Aaaaah, finally understand the reason for the Spydey hole, I think?

H

Houlahound

Joined
Aug 2, 2017
Messages
3,121
I always thought the Spydey hole was just to be different in a saturated market. I don't know if this is the actually reason but I was doing some cutting with a thumb stud knife on soft material and wouldn't you know it...the thumb studs got caught in mass of material.

It dawned on me then, aaaaah this is why Spyderco built the Spydey hole?? Does this sound right?

The question then becomes what is more important to you?

- less height/thinner profile that disappears in your pocket good = get a knife with thumb studs or nail nicks. Even more important for belt carry.

- obstacle free cutting but a taller profile hence poor pocket fit = get a Spydey hole.

That's my analysis and I'm sticking to it.

Your welcome.
 
Last edited:
in all fairness, when the first Clipits came out back in eighties a lot of folks couldn't figure out the hole either...
 
Houlahound said:
The question then becomes what is more important to you?

- less height/thinner profile that disappears in your pocket good = get a knife with thumb studs or nail nicks. Even more important for belt carry.

- obstacle free cutting but a taller profile hence poor pocket fit = get a Spydey hole.
Click to expand...

While I like the practical utility afforded by the hole, I do dislike the enlarged closed profile it results in. Though I won't choose a knife just because of one or the other. If I like it enough I'll live with the respective loss. That's one of the reasons why the Brouwer is my favorite Spyderco. I get the Spydie hole and a slim profile when closed. That and it has a combination of other knife features I like plus I just find it the all around nicest Spydie.
 
Hole opening is my preferred method, but the Spyderco holes are much bigger than I need them to be. Makes the blade pretty wide in the pocket. I'll take a thin oval or a deep cut fuller to keep the width down.
 
I always thought it was just the opening method before the thumb stud became prevalent. Personally I don't find it as effective as studs, disks or flippers. Not a huge flipper fan either but one of those would also alleviate your drag problem.
 
I just use a blade length that is appropriate to the cutting I happen to be doing at the time.

This method has served me well for decades.

I don't mind carrying a longer knife in my pocket. I do mind carrying a wider knife.

But that's me.
 
I’ve heard some guys also use the Spydey Hole to make narrower more controlled sparks with ferro rods. Haven’t tried this yet myself though.
 
You nailed it H Houlahound -inspired from Sal's early history of making custom bridal veils. :D


Just funnin' with ya. Spydey Holes are a brilliant innovation no matter the inspiration. :thumbsup:
 
I generally dislike thumbstuds. I will only buy a knife with studs if it also is a flipper.

I have very large thumbs, and most studs are so close to the handle it's hard for me to get leverage, especially ones that are conical like CRK and Benchmade.

I like the extra width the spydiehole makes, easier to manipulate imo.

With so many varieties of knives, there is something for everyone.

If I want something slim, I have flippers or OTF. If I want something robust, the Manix 2, Gayle Bradley, or Domino is great.
 
Not mentioned yet, I think, thumb studs also get in the way of sharpening.
Overly tall blade profiles is the only thing I don't like about most Spydercos.
They don't have to be that way. For instance...

IMG_6544ee.jpg
 
Spydie holes work. They are a bit weird looking, take up a bit of extra space (not a big issue IMHO), but it's hard to find another opening feature that is more convenient. Kudos to Sal for devising a simple, brilliant innovation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top