I care less about the 'brute strength' of a lock and more about its safety and reliability during use. Most of those 'lock strength' tests do not replicate the actual forces that any reasonable person would put on a pocketknife. If you plan to, then you need a fixed blade (or better yet, a crowbar).
I used a single slipjoint SAK as my only EDC pocketknife for over a decade, from the mid-'80s to the late '90s. I used that knife for every pocketknife task, and never had it close on me. And yet, that knife would have failed any 'lock test' 100% of the time.
Jim
Jim, you know that I am with you 100%.
My reply to TT Fulltimer was just out of theoretical / technical interest and has no practical value (for me).
Said if (quite often) before: From a practical point of view I find even any Spyderco linerlock easily strong enough, though one could argue that technically this is the "weakest" of the main locktypes they are using.
Spyderco's locks are amazing like you say every type they do perfectly. But other brands man they have hickups ... before i knew spyderco i had many locks fail at me. A buck lockback , boker linerlock , and one of the chinese knife brands framelock and a few others.... but the worst is the buck's lockback it fails the moment you put the slightest touch of youre finger on the spine. Still have that thing stil find it funny
I don't mind liner locks because the failure is not blade closing on my fingers it is bending of the liner tab. My only concern with liner locks is if they are protruding beyond the scale (for ease of use) If I am twisting on the knife I could knock that lock out of place. Same concern with the compression lock.
Just a crotchety old curmudgeon who has seen a thing or two
... Only one lock did not fail in testing Back Lock, broke the blade first.)
.....
The backlock is my favorite locktype, and I think it is a really strong one (that said: I think all lock types Spyderco does are more than strong enough)
I think though you are referring to this Blade HQ vid about lock strengthes, where the backlock gets tested at around minute 11:00 https://youtu.be/ERxHUXAFVs4?t=663
Sorry to say this, but actually an astonishingly bad design of that test: Look at the screenshot below, the noose around the handle is placed so that the lock bar just can`t move, so the lock actually can not give way to the tractive and so in the end the blade has to break (in other words: This is no lock strength test, since the lock itself gets blocked by the test design... )
Sorry to say this but the cable is behind the pivot (that tiny little hole in the FRN) and if the scales deform at all the lock is actually being actuated by the cable to open. Draw your own free body diagram to see where the forces are being applied to the handle.
Rewatch the video. That screenshot is taken after the knife and cable slip slightly and the tape moves. The inital setup is difficult to tell the exact cable placement because of the tape, but it would seem as though the cable is at least over the pivot. Given the cable diameter that would imply some of the force was in fact distributed on the wrong side of the lockbar.
Regardless its not a great test.
Even more regardless, it has been stated many times any of the locks can be made as strong as necessary. To the point where the blade will break first. Good locks are just preference.
"Rome's greatest contribution to mathematics was the killing of Archimedes."
What I don't like and these are easy to fix ; most blades are too thick behind the edge(and some have too thick blade stock) and the Seki backlocks are poorly built. Most of my Seki backlocks developed annoying vertical blade play and this is not acceptable in this day of age if you ask me. It's a mistery to me why don't they implement the internal stop pin.
Marius
" A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it "
( Rabindranath Tagore ) Proud member of the old school spyderedge nation
Ask 100 people for an opinion and you will get 100 different opinions.
I'm glad you mentioned that. More precisely:
"Ask 100 people for an opinion and you will get 100 different opinions if you are doing it right."
If you are doing it wrong, 50 of those opinions will all be about the same thing.
Everybody has an opinion, and on this board, I suspect pretty much everyone fantasizes about being Sal or Eric and designing the knives themselves. But when the recommendations are all over the board, with half wanting more X and the other half wanting less X, that means that Spyderco has found a good spot to be.
Steel novice who self-identifies as a steel expert. Proud M.N.O.S.D. member 0003. Spydie Steels: 4V, 15V, 20CV, AEB-L, AUS6, Cru-Wear, HAP40, K294, K390, M4, Magnacut, S110V, S30V, S35VN, S45VN, SPY27, SRS13, T15, VG10, XHP, ZWear, ZDP189
Any lock but Back Lock or Buried Liner Lock (CBBL and Bar Lock are just awkward and get in the way of grip. Compression lock is just waiting for a wrong twist angle to release. Frame lock just plain makes it ugly and uncomfortable on one side. Only one lock did not fail in testing Back Lock, broke the blade first.)
