OS + crossbow emblem
I would like to add a reference to those green EvoGrip scales (https://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,85981.0.html). But we don't know the model (yet). What to do?
Also: https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-browse_gallery.php?galleryId=202 I guess that should be 91mm?
But surely should have a reference under Camper?
If so we can put it as a variation of the 17 and in the alpha list
(...)Yup,that's the one I saw. It's a more common model than the Commander, isn't it? Maybe it should have its own page and pics.
But indeed they are not featured on the 2 layer model page: https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Wenger+85mm+2+Layer+Models
:dunno:
We have received a couple of nice images of the Christmas series from Marcos of the VicSpain youtube channel and updates on the released quantities.Maybe add a photo with the number of knives released below the table?
Thanks Marcos:iagree: :tu: :hatsoff:
Oh I think I might have cracked one of them!!Yep! That’s definitely pushing it H…wait there’s more, if you ring in the next 20 minutes get metric and imperial for the price of one :)
Ruler cm and Ruler inches = Two functions
Might also explain the SC anomaly!
I do think that is pushing it a bit tho' - A ruler is a ruler - Right? ???
Hello,
I don't know if it would help for datation or if there is enough data already, but here is one oldie I got by me that may give some more hints on the tools and markings that could exist at the same era :
Oh I think I might have cracked one of them!!
Ruler cm and Ruler inches = Two functions
Might also explain the SC anomaly!
I do think that is pushing it a bit tho' - A ruler is a ruler - Right? ???
They definitely count those as two tools/functions, here's the list of tools from Fisherman's page... :DYou're absolutely correct.
Oh there he is. Hi Alex :hatsoff:
There have been many discussions around the changed Annual Alox modelsIt looks great! :tu: :like:
Anyway we said that, once they were on the Vic website, we'd update the Wiki - And they are - So we did :tu:
One interesting observation - If the numbering convention continues - Next year's Classic will be 0.6221.L22Perhaps they will add a suffix? For example 22LE?
However if you look at teh Wiki Classic page - You'll see ther already was a 0.6221.L22 and a few subsequent numbers
Hmmm :think: Interesting - I wonder what they'll do ???
Perhaps they will add a suffix? For example 22LE?
It looks great! :tu: :like:Perhaps they will add a suffix? For example 22LE?Previously used number is 0.6221.L22 (we all know the number before the dot refers to number of "other tools", in this case 1 means KR only). Next year's Classic LEs would be 0.6223.L22(immediately followed by 01-10), so there shouldn't be any PN overlapping. :cheers:
What do you think? - Shall we update the page?The page looks better in my opinion. :tu:
Nick - I adjusted the table and image sign - Does that work better now?Yes, it works better now. :tu:
As a few examples:
1. I have seen an extra version of pliers for 91mm SAKs (I have pics)
2. Your page about the "Automobile" does not mention that that knife came with or without a key ring.
3. There is a later version of the 84mm Huntsman Small (c. 1962-1968).
4. There is a version of the Victorinox Passenger SAK without toothpick and tweezers.
So it is a Commander not a Viking - Right ? ???
Re the Victorinox page I transferred the new temp page to the old one - So that is updated nowIt looks great now! :like:
Nick you discovered a shocker of a page with the Wenger LH tools page >:D - I had to attack that page :whistle:As for me, it's much better now. :tu:
Proposed new structure here
One interesting observation about this temp LH page - It's had over 50 hits already - :o And it's not in the menu structure and allegedly no-one knew about it apart from me!When you create a new page, it appears in the list on the left side of the SAKWiki screen and is visible to all registered users. So I've already followed the link at least twice. ;)
I guess that is the way of teh internet
Unfortunately we wont be able to correct the text on the imageWhy not? Just download the bigger picture (https://sakwiki.com/show_image.php?id=2547&scalesize=o), edit it and upload the corrected version as a smaller picture again (for example, see the attachment).
Thanks Nick - You have better editing skills than me!!Thanks Huntsman, you are so kind. :hatsoff:
Page updated with Commander corrections and new pic!:like:
Wenger Shortix-Plus SPECIFICATIONSAdded. :salute:
Good job Nick!Thanks, Reinier! :salute:
Added. :salute:
Thank you, MexSAK!
I've found another black oxide limited run: the "black série" with black-oxide coated serrated blade, liners, spring, keyring but NO clip. The réf. is 0.8413.MILI and it comes with a soft kaki leather pouch which can be fitted horizontally ou verticallyThank you for the information, Sir bismouth!
