Any interest in ~1.0 mm blade thickness?

[Ryder]

[

The Chap FRN actually was the final component that won me over to thinner blade stocks on folders functionwise (I still like thicker stock sometimes, cause it might look cool, makes putting a finger on the spine more comfortable, offers more lock interface for liner- and comp.lock and so on):
Like you I found it to be really small at first, but I guess unlike you I admired its extremely solid built (for such a thin knife) immediately :)
Then I discovered that the ergos are actually not bad at all for such a thin, small knife and for my L to XL hands, and the knife felt very "stable" in hand (more so than "comfortable" perhaps)

But I still thought the blade might not be up to "harder" tasks.

But boy, was I wrong! I tested that thing in the outdoors in pretty much any task I´d use a folder for and it took it like a champ while being a superior slicer.

Maybe try not to see it just as "your usual folder" but as something else, almost a "different" tool: For me it is really kind of like a "bushcraft-claw", easily carried (often as a companion to a larger (fixed-)blade) and great for all the small, but if need arises still "hard" tasks.

Sometimes I think of getting a second Chap to thin that one out as good as I can and make use of the great platform or premise it offers to become a really mean slicer (but then not as solid in the blade anymore of course).

The Chaparral is a shapeshifter. It morphs from a small unassuming thing in the palm of the hand to a full handed, full fingered grip when deployed. It is inexplicable dark magic.

[Blerv]

I have a Stretch ZDP and Sage2 Kreisler regrind with a distal taper. Spine thickness ranges from 2mm or so down quite thin.

If using 1mm stock I’d rather have a 2mm blade with a hollow or high hollow primary bevel. That would have the same effect (for most tasks) to a 1mm blade while still being a normal pocket knife with some spine rigidity. The Cento 3/4 are great examples of this. A Manix or Superleaf high hollow would be amazing.

1mm stocks are great for the kitchen though. I’ve yet to bend or break my Spyderco utility knives in MBS-26 so maybe it’s unjust skepticism.

[Wartstein]

The Chaparral is a shapeshifter. It morphs from a small unassuming thing in the palm of the hand to a full handed, full fingered grip when deployed. It is inexplicable dark magic.

True. It IS magic indeed!!
Sal must have some mighty spells up his sleeves..

[Wartstein]

Well we can agree to disagree

For one a GB with a 1mm blade would be crazy as the handle is probably the most beefy handle that Spyderco makes.

It’s good to have a lighter EDC for some but myself I have no need for a lighter pocket knife with a 1mm blade

You want light 1mm blade stock buy a opinel


Think for a second....
Once you go to 1mm blades you change the whole aesthetics of Spyderco knives because it’s handles and everything that has to be re-designed remodelled to support a 1mm blade. It’s not as easy as just throwing a 1mm blade in a already made and designed knife or handle.
And if your thinking you could just do it with the knife as it is, then you could just take any knife you already own down to a 1mm with a good hour on a wet stone.

Did think about it...

And now think you´re right and I was a bit "overenthusiastic" in my preference for thin stocks
1 mm would be TOO thin for any EDC folder I´d really want to carry.

Perhaps something like a Chaparral XL (Endela size) in 1.5 mm would be nice to try, though I think for my main EDC I´d still want even a fictional Chap XL in 2.00 mm.
As I would like to try a Stretch in 2 mm.

And even an Opinel is thicker than 1.00 I think (1.4 ? 1.8 ? Can´t recall right now)

[sal]

For the sake of discussion, I would begin with a thicker stock, just to make sure lock or slippie springs were working the same as the original shape. Then grind down the blade to the desired thickness.

sal

[Holland]

For the sake of discussion, I would begin with a thicker stock, just to make sure lock or slippie springs were working the same as the original shape. Then grind down the blade to the desired thickness.

sal

Good idea. Would it be relatively inexpensive to do a run of say dragonfly 2s and stretch 2s in a steel that the factory has worked with before (k390, hap40, SuperBlue, vToku2, etc)?

Even a 1.5mm spine would be very educational and fun to try out

[sal]

Hi Holland,

The size of the demand is the first question.

sal

[Matus]

Just to show what I meant earlier - the is the spine of a knife that originally was 3mm thick for 80% of its length. Now it is about 1.6mm in the middle.

