Talk:Swiss Army knife

The new Swiss Military standard issue knife?
Can anyone confirm which knife and which manufacturer was awarded the contract for the new official army knife known as the Soldatenmsser 08? I have received conflicting information. Koalorka (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

'Trivia' template deleted
A 'trivia' template was on the 'Popular Culture' section. I deleted the 'trivia' template since the guidelines on WP:TRIVIA specifically reccommend Trivia be moved to 'References in popular culture' sections as we have here.Filceolaire (talk) 13:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Victorinox logo.gif
The image Image:Victorinox logo.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:


 * Image:W-wenger-logo.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --05:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Anachronism?
The section headed "Knives Issued by the Swiss Military" begins with the phrase "During the late 1890s, the Swiss Army decided...." and goes on to talk about the Modell 1890 (and an 1889 service rifle.) I suspect that "the late 1880s" was intended. Charles dye (talk) 20:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Logos
It's not obvious why we need to have a gallery section again just for the sake of the two company logos. Firstly, they're non-free, which means we should use them sparingly and only when really necessary. We already have multiple images of the knives themselves which show the logos. Secondly, it means opening another gap in the content, and gallery sections are discouraged. I rather think that these should simply be removed again. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:14, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:NFTABLE suggests that there can be exceptions to the no gallery rule - but per the above I don't think this is one of them.  Я ehevkor ✉  10:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The logos where there in the original image setting I tried to restore, but can be removed since there are pictures of knives and articles about Victorinox and Wenger that display them.--Francis Flinch (talk) 11:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Removed again. Thanks, folks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:14, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Unreliable sources
At present, several points in the article are referenced to unreliable sources, namely forums and the SAK wiki. We shouldn't reference content using websites which are user-generated. Ideally these need to be replaced with more reliable sources, especially if the article is to go through GA. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * What is reliable information and what not gets harder to find out with time progressing. Sadly the occurrence in (reviewed) scientific works of painful copy paste jobs or invented datasets seems to be rising, resulting in doctorate revocations and forced resignations of university professors. A few decades ago such things were very rare.--Francis Flinch (talk) 12:21, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Please change reference #11 to the "giant swiss army knife" to the actual original source of the manufacturer's weblink: http://www.wengerna.com/giant-knife-16999. It should NOT point to a retail website as it does now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljgljg3 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The "giant swiss army knife" manufacturer's weblink: http://www.wengerna.com/giant-knife-16999 was already part of the article. The "giant swiss army knife" retailer website has been moved to a more appropriate text portion to show that some vendors demand high prices for this knife.--Francis Flinch (talk) 20:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Usage statistics
Is there any data about which 10 versions of knives are most popular or something like that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.61.22.87 (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Precursor to Swiss Army Knives?
In the novel Moby Dick, chapter 107, Herman Melville mentions a "Sheffield contrivance" that sounds similar to what we think of as a Swiss Army knife, but his description predates the first Swiss Army knife by 40 years: " He was like one of those unreasoning but still highly useful, MULTUM IN PARVO, Sheffield contrivances, assuming the exterior--though a little swelled--of a common pocket knife; but containing, not only blades of various sizes, but also screw-drivers, cork-screws, tweezers, awls, pens, rulers, nail-filers, countersinkers." Sheffield, England is a city famous for its knives and silverware, and was home to several pocket knife makers in the first half of the 19th century. From Melville's description in 1851, it seems that they produced multiblade, multitool pocket knives well before the Swiss, and it is possible that other pocket knife makers elsewhere did the same. Perhaps this fact deserves mentioning in the History/Origins section. Jencinas (talk) 11:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Materials citations bad
I have removed several references as they come at the end of a paragraph and it is not at all clear to what they refer.

This reference cite web|url=http://www.cutleryscience.com/reviews/blade_materials.html#S_INOX |title=Knife blade materials INOX |publisher=Cutleryscience.com |date= |accessdate=2011-10-31 returns only a search page for me with no information on it.

This reference cite web|url=http://www.knivesandtools.com/nl/ct/victorinox-swiss-army-knife.htm |title=Victorinox stainless steel (Dutch) |publisher=Knivesandtools.com |date= |accessdate=2011-10-31 lists several models of SAK but offers no infomation about knife material.

This reference cite web|url=http://www.struers.com/default.asp?top_id=5&main_id=25&doc_id=344&target=_self&collapse=1&admin_language=22 |title=Hardness Conversion Table |publisher=Struers.com |date= |accessdate=2011-10-31 is nothing but a table that converts between scales of hardness. It does not state anything about SAKs or about ease with which certain hardnesses may be sharpened.

