-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is $300 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Frame Lock question
- Thread starter tomcrx
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,955
I really don't know. In my own testing it makes no difference whatsoever which side the cuts are on. I have asked others about this and can vouch for at least three other makers that have confirmed this as well as Sal Glesser of Spyderco in his own testing. These locks can and do slide off the interface contact area for either way its done but this has a lot to do with the pitch angle of the contact also. There are theories behind why its best on one side vs another but nothing that can prove one way is better. I note that some makers like Ken Onion and Chris Reeves among others will do it both ways at times. Strider believes it has some way of controlling the energy transferred down the lock under stress. I have not seen this in my testing and it appears to me not to make a difference what side it is on or how many relief cuts there are. I've done it both ways.
Emerson, and many others do it inside and have for years with no issues. I happen to feel it looks better inside tucked out of the way so thats how I do them 99.9% of the time for my own. In my own testing, its the contact area and more specifically the angle of that contact ramp as well as the way the lock contacts the blade, ie amount of lock contact for surface to surface area has more to do with when the lock defeats and how than the relief cut itself does but its much more than this too really. Many people don't realize that longer knives tend to put more pressure on the contact of the lock and blade at the pivot. Oh, they know about leverage but they don't associate it with a folder much I don't think but believe me it affects them. 100 pounds on the tail or lanyard end of a Military is more weight on the pivot than it is on a Strider PT. The amount and way the lock contacts has to do with how well the lock wears and how also but again the length of both the blade and the body play a role in this also. Indenting is very commonly seen in certain knives vs others in the industry and its all tied into these same points mentioned.
One of my biggest pet peves with many makers is how incredibly thin they take these cuts to spring the locks. Don't take this wrong because the length of the lockbar as well as the width in back at the cuts has a lot so say about how much you can leave behind when you make these cuts, but I will say it seems some get a bit carried away and take more than is necessary out of the lock. I've measured some as thin as .032 thickness on .125 or thicker slab sides the lock was made out of and yet the lock would probably have worked and been fine at .055 to .060 or thicker had they stopped there and tried it out. On other makes you can find knives with similar length and thickness lockbars with lock cuts left thicker that work fine. All I've ever been able to figure for this thinness is that they want them to be easier to push to release the lock, or they are concerned with how the lock can affect blade centering or something. I really don't know what the reasoning behind making one this thin is.
Chris Reeve takes his down to between .050 and .060 thickness at both his cuts with a thin spot in the middle perhaps .010 or so thinner still and this is based on my own measurements of his knives, two of which I own myself so that is where I put mine usually. Anywhere between .045 and .060 seems to get by for most without worry but again I don't hear a lot of factual support to back up one way being better over another. Its all conjecture but based on what I've seen the locks do in my shop under stress it appears to make no diff at all.
I have noted also that a number of makers do one, two or sometimes three cut reliefs in their locks, while others use just one thin one and others still use one massively wide one. There also seems to be a wide margin of difference in how thin they are in the same models for productions and customs alike because I've had SnG and PT Striders, Emerson CQC12 models and many more from all manufacturers and makers from Terzuola to Mayo and more here for low rider pocket clips or other such things that allowed me to get to check them out. During these times I've measured on several occasions knives of the same model and got different measurements. Don't get me wrong, its not real extreme but some would be .034 and others .039 and yet others .044 thickness. It seems they just eye it up or something. I really don't know how a lot of them do it either. Some looked milled out, some maybe done with a laser, and others are almost like they were sanded/ground down instead.
Again it all has more to do with their own personal beliefs I think than anything I've found in testing my own and many sent to me for evaluation by manufacturers.
On integral folders I've hung free weights from using a cable through the lanyard with the blade open and locked and clamped tight in a wooden vice this relief area is the weak link that will literally fold in under enough stress and at times even kink in ruining the lock but in a very high % of all knives I've tested the lock will slide of the interface before the stress is allowed to get that great. Keep in mind that a lot of these folders I tested took weights more than likely beyond what the normal 200 pound man would be able to put on one but others failed miserably at 65 pounds on the tail of the knife. Ironically the ones that fail a lot of the time are the bigger higher leverage models that look a lot tougher than some that hold an unbelievable amount of weight. Again there is no rhyme or reason to how or when they fail either and in use with the grip holding the lock it is feesible that a lot more weight could be applied before the lock kinked in. Personally if I was looking at two massive frame locks I'd pass over the one with the .032 thin relief and get the beefcake looking one myself.
The thickness matters to me more than which side its cut out on.
