Multitool.org Forum
+-

Hello Lurker! Remove this ad and much more by logging in.


SAKs Old vs New?

mcrib · 39 · 2956

Offline mcrib

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 13
SAKs Old vs New?
on: June 15, 2017, 07:50:31 AM
I'm curious to know if people think that older SAKs were better made than their contemporary counterparts. I definitely see that older SAKs use thicker blade stocks, non hollow scales, more ornate corkscrews, and have a heavier weight. Does that necessarily mean it's better? The Swiss Army Owner's Manual points out that the metallurgy has improved a lot with current models making better and stronger, yet thinner and lighter tools. Can anyone confirm that this is actually true? I was on the fence whether to believe this or not, but two things occurred to me today.

I was just delivered a new to me 80s SAK I overpaid for with a bent tip the seller neglected to tell me about. :rant: Because I love trying to fix things despite not having the necessary skills or knowledge to do so, I tried straightening the blade. I thought this would take some time because a few days ago I did something similar and crinked a current model Pioneer that had a main blade that was annoyingly close to the bottle opener. I put the pioneer blade in a padded vise and went to town on it. I flexed the blade near the tip an uncomfortable amount, but it would always spring back to normal not budging one bit. Anyways, when I tried to bend the tip straight on the 80s SAK, it bent very easily. It didn't require nearly as much force. The blade could have had some micro fractures from the original bend which made it over all easier to bend. I don't know for sure. Second thing I noticed is that it was very easy to sharpen from completely dull and bevel-less to pretty darn sharp. The ease also could be in my head though.

Anyways, I like using/edcing the current versions of these SAKs for pretty much one dumb reason: the hidden pin I'll probably never use that stores in the cellidor scale. But now I like to think the steel is actually better despite the thinness being an eyesore


it Offline shadowrider

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 241
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #1 on: June 15, 2017, 11:35:06 AM
While I like the extra thickness of old blades, I think this is one of the rare cases when modern is better.
The reason being that the tools are ever improved as technology evolves. One example: the new stainless steel metal file which is so much more aggressive and durable than the old one.


00 Offline Mechanickal

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 14,686
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #2 on: June 15, 2017, 12:01:13 PM
These days there are microscopes, electronicaly managed and controled heat treatments etc.
So I'd say it's highly plausibele that the steel has become better throughout the years.


no Offline Steinar

  • *
  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 3,435
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #3 on: June 15, 2017, 12:01:36 PM
Metallurgy is continuing to evolve, and current steels are cleaner and processes are better controlled. The older tools are chunkier, but I suspect we get a better deal today anyway. (At least those of us who like lightweight tools. :D )


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #4 on: June 15, 2017, 12:28:37 PM
I'm curious to know if people think that older SAKs were better made than their contemporary counterparts. I definitely see that older SAKs use thicker blade stocks, non hollow scales, more ornate corkscrews, and have a heavier weight. Does that necessarily mean it's better? The Swiss Army Owner's Manual points out that the metallurgy has improved a lot with current models making better and stronger, yet thinner and lighter tools. Can anyone confirm that this is actually true? I was on the fence whether to believe this or not, but two things occurred to me today.

I was just delivered a new to me 80s SAK I overpaid for with a bent tip the seller neglected to tell me about. :rant: Because I love trying to fix things despite not having the necessary skills or knowledge to do so, I tried straightening the blade. I thought this would take some time because a few days ago I did something similar and crinked a current model Pioneer that had a main blade that was annoyingly close to the bottle opener. I put the pioneer blade in a padded vise and went to town on it. I flexed the blade near the tip an uncomfortable amount, but it would always spring back to normal not budging one bit. Anyways, when I tried to bend the tip straight on the 80s SAK, it bent very easily. It didn't require nearly as much force. The blade could have had some micro fractures from the original bend which made it over all easier to bend. I don't know for sure. Second thing I noticed is that it was very easy to sharpen from completely dull and bevel-less to pretty darn sharp. The ease also could be in my head though.

