Delica/Endura Gen 5 Thoughts

[James Y]

The weird thing for me is that I barely even noticed the bump on the E4’s handle in my grip until I started reading people’s posts on the forum talking about how uncomfortable it is. Then for a brief while it became ‘uncomfortable’ in my hand until I went back to treating it the way I did before. Then it went back to not bothering me.

Of course, this is only MY experience with the E4 handle, and others people’s experiences will differ.

Jim

[spoonrobot]

Reading the posts here, apparently quite a few people on this forum have an unfulfilled desire to own the C90FPIV2 :D

[weeping minora]

One thing I thought initially from pictures was the added depth of the ricasso into the handle and after handling the model, I believe this will nullify lock-rock inherent to the lock type, especially after prolonged usage.

I'm not following here. The disassembly pictures seem to show a normal back lock with nothing different that would nullify potential lock-rock.

That said, I never bought an D3/E3 when they were around because I didn't really like the blade shape or overall aesthetic. I did buy a bunch of gen 1 Pacifics and Salt 1s and I've had quite a few D4/E4 models over the years. I don't know if I say the D4/E4 are perfect, but they're very very good. I liked the saber grind better than FFG because even though it didn't cut quite as well, the additional blade weight made the knife more satisfying to open/close. Regardless I'd be excited to see where they can find improvement in the design.

I've not seen, nor am I referencing disassembly pictures, but I'll explain in further depth.

When you look at how small the ricasso/kick is on the RockJumper, in order to facilitate one handed closing, a la Delica, that kick has been seated a bit deeper into the handle, being further sandwiched between the two scales and has a much wider contact width at the conjunction between the scales versus the D4.

I'm not specifically stating a difference in the lock, rather the design placement of added mass between the scales via the widened kick, along with a bit extra seated depth between the scales; which to my mind would add more rigidity, whether intentional, or not, this could be a fallout result in creating one handed usage, or a happy accident. Definitely not enough mileage on this design yet to prove my theory right, or wrong; however speaking from having all of my D4/E4 models develop some sort of side-to-side blade play after extended usage, this looks to be an improvement, of course IMO. Time will tell.

Hope this clears things up a bit.

That may be where the confusion is coming from. Internally, the RJ and E4/D4 are not much different. I do not believe the RJ design will be inherently better at preventing lock-rock and/or side-to-side play. The former is a function of the lock geometry designed for maximum engagement and to shed debris that may prevent lockup while maintaining integrity as the facing surfaces wear. The latter is a function of the bearing surface preload and was mainly solved by moving to a screw and barrel pivot. Almost all of the non-triad-lock lockbacks I've owned have showed some play, either inherent in the design that stays consistent over many thousands of open close cycles or slowly develops as the knife is used.

RJ

E4 Initial

E4 CQI FFG

FRN Stretch

I'll preface in stating that I am ignorant to the fact of moving parts coming together to make the whole of the back-lock work in any form and I'll admit, perhaps my words were taken much more literal than intended and outweighed my enthusiasm in this matter. Suppose reading in black-and-white is as literal as it gets, however, for a matter of reference, no matter how much usage I put my original Stretch FRN through, I never noticed lock-rock develop from daily use, nor when intentionally testing for it. Albeit, I do not torture my knives and I do not go out of my way to test them to prove a point to myself, so my viewpoint is singular, yet I've had the exact opposite experience with my numerous Delica and Endura models. I do believe that added mass at the junction of handle/blade has a huge part to do with that; if not entirely. The RockJumper not only does this, but also adds a bit more depth of kick into the handle as well, which by laymen standards tells me it will add that much more to the overall rigidity. I'll chalk this up as a happy accident in the design and if this proves to transfer over to the RockJumper and any model that examples after this design, I'll be happy with that. I believe the back-lock Spyderco produces is absolutely world-class and is nothing short of perfect in terms of functionality and strength as it is displayed, but I cannot deny that the improved design is a very welcomed and much exciting evolution, to me.

This being said and aside from the seeming uncanny ability in developing lock-rock, in my use, I do not find another flaw in the Delica, nor Endura in their current iterations. I do believe if Sal & Co. were to mitigate this, it would have changes too drastic to just CQI into the current 4th gen; requiring a re-working of the handle and internals in fitting a lock of this design into the models, thus provoking my starting of this thread. I thank you for your feedback spoon. I'd like to think I learn a little bit more each day, though my ignorance knows no bounds.