I just received a new Chinook and, although generally impressed with the knife, there are a few fit/finish problems. I wanted to know if I should just return the knife for a refund or send it to Spyderco to get fixed.
Specifically, there are two issues: 1) the thumb stop is not evenly ground, meaning that the forward ridges are much thinner and sharper than the proximal ones. 2) the swedge, I think that's what it's called, is dramatically asymmetrical. Also, the clip has a slight burr on the end which makes gripping uncomfortable.
Am I being too picky, or do these observations warrant return? I really like this knife and would prefer not to have to return it. Thanks,
Brian
Chinook question
-
John Frederick
- Member
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
- Location: Pearl River, La. USA
It sounds like your first 2 issues are strictly cosmetic and the 3rd can be fixed by you. What you need to ask yourself is "Can I live with these cosmetic defects?" I'm sure SFO will replace your knife if you decide to return it. My Chinook has a slightly asymmetrical swedge grind but I have learned to live with it. I guess it depends on a persons definition of acceptable flaws. I'd suggest handling it and using it lightly for a few days and see if it grows on you. If the cosmetic flaws continue to bug you return it. If your Chinook grows on you then hit the clip with a file and enjoy your new knife.
Actually, the thumb stop can be pretty painful, but maybe that's just me being a wuss. I've gone ahead and tried to illustrate my complaints below. The two lower panels are product shots from botach tactical. The upper panels have the profile and swedge of my knife superimposed on them. I didn't think I was expecting too much, but maybe I am, just trying to get an idea what range of cosmetic/ergonomic flaws fall within normal limits for this knife. If this would not be considered substandard, I may have a metal working friend grind down the painful bits to a more tolerable depth or simply return it for a BM 721. Kind of surprised that my Gunting trainer seems to have such better fit and finish. Is this what the rest of your all Chinook's look/feel like?
I appreciate the replies, but the more I think about it the more I feel I must beg to differ. Please note that this is not a generalized complaint about Spyderco or its knives. I only have two, a Chinook and a Gunting Trainer. My G is great, and I expect most other people's Chinooks are just fine. But to clarify...
I'm not a collector, and maybe I'm too picky, but my sense would dictate that it's appropriate to expect gross evidence of manufacture pride and quality from a $100+ knife. That is, the piece should pass the test of casual inspection and handling without demonstrating obvious defects, cosmetic or otherwise. For instance, last year I bought a .22 from Thompson Center for under $250. It is not a high volume unit but it was built to high tolerances of quality materials in America. It's not an Anschutz or a Cooper, but it passes casual inspection with flying colors. My Kershaws and Benchmades are very well crafted, even though they are, for the most part, lower end knives with lower quality materials than the Chinook.
I guess this is just to say, that even in a worker, maybe especially in a worker, a person likes to see evidence of the craftsmanship and pride involved in the tool's manufacture. There's nothing better than having someone put their all into designing and building something and then having the end user work it to death or die trying. Just because I didn't get a William Henry or CRK product doesn't mean I shouldn't expect quality and pride in manufacture. And just because it's a worker doesn't mean that obvious cosmetic defects should be ignored. I'm not looking for an ornament, or micrometer tolerances on ornamental details, but I would like to see a little more pride of manufacture.
This little rant is not meant as a jab at Spyderco, even great companies let some lemons get through. I hope Sal, Eric, Joyce, et al will not take it as such if any of them read this post. I have no doubt that when I return the knife, the defects will be corrected or the piece will be replaced. But I'm surprised to hear other knife users take such a cavalier attitude about the quality they are willing to accept, or expect others to accept, at a given price point. I am impressed with the Glesser spirit of innovation, which is why I will continue to be a Spyderco customer, but I think it's healthy to set reasonable expectations and express honest disappointment in a product even when people or companies we admire are involved.
I'm not a collector, and maybe I'm too picky, but my sense would dictate that it's appropriate to expect gross evidence of manufacture pride and quality from a $100+ knife. That is, the piece should pass the test of casual inspection and handling without demonstrating obvious defects, cosmetic or otherwise. For instance, last year I bought a .22 from Thompson Center for under $250. It is not a high volume unit but it was built to high tolerances of quality materials in America. It's not an Anschutz or a Cooper, but it passes casual inspection with flying colors. My Kershaws and Benchmades are very well crafted, even though they are, for the most part, lower end knives with lower quality materials than the Chinook.
I guess this is just to say, that even in a worker, maybe especially in a worker, a person likes to see evidence of the craftsmanship and pride involved in the tool's manufacture. There's nothing better than having someone put their all into designing and building something and then having the end user work it to death or die trying. Just because I didn't get a William Henry or CRK product doesn't mean I shouldn't expect quality and pride in manufacture. And just because it's a worker doesn't mean that obvious cosmetic defects should be ignored. I'm not looking for an ornament, or micrometer tolerances on ornamental details, but I would like to see a little more pride of manufacture.
This little rant is not meant as a jab at Spyderco, even great companies let some lemons get through. I hope Sal, Eric, Joyce, et al will not take it as such if any of them read this post. I have no doubt that when I return the knife, the defects will be corrected or the piece will be replaced. But I'm surprised to hear other knife users take such a cavalier attitude about the quality they are willing to accept, or expect others to accept, at a given price point. I am impressed with the Glesser spirit of innovation, which is why I will continue to be a Spyderco customer, but I think it's healthy to set reasonable expectations and express honest disappointment in a product even when people or companies we admire are involved.
-
glockman99
- Member
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
- Location: Aberdeen, WA USA
- Contact:
Spyderco really DOES want their customers to be happy and satisfied with Spyderco products...If you are not happy with your Chinook, then return it.
Dann Fassnacht Aberdeen, WA glockman99@hotmail.com ICQ: 53675663
Dann Fassnacht Aberdeen, WA glockman99@hotmail.com ICQ: 53675663
-
fredswartz
- Member
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:33 am
- Location: Appalachia
I bought a new Chinook and it was almost impossible to unlock the blade. I don't usually send knives back for repair unless there is a glaring problem. Guess what? I got a new Chinook from Mike with perfect lockup. I think that a cosmetic flaw would not qualify in my book but that is up to you.
Jerry
Jerry