Anyways, I like using/edcing the current versions of these SAKs for pretty much one dumb reason: the hidden pin I'll probably never use that stores in the cellidor scale. But now I like to think the steel is actually better despite the thinness being an eyesore

I totally understand what you mean because i've also had the exact same doubts and questions. Yes the older ones (70's/80's/90's) kind of "feel" a little different and sturdier. I only have two "vintage" 80's small tinkers, and when i compare them to the current version they feel heavier and sturdier. But after weighing and measuring both i just figure it's more "inside our heads" than the actually reality. The old ones weigh only 2 grams more or so than the current, that's almost nothing. Yes the older blade tang is a bit thicker, but it makes almost zero difference to the sturdiness of the blade. They may have been small changes in the stainless alloy too as i feel the current steel to be a bit more flexible (elastic), so less prone to break.
The thickness of the other tools is exactly the same as it always where, maybe the springs are just a little thinner, but then again they are more beveled at the edges than the older ones due to different polishing processes, so if you look at a piece of steel with more beveled edges against one non beveled the beveled ones will have the illusion of being thinner than they actually are.

Finally the solid cellidor scales, they have a different feel than the current ones and feel more solid for sure and make the sak feel less "hollow", but it doesn't necessarily mean they are tougher or harder to break or damage. More solid and stiffer may also mean less elastic and may break or chip more easily in some cases.
The solid ones however are thicker than the current hollow ones and kind of less flat on the top, and they polish better than the new ones. But the new ones do sit better flush with the liners with no gaps because they are more flexible, especially on the ends.

I also normally carry current models as opposed to the older "vintage" ones, it adds the pin, if i break a current scale i'll just pop it out and put a new one in and if i mess a new one out i can grab a new one from my backup's or buy another while a vintage ones are harder to find in good shape.

Summing it up, from a user's perspective there isn't such a big difference from old to new that makes me prefer the older ones instead of the mew ones. They're all good  :cheers:
« Last Edit: June 15, 2017, 12:34:59 PM by MacGyver »
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


wales Offline magentus

  • Admin Team
  • *
  • Absolute Zombie Club
  • *
    • Posts: 20,383
  • mmmmm SAKrelicious
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #5 on: June 15, 2017, 12:37:34 PM
Quote
Summing it up, from a user's perspective there isn't such a big difference from old to new that makes me prefer the older ones instead of the mew ones. They're all good

Well put Mac-G :cheers: Couldn't have put it better myself!

While I wish Vic still did the bail on cellidor models, it does make the scales much harder to replace.
While I like the thicker tang, it really doesn't make any difference.
While I like the older, grey mag, the new clear surround with glass mag is cool too (don't like the plastic one because it's easier to scratch)
The newer metal file is better
The new scales have the straight pin option
I much prefer the spring mounted lanyard hole to the old spacer mounted one - much more comfortable with prolonged use
I prefer the older cap lifter with the sharpened edge

But after all is said and done, I think it was Mac -G himself who said ' They're all good'.  :D
'Use the force Harry' - Gandalf


gb Offline AimlessWanderer

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 17,517
  • I'm not a pessimist, I'm an experienced optimist!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #6 on: June 15, 2017, 05:51:35 PM
I believe these days the blade steel is better due to metallurgical developments, and the springs have a higher cycle life too. Victorinox is one of the few companies that strives to cut costs and keep products affordable, without compromising product quality.

I do prefer some of the older models though, more for layout and toolset rather than quality. Climber Small and Original Outdoorsman spring to mind. I also prefer the smooth alox scales (and the ribbed scales too) over the current texture/pattern.

I'd also like to see nylon scales used more.


The cantankerous but occasionally useful member, formally known as 50ft-trad


ie Offline Don Pablo

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 15,292
  • Yoo-hoo, big summer blowout!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #7 on: June 15, 2017, 06:04:23 PM
I believe these days the blade steel is better due to metallurgical developments, and the springs have a higher cycle life too. Victorinox is one of the few companies that strives to cut costs and keep products affordable, without compromising product quality.

I do prefer some of the older models though, more for layout and toolset rather than quality. Climber Small and Original Outdoorsman spring to mind. I also prefer the smooth alox scales (and the ribbed scales too) over the current texture/pattern.