STR
Emerson, and many others do it inside and have for years with no issues. I happen to feel it looks better inside tucked out of the way so thats how I do them 99.9% of the time for my own. In my own testing, its the contact area and more specifically the angle of that contact ramp as well as the way the lock contacts the blade, ie amount of lock contact for surface to surface area has more to do with when the lock defeats and how than the relief cut itself does but its much more than this too really. Many people don't realize that longer knives tend to put more pressure on the contact of the lock and blade at the pivot. Oh, they know about leverage but they don't associate it with a folder much I don't think but believe me it affects them. 100 pounds on the tail or lanyard end of a Military is more weight on the pivot than it is on a Strider PT. The amount and way the lock contacts has to do with how well the lock wears and how also but again the length of both the blade and the body play a role in this also. Indenting is very commonly seen in certain knives vs others in the industry and its all tied into these same points mentioned.
One of my biggest pet peves with many makers is how incredibly thin they take these cuts to spring the locks. Don't take this wrong because the length of the lockbar as well as the width in back at the cuts has a lot so say about how much you can leave behind when you make these cuts, but I will say it seems some get a bit carried away and take more than is necessary out of the lock. I've measured some as thin as .032 thickness on .125 or thicker slab sides the lock was made out of and yet the lock would probably have worked and been fine at .055 to .060 or thicker had they stopped there and tried it out. On other makes you can find knives with similar length and thickness lockbars with lock cuts left thicker that work fine. All I've ever been able to figure for this thinness is that they want them to be easier to push to release the lock, or they are concerned with how the lock can affect blade centering or something. I really don't know what the reasoning behind making one this thin is.
Chris Reeve takes his down to between .050 and .060 thickness at both his cuts with a thin spot in the middle perhaps .010 or so thinner still and this is based on my own measurements of his knives, two of which I own myself so that is where I put mine usually. Anywhere between .045 and .060 seems to get by for most without worry but again I don't hear a lot of factual support to back up one way being better over another. Its all conjecture but based on what I've seen the locks do in my shop under stress it appears to make no diff at all.
I have noted also that a number of makers do one, two or sometimes three cut reliefs in their locks, while others use just one thin one and others still use one massively wide one. There also seems to be a wide margin of difference in how thin they are in the same models for productions and customs alike because I've had SnG and PT Striders, Emerson CQC12 models and many more from all manufacturers and makers from Terzuola to Mayo and more here for low rider pocket clips or other such things that allowed me to get to check them out. During these times I've measured on several occasions knives of the same model and got different measurements. Don't get me wrong, its not real extreme but some would be .034 and others .039 and yet others .044 thickness. It seems they just eye it up or something. I really don't know how a lot of them do it either. Some looked milled out, some maybe done with a laser, and others are almost like they were sanded/ground down instead.
Again it all has more to do with their own personal beliefs I think than anything I've found in testing my own and many sent to me for evaluation by manufacturers.
On integral folders I've hung free weights from using a cable through the lanyard with the blade open and locked and clamped tight in a wooden vice this relief area is the weak link that will literally fold in under enough stress and at times even kink in ruining the lock but in a very high % of all knives I've tested the lock will slide of the interface before the stress is allowed to get that great. Keep in mind that a lot of these folders I tested took weights more than likely beyond what the normal 200 pound man would be able to put on one but others failed miserably at 65 pounds on the tail of the knife. Ironically the ones that fail a lot of the time are the bigger higher leverage models that look a lot tougher than some that hold an unbelievable amount of weight. Again there is no rhyme or reason to how or when they fail either and in use with the grip holding the lock it is feesible that a lot more weight could be applied before the lock kinked in. Personally if I was looking at two massive frame locks I'd pass over the one with the .032 thin relief and get the beefcake looking one myself.
The thickness matters to me more than which side its cut out on.STR
Thanks STR. I was always wondering. I had thought after posting that it may help in the manufacture by making the steel easier to bend in fitting the knife before heat treating. That is assuming the lock side is heat treated. I may be way off on that.
Have any framelocks ever been made that don't have relief cuts?
On a side note has a framelock ever been made that is purposely designed so that the lock bar contacts the other side of the frame? Where downward pressure on the blade would actually force it further into the opposite frame. It seems this would be extremely secure and prevent walking.
Thinking about the above idea after the fact makes me realize this would need extremely high precision in fitting and probably hardened bearing surfaces > 90C. It would almost be like a sear fitting. Any slop would cause blade play since there would be no wear adjustment like in current locks. Scratch that idea.
Again thanks for the explanation and discussion. Enjoyable as always
Have any framelocks ever been made that don't have relief cuts?
On a side note has a framelock ever been made that is purposely designed so that the lock bar contacts the other side of the frame? Where downward pressure on the blade would actually force it further into the opposite frame. It seems this would be extremely secure and prevent walking.