The delica had the weakest blade in that test, so I don't think the blade breaking really means a lot. The Manix had a much wider and thicker blade, so it was inevitable that the handle would fail before the blade.
Lock strength doesn't matter too much with most of spyderco's knives because they've usually got a choil/ricasso so you're not going to get cut if the lock fails while you're using a normal grip.
I absolutely loved the way Spyderco took risks on designs 10-15 years back. Remote release. Bi-fold. T-Mag. Lava. Shabaria. Kriss. Junior. Rescue/reverse hawkbill Swick (I still have a photo of that one saved). The list goes on. Yes, some were flops. Yet I believe some were actively contributing to propelling Spyderco towards being perceived as highly innovative and never resting on their laurels.
They also played a lot with textures. The volcano grip was/is really good (you can still enjoy it on Atlantics). The fish-scale texture on Calypsos was really awesome, for the life of me I can't imagine why they dropped it. The inserts on snap-it and remote release showed a deep focus on that particular intention of use. The steel bolster plus micarta scale looks sooo good. Yet again, the list goes on.
Nowadays they seem to play it a lot more safe and this has got me somewhat disenchanted (after all, how many deep choils can one possibly need...)
The fish-scale texture on Calypsos was really awesome, for the life of me I can't imagine why they dropped it.
I just stumbled on the Calypso Jr, which I hadn't heared about, and it sure looks like a Chaparral Salt (with a lovely Dragonfly-type swedged blade) !
Cool scales indeed. Too bad I missed it... would definitely have bought one otherwise
1) The lack of a truly competitive entry in the <$50 price bracket. This used to be where Spyderco really thumped the competition, especially if you expanded to <$100. Unfortunately, while I love the Seki City lock backs, I don't think, say, a standard Delica at $88 is a compelling deal. Similarly, the Chinese Spydercos (Tenacious, et al.) are too much for what you get compared to a brand like Civivi or other Chinese manufacturers. I still love the ergos of my Spydies more than other knives, but the overall value proposition here leaves a lot to be desired.
What about the Byrds ? They should fare decently in the ~30 € range.
1) The design compromises inherent to the round hole.
It's a great opening mechanism and a fantastic innovation. But it does make a folding knife wider and induces [negative] changes to the shape of both the blade and the handle. This impacts on the ergonomics, eg the handle often has to be slimmer to accommodate most/all of the opening hole staying outside the handle when the knife is closed. And on anything other than a big knife the presence of the hole practically guarantees the blade has to be leaf shaped.
2) Adding a hole to a fixed blade knife.
Now I get the logic around trademark protection but artificially weakening a knife just seems daft. Especially for a company that is happy to produce 'ugly' knives because they believe form should follow function. [Even more daft seems to be using a non round hole on the Byrd line when competitors like Benchmade use a round hole]
3) Sprint runs.
Spyderco are (or were) the most innovative knife company on earth, responsible for shaking up the folding knife industry way back when. Just look at the opening hole, the pocket clip, the Sharpmaker, pioneering rust-proof steels, mule team etc. But sadly you wouldn't know that from recent catalogues. The seemingly endless sprint runs that involve different colour and/or steel combinations may make good business sense but they don't excite like genuine innovation does.
4) Allegedly 'ergonomic' handle designs.
There is a reason pretty much all tools from yesteryear have neutral handles. That's because the human hand is so incredibly versatile in the ways it can grasp an object that it doesn't need extra guides, ramps or protrusions. Hence surgeons don't use scalpels with choils and axes don't come with finger cut-outs. The most ergonomic knife I own is a Mora Companion. I can hold that knife comfortably and securely in a whole variety of positions without any discomfort. I cannot say the same of a knife with a heavily sculpted handle like the Native. I'm hoping that some of the new handle designs (eg Leafjumper) mean that we'll start to see properly neutral handles that don't constrain the user.
5) Short blades
I get that legal restrictions might impact on some designs and lead to shorter blades than might otherwise be the case. But I don't get why, even on those models where the intention is to pack in as much blade as possible, we still see significant chunks of unfilled space. The RockJumper is a great example of this happening. Ditto various iterations of the Urban. I know some people will say that you can do most things with a shorter blade and I'd agree. But for some applications, eg most pull cuts, you definitely want as long as blade as you can get. So why not give customers the choice and max out the edge on more models whilst still leaving others shorter?