I'd also like to see nylon scales used more.
Should I be worried about my primary SAK having old tools and springs?  :ahhh
Hooked, like everyone else. ;)

All hail the hook!


gb Offline AimlessWanderer

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 17,517
  • I'm not a pessimist, I'm an experienced optimist!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #8 on: June 15, 2017, 06:09:37 PM
Should the worst happen, you buy a new one and have fun modding  :D

Use it as it was meant to be used, and enjoy  :cheers:


The cantankerous but occasionally useful member, formally known as 50ft-trad


ie Offline Don Pablo

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 15,292
  • Yoo-hoo, big summer blowout!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #9 on: June 15, 2017, 06:50:28 PM
Should the worst happen, you buy a new one and have fun modding  :D

Use it as it was meant to be used, and enjoy  :cheers:
Good philosophy.   :salute:
Hooked, like everyone else. ;)

All hail the hook!


england Offline Guardian

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 518
  • Unless
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #10 on: June 15, 2017, 07:24:46 PM
Should the worst happen, you buy a new one and have fun modding  :D

Use it as it was meant to be used, and enjoy  :cheers:
Good philosophy.   :salute:

+1  :tu:
"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not."
― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #11 on: June 15, 2017, 09:56:48 PM
Should the worst happen, you buy a new one and have fun modding  :D

Use it as it was meant to be used, and enjoy  :cheers:
Good philosophy.   :salute:

+2 :cheers:
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


ca Offline Syph007

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *
    • Posts: 9,831
  • SAK Surgeon
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #12 on: June 16, 2017, 01:45:12 AM
Thicker blades is the only thing I miss.  The rest (except I guess the hollow scales) is better now.  I can tell you the steel in the backsprings is waaaay better than the old stuff.  You will never see a modern cracked or broken backspring, but that happened alot on the old ones.
PM me or email sakmodder [at] gmail . com if you are looking for custom SAK work.

Modding thread : Here
Website : WWW.SAKModder.com 
Facebook : SAKModder
Instagram : robertjlessard
Youtube : www.youtube.com/robertjlessard


us Offline WoodsDuck

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,832
  • Duck!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #13 on: June 16, 2017, 02:15:13 AM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.


us Offline cody6268

  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *******
    • Posts: 5,813
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #14 on: June 16, 2017, 02:27:07 AM
Don't even bother comparing a modern SAK to the old 1908 Soldiers, the old Soldiers are far better.



I have sharpened both old blades dating back to the mid 1970s, all with the crossbow tang, and they sharpen easier. They also have way better snap. The gray frame, glass lens magnifier has better magnification, and it's impossible to lose the lens, as I occasionally hear of the lens popping out of modern variants.  I like the scissors held together with a screw, they're easy to tighten up when loose, and adjust when needed.   I like the older bottle openers with the scraper. The bail is something I want to see again.

On the flip side, modern SAKs have the hook, chisel, and terminal block sized fine screwdriver.  On old ones, most just had the Phillips/Corkscrew, awl, and occasionally the fat fine screwdriver on them on larger models.  The can key Phillips can't fit No. 1 Phillips, while the modern solid one can.   Wenger's saws before they changed to the modern version downright suck, I've had better ones on Chinese SAK clones.  That old sickle style can opener on the older Soldiers should not even be used on steel cans.  The new stainless file is way more aggressive. Except on really hardened carbon, and stainless, the file on my Master RT is just as good as my old Nicholson and Grobet files.


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #15 on: June 16, 2017, 02:02:45 PM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:
WPDrawing2017-13-16_01_13_51.jpg
* WPDrawing2017-13-16_01_13_51.jpg (Filesize: 288.93 KB)
« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 02:21:35 PM by MacGyver »
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


us Offline WoodsDuck

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,832
  • Duck!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #16 on: June 16, 2017, 03:01:04 PM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:

Thanks for doing the research, because I am far too lazy  :D


Offline mcrib

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 13
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #17 on: June 17, 2017, 09:23:56 AM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:

