Benjamin Schwartz

Ben Schwartz is a writer and gear geek. When not contributing to BladeReviews, he is the editor of KnifeNews.com reporting on the latest news on new and popular knives, production knife companies, custom knife makers, and things happening in the cutlery industry. Here are his barely-maintained Twitter and blog.

Buck 110 Folding Hunter Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 62 Comments

No history of the folding pocket knife is complete without the Buck 110 Folding Hunter. It is arguably the first modern folder, in ethos if not in design. “Buck knife” is now a catch-all term for a certain style of blade, and the 110 is responsible for that. More than other knife besides the Swiss Army Knife, the Buck 110 is an icon.

Buy the Buck 110 at BladeHQ

But for all that it heralds modern folder design, the 110 is more antithetical to a Paramilitary 2 or a Griptilian than a traditional knife. It’s a question of refinement. Traditionals evolved on a separate path, and even if that evolution peaked 100 years ago there is a lot more refinement in a Case Peanut than in the 110. Its design is iconic and influential, but it does seem crude by modern standards.

Is it fair to hold the 110 to modern standards? Well, Buck still markets this knife as a tool, not a collectible. The implication here is that they believe it is a competitive offering in today’s knife market. And crude doesn’t necessarily equate to bad. So I’ve tested it as I would any other knife under review, and after several weeks of dedicated carry and use, I have come to my conclusions regarding the 110.

General Dimensions and Blade Details

The 110 has a handle length of 4 ¾”, a blade length of 3 ¾”, and an overall length of 8 9/16”. It weighs 7.2 oz. The lines of the 110 are so familiar that I hardly need to go over them. The gleaming brass bolsters and wooden scales have been copied by dozens and dozens of manufacturers over the years. Although I take issue with Buck’s decision to keep the 110 design more or less as is for 50 years, I can certainly sympathize with it. Buck struck a chord with the 110. There are major issues with the tolerances, but the finish on the 110 is quite good for a $40 knife. This is a handsome blade.

And beyond looks the 110 has plenty of merit, mainly thanks to its utter simplicity. I’ve talked about handles being task neutral before, but here we have a task neutral knife. Although called a hunter, there’s just an alchemy between the lines and proportions of the 110 that make it able to perform any kind of cutting task.

Some of that versatility is delivered by the blade shape. A low-slung, sharkish clip point, it leverages its length to great effect. The larger blade means that you have a decent run of straight edge before the sweep to the tip, so sawing and slicing are on the table. In relation to the handle, the belly is angled so that you can really push down and get through material quickly. The tip is acute for effective leading and good piercing. And, unlike many large blades, it is a great slicer. A workhorse blade shape that manages to retain its grace as well.

The steel is 420HC. Much is made of Buck’s Paul Bos heat treatments. I have no experience with this steel outside of Buck knives so I can’t say whether it makes a difference. The Buck/Bos 420HC is probably a smidge better than 8Cr13MoV, but not quite as good as AUS-8A. It dulls rather quickly, but you can sharpen the hell out of this 420HC very easily. Some steels, like VG-10, I can work and work and work on without getting past a certain level of sharpness. Here, 420HC got super sharp super quick, which I appreciate.

Handle, Ergonomics, and Carry

I have no complaints about the 110’s handle shape. The bow shape handle is as neutral as it gets. A lot of makers seem to think that we need finger grooves and scallops and jimping to show us the different ways we can hold our knife, but it is always better when the handle lets us decide. There isn’t a wrong way to hold the 110.

I find balance to be an essential part of good knife design. The closer the balance is to the pivot, the more control we have over the blade. The 110’s Dymondwod and brass construction lead to a rather Rubenesque knife. Balance is right in the middle of the handle, where the swell is most pronounced – a decent distance from the pivot. There’s nothing unpleasant about this while holding the knife, but in use it means you lose so much control for finer work. A shame, considering the surprising competency of this nearly 4” in delicate tasks.

But where the weight really kills the 110, of course, is in carry. There is no better way to learn about the advantages of lightweight knives than to spend a little time with a Buck 110. No clip here. My 110 came with a leather sheath, the traditional carry method for this knife, but I find that to be impractical for day-to-day suburban life, so my 110 rode in the back pocket. It wasn’t good, but at 7.2 oz. you’re going to notice this thing wherever you have it. It’s less ‘just bad’ than it is ‘really unfeasible.’

Deployment and Lockup

The 110’s two-handed opening is a bummer. Nail nicks are part of the charm of traditional knives, but the 110 isn’t a traditional knife. That’s why it’s famous. On the other hand I understand that thumb studs weren’t a common sight when the 110 came out, so I’m not faulting Buck for releasing the 110 without them, I just wish that they would have added them at some point in the last 50 years.

Complaints aside, the nail nick on the 110 works well, as does simply pinching the blade as I normally do on my Opinel. The opening action is smooth and positive, and the sound when the lock engages is satisfying, and all of this was how the knife was out of the box. You expect these things to feel right on a classic, and they do.

Much less right is the lock. I have faith in its safety, but it’s sloppy. From day one there was play in every direction on my 110, and the lock bar flexes quite readily during hard downward cuts. If I don’t sound particularly disappointed it’s probably because it’s the level of QC I’ve come to expect from Buck – which is itself the worst kind of condemnation.

If Buck is going to continue to espouse the virtues of stateside production, I really would like to see them recognize the level of competition out there and up their game. Newer products like the Marksman seem to indicate they’re capable of tight tolerances and complicated designs, and I for one would willingly pay more to see that same attention to detail on their flagship product.

Buck 110 Folding Hunter – Final Thoughts

There is no unqualified recommendation I can make for the 110 other than collectability. If you’re interested in knives and the history of their design, the 110 is 100% required reading. But as a tool, in any application, I can suggest a dozen other knives that outperform it. I can suggest better cutters, better locks, better fit and finish, all at or around the same price and all considerably lighter.