Thinking about the above idea after the fact makes me realize this would need extremely high precision in fitting and probably hardened bearing surfaces > 90C. It would almost be like a sear fitting. Any slop would cause blade play since there would be no wear adjustment like in current locks. Scratch that idea.
Again thanks for the explanation and discussion. Enjoyable as always
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,955
Most makers these days shoot for a bare minimum contact coming out to get behind the blade but still within their comfort zone. I like to see on a new folder between 40% and 70% max and hopefull the lower.
If you look at the links here http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77298&d=1187628609 you will see a Buck Strider first production run BG42 model 880 side by side with a regular production run 880 model. The first production run has a .080 thick set of liners in it. The other regular production folder was in .074 plus or minus thickness in ATS34. Note that both of these are "frame lock like" being thicker stock but techinally these are liner locks. They just have thick locks, and neither of them has a relief cut in them anywhere. As you can see the locks are just sprung as they are without modification. No one ever complained to my knowledge that either of these were hard to close. In fact my wife had no problem closing either of them. These were both knives I bought and owned at the time these pics were taken.
Now it always made me wonder why it was even needed or why you would even make a relief cut if in fact you can bend a .070 thick steel or titanium lock without worry and make it work as good as these do here. From this stand point it makes the frame locks in .125 thickness with a .032 relief cut look like the weaker lock and actually pretty dumb to do that in my mind compared to this one in .080 thickness the whole way down the body of the folder. However in their defense if the the width of the lock was greater than these then yeah I could see the need to take it down a bit thinner. Again though I look at what I consider to be the standard which I judge all others. That being the Sebenzas. Still it makes one wonder when you consider that the entire length of the .125 lock will remain rigid under stress but transfer all that energy from any stress into that thinner area and when this happens and reaches a point where something has to give well, thats the area that will give unless the stress moves the lock off the contact.
When I was successful in sales in my dental business I watched and studied and learned from those that were already as successful as I one day hoped to be and did what they did, dressed like they did and tried to emulate them. I still do much that same thing with knives I guess although I have no such dreams of one day becoming anything more than the backyard mechanic I am. What I'm saying is that I don't much need to talk with Chris Reeves or Rick Hinderer to see that both these guys set new standards in the industry for craftsmanship and engineering as well as tolerances. By studying their knives I can learn all I need to know to make mine better and I can even see a niche or void to fill by what both models lack that I'd still like to see personally.
Some of the makers I've questioned about the lock relief cuts and why they were so thin that did get back to me told me straight faced during the replies that they made their folders just like Reeves does. Yet, I see and note several key differences showing me point blank that this is not the case at all. I could get into detail and point out each specific difference I see and believe me there are more than one but these guys just get defensive so I'm just going to let em think what they think and go about my business. I can only speak for what I see in the knives and when it comes to folders and looking them over? Hey, I don't miss much. Ask anyone that has had me evaluate theirs for them.
I am fortunate really that because of the kind of work I do I get to see and play with a large sampling of what is currently being sold and what has been out there for some time and compare the two. I have a pretty good idea of what is going on in the knife world with folders most times just because of the number of knives I get mailed to me all the time.
I did up a quiz a while back for the integral lock and got some interesting feedback in the way of answers to the questions. What I found was that there is good reason this lock type is the most controversial of all others. No two makers can agree on any one aspect of the 'proper' way to make them. Theorizing seems to be a big thing and the biggest single stand out point for why they do what they do on their own knives and thats fine. Heck I do it too and I think most guys intelligently look at them, decide what they think is the best way to go and then they do it.
For the most part they all seem to work ok. Some stand out as not working so well compared to others but I'm not going there publically with opinions. We'll leave that fight to someone else.
STR
If you look at the links here http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77298&d=1187628609 you will see a Buck Strider first production run BG42 model 880 side by side with a regular production run 880 model. The first production run has a .080 thick set of liners in it. The other regular production folder was in .074 plus or minus thickness in ATS34. Note that both of these are "frame lock like" being thicker stock but techinally these are liner locks. They just have thick locks, and neither of them has a relief cut in them anywhere. As you can see the locks are just sprung as they are without modification. No one ever complained to my knowledge that either of these were hard to close. In fact my wife had no problem closing either of them. These were both knives I bought and owned at the time these pics were taken.
