Now that is a knife that I could use everyday to prep with.
All SS, nashiji finish for good looks and food release, and I really like the extra height to keep my fingers safe.
Well done Mrs. Claus...
Now that is a knife that I could use everyday to prep with.
Was wondering the same thing because I regularly see similar knives and many of them are referred to by their makers as having "Granton" edges or blades.Kekoa wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 3:58 pm Neat! Now I want to look into the brand. I am curious though, I have seen a lot of knives from many makers with very similar looking dimples, which has me wondering if Granton still has a patent, if other companies pay royalties, which I would doubt on a $10 knife, or if many just use the design without permission?
but as you can see, it was cancelled January 15, 2016.(CANCELLED) IC 008. US 023. G & S: CUTLERY - NAMELY, TABLE KNIVES; FORKS AND SPOONS; CARVING KNIVES, KITCHEN KNIVES; BUTCHER KNIVES; PARING KNIVES; AND SLICING KNIVES. FIRST USE: 19310611. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19780000
that I can find in the US trademark database.IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Jewelry, namely, watches, diamond watches. FIRST USE: 20160621. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20161221
Ah, so that is the difference, that they go to the edge. I wouldn't have guessed that the positioning would result in totally opposite outcomes, more stick instead of less. I had heard from somebody that those dimples result in more friction, but I didn't have enough experience to form an opinion. This makes sense of the confusion of whether or not dimples actually do reduce stick.roaduck wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 5:22 pm Granton have the patent and other brands can put grantons on the blade - but not to the edge of the blade - that makes all the difference.It`s not a $10 knife believe me - it`s hand-made in Sheffield - England.The plastic-handled one is nearly $50 without shipping and the rosewood one is over $60.Other manufacturers put dimples in the middle of the blade which is useless because it just causes suction.
Obviously the older forged Grantons were better - i`m looking for a decent vintage or new old stock one now.The above knife was a Christmas present - I didn`t buy it.
Granton professional knives last for decades - used 24/7.
I have not seen any other knife manufacturer ( Apart from Granton - Sheffield ) use grantons - dimples right to the edge of the blade - that is the crucial difference.XexoX wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 8:35 pm All this is for the US, I have no clue how to search for trademarks and patents anywhere else in the world.
There was a Trademark for the word "Granton" used inbut as you can see, it was cancelled January 15, 2016.(CANCELLED) IC 008. US 023. G & S: CUTLERY - NAMELY, TABLE KNIVES; FORKS AND SPOONS; CARVING KNIVES, KITCHEN KNIVES; BUTCHER KNIVES; PARING KNIVES; AND SLICING KNIVES. FIRST USE: 19310611. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19780000
The only current, in use trademark for "Granton" in the US is forthat I can find in the US trademark database.IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Jewelry, namely, watches, diamond watches. FIRST USE: 20160621. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20161221
I'm not skilled enough to search the Patent database without a patent number, but a patent is only good for 20 years from the date of issuance I believe, so if this Granton grooves on knives was patented decades ago, it has most likely expired.
I see Colonel J. Lloyd beat me to the punch, as it were.
Yea, that board is the bomb, can you post a link to it?
Sure it`s a bespoke Rhino woodworks - endgrain American Walnut - size - 18" x 13" x 2" weight - 15 lbs.I got the dark walnut so it doesn`t show stains and didn`t get beech, acacia, bamboo or teak or oak because those woods are too hard, too light coloured, are too absorbant, have large grain structure, have too much silica in them etc.
Yep Bill It`s a nice piece of wood.Apparently John Boos quality control is not there anymore and people are returning $300 - $600 cutting boards with splits, gaps and warps.Obviously not selected properly kiln dried - probably uneven moisture content etc.