Buck is a company with a proud history, and the 110 is central to that history. I think they’ve convinced themselves that, by changing the 110, they are flouting the tradition it represents. That’s simply not true. Spyderco has been tweaking their flagships for years and nobody’s forgotten the significance of the Delica. There is a difference between honoring your past and being imprisoned by it. It’s frustrating that there aren’t readily available modern variations on the 110 from Buck. A model with G-10 scales, aluminum bolsters, and a clip would be cool. KA-BAR recently released such a knife and it is 2 oz. lighter than the 110.

I don’t even know that it’s a particularly good value at $40. The finish is good in a rough and tumble, barroom countertop kind of way, but the tolerances are way below par. I think that Buck is still trying to work out its priorities and in the meantime customers are left in the lurch with some very shoddy production. The Mini Spitfire I handled was worse than this, but not much worse.

The iconic character of the 110 saves it from being a total pass. This is real knife history that can be had for $40. Go grab one and see how far we’ve come. You’ll learn a lot, but don’t expect to end up using it much. It’s hard not to like the 110, but it is even harder to want to carry it.

If you are considering buying a Buck 110, I recommend purchasing it at Amazon or BladeHQ. By purchasing things through any of the links on this website you support BladeReviews.com, keep the website free of annoying banner ads, and help produce future reviews. Thank you very much.

Olight S1 Baton Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 13 Comments

Last Updated: September 16, 2019
With some pieces of gear appreciation takes a while. Advantages and charms are subtle, and only appear over a long period of use. With others, their positive qualities are immediate and obvious. Almost from the second you start using it, you understand and appreciate it.

Buy on Amazon

So it was, for me, with the Olight S1 Baton. As soon as I had it out of the packaging and put in a battery, I knew I loved it. This is a phenomenal light. It’s less a case of perfection than one of consistent excellence in nearly every category. The things that are bad are minor, and the things that are good are so good that, in some ways, I feel like they couldn’t be improved.

Foolish thoughts, of course, but any time a product inspires such thoughts I think it’s worth it to sit up and pay attention. The Olight S1 Baton is a top-tier piece of kit.

General Dimensions and Construction

The Olight S1 Baton is 2 3/8” long, and ¾” across as its widest point. With the battery in, it weighs 1.6 oz. Very light, but the weight distribution is such that there’s a pleasant heft to the S1 with the battery in. The S1 Baton is available in raw or rose gold copper, polished or bead blasted titanium, or, like mine, in standard black anodized aluminum. It uses a 1xCR123a battery.

The fit and finish of the S1 is thoroughly competent. The Type III anodization is clean, and seems to be more durable than the job on my Microstream. The threads all work smoothly without any drama or a break-in period. The blue accents give this otherwise extremely utilitarian-looking design a little character without being obtrusive or corny.

The S1 Baton is so-called because it features a magnet in the tail cap that allows you to stick it to something for hands free use (like a…baton? I don’t really get the naming convention). The magnet is removable, and before I got it I thought it was something I was going to get rid of, but I ended up really liking it. I keep it stuck to my nightstand lamp so it’s always in the same place if I go looking for it in the middle of the night. A surprisingly handy feature.

The S1’s clip is a friction fit clip. The clip is oriented for ‘tip up’ carry, if you will. Situated the way it is, you can clip it to a hat brim for hands-free operation without the need of an S-style clip. It runs almost the length of the light and is made of surprisingly thick steel.

Instead of a standard reflector, the S1 utilizes a TIR optic. TIR stands for Total Internal Reflection. As a journeyman flashoholic I don’t understand all the attendant TIR arcana, but I do know that it is supposed to produce clean, even beams. I’ll discuss the performance below, but note here that you might be surprised at how the S1’s optic looks – I know I was. It’s concave, made from some sort of polycarbonate, with a raised piece in the center. Not bad, just unusual.

Output, Runtime, and UI

The S1’s specs feel very current, even months after its release. The high of 500 lumens is shocking to see, flaring out of a light this small. I don’t know how practical it is. I haven’t used it all that much for anything other than showing off, but it’s nice to know that it’s there if I ever need it.

Much more useful is are medium and low at 80 and 8 lumens, respectively. The medium setting, for me, is ideal for illuminating the path during night walks. The 8 lumen low is deceptively bright, more than enough for checking under couches or searching for dropped keys in a parking lot. I was a little hesitant at the disparity between each of the modes, but Olight clearly knew what it was doing: these are thoughtful demarcations, each with their own uses.

The .5 lumen moonlight low is great. It’s bright enough to read by, but dim enough to be easy on your eyes and not bother a sleeping partner or freak out the cats. Moonlight lows seem like they are becoming more or less standard features on flashlights, and I can see why. Once you try it, it’s hard to go back.

The only other light I’ve used with a TIR was an Armytek Partner C1, and its beam pattern was oddly textured and spotty. Thankfully, the S1’s pattern is nice and clean, even and white. Much more flood than throw, obviously, but that’s what you want in an EDC light most of the time.

Runtimes are pretty great. You get 1.5 hours on high, 6 hours on medium, 40 hours on low, and 25 days on moonlight low. I’m surprised that the medium runtime isn’t a little higher, but it isn’t dismal and I don’t use the medium often enough to care.

I think clickies are the best UI. They facilitate one-handed operation better than twisties and, when executed well, are equally as intuitive. The S1’s side button clicky is executed very well. One click turns the light on in the last mode used. Holding it down cycles through the levels. Clicking the button three times while on turns on strobe. You access moonlight by holding the button down while the light is off. Similarly, you can jump right to high by double pressing the button while the light is off. Simple.

There are two hidden timer modes, one for three minutes and one for nine minutes, that can be accessed. I’ve never used them, and never will. I find these hidden modes to be more or less useless on any light, but if they’re sufficiently hidden I have no problem with them being around.

Ergonomics and Carry

The S1 isn’t so much small as it is short. This is a short, short light. It is almost hard to hold on to: the checkered texturing on the aluminum isn’t grippy, nor is the anodization. The aforementioned weightiness keeps the S1 more or less in place, and the flats of the hex-bolt collar give you a place to pinch it. It achieves decent grippiness through balance rather than texturing.

