While I see your point - certainly not every knife needs to follow modern trends - I do think there's usually good reasons behind these innovations. We could argue that our ancestors functioned just fine traveling on horseback, but obviously traveling by motor vehicle has numerous advantages. I still love riding horses, but I wouldn't want that to be my only or primary option. Same goes for knives: I can appreciate a traditional design, but I like all the modern accoutrements on my daily drivers.MichaelScott wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:37 pmEvery modern folder design must have these elements: bearings or washers of some type, an opening and closing mechanism that can be operated with one hand, a lock (in the majority of cases) that can be released with one hand, some kind of pocket clip, and a single blade.
Battles rage about the best clip, where it must, or must not be placed. Which lock is best, strongest, easiest to operate. Not to mention steels and steel-like blade material,grinds, shapes and scales.
As we all know our ancestors functioned very capably with none of these. A handle, one or more blades for different types of cutting tasks, interesting shapes and scale materials from bone to micarta. Bolsters are common on traditional knives, as is 1095 carbon steel.
I suspect it is exceptionally rare for a knife cutting task to require all that a modern one-handed knife offers. If one is in a situation that frequently requires that, a fixed blade knife is often a good choice.
Why do I say this? My thinking is that, in contrast to quality traditional knife makers, these one-handed requirements continue to stifle innovation except in the narrowest sense. Ceremaic detent balls are not earth shaking events. Nor are ball bearing washers.
I’d like to see Spyderco and other top companies break out and show us some real innovative (dare I say multiple blade) designs.
I like tons of options. They make for a better knife.Takuan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:57 pmI think I might have interpreted MichaelScott’s original post differently. I thought he might be criticizing the knife industry’s current obsession with things like flippers that open the knife in a flashy (and fun) manner, but don’t really offer an advantage over something simple like the round hole. Clearly, Spyderco has been a major innovator over the years: the round hole, pocket clips, serrations, etc.
And where are they now? Dead.
The OP says, “The Swayback was designed as a one-handed knife. It didn’t meet even that basic requirement.” I have a two-handed swayback slip joint which, in addition to having two blades, works much better and quicker than the Spyderco SwayBack.
The Swayback can be operated entirely with one hand. It's objectively wrong to say it can't be.MichaelScott wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:03 pmThe OP says, “The Swayback was designed as a one-handed knife. It didn’t meet even that basic requirement.” I have a two-handed swayback slip joint which, in addition to having two blades, works much better and quicker than the Spyderco SwayBack.
While most of you have expressed why you like a one-handed knife, no one has addressed my claim of stunted innovation other than small changes to that basic design. The fact that you like them isn’t the point.
And, yes, our ancestors are dead. That is why they are ancestors.
i was going to say the same thing.curlyhairedboy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:29 pmOur ancestors always had the quickest knife to deploy - a fixed blade. Designed for extended use, high comfort and utility, there are thousands of fixed blade patterns for any number of applications.
The fact that we have folders that can deploy as fast as a fixed blade is entirely in line with the use expecations of our forebears. One hand to hold, one hand to cut.
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], mikey177 and 22 guests