Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 6 conversations about:
LoremicusIpsuminus
57
Sep 18, 2018
bookmark_border
Hatuletoh
850
Sep 18, 2018
bookmark_border
LoremicusIpsuminusWell said. I dont agree with every last word, but your points about washers and Spyderco aesthetics should just be copied and pinned to the top on every Spyderco MF thread, like OSHA posters at job sites. The only thing I'd add is that all the "best" Spyderco models, the one's people love like the Paramilitary series, the Manix, Delicas and Enduras, Native and Chaparral--all washers, no bearings. And always outstanding action, with more reliability.
Kavik
5531
Sep 18, 2018
bookmark_border
LoremicusIpsuminusHi there,
I applaud you for bringing up some things that generally aren't considered when we look at the straight up cost of materials vs price of the knife, specifically the costs of research and development, but I have to question the extent of the impact those costs have long term?
When we're looking at a knife like this one, which costs more than double what many people feel the materials are worth, are we saying that R&D costs account for over 50% of the value? And if so (which, it just can't be...but for the sake of argument let's say it is), how long are the consumers expected to continue paying that premium?
Eventually, at some point, enough knives have been sold to cover the full cost of R&D. Does Spyderco drop the price of a particular model once it reaches that point? Of course not. They continue selling at the same price, the model has paid for itself, the rest is pure profit. Best case scenario, you'd argue that all that extra money goes into their R&D for other projects, but again, that's all the more reason that 100% of that cost shouldn't be factored into each and every knife, as it's a cost of keeping your business running and your reputation strong.
I don't know much about this particular knife, but look at some of their flagship knives that have been selling for decades, R&D was paid for AGES ago. In many cases nothing in the design has changed, materials haven't changed (or if they have, the price changed with them anyway), yet the prices keep rising year after year (and no, not just on par with general inflation).
Add to that the fact that they re-use soooo many design aspects across different models, it's not like they're designing much of anything from scratch at this point. For example; this lockback is nothing new to them, all they had to do was decide this is the lock style they wanted to put on this knife. Outside of sprint runs they have their "go to" steels, and they just need to pick which one is best suited for each individual knife...they aren't prototyping and real world testing every blade in different steels every time, they already know what they think works for different styles and for different applications.
In my opinion I do agree that you should expect to pay a premium for the costs associated with developing a tried and true brand......but it should be a nominal fee, not a 100%+ markup. If they need that much more money on every single sale for research and business costs then they're looking for investors, not customers. (and also, they need to rethink their business model at look at ways of reducing operating costs) Someone who HAS to have every new Spyderco might consider it an investment in keeping their favorite line going.....but the average person just looking for one or two good knives doesn't need to be donating extra money to future developments for something they will never benefit from.
In short, you're right, Spyderco doesn't specialize in complicated high cost production builds. All the more reason that their models with flat stock FRN/G10 and VG10/S30V and simple lockback designs should never cost $100, much less $2-300...it's absurd. Especially when we're shown time and again by other companies that more elaborate designs, with higher end materials, can be made just as well for much, much less.
When we're looking at a knife like this one, which costs more than double what many people feel the materials are worth, are we saying that R&D costs account for over 50% of the value? And if so (which, it just can't be...but for the sake of argument let's say it is), how long are the consumers expected to continue paying that premium?
Eventually, at some point, enough knives have been sold to cover the full cost of R&D. Does Spyderco drop the price of a particular model once it reaches that point? Of course not. They continue selling at the same price, the model has paid for itself, the rest is pure profit. Best case scenario, you'd argue that all that extra money goes into their R&D for other projects, but again, that's all the more reason that 100% of that cost shouldn't be factored into each and every knife, as it's a cost of keeping your business running and your reputation strong.
I don't know much about this particular knife, but look at some of their flagship knives that have been selling for decades, R&D was paid for AGES ago. In many cases nothing in the design has changed, materials haven't changed (or if they have, the price changed with them anyway), yet the prices keep rising year after year (and no, not just on par with general inflation).
Add to that the fact that they re-use soooo many design aspects across different models, it's not like they're designing much of anything from scratch at this point. For example; this lockback is nothing new to them, all they had to do was decide this is the lock style they wanted to put on this knife. Outside of sprint runs they have their "go to" steels, and they just need to pick which one is best suited for each individual knife...they aren't prototyping and real world testing every blade in different steels every time, they already know what they think works for different styles and for different applications.
In my opinion I do agree that you should expect to pay a premium for the costs associated with developing a tried and true brand......but it should be a nominal fee, not a 100%+ markup. If they need that much more money on every single sale for research and business costs then they're looking for investors, not customers. (and also, they need to rethink their business model at look at ways of reducing operating costs) Someone who HAS to have every new Spyderco might consider it an investment in keeping their favorite line going.....but the average person just looking for one or two good knives doesn't need to be donating extra money to future developments for something they will never benefit from.
In short, you're right, Spyderco doesn't specialize in complicated high cost production builds. All the more reason that their models with flat stock FRN/G10 and VG10/S30V and simple lockback designs should never cost $100, much less $2-300...it's absurd. Especially when we're shown time and again by other companies that more elaborate designs, with higher end materials, can be made just as well for much, much less.
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop
1. (Ceramic) Ball Bearing
Chris Reeve Knives easily cost over 500 and uses washers, Faellkniven/Al Mar/Moki easily cost over 200 and uses plastic washers or no washers. Does that mean they are bad? No, they are easily some of the best knives out there.
Ball Bearing is a choice for fun action but low in maintenance. It requires delicate maintenance in comparison to washers. For instance, you will not want to skin a deer with bearing knife.
2. s30v is inferior
s30v is a choice. A lot of other "supersteel" like s90v, s110v, Elmax, 20CV, M390 are not made for cutting general material, but was specifically created to cut high abrasive material like plastic in the first place. In urban area, under normal circumstances it has good edge retention.
Now try that in cutting dirty material that may have rocks or nails in them. Non-vanadium or traditional lower carbide steels will be very easy to restore the edge or keeping a high sharpness. This is the simple reason why the stock steel for Chef was X50 or VG10 for the fancy lads. Some fancy lad uses Hap40 or Aogami series but it is a deliberate choice and they will cry when a careless guy "borrowed" their knife.
3. Ugly
Spyderco has the best ergo. If a person need absolute ergo they choose Spyderco. There are a lot of knife that looks better but perform harsh in the hand all over.
4. Price
This is where the problem goes now. Consumer prefer pretty knife made of fancy steel for pocket jewelry rather than work knife, which is okay. Buying Spyderco means paying for the research and development fee and the uniqueness of the line.
Problem though is the new trend to produce aesthetically pleasing knife which involved high production cost which is not a specialty of Spyderco.
The best Spyderco knives are designed by Sal and Eric, which are the stock line. There are interesting pieces from Ed Schempp and Marcin Slysz and couple others. My most carried knife is the Squarehead by Darriel Caston which is unique in the market and it is hard to replace it with any other knife. This is the reason I paid for it.