I had heard bad things about the clip before I picked up the S1. I was determined to come to it with an open mind. This clip is really bad. I mentioned above that it’s thick. It’s also tight. I had to fight this thing to get it clipped to my jeans, and when I did the rotund S1 occupied a surprisingly large amount of pocket space. Retrieval is a whole other chore. The retention notch and the angle at which the clip loops it over itself makes pulling this light out feel like you’re wrestling with a misaligned zipper. Terrible, terrible clip. Thank God it’s removable.

Without the clip, the S1 is manageable. It is short, which is nice, but chunky, which is not. Pocket carry is doable, coin pocket carry too, but nothing felt ideal. I do wish it were thinner, but I think its rotundity is a function of the type of battery it takes, and I’m just spoiled from the svelte AAA lights I’ve carried up until now.

Olight S1 Baton Review – Final Thoughts

I don’t buy a lot of flashlights. I average one a year. The S1 may very well slow down the pace even more. It gets the important stuff right. It’s a good representation of the best that the current generation of flashlight technology has to offer, maybe the best representation, and I have a hard time imagining why I would ever need another light.

I mean, I’m sure I will get other lights at some point. The Paramilitary 2 may be all the knife I’ll ever need, but I’ll be damned if I’m not going to keep buying and carrying other knives as well. But, just like with the PM2, I’m sure the S1 will remain in my collection. It’s too good not to have around. Whether it’s your first light or your fiftieth, the S1 is immediately, obviously excellent.

OLIGHT S1 500 Lumen Cree XM-L2 CW Compact EDC LED Flashlight

Cree XM-L2 CW LED. Maximum light output up to 500 lumens.
PMMA TIR lens with a 90% light transmittance rate.
3 standard modes: 8 lumens, 80 lumens and 500 lumens.
2 special modes: 0.5 lumen moonlight mode and a 10Hz strobe mode.
Runs on: 1x CR123A or 1x RCR123(Battery not included).

I recommend buying the Olight S1 Baton at Amazon. Thank you for reading.

Kizer Vanguard Gemini Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 23 Comments

Last Updated: August 2, 2019
It’s a question I (and others) have been asking a lot lately: Where is the middle?

The Budget Knife has had its day: the Tenacious, the Cryo, the Skyline, the RAT-1, the Drifter; value was the byword of the industry, and knife makers were showing some serious creativity and finesse working under the restrictive parameters of budget knife design.

Buy the Kizer Gemini at BladeHQ

Buy on Amazon

Similarly, 2015 saw the high end of the market really take off, with a stream of great $150 announced and released. The materials were different – S35VN and titanium instead of 8Cr13MoV and black polymers – but the feverish pace of invention and the way in which our expectations for quality were reset were the same.

But the middle was more or less ignored. Companies’ attention was clearly elsewhere, and this is a shame. Designs in the middle of the market (let’s say the $60-$100 range) are some of the historical best: things like the Delica and the Mini Gripitilian have good materials and great designs at an affordable price. If I were feeling polemical, I’d say that the middle of the market is the only segment in which you can shake the feeling of having to have compromised: with a budget knife, even a good one, you can’t help but think it could be improved with better steel or execution; with a high end knife, you feel like you’re paying a lot for only a little more performance.

In the middle you can get, if not the best, the more-than-adequate of both worlds. Great design, great fit and finish, great materials and steel. Less compromise, more performance. But, there just aren’t a lot of designs coming out that cater to this segment; this is why Kizer’s Vanguard series, and in particular the Vanguard Gemini, excited me so much: this is a quality design, by a famous custom maker, at a very affordable price point. As soon as I was able to, I picked one up.

But there are a lot of questions here: is it a good knife? Is it a good knife for the money? Is a good knife compared to the classics of the middle genre? Is it a better value than the premium version? The answers are complicated, and intertwine; so let’s get into it.

General Dimensions and Blade Details

The Gemini has a blade length of 3.125″, an overall length of 7/25″, weighs 3.58 ounces and is made in China. In terms of proportions, it is adequate if not distinctive. Where it really distinguishes itself from other knives like the Delica or the Mini Grip, and even from some Kizer stablemates like the 3404, is in its custom pedigree.

The Gemini is a production version of Ray Laconico’s Jasmine. Really, the Jasmine is less a specific knife than a kind of overarching design or aesthetic, a series of lines and design nuances that are translated from one Laconico knife to another. Sometimes it’s a titanium flipper, sometimes it has a liner lock and a thumbstud, but always there’s a certain aesthetic in play, and I think this aesthetic comes through most clearly, on the various custom iterations and this production riff, in the blade shape.

It’s a drop point, almost a Platonically ideal Loveless drop point except for its somewhat more elongate tip. Although this is a larger knife than the SRM 710, it too embodies an excellent, near perfect combination of edge types: you have your straight edge, your curving belly, your acute tip. You can slice, pierce, chop gracefully. The single caveat I have is that it isn’t the most robust blade, but in all reasonable use you’ll be delighted. For all around utility, this is up there with some of the best of the best.

The Gemini’s blade is made from VG-10. Certainly VG-10 has fallen from grace in recent years. It’s a really weird steel. It holds an edge better than 8Cr13MoV or AUS-8, but worse than most other mid-tier steels like 154CM or N690Co – and it’s harder to sharpen well. You can get a functional edge back on VG-10 quickly, but to get it really fine you need to work on it for a bit. In short, it has an odd work-to-performance ratio, with no real standout characteristic other than its rust resistance – which, let it be said, is incredible.

The choice of steel is one of a few budget conscious decisions Kizer made when producing the Vanguard Gemini, and probably the least successful of the three. The middle segment of the market doesn’t have a representative steel like 8Cr13MoV or S35VN are for budget and high end knives. There are candidates, like 154CM or N690Co, but nothing established – and, while I don’t hate it, I don’t think that VG-10 should be in the running.

Handle, Ergonomics, and Carry

The Vanguard Gemini handle is G-10, as opposed to titanium on the premium version. And, to be frank, I prefer G-10 over titanium. Besides aesthetics, I don’t know what the argument is for titanium, now that I think about it. It isn’t warm to the touch, it isn’t lighter, it isn’t more durable in any practical sense. If the big advantage of titanium is that it allows for a framelock, that doesn’t sell it, as I find framelocks more or less strictly inferior at this point.

