Manix 2 lock fails hard-use test [VID] -- thoughts?

[JNewell]

Sal already answered the question in another post. The change is just a couple of thousandths of an inch difference in the existing lock components (blade tang ramp, I believe). Unless the knives themselves are marked, there's no way you'll be able to eyeball the difference, I suspect, and I doubt there's going to be a retrofit program - but of course I am not Sal.

No one has directly said it but I detect lots of hints.

I think what everyone is thinking is "how can I tell when I buy a Manix 2 if its the newly improved 'Overstrike' edition"

Of course, there is nothing really wrong with the Manix 2 unless you want to overstike as Sal pointed out. Not something I would be worried about. However, I think it matters to some people so its bothering them.

Perhaps allow for someone to return a Manix 2 to have the improved lock fitted to prevent more moaning on the forum? I know it would cost but it would put threads like this to rest.

[THG]

Whatever......you are the expert.Lord knows I run in to plenty of them every day .I guess I am a psycho fan(guilty as charged).Spine whack away(just a thought..... the sharpened side of the blade cuts better ). Hope you (the official spine whack/demolition expert) don't cut your fingers off.

You don't need to mock me. Look:

We broke many samples of the Manix to study this question. We were able to duplicate the break and we're making adjustments.

Even Sal said that he was able to reproduce Ankerson's results. Sal has moved onto re-engineering the lock rather than complaining that Ankerson's tests have no merit. This is the Spyderco Spirit. Complaining that you don't like the tests and concluding that everything is perfectly fine isn't.

[sal]

Hi THG,

We were able to reproduce a break. His results were another story.

We were not able to reproduce the damage to Mr. Ankerson's sample without many more strikes than shown. Mr. Ankerson did say that he did more "testing" off camera.

We were not able to reporduce the damage done to both ends without taking the knife apart and re-assembling it. :confused:

We have only had one Manix returned to us broken, and that was Mr. Ankerson's test piece. It was pretty beat up.

If the lock fails due to an overstrike(accident) is it damaged or is it safe to keep using? I heard once a lock is defeated it is no good-I don't believe that all the time,maybe sometimes "depending" on the intended use.This isn't just a Manix 2 question by the way.

Hi TrojanDonkey,

Would you be so kind as to explain how such an "accident" could occur?

sal

[Ankerson]

Sal,


I only had one knife to work with though, might have been better of I had 3 I think then maybe the one wouldn't have been in the shape that it was. :confused:

Would have used a 2nd sample and maybe a 3rd instead of retesting the 1st one over again.

But then you guys did your own testing also. :)

I think the results might have been closer to what you found then if I had more than one sample to test.

Or maybe if I would not have retested the one sample I had as in just sent it to you without retesting it.

Do you think that's possible? :)


Jim

[THG]

Hi THG,

We were able to reproduce a break. His results were another story.

We were not able to reproduce the damage to Mr. Ankerson's sample without many more strikes than shown. Mr. Ankerson did say that he did more "testing" off camera.

Hello Sal,

That's true. Whether he would be able to duplicate his own results is an unknown as well. However, the damage still does occur although with much more "abuse," correct?

Like I said, my only concern is that steps are being taken to rectify this "problem" (which I don't consider too big a problem in the first place since spine whacks are not part of regular use or "use" in general.) And I think that with Spyderco's strive for CQI, we can both agree as engineers that issues must first be addressed in order for improvements to be made, and that (deliberate) neglect to address them is ultimately detrimental to the idea of CQI which is unique to Spyderco.

[TBob]

I think the results might have been closer to what you found then if I had more than one sample to test.

Test? I've watched your video, read this whole unfortunate thread plus some of a parallel thread on another forum which I do not frequent, and it's clear to me that you still don't understand the underlying problem. What you recorded wasn't a test at all. Here's just a surface survey of the shortcomings what you call your "test":

You didn't measure the forces and moments applied at any part of the test on anything in the test. You didn't measure the speed of any impact of any knife on the makeshift anvil. You didn't impact the exact location where any knife struck the makeshift anvil on any strike. You didn't measure the characteristics of the anvil for surface deformation and the energy dissipated during that deformation. Even if you were lucky enough to hit the same exact spot on the makeshift anvil more than once, you did not account for the changing hardness of the surface as a result of previous strikes. You didn't note the relative positioning of the components in any knife's mechanisms between each strike.

As far as the blade performance itself goes, you didn't measure the cutting resistance of anything that you cut, nor the angle of the blade to the surface cut, nor the blade edge angles, nor the force and moment on the knife's pivot. You didn't measure the angular or linear "play" in the pivot at any point. You just manhandled the blade around the pivot for the camera, perhaps causing more damage to the mechanism each time that you did so. You have no way of knowing, and neither does your audience.

In fact, you didn't measure anything! Therefore, you cannot by definition "duplicate" anything that you did if someone sent you 100 knives. Further, you certainly cannot compare the results between different knife models or manufacturers for the same reasons. You cannot hope to show that the forces and moments applied to any knife in the videos was the exact same as any that applied to any other knife. What you call a test was actually a random series of intentionally destructive acts that no one, yourself included, can ever reliably duplicate.

Nor could you even remotely guess at why or how the Manix lock failed, nor at what point in the sequence of abuse the mechanism parts exceeded their plastic deformation limits. And this brief survey doesn't come close to exhausting the technical issues involved. There's a lot more to physics and engineering than pushing the record button on a video camera and then swinging away.

The videos don't record a user test, either, so don't try to hide there. User tests are conducted against pre-determined user requirements for which a product is designed. Requirements must be measurable, testable, and operationally relevant. Against what user requirement for which the knife was designed did you test? Did you test the knife against any task that any serious user would do with it? Do you see many knife owners turning fence posts into toothpicks with their 3-3/8"-bladed folding pocket knives? Do you see many users smacking their folding knife handles into fence posts with the blades open? What useful task would they be accomplishing in doing so, other than perhaps attempted finger amputation?

And PLEASE don't pull out your standard "Sal said he duplicated my result and will fix the knife." Sal's already made it clear that he could NOT reproduce the damage to the knife in the way you said that you abused it. How could he? You can't offer a single, measured condition for Spyderco to duplicate. Sal conducted his own real tests and, as is true for everything made by man, found ways to improve the design. That's the end result of real test and evaluation.

I could go on for pages. The bottom line is that you don't "test" anything in your videos according to any useful definition of test and evaluation. You just played in your yard and recorded it. That's not a gratuitous slam, that's a fact. If you want to play to an Internet audience, that's your business. But I cannot close without observing that it doesn't take an expert or even minimal competency to gratuitously damage the reputation of a company or product, whether intentionally or unintentionally. At best, all you recorded was a nifty knack to destroy a quality product through gross abuse. Most of us mastered that "skill" by the time we were two years old.

I invite you to prove me wrong. Show us your force and moment measurements. Show us how you recorded and replicated the conditions, forces and moments as you "tested" each knife. Please feel free to bring all your engineering, test, and evaluation training and expertise to bear.

[dsmegst]

Can we let this thread die a natural death? I think we've exhausted every possible angle and we're ultimately going to get a better Manix 2 in the future. No more good can come from this.

[TBob]

Can we let this thread die a natural death? I think we've exhausted every possible angle and we're ultimately going to get a better Manix 2 in the future. No more good can come from this.

I was content to do just that until Ankerson's last comment for the reasons stated. Perhaps we can hope that if Ankerson and his devotees learn something of real engineering, test and evaluation, that might produce some good.

[Ankerson]

Here we go again......

Or not...

ROFL :D

This is my last post in this thread and on this subject.

[TBob]

Yep, that's what I thought. :rolleyes:

[chuck_roxas45]

Here we go again......

Or not...

ROFL :D

This is my last post in this thread and on this subject.

Yep, what I said. We go round and round and it slowly winds down. Then Johnny comes lately with a repeat comes along....

[TBob]

Yep, what I said. We go round and round and it slowly winds down. Then Johnny comes lately with a repeat comes along....

You are welcome to answer my challenge from your wealth of technical expertise as well. I was content to let the thread die until Ankerson asserted that he could have done better with more samples to test. If not for that absurd statement, this thread would probably have died a well-deserved death.

OTOH, if you have nothing of substance to offer, then I'm happy to stick a fork in the thread.

[The General]

Seriously... :rolleyes:

[Holmes]

Thats a big duck.

[The General]

Thats a big duck.

Lol! I could make jokes about ducking the issue... groan :p However this is an in joke that Sal will understand. :D

[chuck_roxas45]

Lol! I could make jokes about ducking the issue... groan :p However this is an in joke that Sal will understand. :D

Well, you can make all the inside jokes you want. It just don't cut the cheese with me. :D

[TBob]

Seriously... :rolleyes:

That's a very serious duck, sir! :eek: :D

[JNewell]

'tis a hard use thread...I am going to make a video...

[bigocean]

Seriously... :rolleyes:

Was this pic taken in Portsmouth ?
Heard you fellas are getting some new stealth aircraft carriers...

[shu]

we're ultimately going to get a better Manix 2

Really? Or is it just being "idiot-proofed"?


On a more serious note, I had a very similar experience with a Remington 870 shotgun (3" 12 ga). I am a waterfowler, so as a test I packed the barrel with mud and fired off a few 3-1/2" shells.

Well you can guess what happened.

To add insult to injury - literally - Remington, who apparently does not strive for CQI like a company we all know and love, basically told me I am an idiot and recommended I buy Mossberg in the future.

No 'Shiny Footprints' there, I must say....