The thinness of the tang is actually what bothers me about the newer SAKs. To make up for that gap, they modified the liner by pressing/embossing the pivot area material in. It looks terrible compared to an older thick tanged SAK where the tang meets nicely against the flat liner. Not to mention, the embossed/pressed in liner pivot has to be weaker laterally too.


nl Offline Ron Who

  • *
  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *******
    • Posts: 8,850
  • I'm blue!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #18 on: June 17, 2017, 09:54:03 AM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:

The thinness of the tang is actually what bothers me about the newer SAKs. To make up for that gap, they modified the liner by pressing/embossing the pivot area material in. It looks terrible compared to an older thick tanged SAK where the tang meets nicely against the flat liner. Not to mention, the embossed/pressed in liner pivot has to be weaker laterally too.
Quite the opposite. The flat liner bends much more easily.

I read somewhere that in the manufacture of cars, ships, and airplanes it's quite common to use "structured" sheets of metal, with ribs, rills etc. because a flat sheet of the same strength would be thicker, heavier, and more expensive. So when I read your post, I decided to try and retrieved some liners from my parts box, and tried bending them. I can't tell you exactly how much force I needed, I don't have any measuring equipment.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 10:41:12 AM by Ronald Schröder »


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #19 on: June 17, 2017, 03:46:35 PM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:

The thinness of the tang is actually what bothers me about the newer SAKs. To make up for that gap, they modified the liner by pressing/embossing the pivot area material in. It looks terrible compared to an older thick tanged SAK where the tang meets nicely against the flat liner. Not to mention, the embossed/pressed in liner pivot has to be weaker laterally too.
Quite the opposite. The flat liner bends much more easily.

I read somewhere that in the manufacture of cars, ships, and airplanes it's quite common to use "structured" sheets of metal, with ribs, rills etc. because a flat sheet of the same strength would be thicker, heavier, and more expensive. So when I read your post, I decided to try and retrieved some liners from my parts box, and tried bending them. I can't tell you exactly how much force I needed, I don't have any measuring equipment.

Coming from a Mechanical Engineering background i must say i agree with Ronald's statement 100%.

Believe me, that little pressed in indent on the newer liners is very tough,  and because it's a very small area makes it even tougher, more than the straight sheet of aluminum of the old ones.
Compare it to how metal sheets on cars are made and stamped (pressed in), the principle is roughly the same, to strengthen structural integrity of assembled sheets of metal.
Yes the older straight ones may look better, but i believe the newer ones are tougher.

And having a slimmer tang means the blank sheet of stainless steel from which the main blade is made can also be slightly thinner as raw material, there for reducing cost of raw materials and less goes to waste after grinding the blades to final shape.
It's almost insignificant on one blade, but if you multiply by many millions, well... you get the picture.  :cheers:
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 03:48:19 PM by MacGyver »
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


us Offline El Corkscrew

  • *
  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *******
    • Posts: 8,187
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #20 on: June 17, 2017, 04:54:39 PM
Not saying they're "better" but I prefer the older stuff.  I do kind of find it hard to believe that the older blades are not sturdier... especially towards the tip.  If you compare a 60's 91mm or 93mm with current, the blade is thicker all the way up to the tip.  Common sense would tell you the thicker blade will last longer and can endure more sharpening.

I'm not saying the new ones, with their many improvements and innovations are inferior, I just like vintage stuff I guess.

Comparing the thickness of the cap lifter on a vintage soldier/pioneer to a more current one is a night and day difference. Again, I find it hard to believe that this tool would not be more durable.

The older stamps have more variations and are more collectible IMO.   


For me it's just like classic cars... Of course I think a new Tesla would be awesome, but a 65 Mercedes would be pretty cool too. Right?

 :cheers: :salute:
“All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure.” - Mark Twain


Offline mcrib

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 13
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #21 on: June 17, 2017, 06:02:21 PM
On the upside, thinner blades make better slicers. Though it's admittedly a marginal difference in the case of old vs new SAKs.

Guys, about the blades, and just for the sake of accuracy...  :pok:

The newer blades aren't thinner than the old ones

The only thing slightly thinner on the current is the blade tang (the part that attaches the blade to the handle until the sharp edge starts)

I've actually went and measured the newer blade on my small Tinker at the end of the cutting part (just before the tang begins) and it's 2mm, measured the older 80's small Tinker blade at the same spot and it's actually some microns thinner, the measurement tool had some slack at 2mm.