The G-10 on the Gemini is real good. It is grippy, without being outrageously aggressive. It accentuates the simple utility of the straightforward handle, giving you purchase no matter how you’re holding the blade. Compared to the Delica, which has a refined although somewhat dictatorial handle, you have a lot more freedom in terms of how you hold the Gemini.

Reviewing the 3404, the biggest issue I took with the knife besides its overall blandness was the horrible pocket clip. Kizer seems to have learned a lot about pocket clips in the time between the design of that knife and this one, because the clip on the Gemini, in terms of its lines, is very good – smaller than it looks like in pictures, but not in any way that affects carry.

What does affect carry is the clip’s tightness. It’s not terrible, but it can be a pain to pull out of your pocket. I kind of had to pull it out diagonally, in order for my jeans to not get bunched up. It’s not ideal, but I’ll take this minor inconvenience over the atrocious clip on the 3404, every day.

Deployment and Lockup

With the Vanguard Gemini’s flipper, instead of building to a price point Kizer went all out. The flipper on the Vanguard Gemini is as good a flipper as I’ve ever used. The combination of ball-bearing pivot and silky, perfectly-tensioned detent (complete with ceramic detent ball) makes for nearly effortless deployment. Seriously, I had to go out of my way to deploy this thing incorrectly, it’s that responsive.

I don’t think there’s any practical advantage to a flipper design, but like any knife collector, I am susceptible to fidget factor, and the Gemini is absolutely hypnotic and addicting to play with. It makes knives that I thought pretty fast, knives like the 3404, feel sluggish. I carried the Delica 4 again around the time I was testing the Gemini, and the laggardly lockback felt like the relic of a distant age.

Because the Vanguard Gemini has G-10 scales instead of titanium, it uses a liner lock instead of a framelock – to my mind a straight upgrade. I’ve gone on at length before about my distaste for framelocks. I suppose I’ll find one I like at some point, but until then I’ll continue to espouse the liner lock as strictly better – and here on the Vanguard Gemini we have an excellent rendition of the form.

In my experience, every knife I’ve owned has some bladeplay, or develops some over my review/testing period – even if it’s very, very little. So far on the Gemini, I’ve got nothing, and I didn’t baby this knife: a cardboard cut-off with the Delica 4 induced nothing at all. Things may change in the future but, as of now, this thing is solid.

Kizer Vanguard Gemini Review – Final Thoughts

There are three different ways to look at the Gemini. First as the realization of the Kizer Promise. They were making good knives before the Gemini, but nothing that struck me as really top-tier, nothing that really stood out amidst the competition. But the clean, ineffable lines of the Laconico custom have been given a characterful production life by Kizer. If you had any lingering doubts about their legitimacy as a manufacturer, the Gemini will put them to rest.

Second, we can compare the Vanguard Gemini to its higher-end iteration. I don’t think that it’s a question of one being strictly better than the other. I prefer G-10 to titanium and liner locks to framelocks, but S35VN is a better steel. The way I see it, there are a lot of other titanium framelock flippers with S35VN steel in the world, but there’s nothing that looks or flips like the $80 Vanguard Gemini.

Third, we can look at the Vanguard Gemini as a knife in the depopulated middle price bracket. What is its competition? The old standbys, mostly: the Delica 4, the standard Mini Grip. And against these knives I’d say the Gemini falls in the middle: I think all three are excellent designs and great users. It’s largely a matter of personal preference, but the Gemini, with its luxe flipping action and top-tier finish, feels a little nicer than either.

Regardless of where it falls in the overall middle price bracket hierarchy, the Vanguard Gemini is exciting precisely because it brings something new to this much-neglected segment of the market. It routinely sold out online. Maybe it will lead the charge of a new mid-priced knife renaissance? Be a vanguard, of sorts, if you will?

Kizer Cutlery Gemini Linerlock Green Folding Knife,3in,OD Green,G10 Handle, V3471A2

3" stonewash finish Bohler N690 stainless blade
Green textured G10 handle
4.13" closed
Extended tang
Lanyard hole

I recommend purchasing the Kizer Vanguard Gemini from BladeHQ or Amazon. Please consider that purchasing anything through any of the links on this website helps support BladeReviews.com, and keeps the site going. As always, any and all support is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much.

Sanrenmu 710 Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 13 Comments

Last Updated: June 18, 2019

As an OEM for various knife companies, Sanrenmu is responsible for a lot of excellent, affordable budget knives: models like the CRKT Drifter helped establish just how much we can expect from a cheap knife, setting the standards for things like the steel choice, fit and finish levels, and utility on budget folders.

Buy on Amazon

As a knifemaker on its own, however, Sanrenmu has attracted controversy. Not only does it sell its knives at very low prices (a lot of times even lower than the budget knives it makes for other companies), but there are also features and designs in their catalogue that are taken directly from other knife companies, without their consent: most famously the Benchmade Axis Lock and the knife I’m reviewing today, the Sanrenmu 710, a knife that is commonly described (and decried) as a rip-off/knock-off/copy of the Chris Reeve Knives Sebenza.

I feel like any review of the 710 has to address this issue, however briefly. The 710 echoes the Small Sebenza’s lines, but a comparison of the two knives will show that the overall designs are different: the 710 is smaller, with a different blade shape and grind. Additionally, speaking as somebody who has always wanted but never owned a Small Sebenza, I can say that the 710 has never struck me as a substitute or cheaper replacement for one.

It has, however, struck me as an excellent little knife. It has all the quality of Sanrenmu’s OEM knives and as the unofficial ‘flagship’ of their SRM-branded blades, I think it’s worth looking at a little closer.

General Dimensions and Blade Details

The 710 has a blade length of 2-11/16”, a handle length of 3-11/16”, an overall length of 6-9/16”, and is made in China. The size of the 710 is just about right for an EDC knife. The weight, at 3.25 oz., is not inspiring, but with an all stainless steel construction you go in expecting to be disappointed in this regard.