This reference is just a table listing compositions of steels by name and it is not from the Victorinox site cite web|url=http://www.euro-inox.org/pdf/map/Tables_TechnicalProperties_EN.pdf |title=chemical.xls |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=2011-10-31 it does not support the claim that Victorinox says it uses a certain steel.

Two sentences both claim that Victorinox claims its steel is of a type but those two claims are contradictory as two different steels are listed. The list of given of the percentage composition is unreferenced and assumes fixed values for things like chromium at 15% when it could be from 13 - 15% for the steel named. The other type of steel named is ambiguous and could be 12 - 14% or exactly 13%.

The pizzini source I have left in but I haven't tried to use it as a reference as it claims that its sources is victorinox making it a secondary source of unknown provenance at best.

Waerloeg (talk) 23:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Victorinox answers technical questions regarding their employed steels and other subjects online. There are emails available from Victorinox regarding steel. I have provided a ref that links to a technical question answered by Mr. Elsener that originates from Victorinox. In the email Elsener mentions 3 Euronorm/DIN steel types and also emphasizes that Victorinox tests the material they receive. I think a non Victorinox reference regarding the many standardized European stainless steels can be used to see that the Victorinox steel is actually conform to the X55CrMo14 industry parameters is in its place in this article, since Victorinox only processes steel. When a customer (like Victorinox) buys enough steel (rolls) they can specify the alloy they want. A cutlery manufacturer has to choose a steel that comes close to the properties the manufacturer deems important for the blade or tool. I hope you understood X55CrMo14 = DIN 1.4110 the DIN number only being a German standard designation for the X55CrMo14 Euronorm designation. These DIN numbers are however still often used in Europe. The alloys used by Victorinox are no proprietary alloys and can and are also used by other European cutlery manufacturers.--Francis Flinch (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Erm, emails cannot be used as sources, they are not verifiable.  Я ehevkor ✉  15:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Are knife magazine articles and product presentations on the Victorinox website instead of an online published email scan of an answer by Mr. Elsener from Victorinox more verifiable sources? I suppose one does not have to understand much German to read steel designations at the Hauptklinge (= main blade) entries in a Messer Magazin hunting knife test article. See: http://www.victorinox.com/medias/sys_master/sak_test_reports/8804656644126/jagdmesser.pdf. At http://www.victorinox.com/ch/product/Swiss-Army-Knives/Category/Pocket-knives-with-lock-blade/Pocket-knives-with-lock-blade-Linerlock-111-mm/Hunter-XS/0.8331.MC9 the usage of X55CrMo14 / 1.4110 steel is affirmed in a product presentation on the Victorinox site, so it is plausible that the usage of X55CrMo14 / 1.4110 blade steel mentioned in the email scan from 2007 is correct. Victorinox assertion in the Hunter XT product presentation that X55CrMo14 / 1.4110 is hard-wearing is true when compared to low-end stainless steel, but not when compared to typical high-end blade stainless steels like VG10 or CPM S30V steel.--Francis Flinch (talk) 08:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Swiss Army knife. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110716105747/http://www.sosakonline.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=93 to http://www.sosakonline.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=93
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110615102057/http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=CC78CMFIwnc&feature=related to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC78CMFIwnc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:19, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Amazon Reviews
At the end of the cultural impact section, is a sentence about joke reviews on the giant model. Considering the fact that this is just a link to an Amazon comments section, and the fact that this knife is clearly supposed to just be a demo piece anyway, I think it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jelephant (talk • contribs) 01:13, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

.22 pistol
I've heard there was a Swiss Army Knife that contained a .22 pistol but I suspect this might be an urban legend? 108.200.234.93 (talk) 16:58, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would make the knife a part of the pistol rather than the opposite. The Swiss don't need pistols anyway, they are repeatedly trained with the rifle as reserve troops. — Tonymec (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Nigerian Air Force model
The Nigerian Air Force ordered a large number of Swiss knives with an additional curved blade for cutting tangled parachute lines.

Source: Tunley, Roul. "The Little Red Knife That Does It All." Reader's Digest, Asia Edition, September 1980, pp. 57-60.

Can anyone supply a photo of this knife? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.234.181 (talk) 01:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Roman "Swiss Army Knife" 201 CE - 300 CE
https://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/learning/look-think-do/roman-swiss-army-knife

Roman "Swiss Army Knife" Middle Roman 201 CE - 300 CE Silver and Iron 8.8cm X 15.5 cm GR.1.1991 tickle me 18:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)