Same design and pouch for the trailmaster of the 'black série": Réf. 0.8463.MILI
Thanks for adding the Black Ice series Nick :tu:My pleasure, Reinier! :cheers:
I can't believe we didn't already have it :)As you know for sure, we always have some info to be added. ;)
And I don't mean that in a wrong way :DIt's Ok. :cheers:
Nick - I though you said you were busy WRL at the mo :think: ...... You've been going nuts in the Wiki - I guess the contract ended? ???Thank you, Huntsman! :salute:
Thanks for all the updates - Great stuff :cheers:
Hello guys. I have detected some missing info at SakWiki over the last couple of years, and was told by Nikola that this is the channel to share my findings. Here I go with the first one, from a little list of some 5-6.
There is an extra type of Victorinox pliers, to be identified between types 2 and 3 at this SakWiki page: https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Pliers (https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Pliers)
It is, "Type 2" (1987-1995) BUT with the groove for the spring added.
I have pictures to prove this fact but, unfortunately, I am not able to upload them, for some reason (the size is not a matter because the files were converted to 614 x 406.
Hello KK,
Are you saying that the original pliers version was on the Rutli? ??? ........ Very interesting - Never knew that ::)
I made the changes you suggested ..... I think! ...... Please check it out :think:
https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Pliers
Yes I noted the 85/86 variation in some of the SC dates.
I guess it's a variation between announcement and availability date and also possibly availability in different markets
Also catalogues can be somewhat misleading - For instance the 'current' catalogue on the Vic website is 2017!!
Thanks for the info
The table gets a bit screwed up due to text wrapping - Looks like we need to stick with the original.The original looks better in my opinion.
Back to the original :salute:Thank you, Sir Huntsman! :tu:
One little information about the Rescue tool variation with the black handle and the nylon-velcro pouch...
The ref is: 08623.MW3
I have just discovered that there is another option which, when a user clicks on the link, the catalogue is displayed :woohoo::like:
This is much friendlier for our users (way quicker too) :tu: .... Of couse they can still download if they want to.
So please go and have a look.It works great for me. :tu:
I have just made an amazing discovery ....... :D :o :tu:
As many of you know we have mainly jpeg images in the Wiki, however we do have a few pdf files - Which mainly feature in the Catalogues page.
One thing I never liked about that page is that when you click on a PDF catalogue it just got downloaded to the user's PC. :(
I have just discovered that there is another option which, when a user clicks on the link, the catalogue is displayed :woohoo:
This is much friendlier for our users (way quicker too) :tu: .... Of couse they can still download if they want to.
Very happy about that!! :D :D :D
This discovery was triggered by some work that Max is doing on the catalogues.
He has found a fabulous document:
Everything you need to know about multi-tools and cutlery - which was written by Victorinox in 2008 - It's really great
- I think MiniChamp may also have pointed out this document to us earlier.
Well it is in the Wiki now - So please go and have a look.
https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Swiss+Army+Knife+Catalogs
Thanks Max
Could I get a passcode? Saw a few edits I wanted to make while poking around today, and realized I can't sign up to make them.
Thanks Max - Great stuff - Yes a very obvious omission :tu:
I am soooooo glad you listed the nunmbers horizontally in their groups not vertically :o
Just a thought - Should we put the name of the group at the beginning of the list rather than at the end? Maybe following a group identifier - Or even first as a 'title' for the line? ???
That's cool, I don't think I had ever heard of that before.
Me neither. :tu:There are slight concave and convex marks on the back of it. I can see the letters "fastum gel" by reflecting with a magnifying glass.
Too bad it isn't an advertisement SAK so we would know for whom it was made.
That's cool, I don't think I had ever heard of that before.
Me neither. :tu:
Too bad it isn't an advertisement SAK so we would know for whom it was made.
We created a few new galleries for all the SAK images some time ago - and added three more 93mm galleries recently:like: That's great!
Weird that we have hit a round number of views (multiple of 10) for four of the galleries at exactly the same timeA lot of farmers around? :dunno: :D
Especially the Farmer gallery. Now that is a very nice round number !! :climber:
I added the picture of ampoule cutter to the Class homepage. It is an interesting tool. I think it should also be added to the homepage of 58mm tool, but I am not familiar with the operation.Ampoules are basically little bottle-shaped vials made entirely of glass, with the contents hermetically sealed inside at the point of manufacture. To use this tool, you saw a nick all the way around the upper end, then snap the top off.