I do think it’s worth discussing the fit and finish a little because, to be frank, Sanrenmu has a reputation for doing a slapdash job on their blades. I’ve owned two other SRM knives. My first was a 763, purchased three years ago. Out of the box it was completely adequate, besides a sloppy (but not catastrophically sloppy) edge bevel. The next, purchased maybe a year later, was a 605. Out of the box the blade centering was off, but a tightening of the pivot pin fixed this.

While neither my 763 nor 605 were bad out of the box, my 710 was almost pristine: the blade was centered, the scales were chamfered and lustrous, the edge bevel was much more even. The only issues were a slightly uneven finish on the blade itself, and blade decentering over time(easily fixable). Sanrenmu has always been seen as a bit of a gamble fit and finish-wise, but that’s never been my experience. Even so, the 710 was a step up.

The part of me that wants everything to be connected thinks that maybe, with the middle of the market bottoming out, the communal fixation on low- and high-end knives that this bottoming-out entails, and the new levels of quality and popularity Chinese companies like Kizer and Reate have been attaining, SRM has decided to work on their image and the level of quality in their products. Conspiracy theorizing aside, I find the 710’s fit and finish excellent.

The 710’s angular drop point is also excellent, a gloriously task-neutral, light-to-medium duty blade. The proportion of straight edge to belly is perfect. The tip is acute, and dropped to just the right point, making it easy to ‘lead’ a cut and accurately follow through. The 710’s blade offers very good, and very consistent, performance in all the standard EDC tasks.

An aggressive high hollow grind plays a key role here. Despite starting from fairly thick stock, the grind is very thin behind the edge, ensuring that the primary characteristic of a hollow grind – reduced friction and drag through material – is noticeable. In fact, out of the last few knives that I’ve reviewed, the 710 has done the best with cardboard cutting, the efficient, low-drag hollow grind making up for an edge that dulls fairly quickly.

As you’d expect the 710 is made from 8Cr13MoV, default budget knife blade steel. For me, 8Cr13MoV is the baseline for modern steel, setting the bar for acceptability in every area, but impressing in none other than sharpenability. I’ve never been surprised by 8Cr13MoV, but never really disappointed by it either. Adequate, a known quantity, and endearingly mediocre: what else is there to say?

Well, maybe just one last note: I think that, in our spec-obsessed modern age, we forget that poor edge retention in any modern steel is steel pretty decent: I cut through a lot of cardboard with the 710, more than I could reasonably expect to deal with in a month of standard use, before I noticed any real performance issues. I still prefer better steels, don’t get me wrong: I just think that we tend to hyperventilate when it comes to comparisons that, in 90% of the situations we find ourselves using blades in, don’t matter. Yes, 154CM or N690Co or S30V are better steels by a long shot, but in a regular week of use I certainly wouldn’t appreciate the difference.

Handle, Ergonomics, and Carry

The 710 is all stainless steel, never my preferred material for a handle, but good execution of substandard materials goes a long way with me, and on this 710 the handles are cleanly-cut and chamfered all around the edges inside and out, making them comfortable and solid-feeling in the hand.

The general lines of the handle also help. Clean and simple, just like I like it. There aren’t any unnecessary grooves, besides the acceptable choil/lock access cutout. Indeed, the handle would almost be too flat if a gentle, almost unnoticeable curve to the inside portion of the handle (the part your fingers cross over) didn’t lend some dimensionality to the knife.

The jimping on the spine of the blade is really good, the same squarish, ‘gear teeth’ jimping that you see on the CRKT Drifter. It keeps your thumb right where it needs to be to steer cuts, aided by the somewhat back-heavy balance: normally this isn’t something I like, but on a knife this small, with a blade ground so thin behind the edge, it feels right.

The texturing on the handle is less successful. Nail file or grip tape is definitely the cue visually, but it is much less textured than either. I appreciate the way it breaks up the monotony of the steel handle, but it doesn’t help with the grip during deployment, which this knife could use. The jimping and balance provide grip during use, but when you’re deploying the knife or trying to manipulate the lock you may fumble with it a little bit.

As is the case with a lot of SRM knives (Drifter included), the 710’s clip cannot be repositioned: tip-down, right-hand carry is all you get here. The lack of options is definitely a bummer, particularly considering how easily this knife could be drilled for all four positions, but the clip itself is good: slim, strong, effective. I like it much better than the wide, too-tight clip on the Drifter.

Thanks to the stainless steel scales, stowing and retrieval is effortless. This is the one area in which the handle material is an unequivocal win. Smooth retrieval/stowage and a slim overall profile make the 710 a great carry.

Deployment and Lockup

The 710 deploys via good old fashioned thumb studs and a common budget knife washer setup: a thin phosphor bronze/Teflon washer combo on one side, a lone Teflon washer on the other. This is probably a cost-saving measure, but regardless the performance here is indisputably good – great, even. Out of the box it was reliable and quick; after a drop of Nano Oil it became glass-smooth, rocket-fast: wonderful. Until I got my hands on a Vanguard Gemini, this was the early frontrunner for Highest Fidget Factor 2016.

I just don’t like framelocks. I’ve used a lot of them over the years, and I’ve never used one that didn’t immediately exhibit or quickly develop bladeplay. It isn’t really an issue, per se, because it can usually be tightened out again, but the fact is that framelocks are finicky in a way that a lockback or a liner lock just aren’t. The faster this obsession with framelocks ends, the happier I’ll be.

For all my grumpiness, however, the 710’s framelock is good. Steel framelocks are stronger and more reliable than titanium ones (and much cheaper, of course), and, while I did eventually get bladeplay, it isn’t much and yes, can be tuned back out. Besides this everything is good: the lockbar is easy to access thanks to that choil/cutout, and the lockbar disengages smoothly, every time. I like the liner lock on the G-10 Drifter better, but this’ll do.

Sanrenmu 710 Review – Final Thoughts

Sanrenmu knows how to put together an affordable, useful blade: they’ve proven that with their OEM work for Spyderco, CRKT, and others, and proven it again with their own knives. The 710 is very affordable, even in the context of the budget knife category, and it’s stiff competition for affordable favorites like the Drifter.

