We are in a strange place right now in the knife market. So many knives are rushing past the Sebenza Barrier like it is nothing more than a speed bump, that we no longer stare in shock at $1,000 production knives. To me, this all seems insane, but I am acutely aware that I may be afflicted with Old Man Syndrome, whereby I am evaluating behavior based on outdated norms. That said, these knives seem to serve no purpose. They lack the rarity, individuality, and hardcrafted nature of true collectibles, but they are too expensive and often gilded with very impractical materials that using them as tools seems silly. But what do I know? If you want to spend $1,100 for a production version of a custom knife that costs $1,000, go for it.

But in this weird market, there are folks at least trying to make a go at more reasonably priced knives. Such are the strange times we live in that the Daedalus Knife Co. Lab is a “value” knife at $150. The brand is a collaboration between Evan Nicolaides (Esyx) and Justin Lundquist (maker of the Kizer Feist and the Urban EDC Supply Baby Barlow and NOT Jacob Lundquist maker of the Invert, something I may have mixed up in previous articles). It is a classic rendition of the “modern traditional” knife, with a form that echoes patterns of yesteryear with touches and materials that are more current. The Lab has a pronounced clip in the blade with a large blood groove for slow deployment, but it also has a lock, a pocket clip, and a front flipper. In many ways this reminds me of the Pena X Series modern traditionals, at a lower price point. Is it worth a look? Read on.

Here is the product page, but it is really just a landing page. I bought the review sample with personal funds at C. Risner (aka TraditionalPocketKnives.com) where you can find all the specs. Here is a video review. There are no written reviews. Here is the review sample:

Quick Review Summary: A smart design with cost savings in the right places, but a few unforced errors.

Design: 2

This is pretty clearly a traditional knife pattern. There are absolutely no concessions whatsoever to a modern form. The bulbus back end, the exaggerated belly, and the almost cartoonish narrowing of the blade near the pivot, the design is like wasabi—exceptionally strong. You will either like it or not. If you don’t like these things about traditional knife patterns, you won’t like this knife. If you are like me, you like EVERY kind of knife, and so the elements that are distinctively old school will appeal to you. I didn’t think there was a way to do a good traditional knife with a theme-appropriate clip, but Daedalus did it. This is much more in the traditional camp than most “modern traditional” knives, not so much of a design mashup, but making an old knife better with modern materials and three modern touches discretely added.

Fit and Finish: 2

WIthout a smidge of blade play or wobbly edges on the blade grind, the Lab, like most Chinese made knives is pretty much flawless in its execution. There is a difference in how complex the machining is, compared to say, a Pena X series knife with its perfectly flush transition between materials. If this were Olympic diving the Lab would have a high score for execution and a low score for degree of difficulty.

Grip: 2

Remember the part about low complexity machining? Well, they basically did a checkered pattern on the handle and left it at that. I am not a huge fan as it looks lazy, but it is really grippy. This does remind me of jimping, though. Well designed knives are grippy without an excess of “grip aids,” maybe a quick run of jimping and nothing more, but here the entire handle is covered in a checkered pattern and while it does help, it looks pretty ugly, like they had no idea what to do or how to finish the knife so they left it on the CNC machine for a while and this came out.

Carry: 2

Traditional knives, even the bigger patterns were really easy in the pocket and the Lab, which would be a larger traditional knife, is no different. Even with its all metal construction and the bulbous back end, it is still pretty easy to pocket.

Steel: 1

I like 154CM. For some reason, it strikes me as a better steel than VG10. I am not sure it is better than 14C28N or Nitro V, but it is close in terms of performance. But, its not state of the art. I understand this is how the Lab came in cheaper than something like the Pena Zulu Spear, but not deducting a point here seems unfair, as the steel, while more than good enough for most tasks is below par in 2024 for a $150 knife. When everyone and their brother is making knives in 14C28N and selling them for $30-$50 this seems a bit much.

Blade Shape: 2

I love the look of the knife with the pronounced clip and the huge belly, but I can see how people wouldn’t. If you are a minimalist fan this blade shape seems gaudy and dumb, but unlike a lot of gaudy and dumb blade shapes out there like “harpoon” tips, this blade shape, which is found on quite a few traditional patterns, actually had a purpose. If you notice, the belly of the blade drops down below the pivot of the knife and then comes back to the handle in a straight line. This “negative” blade angle creates an exceptionally aggressive approach to the cutting material, essentially giving you the cutting power of a recurve with none of the sharpening difficulties. It is a very smart design and you will see it in modern knives too where the designer has some knowledge of knife design history. One particularly good modern design like this is the Knafs Lander. Great blade shape.