Most of the convexity happens first 5mm behind the edge, (so the thickness behind the edge was effectively 0 after the first sharpening) then the grind changes to near flat. This was all done free hand on a belt grinder (yes I have made a poor job at the plunge lines, kinda did not really care for other than not grinding where the thumbstuds are), but this kind of a complex grind would be hard to achieve in serial production unless you use high end CNC mills what would most likely make the price to explode.

Full flat grind with a blade this thin is not an option if you also want a thin edge. And should one go with a flat saber grind, then doing the blade this thin at the spine would make only limited sense performance wise.

[araneae]

An Opinel No 6 is 1.33 mm at it's thickest. That sized blade works well at that thickness. I've whittled many a walking stick with one. Flex is not a problem I've noticed.

I'd try a Dragonfly or Chap at similar thickness. I wouldn't want a longer blade, I think flex would become very apparent the longer you go.

[Rinzler]

I’m interested in a very thin slicey knife as long as it’s a small knife. I wouldn’t have a use for something bigger than a delica or dragonfly.

[zhyla]

I don’t know if I really want something thinner than the chaparral.

[Wartstein]

I don’t know if I really want something thinner than the chaparral.

Perhaps, perhaps not...

but definitely something longer while as thin as the Chaparral...
My (and others of course) old "pet subject" Chaparral XL.... :rolleyes:

As said: For me it is longer blades that profit the most from being thin and slicey, more than shorter ones.

[Matus]

To have a dedicated apple slicer is something I can well understand - so a chaparral XL would make sense to me too (just not necessarily with a 1 mm thick blade). I personally think that thin-ish blade with a hollow grind is the way to go for a production knife (QC Waypoint is a proof that it works and can be done). I would really like to see more hollow grinds from Spyderco. They know how to do them well (look at Gayle Gradle 1 and 2 as an example)

[sal]

Hey Matus,

How's she cutting?

sal

[Matus]

Hello Sal,

since I was not 100% sure what knife you are referring to, I decided to make a quick cutting comparison video of a few knives I have mentioned :) Please not that the apple was not quite as hard is it ideally would be, but the carrot was super hard, so that should make up for it. I added a Toyama nakiri just to send a comparison point to a kitchen knife (no, I don't expect a pocket knife with a grind that thin, but here one can see how important a gentle convexity is when cutting food)

https://youtu.be/FvEJNPB0WxI

All 3 knives here are reasonably sharp (would shave hair). I find that on the carrot the reground Ace Iona did a little better than the Waypoint followed by the GB1. To be fair - GB1 is a heavy duty knife, the thickness behind the edge is about 0.018", so exactly where I want it to be. The blade of the Waypoint in comparison feels 'fragile' as it is so thin.

On Cardboard the best performer was probably the Waypoint, but the GB1 was really very close. The Ace Iona did very well too, but here the convexity simply meant a little more drag than a hollow grind. All 3 in my personal view performed very well and better than - my Brouwer (which I did not buy to be a dedicated cardboard slayer, but rather a multipurpose EDC and I love it dearly).

I hope this answers your question. If not, then I can make more videos :)

Matus

[Cl1ff]

I had a very thin slip joint around the 1.5 mm mark and used it for some really heavy cutting.
The blade was reprofiled to a full zero-edge convex on stones by myself and had no problem doing very abusive cutting.
In fact, I would cut so hard with it that the spring popped and pushed the scale to the side letting the blade fold backwards. It was a surprisingly easy fix, but yeah the blade itself was stronger than the handle.
And it sliced better than any other knife I had.

That failure is probably the only concern I’d have with a knife like that, so a dramatic distal taper (similar to what is seen on the Bow river but more exaggerated) or thin hollow grind is likely the way to go in order to maintain enough lock engagement, which seems to be where we generally agree.

[Wartstein]

To have a dedicated apple slicer is something I can well understand - so a chaparral XL would make sense to me too (just not necessarily with a 1 mm thick blade). ....

A Chaparral XL with the regular 2mm bladestock would be a dedicated apple slicer indeed...but a LOT more than this.
A perfect, superslicey and sturdy enough do-it-all EDC folder, even for harder tasks.

This tall blade would not break easily even when elongated, the tip (anyway the area that will break first and alone if at all in blades generally) has a pretty solid profile sideways and I don´t think there´d be flex that caused any problems

[Danvp]

I pass....

[Ric]

@danvp
What did you cut?
Too much twisting?

[Danvp]

I don't know exactly. My wife used it in the kitchen. I have to hide all of my knives i guess. :D

I like thin blades and I love my Chaparral!