Sanrenmu helped to establish the budget knife archetype, and here we have as distilled a representation of that archetype as possible. The 710 is a very, very good knife.

Sanrenmu 7010 Folding Pocket Knife EDC Knife 8Cr13mov Blade Frame Lock Stainless Steel Handle with Clip

Sanrenmu 7010 is an all-steel construction knife and is very affordable for people who want to start with a cheap yet quality knife. The locking mechanism of this knife is quite proficient and supports a one-hand opening style from both sides. The knife is small and heavy, making it quite preferable for some rough applications. This foldable alloy steel knife holds the edge pretty well, even regularly.
It comes with a Frame lock mechanism. It is highly preferable for everyday carry, hunting, and camping adventures. It comes with a straight-back blade shape
It uses 8Cr13mov blade steel for the making.The blade size for this knife is 2.7 inches. The weight is pretty much on the heavier side with 3.2oz.
Blade Length: 7.0 cm / 2.76 inches; Blade Width : 2.4 cm / 0.94 inches; Unfold Length: 16.5 cm / 6.50 inches; Fold Length: 9.5 cm / 3.74 inches; Product weight: 90g
You can clip it on your belt, backpack or somewhere else you want Folding design makes it more secure and convenient to use.

I recommend purchasing the Sanrenmu 710 at Amazon. Please consider that purchasing anything through any of the links on this website helps support BladeReviews.com, and keeps the site going. As always, any and all support is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much.

Emerson Mini CQC-7 Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 13 Comments

Last Updated: August 3, 2019
As Dan wrote in his review of the full-size model, the CQC-7 is one of the very first and most influential tactical knives in the world. Ernie Emerson’s influence on the perception and use of folding knives for self-defense is incalculable. I had wanted an Emerson knife for a long time, but my general reluctance to carry a blade over 3” meant that most of their standard models, the CQC-7 included, were a no-go. I had my eye on the Mini CQC-7 for a long time before it came back into production and I was able to pick one up.

Buy the Emerson Mini CQC-7 at BladeHQ

Buy on Amazon

History aside, my thoughts on this design are mixed. I think that the CQC-7’s pedigree has made EKI loathe to futz with the design of the knife, and users loathe to criticize it. This is a shame, because I think there’s a lot of room for improvement. Like the Delica, the Mini CQC-7 is an outdated knife. When it first released, it must have seemed like a revelation, but in 2016, it is neither the best design around, nor worth the price it is being sold at.

General Dimensions and Blade Details

The Mini CQC-7 has a blade length of 2.9”, a handle length of 4 1/8”, and an overall length of 7.25”. It weighs 4.4 oz. This is a fat knife, but one that feels quite balanced in the hand. The exact weight of a knife isn’t as important as the distribution of that weight: that’s why some light knives, like the Clipitool, can feel heavier than they are, and chunky knives like the Mini CQC-7 lighter.

The 2.9” blade, on my Mini CQC-7, is a chisel ground tanto. This is a real one-two punch in terms of things I have grown to dislike. There’s an unwarranted reverence for the tanto blade shape. I appreciate a run of straight edge on my blades but I want some belly too, and the stylized, angular shape of the American tanto lacks any at all.

Of course, it’s the tanto’s reputation as an ideal tactical blade shape that gives it its cachet. And it is a good piercer, with a quite a robust tip. But a good drop point or clip point blade would have excellent piercing capability and more than adequate tip strength, as well as a significantly more useful overall shape. I don’t carry a knife with the intention of using it for self-defense, but even if I did, I would prefer another blade shape: the tanto doesn’t do anything significantly better than a drop point or a clip point, and many things worse.

The Mini CQC-7 is chisel ground. The argument for the chisel grind is as follows: better strength, better edge retention, and it’s easier to sharpen. There have been long and articulate counterpoints made against these arguments, but for me it comes down to the simple fact that a chisel grind just cuts worse.

So much control is lost. Cuts track terribly through material. Approaching thin material like paper is a chore. I understand that some knives are made for hard use, and in these cases durability is more desirable than finesse, but here’s the thing: you can have both. The well-executed, traditional v-grind of the Paramilitary 2 can take a beating and slices like a dream.

Maybe, maybe, in the vacuum of theory, a chisel grind can withstand more abuse than a traditional V-grind, but I would bet it isn’t much more, and in what real-life scenario is it going to matter? And as far as sharpening goes: well, I guess it takes less time to sharpen one edge bevel than two, although you still need to maintain the unsharpened side of a chisel-ground knife, so you’re only saved a modicum of effort.

The steel on the Mini CQC-7 is 154CM. This is one of my favorite steels, and one I think can compete with N690Co for the title of Most Underrated Steel in the World. It is a solid upper-mid-tier steel that responds to sharpening as well as something like 8Cr13MoV, but holds an edge longer. No complaints about 154CM itself.

But the Mini CQC-7 costs about $165. As much as I’m sad to see the middle of the market drop out, one good thing that’s come from it is that we can expect a lot from knives in $150 – $200 price point. The Benchmade Valet costs $170 and has M390. The Zero Tolerance 0770 comes in Elmax for $120. You can get the Spyderco Mantra comes in M4 for $167. The Native 5 LW is half the price of the Mini CQC-7 and comes with S35VN.

This segment of the market is so competitive that I feel alright harping on the price a bit. Amidst such company, at such a price, 154CM is unacceptable – even more so when you consider that CPM-154, the powder metallurgy variant of 154CM, has been around for a while now. I think that, like the chisel grind and the tanto blade, EKI’s steel choice has been given a pass because of the historical significance of the brand and its blades, and the Mini CQC-7 suffers as a knife for it.

Handle, Ergonomics, and Carry

The Mini CQC-7’s handle is wonderful. The thickness of the knife and the swell in the middle of the handle work to make the Mini CQC-7 very comfortable in hand. The jimping is mild, really better for indexing than for locking your hand in place. The real grippiness comes from the G-10, which is very coarse without being overly aggressive like Cold Steel G-10. Superbly executed all around.