So believe me when i tell you that there is no difference (that matters) between the older vs newer blade's thickness (or any of the other tools for that matter...). At leas comparing 84/91mm 80's sak's to 84/91mm current ones, i can't comment on the 70's and before models as i've never seen or handed any, or other Sak sizes.  :cheers:

The thinness of the tang is actually what bothers me about the newer SAKs. To make up for that gap, they modified the liner by pressing/embossing the pivot area material in. It looks terrible compared to an older thick tanged SAK where the tang meets nicely against the flat liner. Not to mention, the embossed/pressed in liner pivot has to be weaker laterally too.
Quite the opposite. The flat liner bends much more easily.

I read somewhere that in the manufacture of cars, ships, and airplanes it's quite common to use "structured" sheets of metal, with ribs, rills etc. because a flat sheet of the same strength would be thicker, heavier, and more expensive. So when I read your post, I decided to try and retrieved some liners from my parts box, and tried bending them. I can't tell you exactly how much force I needed, I don't have any measuring equipment.

Coming from a Mechanical Engineering background i must say i agree with Ronald's statement 100%.

Believe me, that little pressed in indent on the newer liners is very tough,  and because it's a very small area makes it even tougher, more than the straight sheet of aluminum of the old ones.
Compare it to how metal sheets on cars are made and stamped (pressed in), the principle is roughly the same, to strengthen structural integrity of assembled sheets of metal.
Yes the older straight ones may look better, but i believe the newer ones are tougher.

And having a slimmer tang means the blank sheet of stainless steel from which the main blade is made can also be slightly thinner as raw material, there for reducing cost of raw materials and less goes to waste after grinding the blades to final shape.
It's almost insignificant on one blade, but if you multiply by many millions, well... you get the picture.  :cheers:

I'd definitely agree that the liners themselves as a whole are stiffer because of the stamping, probably for the same reason an I-beam is stronger than a solid square beam of the same weight (thank you Mr. Wizard's World!).  But I was only speaking of the pivot area and the possibly weaker lateral strength caused by the decreased surface area sandwiching the tang.  When the blade is open, there is more leverage available when moving the blade laterally. The best analogy I can think of right now is comparing the strength of gripping a baseball bat with your entire hand versus gripping it with your hand but without your pinky.  I am not a mechanical engineer, so I have no idea really. But I'm guessing you're saying that the added strength concentrated around the pivot though having a smaller surface area contacting the tang more than makes up for the increased leverage (caused by the gap) when moving the blade laterally.

I'd probably guess the main reason Vic switched to a thinner tang and redesigned liners was just so they could use thinner sheets of stainless steel.

Lighter, possibly stronger blades, increased liner strength, better back spring, and the most important feature, the hidden straight pin hole. The verdict is in. Current model SAKs are better than older ones! Now knowing all vintage SAKs are obsolete, I'll be happy to take them off your hands!  ;)


nl Offline EMZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 933
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #22 on: June 17, 2017, 06:18:07 PM
A weight reduction of 2 grams per knife is HUGHE if you produce around 35.000 knives a DAY!
That is about 70 kg of high quality steel a day you need less. That's money!


us Offline El Corkscrew

  • *
  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *******
    • Posts: 8,187
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #23 on: June 17, 2017, 07:08:14 PM
A weight reduction of 2 grams per knife is HUGHE if you produce around 35.000 knives a DAY!
That is about 70 kg of high quality steel a day you need less. That's money!

You'll see this 2g change and more just in the 80's, but it wasn't always a lateral movement, they went up and down a couple times with the weight in the 80's.  Long story short my heaviest 80's soldier is 3+g heavier than my lightest 00's.   - Just talking Vic here.  Wenger consistently trails Vic by 1-3g every year I've seen.  (again just talking soldier models)

 :cheers:
“All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure.” - Mark Twain


gb Offline AimlessWanderer

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 17,517
  • I'm not a pessimist, I'm an experienced optimist!
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #24 on: June 17, 2017, 07:21:37 PM
A weight reduction of 2 grams per knife is HUGHE if you produce around 35.000 knives a DAY!
That is about 70 kg of high quality steel a day you need less. That's money!

