Ah! So the big cutout at the base of the cutting edge allows the lock to also act as a stay-closed-in-pocket mechanism.
In comparing these pics to my Sifu in hand, I'd be willing to bet the Rolling Lock allows more metal around the pivot. But, I'm not sure the advantages in that are more than theoretical. Folders most often fail somewhere on the outer 1" of blade (tip breaks off) or sometimes right at the base where it exits the liner. But for the Arclock to fail "because it's an arclock", you'd see a break "across the pivot pin hole".
Has anybody seen even a cheap folder fail that way? I haven't. So the "reduction in beefyness" at the pivot metal may have been a fairly smart thing to do.
The ultimate test would be "destructive prybar testing", with a 4" class Arclock versus a "tried and true" folder such as the BM AFCK, as long as both used the same steel (such as ATS34). See how much weight each can take with the tip buried 2" between wooden boards, blade horizontal and "flat", hanging the weight off the pommel. If it holds as well as the AFCK which has no noteworthy history of such failure, cool, you've got a trustworthy piece
. Dunno where SOG is based but it should be possible to invite a couple of local forumites to witness the tests.
I'm not saying this is absolutely necessary BUT you do appear to be using less metal around the pivot pin than has been common practice. Proving for dead certain that was a good move might be...another good move
.
Because if we're buying a dire-need streetfighter like the PE2, we need to know it can cope with something harsh. Absolute confidence in the gear translates all the way to your face if God forbid you ever have to pull it...and that in turn raises the likelyhood the assailant will rabbit, leaving you with no legal hassled, diseased blood to worry about, etc
.
Jim