The clip is the same clip you see on almost every Emerson, and like the ergonomics it is an unqualified win. And, as thick as the knife is, I don’t mind it in the pocket. It stays out of the way and isn’t so bulky as to be noticeable when I’m walking around – again, showing how important distribution of weight is with pocket knives.

The Mini CQC-7 isn’t tapped for left hand carry. Emerson can tap it for you, but A) you have to get the knife from EKI or send it in, and B) it will cost you $25. There are a lot of knives with non-repositionable clips, even at this price point, but given how integral the wave opening is to the design of the Mini CQC-7 it should come drilled for righties and lefties out of the box. For reference, the Emerson/Kershaw collabs are all drilled for both.

Deployment and Lockup

The Mini CQC-7 can be deployed via two different methods: either by the thumb disk or by the Emerson wave opener.

The thumb disk works but is slow – pretty smooth, admittedly, but slow. It almost feels like the knife is pivoting between two layers of cloth. From what I understand the Nylatron washers here are another Emerson standby. I don’t mind them, and if they are supposedly lower-maintenance than phosphor bronze or Teflon washers then that’s fine. Just know that you’re never going to flick this knife open.

Of course, the way you’re supposed to deploy the Mini CQC-7 is with the wave opening feature. The wave is a small hook on the end of the thumb ramp that, when you pull the knife from your pocket, catches on your pants seam, opening the knife as you are retrieving it. It’s…fine, I guess? I’ve had multiple wave opening knives and I don’t really buy into the utility. I’m not good at it. I get a lot of misfires. It makes traditional retrieval a bit complicated; the wave will catch a lot of the time and half-open the knife; I’ve cut myself more than once because I pulled a half-open Mini CQC-7 out of my pocket.

It’s also not a ‘polite’ way of opening a knife around folks who may not be comfortable around edged tools. I wouldn’t fault it for that if it were a larger, more distinctly tactical knife, but even the Emerson literature implies that the Mini CQC-7 is something you can take with you anywhere. If subtlety or politeness is a concern, then you may find the wave opening method a little theatrical for the non-knife people around you.

The Mini CQC-7 has a titanium liner lock. It works. Like any lock made of titanium, I worry about wear over time, but the worst thing I can say for it over two years of ownership is that it doesn’t always lock up at the same point against the tang. If I deploy it hard it travels far across, but if I roll it slowly it just barely slides underneath. To be expected? Probably. I don’t recall noticing this happening on any steel liner lock knives I own, but regardless lockup is very good.

Emerson Mini CQC-7 Review – Final Thoughts

I’ve been hard on the Mini CQC-7. I want to stress that, in a vacuum, it’s a fine blade. But it doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and not even years of accreted Emerson mythology and reputation can save it from looking hopelessly out of step and overpriced in today’s market.

A Mini CQC-7 with CPM-154, a slimmer handle, a conventionally-ground drop point blade, and tapped for both left- and right-handed carry would be an interesting proposition at the price it’s being offered at.

But that isn’t the knife we have. We have the same blade, more or less, that Emerson was selling a decade ago, and probably the same blade they’ll be selling five years from now. I know that Ernie Emerson and his team are probably working on new designs instead of trying to update old ones, but if there were one in the lineup that deserves an update, it’s the CQC-7. This pioneering tactical knife has been left in the dust. I’d like to see it be at the vanguard again.

EMERSON MINI CQC-7 2.9 inch SATIN Plain

I recommend purchasing the Emerson Mini CQC-7 at Amazon or BladeHQ. Thanks for checking out the review.

Editor’s Note: This is a fairly critical review from Ben, but I think it is well reasoned and ultimately fair. The value proposition for knives like this Mini CQC-7 continues to shrink in light of all the advancements in the marketplace. Also, the price point of these Emersons are just painful. If this was a $100-120 knife, I think a lot of the CQC-7’s perceived shortcomings could be overlooked. Still, the CQC-7 remains a classic, and if you are curious about Emerson knives or can find a nice deal then I think this is a good place to start.

Kizer Ki3404-a3 Review

by Benjamin Schwartz 8 Comments

Last Updated: August 12, 2019
As the standard-bearer for the burgeoning (and almost instantaneously influential) high-end Chinese knife scene, Kizer made an immediate impression with its very high-quality, relatively affordable knives. In what is perhaps a not-very-encouraging indicator of where the knife community’s mindset is at, Kizer immediately fell under harsh scrutiny – a scrutiny that only intensified during the unfortunate business with Tim Britton.

Buy the Kizer Ki3404-a3 at BladeHQ

Buy on Amazon

Somehow, though, Kizer came through it, and seem to have earned the respect of knife users, and the attention of other knife companies. I’m not a market analyst, but I think that, since Kizer showed up and started offering a lot of knife at decent prices, prices for high-end knives have, in general, gone down: it’s hard for me to imagine that the lower-than-expected prices of knives like the Spyderco Positron or the Benchmade Valet are total coincidences. The paradigm has shifted.

One of the first Kizer knives to make an impression on me was the Ki3404-a3. Kizer’s initial output, although of indisputably high quality, consisted mainly of huge, over-embellished knives that I wouldn’t have any use for. The 3404, however, was small and spare: a clean, professional, functional design. So I picked one up. When I first got it, I thought it was incredible. My opinion has changed somewhat since then, but I still think that, both as a statement of intent from Kizer and as a tool, the 3404 is worth taking a look at.

General Dimensions and Blade Details

The 3404 has a blade length of 3 1/16”, a handle length of 4 1/16”, and an overall length of7”. It weighs 3.1 oz. There isn’t anything bad, or astounding, about those numbers, and I think that this is indicative of the knife as a whole: it’s competent, but also a little rote and unexciting.

I think that saying one type of blade grind is ‘better’ than another is of limited use critically, because so much comes down to execution, but if I did indulge in a rule of thumb regarding grinds it would be that hollow grinds tend to be better slicers. The 3404’s hollow grind is, like the knife itself, clean, professional, adequate: it doesn’t distinguish itself at any particular task but does a solid B+ job with anything you would reasonably use it for.