After all that you might ask why I still have an interest in Spyderco? Well it's partly because of their historical track-record of innovation that I mention above. It's also partly because they are now almost the only decent manufacturer of backlocks. And it's partly because no other company has a founder that takes the time to engage with his customers like Sal does. Mostly though, it's because I still hold out hope that an innovative new model will catch my eye.
I get that legal restrictions might impact on some designs and lead to shorter blades than might otherwise be the case. But I don't get why, even on those models where the intention is to pack in as much blade as possible, we still see significant chunks of unfilled space. The RockJumper is a great example of this happening. Ditto various iterations of the Urban. I know some people will say that you can do most things with a shorter blade and I'd agree. But for some applications, eg most pull cuts, you definitely want as long as blade as you can get. So why not give customers the choice and max out the edge on more models whilst still leaving others shorter?
I also find this a bit strange. I get why the dragonfly might need a little bit of extra handle so you can get a full grip, but I don't get why the rockjumper or the para 3 needed extra handle length. I don't really care that much about extra blade length, but I'd prefer the knife not be bulkier in the pocket for no reason.
1) The lack of a truly competitive entry in the <$50 price bracket. This used to be where Spyderco really thumped the competition, especially if you expanded to <$100. Unfortunately, while I love the Seki City lock backs, I don't think, say, a standard Delica at $88 is a compelling deal. Similarly, the Chinese Spydercos (Tenacious, et al.) are too much for what you get compared to a brand like Civivi or other Chinese manufacturers. I still love the ergos of my Spydies more than other knives, but the overall value proposition here leaves a lot to be desired.
What about the Byrds ? They should fare decently in the ~30 € range.
I’ve not ever really looked into the Byrd lineup, to be honest. The “flair” of the thumb hole has kinda put me off, as shallow reasoning as that might be.
I also find this a bit strange. I get why the dragonfly might need a little bit of extra handle so you can get a full grip, but I don't get why the rockjumper or the para 3 needed extra handle length. I don't really care that much about extra blade length, but I'd prefer the knife not be bulkier in the pocket for no reason.
That's a good way of looking it. I feel much the same about the Delica 4 / Salt 2. That model is nearly 1cm longer than its predecessor - which is additional length I could easily do without.
What I don't like is the same as what I do like, ironically. The amount of choice Spyderco offers is both good and bad. Variety is the spice of life, but too much can make it hard to be content with what you have.
I agree with Albatross. The tyranny of choice! Learning to be content with what we have is a laudable life skill.
Albatross, can you fix the typo in your signature? It’s “designing in the dark,” not “deigning”.
What I dislike from Spyderco has already been covered upthread. Overly thick blades and the black painted clips. DLC all the black clips! When it bothers me I strip the paint chemically, leaving dull gray stainless steel.
I’ve not ever really looked into the Byrd lineup, to be honest. The “flair” of the thumb hole has kinda put me off, as shallow reasoning as that might be.
You should give it a try. They've got a Delica-like (Meadowlark), for example, which brings the finger choil which the Delica lacks. So it's not merely a dumbed down copy of regular Spyderco models. Their quality is good, too.
But I just saw a video where both the Delica and the Meadowlark were compared to a famous Chinese copycat brand, and well, not even the cheap Byrd could compete against the copycat's quality/price ratio... 15€ for a convincing clone with higher end steel than the twice as expensive Meadowlark, it's just really hard to beat.
Of course and fortunately there's still a place for Byrds. But as long as IP rights aren't properly enforced, they won't be able to tackle that sort of unfair competition head-on. They will always find themselves undercut by some local manufacturers, price-wise.
2) Adding a hole to a fixed blade knife.
Now I get the logic around trademark protection but artificially weakening a knife just seems daft. Especially for a company that is happy to produce 'ugly' knives because they believe form should follow function. [Even more daft seems to be using a non round hole on the Byrd line when competitors like Benchmade use a round hole]
I'm going to quibble with this one. I use my fixies for backpacking, and I like the ability to turn any fixie into a spear with a bit of paracord, if necessary. That superfluous hole makes for a foolproof anchoring point to a shaft.
Steel novice who self-identifies as a steel expert. Proud M.N.O.S.D. member 0003. Spydie Steels: 4V, 15V, 20CV, AEB-L, AUS6, Cru-Wear, HAP40, K294, K390, M4, Magnacut, S110V, S30V, S35VN, S45VN, SPY27, SRS13, T15, VG10, XHP, ZWear, ZDP189
)
