Blade:Closed Size Ratios

[Bolster]

So...I know this is an unappealing topic to some. You may not care how efficiently a blade packs into a handle, and you may even prefer small blades in large handles. Maybe you have big mitts and you like a short blade for tip control. Hey, to each his own...maybe this thread isn't of interest to you.

But if you are one of those who judges a folding knife by its size efficiency, I'm sharing this spreadsheet. It's not comprehensive. (Actually it rather selfishly looks at the knives I'm interested in.) It does however give a view of some of the most size-efficient Spydercos out there. So if this is of interest to you, have a look.

I don't own a Pac Salt, but in several of my efficiency analyses, it stands out as an unusually efficient knife. I'm a fool for not owning one. I bought an Atlantic Salt once, but gave it to a sailor, who loves it.

Note this graphic looks at blade size not edge size. The efficient ratio knives are to the right of the regression line. The further away (in terms of perpendicular to the line) the more efficient they are.

[ladybug93]

this just isn't something i worry about at all. i understand why some people care, but i'd rather have a full handle and short blade (for a task that only requires a short blade) than a small knife that is less comfortable to hold. people complain a lot about the rockjumper, but i'm glad the handle isn't as short as the blade.

[Wandering_About]

Kind of a fascinating topic for me. The answer to what I prefer depends on what I'm doing. For a working knife, ample handle space is best. For lighter daily carry, space efficiency matters. For a while now I've been carrying a PM2 and a CRK Small Inkosi. They are not that far apart in blade size, but overall footprint is very different. They are both favorites but in different respects. The PM2 is a better "work" knife due to its much more generous handle, ease of opening with gloves, and slightly linger blade. The Inkosi is my preferred small EDC currently, as it is just so compact for its blade size. Still a 4 finger grip for me, although only just there.

[kennethsime]

I love it, Bolster. If I’m reading this right, knives to the right of the plotted line are more efficient?

I’ve really got to get myself a Native Chief. And the Stretch 2 XL.

[Enactive]

I'm not fixated on these ratios... but i find a more relevant comparison in edge length to handle ratios-- moreso than blade length to handle. Just my take.

Edited to add-- cool work Bolster, don't mean to yuck your yum.

[Bolster]

I love it, Bolster. If I’m reading this right, knives to the right of the plotted line are more efficient?

I’ve really got to get myself a Native Chief. And the Stretch 2 XL.

Correct. The slant line can be read as the average ratio; points to the right have higher "efficiency ratios." More blade to handle. If you want to spot the highly efficient ratios, look for those that are the farthest distance perpendicular to the right of the line.

As Sal once commented (paraphrased): a folding knife spends a lot more time in the pocket than in the hand. I've always appreciated trim and unobtrusive knives for that reason.

Looking at the chart, you can see one of the reasons the Caly line is so popular. Trim in the pocket but big in the blade.

Native Chief is pretty amazing for efficiency. Kapara was a nice surprise, I wish I owned one.

I would like to know: How close can the pivot be moved toward the front of the handle, before it's too far? At some point it would weaken the knife. But the closer the pivot to the front of the handle, the more blade you can pack into the handle. Can you make up for "area around the pivot" with a deeper/taller handle? For example, on a "tall" knife like the Manix, can the pivot be pushed forward...while on a knife like the Ikuchi, that's "short" (when lying on its spine) by necessity does the pivot have to move back for strength?

[Bolster]

I'm not fixated on these ratios... but i find a more relevant comparison in edge length to cutting edge ratios-- moreso than blade length. Just my take.

Edited to add-- cool work Bolster, don't mean to yuck your yum.

Thanks.

Explain to me, I'm a bit slow: You're interested in 'edge length' to 'cutting edge'?

If you're interested in closed size to cutting edge (not blade length) I have those ratios also. You want?

[Enactive]

I'm not fixated on these ratios... but i find a more relevant comparison in edge length to cutting edge ratios-- moreso than blade length. Just my take.

Edited to add-- cool work Bolster, don't mean to yuck your yum.

Thanks.

Explain to me, I'm a bit slow: You're interested in 'edge length' to 'cutting edge'?

If you're interested in closed size to cutting edge (not blade length) I have those ratios also. You want?

Yes, i mistyped and corrected my earlier post.

[Bolster]

Yes, i mistyped and corrected my earlier post.

OK, I'll try to post those tomorrow. They're on a different computer.

[Enactive]

Yes, i mistyped and corrected my earlier post.

OK, I'll try to post those tomorrow. They're on a different computer.

Cool, thanks. No urgency.

[RustyIron]

Note this graphic looks at blade size not edge size. The efficient ratio knives are to the right of the regression line. The further away (in terms of perpendicular to the line) the more efficient they are.