Grind: 2

Now the blade stock is a bit thicker than it would be on a true traditional knife and it is thicker than what you see from some of the better modern knives right now (see: TRM N2 and the Kershaw Bel Air), but what is here is ground to an absolutely razor sharp edge thanks to a very nice grind.

Deployment Method: 1

Neither the groove nor the front flipper are particularly good. The groove isn’t fun to use as it just doesn’t have that crisp, precise feel. The front flipper, on the other hand, is very crisp. I love a snappy detent, but this is a bit much. It is likely that the detent is normal strength, but the flipper tab doesn’t provide enough leverage.

Retention Method: 2

Clip design sucks. At the very best you make something that is not a mistake. It can never make your knife great, but it can ruin a knife. Here, though, the clip design is truly special. It is curvy and odd in a way that fits the Lab’s form with its exaggerated clip and curvy back end. If traditional knives had well-designed clips, they would have looked like this.

Lock/Blade Safety: 1

The lock just doesn’t allow enough access to make disengagement easy. It seems like a fatal flaw for a lot of knives and it is one I just don’t understand. How can these knives make it out of QC? Do the testers not have thumbs? Are they okay with lock access being okay? For me, I think it is a bit of commitment to a design. It is hard to get these knives made—from sketch to file to manufacturing to shipping to receiving to testing to purchase and shipping again. After all that to have one niggling issue like lock bar access be less than ideal, its probably a huge pain in the ass to get it fixed. The problem is in a market that is this hyper competitive, these little issues get magnified when a good or great knife is compared to a perfect one. Its why the Quiet Carry Drift, as great as it is, doesn’t really hang with the TRM N2/Bridgeport Knife Co 395/Kershaw Bel Air tier of stuff. In a world of 100s, a 97 is below par.

Other Considerations

Fidget Factor: High

Snappy detents bewitch my fingers. I love them so, and as result the Lab is just endless fun.

Fett Effect: Moderate

Eventually the aluminum will show through, but not yet.

Value: Moderate

Okay, so there is the deal, this is pretty expensive for what you get—154CM and aluminum. You can get 14C28N and titanium for less. Compared to something like the CJRB Pyrite, this seems overly expensive, by at least $50.

Overall Score: 17 out of 20

This is a really fun knife and good design. I like the modern traditional mash up quite a bit, but the attempt at making it a modestly priced knife seems like a mistake. Its not cheap enough to rob market share from QSP and CJRB, but it is clearly inferior to the Pena X Series. I think there is a way to hit that spot between the two groups, but it is very hard. In the end, I like the knife, I just think it is about 33% overpriced.

Competition

This knife is essentially a bet—is there space in the market for a modern traditional that sits between some Temu junk and the Pena X Series? In a way it is actually two bets, that one and another one—how much of the lux sheen can be removed from a Pena X Series and still make a good knife. On both accounts, I think the Lab wins the bet.

I do think the knife is a worthwhile consideration in a market that is essentially devoid of things like the Indian River Jack. Northwoods Knives were so popular because you got that old timey feel with, usually, some modern materials. The later versions didn’t have the modern steels, but were so sublimely well made it didn’t matter, but when Queen was cranking out IRJs with the same steel—154CM—this knife would not have been as competitive. Alas those knives are gone or at least not available at sane prices (eBay prices for Indian River Jacks START at around $500).

And so this knife competes with Lionsteel’s line up of modern traditionals. In those competitions, it comes out far ahead. Sure, the Lionsteel knives have better steel (M390 v. 154CM) but they seem like they were made by aliens that had a written description of a traditional knife as opposed to human beings with eye balls and opposable thumbs that have actually used a traditional pocket knife. In that regard, I think the Lab is an unalloyed success. Its both cheaper and more evocative of the traditional knife look and feel than the Roundhead or its iterative brethren.

Compared to the Pena X series, like the wonderful Zulu Spear, the Lab comes up short. Interestingly, it is not just in the places you’d expect—steel and materials. The lock on the Lab, for example, lacks a meaningful access point and so it isn’t as good as the Zulu Spear. It also has nowhere near as good a flipper as the Zulu Spear. And, of course, it missing on materials and steel. I feel like a bit more refinement, a bit more R&D would have gotten the Lab very, very close. A Lab with better lockbar access and flipping action would have made me forget about the Zulu Spear as the lack of carbon fiber scales and M390 isn’t that big a deal. But that’s not the knife we got and even for half the price, I can’t shake the sense that Daedalus left some cost-free refinement on the table.

Links

Kizer Feist