Plus, with thinner steel you can get the stampings closer together, and increase the yield of blades per coil


The cantankerous but occasionally useful member, formally known as 50ft-trad


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #25 on: June 17, 2017, 09:47:29 PM
Guys... I love the vintage ones too, don't get me wrong i love vintage, and in more than just sak's. And i'll grab one if the opportunity arises, no question :salute:  But that's more for the "vintage" factor rather than the (possible) toughness or durability vs a current one

All i'm saying is that slightly thicker and heavier and harder doesn't necessarily mean it's obligatory to be stronger and more durable. It depend's on a lot of factors.

The vintage ones may even be a little stronger, or even feel more solid but at the end of the day, for the average real word use and user's (collecting's aside) does it really makes that much of a difference?

Has any one had any catastrophic tool failure on a recent one as opposed to a vintage one...?  :think:

I'll sick by my statement: They're all good   :D :cheers:
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 09:56:38 PM by MacGyver »
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


us Offline El Corkscrew

  • *
  • Absolutely No Life Club
  • *******
    • Posts: 8,187
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #26 on: June 17, 2017, 09:58:17 PM
Guys... I love the vintage ones too, don't get me wrong i love vintage, and in more than just sak's. And i'll grab one if the Has any one had any catastrophic tool failure on a recent one as opposed to a vintage one...?  :think:

I'll sick by my statement: They're all good   :D :cheers:

Yes. It's AWL good.  It's not like I'm ever gonna put my old vintage SAKs  to the test anyway. 

I just keep those around to pick up chicks... :climber:
“All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure.” - Mark Twain


pt Offline MacGyver

  • No Life Club
  • ******
    • Posts: 1,550
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #27 on: June 17, 2017, 10:07:30 PM

I just keep those around to pick up chicks... :climber:
:rofl:  :rofl:
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 10:10:30 PM by MacGyver »
"Another Day...; a whole n'other set of fresh possibilities..." - MacGyver (S1E19 - "Slow Death")


wales Offline magentus

  • Admin Team
  • *
  • Absolute Zombie Club
  • *
    • Posts: 20,383
  • mmmmm SAKrelicious
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #28 on: June 17, 2017, 10:10:16 PM
Guys... I love the vintage ones too, don't get me wrong i love vintage, and in more than just sak's. And i'll grab one if the Has any one had any catastrophic tool failure on a recent one as opposed to a vintage one...?  :think:

I'll sick by my statement: They're all good   :D :cheers:

Yes. It's AWL good.  It's not like I'm ever gonna put my old vintage SAKs  to the test anyway. 

I just keep those around to pick up chicks... :climber:
That, my friend, is the best and quickest way to get a knock on the door from dks. :D
'Use the force Harry' - Gandalf


00 Offline Mechanickal

  • *
  • Zombie Apprentice
  • ********
    • Posts: 14,686
Re: SAKs Old vs New?
Reply #29 on: June 17, 2017, 10:16:00 PM
Guys... I love the vintage ones too, don't get me wrong i love vintage, and in more than just sak's. And i'll grab one if the Has any one had any catastrophic tool failure on a recent one as opposed to a vintage one...?  :think:

I'll sick by my statement: They're all good   :D :cheers:

Yes. It's AWL good.  It's not like I'm ever gonna put my old vintage SAKs  to the test anyway. 

I just keep those around to pick up chicks... :climber:
That, my friend, is the best and quickest way to get a knock on the door from dks. :D
I can't help myself wondering how that works out for you anyway El C...


 

Donations

Operational Funds

Help us keep the Unworkable working!
Donate with PayPal!
March Goal: $300.00
Due Date: Mar 31
Total Receipts: $379.86
PayPal Fees: $19.62
Net Balance: $360.24
Above Goal: $60.24
Site Currency: USD
120% 
March Donations

Community Links


Powered by EzPortal