Nice chart! I'm a fan of a long blade and long cutting edge, but I'm not too concerned about the folded length of the knife. The other dimension that I find important, if you want to do a 3D chart, is the height of the knife. For instance, I really like the way a Manix 2 XL handles, the length is fine, but the height takes up too much room in my pocket.

[Doc Dan]

I want a handle that fits my hand well, no matter the blade length. I am not one who buys into the handle to blade length ratio. I used to when I was a BM fan, but not in very many years. Learning is a good thing.

[Cl1ff]

I actually really appreciate looking at this stuff. Not really because it’s relevant to my preferences, but because it’s interesting to me to understand and analyze designs.

[aicolainen]

Thanks for your effort and willingness to share, Bolster.

I find this chart interesting for two reasons;
1. My main mode of carry for EDC is loose in my back pocket. This seriously limits how long and thick the handle can be before it gets uncomfortable for an office rat, sitting on my knife most of the day.
I don’t expect to find anything that knocks my DF2 out of my pocket anytime soon, but charts like this is nice for discovering candidates that might have slipped my attention.

2. While I’m a size L in gloves, that’s mostly due to finger length, my palm is quite narrow.
This usually mean I have the opposite priority compared to LB93 and some others. If the handle gets above a certain length, my hand doesn’t align well with the curvatures of a handle designed for larger hands. So while blade length isn’t always important, it is sometimes, and it’s nice to be able to get a blade long enough in a handle that still fits me pretty well.

[Evil D]

Absolutely something I look for and enjoy and I'm sick of feeling like I shouldn't. We all have preferences and there's nothing wrong with preferring whatever ratio you like. For me I think the most efficient design I have is the Autonomy 1, I don't know if Spyderco makes a folder that packs more edge into as small of a folded package as it does. It has just 0.17 inch less edge length than a Military but the folded length is 0.58 shorter. Compared to a Para 2 it's only 0.10 longer closed but has 0.47 more edge length.


The thing for me is not specifically that I like the handle to edge ratio, it's more that I want big knife edge length in a small-medium sized handle. I want as much edge as I can get from any handle size because it just gives me the most usable knife in the smallest folded package. I don't want to have to carry a 6 inch handled knife just to get 4 inches of cutting edge if I can get 4 inches of edge in a 4.5 inch handle.

It surprises me that some of you who obsess over having the deepest possible carry clips don't understand how a small preference like this can be so important to some of us. Some people want deep carry, some want paper thin handles, I just want the most edge I can get with the least necessary handle size.

[JSumm]

Thanks for the info. Bolster! This is always interesting to look at. Some of my favorite models fall to the right of that line, so I guess this is important to me.

I don't know much at all about design, but it seems like making these models so efficient in relation to size while maintaining some of Spyderco's signature features is quite the accomplishment. Kudos to Sal & Company.

The majority of my days I want a large blade and a comfortable handle. I also want it to sit in my pocket comfortably. After all, even with a heavy use day it is a folder after all and will mainly live in my pocket. Models like the Chief, Endura, Kapara, and Caly 3.5 fit that. I would even throw the GB2 in there. It is riding pretty close to that efficiency line you have drawn up. Models like that are probably my favorite. Though I still like a good Manix or Military to play around with.

[p_atrick]

I used to find discussion like this to be very odd. Why nitpick and cause a ruckus over something so trivial? But then I discovered my quirky preference (full-sized, comfortable handle with a smaller blade). What I like runs counter to "mainstream" (i.e., what you typically find outside this forum) knife logic, so bring on the niche topics!

[JRinFL]

The only person who hates this subject more than me is Sal himself. There are some whittling knives that would make your head explode!

[Evil D]

The only person who hates this subject more than me is Sal himself. There are some whittling knives that would make your head explode!

Nah, think of it in terms of context and intended use. A whittling knife only needs to whittle, a scalpel only needs to cut skin and tissue. Nobody is quartering a deer with a whittling knife. Since a pocket knife gets thrust into so many unpredictable types of usage, I want it to be able to do everything. I can whittle with a 4 inch blade but I can't make deep cuts with a carpet knife. It's about versatility, and small blades are limited by their size in more situations than large ones.

[JRinFL]

The only person who hates this subject more than me is Sal himself. There are some whittling knives that would make your head explode!

Nah, think of it in terms of context and intended use. A whittling knife only needs to whittle, a scalpel only needs to cut skin and tissue. Nobody is quartering a deer with a whittling knife. Since a pocket knife gets thrust into so many unpredictable types of usage, I want it to be able to do everything. I can whittle with a 4 inch blade but I can't make deep cuts with a carpet knife. It's about versatility, and small blades are limited by their size in more situations than large ones.

Horses for courses, of course! But I'd wager the large majority of people concerned about blade to handle ratios are concerned primarily due to aesthetic reasons. i.e., a blade smaller than the handle looks wrong, so therefore is wrong.