Welcome Home...THANK YOU FOR BEING A PART OF OUR COMMUNITY

iKnife Collector

The online community of knife collectors, A Knife Family Forged in Steel

Blade thickness

As I posted in my last discussion on Rough Rider vs CASE, I'm having issues with the thinness of some of the Rough Rider blades.

I questioned this on the Rough Rider Facebook page and was confronted by someone there that said that all the RR blades, in the traditional patterns, were 1/16". They even tried to say that the blades in a similar CASE knife we're also 1/16". I haven't heard anything back from them after I posted a side by side of a Rough Rider 603 and a 75 pattern CASE.

Tobias Gibson said I should check the RR298, as the blade specs appeared to indicate thicker blades.

Well, my RR298 came in today and in a quick inspection showed the blades to indeed be thicker than the 603.

While not as robust as the CASE, it certainly appears that the, older, 298 has thicker blades than the, newer, 603.

Is this a trend that Rough Rider is following in order to keep costs down?

Anyone else notice a significant change in blades lately?

0 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by J.J. Smith III on May 22, 2018 at 15:18

I've always been pleased to carry a Rough Rider knife. The 298 is a discontinued pattern that I would not hesitate to carry on a daily basis.

Perhaps I'm just getting more picked, in my old age, but I, personally, would be embarrassed to carry one of the new ones. I'm sorry, Rough Rider, but if this is the direction that you're taking, I'm off the boat.

Permalink Reply by J.J. Smith III on May 22, 2018 at 16:03

It was kind of humorous to see the RR guy trying to compare the Rough Rider to a CASE, when that same comparison is what prompted my initial post.

https://m.facebook.com/comment/replies/?ctoken=2070838306279181_207...

I'd really like to have one of the carbon Stockmans, but they really need to beef back up the blades.

I certainly don't mind paying extra, for decent blades.

Permalink Reply by Vaughn on July 5, 2018 at 11:02

Have to agree, seems the newer R.R. blades are thinner.

Permalink Reply by J.J. Smith III on July 5, 2018 at 14:17

It's really a shame, too.

I was very lucky to find my RR323 while comparing blades.

Vaughn Devereaux said:

Have to agree, seems the newer R.R. blades are thinner.

Permalink Reply by Kevin on Tuesday

Most are fine but I have been disappointed in a few blades that were overly thin. My blue bone Whittler secondary blades are too thin. My dog bone Jack secondary blade is too thin. A few others as well. It’s normally the secondary blades that are too thin on my experience.

Permalink Reply by Kevin D 2 hours ago

Hey JJ,

Hard to be definitive without putting my calipers on them... But I do believe that the one on the right has a slightly thicker blade stock thickness.

The biggest difference that I am seeing is that the grind on the knife on the left is a fair bit more significant than the one on the right. More material removed = more work involved in the manufacturing process, right?

Or maybe the tolerances were opened up to allow for a wider spread between the high limit and low limit. That could allow for a thinner blade to still be "acceptable".

RSS

Welcome to
iKnife Collector

Sign Up
or Sign In

Or sign in with: