Southard Aluminium

[Divo]

Dear Sal,

I like the Southard, but honestly its too expensive to my like.
Personally I dont need titanium in such a knife.
Maybe it is a good idea to make a G10/ aluminium version aside the current one?

[yablanowitz]

If I recall correctly, the Southard employs a Reeve Integral Lock. I seriously doubt aluminum would be an acceptable material for a lock. Steel would work, but at the cost of significant weight gain.

[GoldenSpydie]

Titanium was not chosen just for looks or "coolness." The RIL (frame lock) design of that knife (and the Domino and Dice) requires a strong, spring-like metal that is wear resistant. There are exactly two materials that knife companies use for this purpose: titanium and steel. Titanium is much lighter and can be anodized by DIYers, while steel is very heavy.

Titanium was chosen because it is the lightest, strongest option available.

I don't need titanium in such a knife.

Would you mind explaining that statement? Also, switching to stainless steel would probably only lower the price a little.

[Evil D]

The only way to make a cheaper version would be to eliminate the RIL lock and make it a liner lock, which would eliminate the Ti side. While I'm sure a very nice knife could be made this way, and it could be made much more affordable, the Ti is part of my love of this knife so while I may even like the cheaper version, there would definitely be something lost for me. I pinched quite a few pennies to afford mine, sometimes that's what it takes.

[Divo]

Well you know I love titanium and carbon as materials.

But your or my personal aim is not what is here discussed, there are many people that would benefit.
Maybe in the startpost I refer to myself but this thought needs to be seen as a general public one.
I think Spyderco can make several "sellers" into bestsellers by these adjustments in materials.

I'm convinced there are people that buys such a knife as the Southard and use it as EDC. But there will be many people that sees the knife too expensive to just use or lose and lay it therefore in the closet. Also many people wil not buy at all because they dont have the money or don't want to spend that amount of money to a knife.

If Im right Spyderco (Sal) say you best use a knife, because thats the purpose of a knife.
When I go out of that principle, I think a focus on making particular knives affordable for a larger group of people looks to me a good idea. They can make variants to the like of anyone. Not a degration of a model but just aside as a variant.

As example you can look to knives as the Lion Steel SR1. These you have in titanium as well in aluminium. The alu is way cheaper and even slightly less weight. (although this particular knive has a handle which is totally made of metal) Also this knife shows how to deal with the lock. They use a small piece of stainless steel on the contactpoint.

[JNewell]

By the time you factor in the extra labor costs, an aluminum framelock version would probably cost at least as much as the current version.

[Philo Beddoe]

Dear Devo,


Can you define "affordable"?

[gbelleh]

I don't see why a lower priced aluminum version couldn't be done. Lion Steel has clearly shown it's possible. I have an SR1A and SR2A, and they're both rock solid, and cost way less than the ti equivalents.

Maybe there is a higher cost savings when machining the entire handle? But it's a worthwhile idea to discuss.

[Divo]

By the time you factor in the extra labor costs, an aluminum framelock version would probably cost at least as much as the current version.

Wich labor costs? They dont need to reinvent the wheel. They can rely on current design with a few adjustments.
Also possible to give the alu a kind of texture.

Aluminium is less expensive vs titanium.
Aluminium is less demanding and less dificult to work with.
There are tons of examples in the world around all kinds of products that could have been your source to know his.

A new buyer group would be reached.
Then its very quite possible Spyderco would sell much higher volumes of this alu version.
The outcomes and bebefits you can calculate your self.

[JNewell]

By the time you factor in the extra labor costs, an aluminum framelock version would probably cost at least as much as the current version.

Wich labor costs? They dont need to reinvent the wheel. They can rely on current design with a few adjustments.
Also possible to give the alu a kind of texture.

Aluminium is less expensive vs titanium.
Aluminium is less demanding and less dificult to work with.
There are tons of examples in the world around all kinds of products that could have been your source to know his.

A new buyer group would be reached.
Then its very quite possible Spyderco would sell much higher volumes of this alu version.
The outcomes and bebefits you can calculate your self.

You're completely ignoring the need for new tooling and many new steps in the manufacturing process. Examine the cost of materials: they are a minor part of the cost of producing nearly all knives. The knife would cost no less. The only group of new buyers would be those who might buy the knife for the color of anodized scales. Offset that by the costs of managing the production and distribution of new SKUs and you would be lucky to break even.

[Divo]

When you have an idea or vision, you can test that by asking yourself critical questions. Works very well as a purifier.
When people come with things that I overlook I like to here that. But no I'm not the one that is ignoring.

As I wrote titanium is not only more expensive but shaping/drilling/working with it is a total different thing than processing aluminium, which come with huge costs difference. Means the costs related to material will become higher caused by more than one element.

Look back for a moment to my example of Lion Steel SR-1 models :)
Here in my country they are sold for:
-Titanium version 310 euro
-Aluminium version 180 - 190 euro
A difference of 130 - 120 euro . . . .

Does there come up a light already? :rolleyes:

(Although I dont know if there is also a price difference in the used steels. The titanium uses Sleipner, the alu uses D2)
In the case of the Southard there is in first no need to make design changes, they can make almost copies of the titanium half.
That work you hand over to a company that is specialised to produce these on large scale. Very common thing to do these days.
But even when they make design changes it still can have a beneficial outcome.

Look to the spyderco fakes for a moment, some are coming very close.
These are made with very low cost and still they have profit with producing and selling (more parties involved here)
How does it come that you see no cheap production options for spyderco to let manufacture these halfs somewhere for a good price?


When you follow reviews on the internet you wil discover that many see the Southard as a bit too expensive to their like. Some just by them but dont use them. They are just put in the closet added to their collection. In other words, they find the value to high to edc it. How does it come you dont have an eye and ear for these facts?

Now the following:
A company as Spyderco has a strategy and a target to sell a particular amount of a particular product.
Its possible that Spyderco isn't interested to produce cheaper models because they sell according expectations.
I cant calculate for Spyderco what to do or what not. But I can handover ideas, and that is what I do here.

[yablanowitz]

Just so you will know, D2 is inexpensive as knife steel goes, and the heat treatment is also relatively simple and inexpensive. Working the more exotic steels can add a huge amount of labor, so using D2 is probably saving them as much overall as using aluminum instead of titanium. Fitting a steel insert for the lock means more pieces, more fasteners, more machining and more assembly labor, none of which is likely to reduce the final cost.

As for the fakes coming close, they may look close, but they are still made from inferior materials by virtual slave labor. They have no research and development costs since they are just stealing someone else's labor for all that. Are you suggesting Spyderco should go that route?

Lots of people buy things they will never use. So what? That doesn't necessarily mean they find the value too high to EDC it. In fact, since what I value is cutting performance, if I bought one and didn't carry it, for me the value is too low (not enough return in performance for the investment in purchase price).

It is possible that Spyderco is not interested in producing cheaper models because they feel that portion of the market is being adequately served by others. "Cheap" has never been their target market.

[jujigatame]

In the case of the Southard there is in first no need to make design changes, they can make almost copies of the titanium half.
That work you hand over to a company that is specialised to produce these on large scale. Very common thing to do these days.
But even when they make design changes it still can have a beneficial outcome.

I like the idea of a more budget minded version of the model but I think you're presuming things are much more simplistic to reach that end than they are likely to actually be.

What would you pay for the knife you envision? The standard Ti streets for $230 to $260 at most of the vendors I check. Are you looking to pay half that much? More, less?

[gbelleh]

Spyderco could also use a less expensive, but still capable steel, like S30V if it would reduce costs. Taichung is very well capable of installing a steel insert on the lockbar. Though nothing made in Taichung is inexpensive, an aluminum Southard with S30V steel for a street price of around $150 (street price of the Sage 2), could push many buyers off the fence. I understand what the OP is saying. I never would've bought an SR1, but the price of the SR1A is what made me give it a try. If LionSteel can figure out how to make a less expensive version of a great knife, why not Spyderco?

I don't know Spyderco's costs, and maybe this idea isn't feasible in the real world with this type of cost reduction, but everyone seems to be dismissing the idea pretty quickly.

[jujigatame]

I don't know Spyderco's costs, and maybe this idea isn't feasible in the real world with this type of cost reduction, but everyone seems to be dismissing the idea pretty quickly.

I think we're more skeptical of the premise that a simple swap of aluminum in place of Ti can be done with little or no other work to automatically make a more affordable knife. That position assumes a lot. Not saying it can't happen but we the customers are not the ones who'd have to do it, ya know? :)

[LC Kid]

Hi Divo!

I never liked the Southard. Some of the reasons are:

- It feels awkward in my hand.
- The blade shape looks quite silly to me.
- The whole Internal Stop Pin and Flipping Mechanism looks to me like its taking away material strength from the knife's pivot.

OTOH, I recognize it is very well made, and the materials used are second to none.

Now, you present an alternative to reduce the final price by using Aluminum instead of Titanium.

Geezus, I like Aluminum for knife handles even less... :rolleyes:

It'd easily be the biggest NO-NO reason for me to never look again at this model.

[Strong-Dog]

If Spyderco was so desperate for profits that they took to compromising their model's materials and designs, they wouldn't be Spyderco anymore. The Southard is a collaboration with Brad, and I don't see why either of them would want to implement aluminum. They already built the knife the way they wanted to the first time, and had a target market in mind when doing so. They obviously weren't going for the crowd that would want to spend no more than $150.

Another point that LC Kid addressed is that I hate aluminum on knives. I once owned a Southard, but if it had aluminum I definitely wouldn't have bought it. I don't even like steel frame-locks.

The last point I will make is that it is highly unlikely that Spyderco is, was, or will be losing sleep over the sales they could have had if they made an aluminum Southard. Simply put, it really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things. They have much more important matters to attend to within their business, like entirely new models and such.

[Surfingringo]

Spyderco could also use a less expensive, but still capable steel, like S30V if it would reduce costs. Taichung is very well capable of installing a steel insert on the lockbar. Though nothing made in Taichung is inexpensive, an aluminum Southard with S30V steel for a street price of around $150 (street price of the Sage 2), could push many buyers off the fence. I understand what the OP is saying. I never would've bought an SR1, but the price of the SR1A is what made me give it a try. If LionSteel can figure out how to make a less expensive version of a great knife, why not Spyderco?

I don't know Spyderco's costs, and maybe this idea isn't feasible in the real world with this type of cost reduction, but everyone seems to be dismissing the idea pretty quickly.

I'm with Gbelleh on this. Especially on the last sentence.

[JNewell]

Your price comparison doesn't work for this comparison.

First and most importantly, the SR-1 is produced on existing tooling. No such tooling exists for your aluminum Southard.

The SR-1 Ti and Al versions are packaged substantially differently: wood box with tool vs. cardboard box with no tool.

The Ti and Al versions are produced with different steels used for the blades.

In addition, the wood box suggests that the price difference between the Ti and Al versions may reflect a lot more than pure labor and materials factors: the Ti version may be priced at a premium purely to support a premium market position rather than based purely on labor + materials + standard margin.

[mattman]

I bet the biggest realistic obstacle to this is the lack of capacity in the Taichung facility... I believe it has been stated several times that they are at max, and have been for quite awhile...

The only other thing I can think of is whether aluminum would support the internal stop pin forces...