Any interest in ~1.0 mm blade thickness?

[Holland]

I have always been interested in thinner knives and would like to try a knife with a blade thinner than the chaparral.

Would anyone be interested in a sprint run of an existing model with the blade stock thinned out to 1.0 - 1.5 mm?

I would really like to try a GB2 or Chaparral 1 or Dragonfly with a 1.0 mm tool steel blade.

[Wartstein]

Sure! And at least Stretch size. Thin slicey blades can show their potential best when not too short.

[standy99]

Picked Chaparral but would have picked No

Have no issue with knives as they are.

Don’t think a CB2 would make sense in 1mm

[Brock O Lee]

I’m a fan of thinner blade stock!

My guess is that any liner type lock will be difficult to execute with such a thin blade, so you can probably eliminate them from the list...

I’ll be tempted by a Chaparral or Stretch.

[Wartstein]

My guess is that any liner type lock will be difficult to execute with such a thin blade, so you can probably eliminate them from the list...

This. True probably also for a comp.lock . Not enough lock interface left.

[Wartstein]

Picked Chaparral but would have picked No

Have no issue with knives as they are.

Don’t think a CB2 would make sense in 1mm

EDIT: Ok, maybe 1.00 is TOO thin actually.. :o
1.5 mm though would be worth a try! :)

I have to disagree.
In a majority of lighter duty EDC cutting tasks a thinner blade would perform better imho.
Sure THIS would be more of a lighter or normal duty EDC folder. Something people wrongly (imho) say about the actually pretty stout 2.00 and 2.5mm stock Spydies.

[steelcity16]

I'd vote for the Pacific Salt in LC200N. I like to use mine to cut up food in the car or on the go, and even had one in H1 as my lunch knife in the office pre-covid. The H1 Saber left a lot to be desired for food prep, the FFG LC200N is better, but a thinner blade stock would make it really shine for a lot of food prep tasks.

[skeeg11]

1.5mm fixed filet.

[standy99]

Picked Chaparral but would have picked No

Have no issue with knives as they are.

Don’t think a CB2 would make sense in 1mm

I have to disagree.
In a majority of lighter duty EDC cutting tasks a thinner blade would perform better imho.
Sure THIS would be more of a lighter or normal duty EDC folder. Something people wrongly (imho) say about the actually pretty stout 2.00 and 2.5mm stock Spydies.

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.

[Cl1ff]

More likely to me they’d make a new design because thickness changes a lot of locking geometries.
That said, I’d be happy to see something that thin!

[Peter1960]

I voted "other" as a non-locking folder like UKPK or Urban would be my desire from Spyderco.In general I think a non-locking folder should have a thinner blade.

[Evil D]

Really depends on the knife design and size and especially the steel as this is thin enough to flex and or break/bend depending on the steel. The Z Cuts are already 1.3mm and they're wafer thin so you're talking about even thinner than those. It pretty much rules out all locks except the back lock or maybe the CBBL. Even the Ladybug is 2mm so half as thick? It would probably make more sense as a small fixed blade, but again I'm looking at my ARK which is also 2mm trying to imagine it half as thick.

[Wartstein]

Right. Perhaps 1.00 is too much (or too little actually)
1.5 mm ??

[Evil D]

Right. Perhaps 1.00 is too much (or too little actually)
1.5 mm ??

I'd be fine with 2mm and thinner blade grinds.

[ZrowsN1s]

For obvious reasons production of all knives has been delayed so it may be year before we see it, but the performance afi delica is in the works. That will be thinned out and geared for high performance slicing.

[The Deacon]

I'd love to see a Chaparral, Stretch II, Native, or, better yet, original FRN Stretch with a 1mm to 1.5mm blade.

[Cl1ff]

For obvious reasons production of all knives has been delayed so it may be year before we see it, but the performance afi delica is in the works. That will be thinned out and geared for high performance slicing.

I’m very excited about that!
To some extent, “afi” or “optimized” grinds are more interesting than material variations in my opinion (as much as I love the latter).

[ZrowsN1s]

For obvious reasons production of all knives has been delayed so it may be year before we see it, but the performance afi delica is in the works. That will be thinned out and geared for high performance slicing.

I’m very excited about that!
To some extent, “afi” or “optimized” grinds are more interesting than material variations in my opinion (as much as I love the latter).

I don't know the current status of the project, but when last discussed (mid2019) it was K390 with a very thin high hollow grind.

[Matus]

I am not quite sure what a 1mm thick stock should bring. If you want to see improved slicing performace, you need to work on the grind - like a gentle convex AND and actual distal taper over the length of the blade. That can all be done - but would be very expensive to accomplish in a production knife. If you want (must) stay with a full flat grind, then 1mm stock on a taller blade WITH low thickness behind the edge will yield grinds that will be simply too weak for anything but food-oriented applications. With very thin blades you need a convex grind to get the desired geometry and edge strength. 1m tool steel blade with a flat grind would break like a toothpick if you would twist the knife accidentally while slicing stuff like cardboard. I say this as someone who really likes to complain about most pocket knives being too thick (though especially behind the edge)

I have re-ground my GiantMouse Ace Iona (which hat 3mm stock, full flat grind and was way too thick behind the edge) to a blade that now has around 1.6mm spine thickness half way towards the tip, but the distal taper is NOT linear as otherwise the tip would be way too weak for even light use EDC. The knife has now convex grind so I have good edge strength (cardboard is no problem) and is an excellent cutter. Yet - it performs comparably to my Quite Carry Waypoint (which has an excellently made hollow grind).

I have several high end Japanese kitchen knives and the smallest (with the most narrow and thinnest blade) is a Blazen Ryusen 110 paring knife with 110 mm long blade that is around 18 mm wide close to the handle. The thickness of the spine reaches 1mm around 20 - 25 mm from the tip and goes up to 2mm in front of the handle. The knife has a very thin convex grind. It cuts very well and obviously gets used only for smaller/finer tasks (like slicing apples). An EDC knife with a comparable blade geometry would be very easy to damage with general use.

So - my bottom line is - just asking for thinner stock has little value unless it is matched to a grind that makes sense. For very most of EDC tasks stock thickness of about 2.5 mm is thing enough - it is the grind geometry (especially close to the cutting edge) that decides the cutting performance and properties.

[Notsurewhy]

Never thought I'd say this, but that's too thin for my taste. The only knives I have that are ~1mm thin are kitchen paring knives and I wouldn't want that much flex in a folder. I don't have any problem with them making it if there's a demand, I just wouldn't buy one.

I would prefer if more knives were offered with 2-2.5mm stock. Over 3mm is unnecessary for my uses in a folding knife.