4 Lost Dutchman Leather FINN’s compared

Big Finn, Finnigan, Cash Finn, Thin Finn make up the 4 Lost Dutchman Leather "Finn's" we're comparing in today's video. Considered some of the best minimalist wallet offerings, all are handmade and great for EDC (everyday carry).

Big Finn, Finnigan, Cash Finn, Thin Finn make up the 4 Lost Dutchman Leather “Finn’s” we’re comparing in today’s video. Considered some of the best minimalist wallet offerings, all are handmade and great for EDC (everyday carry).

(if you want to see all the features and how many cards and cash it can hold, please watch the video)

Lost Dutchman wallets are liked by many for many reasons. Our inventory holds four of the Finns, among which, one that I have not reviewed yet, the Thin Finn. In this review, we will take a look at it as we see how they compare to each other, and I think you will be as surprised as I was. 

The Big Finn has one quick access slot in the back, while the interior has three. One is used for cash, making that a cash slot, the other two can be used for cards. It has got a flap and a strap, which provides great security and currency support. Furthermore, you can tuck a card underneath the strap if you would like another quick access. Besides, if you are a cash-heavy person, you can use it as a cash wrap too.

If we compare it to the Finnigan, we would look and say, “Hey, all right, well, these are kind of close, I guess.” The Finnigan has one internal card slot and nothing else on the exterior. With one slot, you have a place to put your cards, coins, cash folded twice, and everything else while remaining secured without the risk of falling out.

The Cash Finn exhibits immediately a tuck flap. It is not equipped with a strap and it does not have any external quick access card slots, and that is by design because it cannot support that. The interior has two card slots and the main cash storage slot which folds twice to store notes. It fits all currencies except for euros and yen, which are a little too wide. Moreover, the double wrap ensures that the cash is not going to fall out of the wallet. In order to get to cards, you have to unfold the wallet twice, which is kind of a lot of work to get to your most frequently used cards.

Finally, the Thin Finn gives the impression of “Okay, this is pretty close.” Well, the Thin Finn has a tuck flap and one internal slot. Once broken in, I do not see its security any different from having a strap, therefore, I think it is more of a personal preference. Again, I wish it had a quick access card slot because even though you would have a little card clash in there, it is still a great way to have a quick access card slot because there is no strap.

I know you are asking yourself, “What about the Franklin and the mini Franklin?” Well, I have them both. So watch for that comparison which will be coming soon. This review is all about the Finns. Let’s throw some basic data in each of these squares of the matrix, then we will look at the differences and you might be surprised.

From a card capacity perspective, the Big Finn can accommodate 12, Finnigan 10, Cash Finn 14 and Thin Finn eight. From a cash capacity perspective, Big Finn can hold 6 notes, Finnigan 3, Cash Finn 15, and Thin Finn 3 that you have to fold twice to fit. So what makes these different from each other?

I am going to compare the larger wallets to each other and the smaller ones to each other. But first, you would think the tuck flaps are related, but they are not. They are more cousins than brothers. Same thing with the strap. So we will compare Big Finn to Cash Finn and Finnigan to Thin Finn.

Starting with the smaller wallets, they are exactly of the same size, with no variation in how they were designed and you can see that in the rollover of the leather. The Finnigan has a strap,  whereas a slit for where the flap goes on the Thin Finn. They both have one slot to put your cards and cash, but while they are the same, you do have more options with the Finnigan that you do not have with the Thin Finn. That is mainly because of the strap. Again, as we talked about with several Finns, the Big Finn, the Finnigan, and other Finn we have got here, you can actually get a quick access slot under the strap where we do not have that with the Thin Finn.

So what is different between the Finnigan and the Thin Finn? Well, the difference is simply the flap which is easy to see.

The difference between the Big Finn and the Cash Finn is that the Cash Finn is a modified Big Finn. They are essentially the same size. The Cash Finn has a longer flap to accommodate the cash wrap versus the Big Finn, since the Cash Finn folds cash. So why tuck versus strap on the closure? From a design perspective, there is no way to put a strap on the Cash Finn. Whereas, in the Big Finn, it works just fine because the whole wallet is enclosed. Finally, only the Big Finn gives you a quick access card slot in the back and an additional one you can slip under the strap in the front. There is no way to do that with the Cash Finn, and that is the one thing I don’t really like about the Cash Finn compared to the Big Finn, because I have to go through an exercise, excessive steps before I can get to my cards. It does not provide a quick mechanism to get the cards, unlike what you have with the Cash Finn. Where, you just need to pull it up, and it is immediately there.

The Cash Finn was built from the Big Finn. We know that adapting designs to make something functional is a great way to develop products. When you have a design that works, you expand it, which is what happened with these wallets building features from a strong design foundation.

Scroll to Top