Curious if it’s primarily a collector thing or if there is a genuine benefit to seeking out the OG ones. I just want to try one and and play around with it so, although they are freakin sweet looking, I don’t exactly need an awesome $100+ mandala engraved version.
1 Like
When I was learning how to do string tricks, the No-Jive was the best yo-yo I could find. Other folks might tell you different, but I can’t feel the difference in the play of regular 3 in 1 N-J’s. Some of my older ones seem to have a darker finish, but play the same.
That being said, all wooden yo-yos have a unique feel because all the wood is slightly different. The etching, butterfly editions, paint, all that kind of stuff makes a difference to me. The original 3-in-1 seems pretty consistent though.
The folks that know could tell you if there is actually a difference, but if you put aside the collectibility factor and limit it to just the basic, natural finish, 3-in-1 model, I would say you are going to get a similar experience from any one you can find. And you should go find one, because they are great yo-yos.
9 Likes
They are different and were made in different factories with different tooling. Some players swear by the Green Box versions. I prefer the brown patent pending version. You can’t go wrong with any era of No Jive however. They were made for around 30 years, so that’s why there are subtle differences and why they are collectable.
7 Likes
There have been many variations of the No Jive 3-in-1 yo-yo shape over the 3+ decades it was produced (it’s 50th anniversary is fast approaching). Generally the history of the No Jive is separated into the “SF Era” and the “BC Era” which roughly align with the two periods of company ownership (Tom Kuhn sold Tom Kuhn Custom Yo-Yos to Brad Countryman in 1999).
Is there a genuine benefit to searching for an older No Jive from a playability perspective? Not really, both the SF era and BC Era No Jives are some of the best wooden yo-yos ever made. The only real argument for a superior play could be made by players who do a lot of looping. The gap on the pre-1993(ish) No Jives is a better gap for looping.
Personally I think the No Jive had its best period between 1985 and 1993. No Jives from this period had worked through some of the issues that make pre-1985 No Jives less than ideal (although the 1977 Original No Jive with it’s smaller body size and polished wood finish is a stellar player). I’d stay away from the 2006 version mainly due to the return of a clear coat finished gap. Those are my preferences.
If you’re looking for a good looking No Jive and the rich honey color of aged maple, you’re going to want one from the early 1980s. Those ones have aged so beautifully.
3 Likes
For what it’s worth, here’s my BC-era (2006 version? 54.18g, left) and SF-era (Green box, 52.64g, right) next to each other.
(Although maybe the Green box is an early BC? It looks a lot like convig’s green box identified as such in this thread.)
Both play great. I think my BC-era has a lighter laser engraving than average, but that SF-era just has the “look” of a No Jive to me.
5 Likes
The Maple No Jive has always had a stamped logo, pressed into the wood. You can tell, to an extent, which of the production runs of No Jive you have by paying attention to the stamp alone. The 2006 BC-made No Jive on the left has a sharp and bold lettering stamp as seen here. The No Jive on the right looks like it came from the run immediately preceding BC’s start making No Jive halves. It’s hard to tell from photos but I’m betting the gap side of that one has a matte finish and plays buttery smooth.
2 Likes
It’s hard to tell from photos but I’m betting the gap side of that one has a matte finish and plays buttery smooth.
Oh yeah.
Edit: Thank you for sharing your expertise in these threads, by the way. I sometimes worry that I get out over my skis a little bit. Without your observations to give them context, I’m pretty much just posting pictures and shrugging optimistically at the people doing searches on the topic in the future.
3 Likes