And speaking of solid B+ performance: the3404’s blade is made of S35VN. S35VN is probably the most balanced of the super steels we commonly see in knives. No freakish chemistry, no single outstanding gimmick, no real compromise other than that it doesn’t excel at any one thing the way that, say, 3V or ZDP-189 do. You just get solid performance in every category. If it is anything besides your first super steel, I suspect you’ll be pleased but not delighted. And, let it be known that, as far as I know or remember, Kizer was the first company to start offering S35VN at the (comparatively) low price points of $90-120.

It’s probably worth making a brief note on the fit and finish: it’s very, very good, and a textbook example of a ‘cool finish’. This is a knife whose high marks in F&F come from precise machining and excellent assembly. The closest comparison I can make is to a Taichung, Taiwan Spyderco, albeit with a little less character – although I think that comes down to the overall blandness of the design rather than Kizer’s manufacturing chops. If I had to complain, I would say that the titanium scales are surprisingly scratch-prone, as you can see in my pictures. It isn’t going to ruin your life

Handle, Ergonomics, and Carry

The blandness that I mentioned above, for all that it stops the 3404 from achieving real greatness, also prevents it (mostly, see below) from awfulness as well. You see this most clearly in the handle design. You’ll never think about the 3404’s handle, either disparagingly or appreciatively, for as long as you have it. It works well, but it isn’t going to ring any cherries either.

The handle isn’t totally neutral, there is one finger groove under the fingerguard/flipper (reminiscent of a less roomy Knockout handle), but it’s just fine. The scales are contoured and fairly gently bead-blasted, and offer enough resistance to keep the 3404 from slipping around as you’re using it. There’s also jimping on the thumb ramp and spine and the base of the handle – more than I need, certainly, but it’s well-cut and I have no complaints.

Issues arise with the clip. It’s bad. I don’t subscribe to the “tip-up or bust” school of thought when it comes to my pocket knives, but I do think that any knife that uses a flipper, as the 3404 does, should come configured tip-up. This is because a tip-up configuration puts the flipper tab on the outside of the knife as it sits in your pocket – that is, the side that isn’t against your pocket’s seam. When you have a flipper knife that clips in tip-down, you have to accommodate the tab against the pocket seam, effectively making the knife occupy more space in your pocket than it should. Irksome more than deal-breaking, true, but it does seem like a strictly inferior choice from a design perspective.

As an aside: I’ve heard from multiple sources that some 3404s come with the handle milled out for optional tip-up carry. I haven’t seen one myself, and it looks like most of the major retailers are still advertising this as a tip-down knife, but you may luck out.

Orientation aside, the clip itself is bad. The weird looks are enough to drag it from my good graces, but beyond that the flared-out end scrapes paint and catches on things. And while I don’t care about deep carry too much, this clip also leaves a lot of knife exposed. I wouldn’t bring this up if the clip did anything else well, but its universal ineptitude is making me petty.

Generally, I feel like the missed opportunity a bad pocket clip represents isn’t very much in the overall scheme of the knife as a tool, but given the uniform competence you see everywhere else on the 3404, it really stands out. I actually seriously considered taking the thing off, and that’s something that’s never even entered my head before with other bad clips.

Deployment and Lockup

There are two broad categories into which a knife’s deployment can fall: smooth or aggressive. Smooth deployments are something like a really well-worked-in Axis Lock, like on my 940-1: thoughtless and graceful. Aggressive deployments are like my really dialed-in CRKT Drifter: kinetic and responsive. Neither is better than the other; both, when done well, can be incredible.

The 3404 is an aggressive flipper done well. You definitely need to build up some tension in your finger, but once you do the 3404’s blade comes shooting out. It’s satisfying, and a ton of fun from the fidget factor perspective. I’ll also say that the thumbstuds, vestigial or no, are really good. I could live without them on a flipper this good, but hey, options aren’t a bad thing if they don’t add much weight and work this well.

What works less well is the 3404’s framelock. It still works, but it is very susceptible to any sort of looseness in the pivot – much more so than a liner lock would be (he said, beating a dead horse). And the pivot comes loose on the 3404 fairly quickly – understandably an easily fixable issue, but the frequency with which it loosened reminded me of the lock problem over and over again. And if I have¬ to have a framelock, I want a steel insert; we all know titanium’s tendency to deform over time. A theoretical concern, maybe, but one that would definitely make the pivot issues even more pronounced.

Kizer Ki3404-a3 Review – Final Thoughts

When I first picked up the 3404, I thought it was one of the best deals I’d ever gotten on a knife – and, at the time, I was right. Titanium, flipper, S35VN for $120 was a screaming deal back then. Even today it’s pretty good. As a statement of intent, it’s hard to argue with the 3404. It caused me to keep my eyes on Kizer, and I think they’re really starting to come into their own with knives like the Gemini – not to mention that the bigger manufacturers are offering similarly enticing, high-value high-end knives: things like the Native 5 with S35VN, or the upcoming Mini-Griptilians with 20CV.

In fact, there are so many cool knives around the 3404’s price point today, that, good as it is, it impresses much less than it did a year ago. Although the 3404 does very little wrong from a design standpoint, I also find it quite boring. It’s competent, but not innovative or memorable beyond the price at which it was offered, and now there are better knives for around the same price – some by Kizer themselves.

All that being said, the 3404 is still a good, good knife. If it catches your eye, I heartily recommend it.

Kizer Cutlery Titanium CPM-S35V Folding Knife,CPM-S35VN Blade KI3404A3

Overall Length:7.00" Blade Length:3.00" Blade Thickness:0.12"

If you are interested in buying a Kizer Ki3404-a3, I recommend purchasing it at Amazon.com or BladeHQ. Thanks for reading.

Editor’s Note: I agree with Ben’s assessment of the 3404. This knife was more exciting a year or so ago than it is now, however, it is still an important knife for Kizer, and at the very least it will serve as a reference point for things to come. On it’s own, it still appears to be a functional and well executed design.