I attempted to patch the software for the sakwiki yesterday and it went a little sideways, all restored but any changes from early yesterday are lost.Yeah, I noticed that... I wondered why it was on the fritz, but assumed someone was working on something and sure enough it was back a little while later.
sorry.
Don't 'spose you have Aquarius? ???
Thanks very much Vericio and Marc Calabria (marcsarmyknives) :tu:
It's really great when members help us out with the Wiki :salute:
Sorry if this is the wrong place. I did a search but the last entries found were from 2012!
How do I register on SAKWiki? It asks for an Administrator Password. TIA
erm gotta ask where is 108mm line on Sakwiki, i see 111mm and 100mm but not 108mm. i know how to see that 108mm page but its missing on on list to get on 108mm just addres line like https://www.sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+108mm and i can acces to it
Check again !! ;)Nice work
https://sakwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page=Victorinox+Knife+List
The ..... 135mm pages use asterisks for unavailable models. Most other pages use them for available.
I think they should be in line with the others, but wanted to make sure there wasn't some reasoning behind it first.[/li][/list]
No mistake in the Wiki
The one you have is not the VSACKS 2021 Club model
Jason is the preseident of VSACKS
Would you care to also add this info to the LNF page - It would be good there too (or I can do it)
Great work NickMy pleasure. :salute:
The page looks great. Now to find a Signature Laser Classic :ahhhWithout SD tip on the file? Haven't seen that one yet, not even in photos.
I try to get more informations about the Wenger Evolution 565 - actually it’s not in the SAKWiki - maybe we get a new article for this model...
Glad to see you here. And to see the actual SAK in question. :tu:
Hopefully some of our more experienced SAK historians can narrow down the production year.
Welcome - Lovely old SAK and great family history :2tu:
We have the rivets going internal in '57 here:
https://forum.multitool.org/index.php/topic,51872.0.html
As promised... I didn't include some info/descriptions of already known things...
........
I hope you'll find this useful! :cheers:
We most certainly do :tu: 8)
Great stuff Nele and thanks for all your research :salute:
I have moved the SOS info from the SC page to the SOS page and added your info as a section below.
The SOS page was already marked as under development - So that comment can stay
The page is WIP and we can consolidate the sections - and add pictures etc - as and when
But at least we don't have an empty page anymore - and all the info we know is in the one place
Brilliant :D :D :D
Hello,
I don't know if you are the right address for this. I don't want to be a grammar nazi, but in the WIKI page is written 'asterix'.
I think that is asterisk.
Asterix is the friend of Obelix in the comics ;)
BR,
****
That’s great vistaMy research leads me to think that this is a (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230310/dfc58cf2a2f15ffcc3bd0eff8575dd71.jpg)
Thanks so much for posting
What shall we call it?
I don’t think we’ll have a new page just a variation of one of the others - which should it be?
What does everyone think?
I sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. :cheers:Don't be silly - :twak: Very likely this was never noticed, or caused any confusion/issue until now
Thanks NeleSorry, my bad... all's fine on the 84mm page ;) :cheers:
But I dont see any error on the 84mm page ;)
What are we goin to do about tis prototype?
Sentinel variation ???n / fieldmaster variation ??? / own page ???
Suggestions on a postcard please
Sentinel variation ??? / fieldmaster variation ??? / own page ???
Thanks Nele - I don't know why I typed Fieldmaster above - I mean to say Soldier ..... I'm loosing it :(Anytime mate :cheers:
But agree Sentinel variation makes sense - Also as no back tools - I'll use your image - Thanks mate
Thanks BPR - The catalogue is in the Wiki now - (Only admin can upload PDFs for security reasons )
Shall we mark all the models that are not in the 2024 catalogue as retired in the Wiki ? ??? :think:
There has been so much change and speculation recently (Vic Spain etc etc)
And it is quite confusing as the website has models that are not in the catalogue - Eg the 85mm Delemonts and the CT 29
Maybe these are still there because they have stock to use up? ???
So the question is - Should the catalogue be the definitive source of current product line/availability? :think:
PPS. It's interesting - As it used to be the other way around - ie there were models in the catalogue that were not on the website !!!
In light of not having an "official" statement from Vic indicating that the models that do not appear in the catalog are actually discontinued, it would be hard to use the word "discontinued" as a definitive statement.
However, being that historically if a model does not appear in the catalog it usually means it's been discontinued even if there's backstock still left to sell. I think we could use the verbiage "potentially discontinued", or something to that effect, until we can revisit the statement at a later date, perhaps somewhere closer to the end of the year.
That's my 2cents. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk!
Beware the Ides of March:like: