Moonglow Manix 2

[Bolster]

Nice as my new Moonglow Manix is, the Manix is not an EDC knife for me, too large. Great for backpacking, but not city carry, and that mirror finished clip advertises its presence.

Now if Spyderco were to make a Caly / Sage / Chaparral sized deep-carry knife with Moonglow scales...then you'd have something practical and unusual.

I hope Spyderco will put glow scales on a few more of their lineup. It's a great idea, and if Spyderco doesn't do it, some other manufacturer will...and there are lots of people who would shell out for a glow handle.

[kronk]

I was so tempted to pull the trigger on one, but just couldn't. Just got too many in S30v at the moment.

[Slash]

Even though I haven't used a manic 2 as an edc yet, it seems like the perfect size to me. Even though I prefer a larger blade. I guess I must be in the bigger the better mindset still.

[syphen]

I finally got my 2nd batch Moonglow Manix 2. I have 1 from the first batch, and one from this new batch. The material is totally different. Exposed to the same lights it doesn't glow as bright or long. I tested this using 2 identical 6700k T5 lamps for a fish tank. Each knife was exposed to identical times, distance from light, type of light and reflector.. VERY noticeable.

Any insight on to why the major discrepancy, Sal & All?

Before exposure:


During exposure:


After:

(The one that looks white was glowing so bright, it threw the white balance off...)

Dark:

[JNewell]

Looks like totally different material. The acrylic used on the first run was said by Sal to be a PITA to machine. It's also fairly fragile (chips easily) and quite expensive. It's also possible that it wasn't available in the required quantities for the second run? Dunno, will be interested to see what develops here.

[Bolster]

I have both also, and while I've noticed the same, the difference in glow is not as dramatic as Syphen's. Good photos BTW Syphen. It may be the difference is I've tested by charging with sunlight rather than artificial?

All the same, the second is for wilderness carrying. The first is for nightstand use as a nightlight.

Anybody like the idea of glow on a smaller knife, or is it just me?

The acrylic used on the first run was ... quite expensive.

Yeah? Well the second run cost the same as the first!

[Eric Glesser]

Thanks for the photos and feedback. In regards to the differences in appearance.
To my understanding, in the manufacturing process it is difficult to guarantee an even distribution of color and glow during liquid state. They want to settle. The completed sheets also vary in thickness from one sheet to another. Looking at the sheets in raw form it’s difficult to identify the variations in color and glow until after you’ve surfaced and shaped the part. Once all the parts are completed we then go through and match to the best of our ability.
In manufacturing we always strive for consistency, in Our knives it can be difficult. I would prefer to say everyone is exact and the same, but unfortunately each has an individual identity. I think mine is named Jon.

[razorsharp]

Hehe, i have made some stuff with acrylic, pita indeed. binds when its sanded, it reforms itself while sanding, horrible :o

[nakahoshi]

I have an original from the first run, and I was not going to buy a second one until I saw how translucent it was. I thought it looked awesome and put my order in.

I like that they are not the same, I am glad I was able to get one of the first runs though.

There have been plenty of pictures posted of the second run on EDC Forums showing how translucent it is.

I would love to see more GITD :spyder: Knives, Maybe something smaller.

-Bobby

[jonsidneyb]

Someone polished a second run knife.

[JNewell]

Yeah? Well the second run cost the same as the first!

Yeah? Well the scales on the second run may have cost the same as the first! :rolleyes:

[Bolster]

I found this on glowforum.com: "... glow powder cannot be buffed without sacrificing brightness..." I think what the poster meant is that glow powder in a matrix of some sort shouldn't be buffed to retain maximum brightness. Don't know if that applies for suspension in acrylic, but...maybe.

Yeah? Well the scales on the second run may have cost the same as the first! :rolleyes:

Could be. Look at post #65 and you give the impression that expense of the first run's scales may be a reason the scales are different for the second run. What does that imply?

[jonsidneyb]

Could be. Look at post #65 and you get the impression that expense of the first run's scales may be a reason the scales are different for the second run. What does that imply?

I talked to the producer of the material for the first run. They where having trouble making enough of the material thick enough at the time. I understand they had quite a bit of waste filling the first order.

[JNewell]

I found this on glowforum.com: "... glow powder cannot be buffed without sacrificing brightness..." I think what the poster meant is that glow powder in a matrix of some sort shouldn't be buffed to retain maximum brightness. Don't know if that applies for suspension in acrylic, but...maybe.



Could be. Look at post #65 and you get the impression that expense of the first run's scales may be a reason the scales are different for the second run. What does that imply?

You may have inferred something that is not implied in the original post...

I talked to the producer of the material for the first run. They where having trouble making enough of the material thick enough at the time. I understand they had quite a bit of waste filling the first order.

The Moonglow Manix is a great idea and I'm glad I bought one. On the other hand, I'm not sure the Moonglow acrylic has a lot to recommend itself as a general purpose scale material, based on talking to some knifemakers - I had been thinking I'd make some Mule scales using this material but came to the conclusion that it probably wasn't all that practical. Still, a big thumbs-up to you for bringing this one to life.

[Bolster]

You may have inferred something that is not implied in the original post...

Do you have information about the cost of the scale material and scale durability on the first and second runs? Also, do you have a source for Moonglow acrylic? I don't mean to infer anything you aren't implying (LOL) but it sounds like you have a source, if you were considering using it for a mule.

[rycen]

look here

http://www.masecraftsupply.com/Merchant ... Code=MOONG

[JNewell]

Do you have information about the cost of the scale material and scale durability on the first and second runs? Also, do you have a source for Moonglow acrylic? I don't mean to infer anything you aren't implying (LOL) but it sounds like you have a source, if you were considering using it for a mule.

No problem, it's all good. I do not have any info on the difference, and it sounds like the material came from the same source (talk about drawing inferences :D ) - based on Eric's post. I did at one point have a source for this stuff, and I think a link was posted here (?). I'll see if I can re-google it. The Moonglow acrylic was pretty expensive, compared to G10 and most of the wood materials I've used.

[JNewell]

Here's what I found, and it was the only source I remember finding (or anyone else posting). I tried a few of the more usual suppliers and got not hits and no real interest.

Acrylic Moon Glow II Photoluminesent sheet 1/8+/- x 5 x 12 $50.00

[JNewell]

Ehhhm, dunce points to me for not reading to the bottom of the thread before replying! :eek: :o :D

look here

http://www.masecraftsupply.com/Merchant ... Code=MOONG

[Bolster]

Wow! Yes, that is expensive! And yet I'm so tempted...thanks for the source.

I notice it says "Moon glow II" and yet the material looks like the first run of the Moonglow Manix. Do you suppose the photo hasn't changed, but they're selling the newer material we're seeing in the second run of the MM? Not that it matters much, just curious.

If I bought a slab of this I might just leave it a slab and use it as a very bright nightlight!!

Also I have some info to add. I got hold of Danny, the CEO of Glow Inc., and asked about machining, (surface) cutting, abrading, sanding, and buffing glow materials. He didn't recommend it if the goal is max brightness. Here's what he said:

The actual glow powder, suspended in a matrix, is in little particles--like very small sacks or capsules, which are suspended in a matrix of some sort (epoxy, resin, acrylic...). When you cut, sand, machine or buff the material, you shear open the capsules that are on the surface, and they stop glowing. Can you sacrifice the capsules on the top layer? Yes, he said, but then those top "empty capsules" serve as a partial light block to the layer beneath.

So it's a two-part process: you empty the capsules of the top (brightest) layer, and then the empty top layer serves as a partial obstruction to the intact layer beneath it.

Can you do it if you want? "Sure, it's not the end of the world," said Danny. Some of his customers do sand, buff, and polish their glow materials, since they prefer the polish look to maximum glow. It's a tradeoff. If you're willing to give up some glow for a polished surface, then it's probably worth it. Does the material actually "glow better" because it's polished? No, it glows less.