If you get a mere handful of spinewhack failures of a certain lock format after several years, that's likely just a manufacturing problem, and that particular knife should be returned to be fixed. This is exactly the case with the axis lock. On the other hand, if you get a high percentage of failures of a particular lock format, regardless of who the manufacturer is, then you should start to worry that there are manufacturing challenges with the format of the lock itself, and -- I would claim -- it's reasonable to avoid that format for more rigorous use. This is exactly the situation with the liner lock.
That, of course, is if you believe the spine whack test is valid at all, which some people don't. And that's okay -- they're your fingers, you are all big boys, you can decide for youselves. One thing I would definitely agree with is that the spine whack isn't the only lock test you should perform -- white knuckling tests and torquing tests are at least as important.
That said, here's what the spine whack test does. It dumps a force into the spine of the knife, very quickly. The key here is "quickly" -- in my experience, the more quickly the lock "feels" the force, the more difficult it is to withstand. Again, in my experience, a light-to-medium whippy spine-whack is much harder to pass than even a hard hammer-like blow ... I imagine because one of the reasons for failure seems to be whether the fast intrusion of the force can mess up the lock geometry and get the blade moving before the lock has a chance to re-form itself. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a shocked look on someone's face when they hand me a knife they claim they spine whacked the hell out of (almost always using hammer-like blows), and then I do a light whippy spinewhack and the thing fails. 'course, plenty of knives failure from slower, medium-type blows as well.
How can a spinewhack type force be seen in real life? First, any time you thrust fast and hard with the knife, if the knife doesn't go directly straight in and it hits a hard object on its spine, some component of the force can be directed in the spine-to-edge direction, similar to a spine whack. In real life, that component of the force is likely to not be as fast or as powerful as a spine whack, but that's part of the point -- in my spine whack test, I'm stressing the knife to make sure it'll take a bit more than I might see in real life. In addition, we've seen several cases of people getting their blades wedged or stuck in whatever material they're cutting, and when they yank the knife out, the spine hits another work surface. That is exactly a spine whack. Corner case? Well sure, but not to the guy whose knife closes on his fingers because of it.
For a long time now, I've felt that the main feeling against the spine whack test is because the most popular lock format for higher-end knives -- the liner lock -- performs so miserably in these tests. So now people have a choice: they can stop carrying their favorite knives, or decide they hate the spine whack test. I've actually seen people support the spine whack test, and then turn around and decide they dislike it after their liner locks fail it.
, perhaps a fixed blade would be the way to go. A folder will not ever be as strong as a fixed blade. In any case, my point was that the knives listed about are considered some of the best and strongest on the market, and they were not 100% except the sebbie.
Even though it failed terribly.