Now it always made me wonder why it was even needed or why you would even make a relief cut if in fact you can bend a .070 thick steel or titanium lock without worry and make it work as good as these do here. From this stand point it makes the frame locks in .125 thickness with a .032 relief cut look like the weaker lock and actually pretty dumb to do that in my mind compared to this one in .080 thickness the whole way down the body of the folder. However in their defense if the the width of the lock was greater than these then yeah I could see the need to take it down a bit thinner. Again though I look at what I consider to be the standard which I judge all others. That being the Sebenzas. Still it makes one wonder when you consider that the entire length of the .125 lock will remain rigid under stress but transfer all that energy from any stress into that thinner area and when this happens and reaches a point where something has to give well, thats the area that will give unless the stress moves the lock off the contact.
When I was successful in sales in my dental business I watched and studied and learned from those that were already as successful as I one day hoped to be and did what they did, dressed like they did and tried to emulate them. I still do much that same thing with knives I guess although I have no such dreams of one day becoming anything more than the backyard mechanic I am. What I'm saying is that I don't much need to talk with Chris Reeves or Rick Hinderer to see that both these guys set new standards in the industry for craftsmanship and engineering as well as tolerances. By studying their knives I can learn all I need to know to make mine better and I can even see a niche or void to fill by what both models lack that I'd still like to see personally.
Some of the makers I've questioned about the lock relief cuts and why they were so thin that did get back to me told me straight faced during the replies that they made their folders just like Reeves does. Yet, I see and note several key differences showing me point blank that this is not the case at all. I could get into detail and point out each specific difference I see and believe me there are more than one but these guys just get defensive so I'm just going to let em think what they think and go about my business. I can only speak for what I see in the knives and when it comes to folders and looking them over? Hey, I don't miss much. Ask anyone that has had me evaluate theirs for them.
I am fortunate really that because of the kind of work I do I get to see and play with a large sampling of what is currently being sold and what has been out there for some time and compare the two. I have a pretty good idea of what is going on in the knife world with folders most times just because of the number of knives I get mailed to me all the time.
I did up a quiz a while back for the integral lock and got some interesting feedback in the way of answers to the questions. What I found was that there is good reason this lock type is the most controversial of all others. No two makers can agree on any one aspect of the 'proper' way to make them. Theorizing seems to be a big thing and the biggest single stand out point for why they do what they do on their own knives and thats fine. Heck I do it too and I think most guys intelligently look at them, decide what they think is the best way to go and then they do it.
For the most part they all seem to work ok. Some stand out as not working so well compared to others but I'm not going there publically with opinions. We'll leave that fight to someone else.
STR
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 556
STR,
THANKS for the info! You answered things I've wondered for awhile and confirmed some beliefs in the mechanics of framelocks. Maybe semantics, but, some makers I've talked to at shows say framelocks are basically just thick linerlocks, just without handles. Interesting way to look at it I suppose.
THANKS for the info! You answered things I've wondered for awhile and confirmed some beliefs in the mechanics of framelocks. Maybe semantics, but, some makers I've talked to at shows say framelocks are basically just thick linerlocks, just without handles. Interesting way to look at it I suppose.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,955
I see the biggest difference in liner vs frame locks in two areas. One is safety and reliability of the mechanism we call the lock. Its much more reliable since your fingers can physically prevent the lock from release in a hard grip.
Second the thicker frame locks do wear better and usually when they do have a "Reeve" type contact at the blade (read more surface area coverage here) they will infact have more metal to metal contact than any liner lock.
Surprisingly that is one area besides the lock relief differences in depth, width, number and size that I see in some of the makers knives that insist they make their frame locks just like Chris Reeves does. Again side by side comparisons of each of their products says otherwise.
For example, take any typical Strider SnG or CQC12 from Emerson. You can see just setting each knife on its side looking down on the clip side of both the differences in the not ony the angles of the lock the way it contacts the blades, but the relief cuts regarding shape, depth, sizes, placement and more like rounded vs squared off, the length of the long cut, and when broken down on the inside you can immdiately see why so many Striders are floating around out there with vertical blade play compared to any Sebenza when you see how little of that massive looking contact and lock surface is actually in physical contact with the blade. This is noted actually before breaking them down on these knives because you can see the gap under the locks just looking them over. Compare that to a Reeve knife.
This goes on and on in the industry though and this is just one short example. In short no they don't make their locks like Chris does at all, they only think they do.
STR
Second the thicker frame locks do wear better and usually when they do have a "Reeve" type contact at the blade (read more surface area coverage here) they will infact have more metal to metal contact than any liner lock.
Surprisingly that is one area besides the lock relief differences in depth, width, number and size that I see in some of the makers knives that insist they make their frame locks just like Chris Reeves does. Again side by side comparisons of each of their products says otherwise.
For example, take any typical Strider SnG or CQC12 from Emerson. You can see just setting each knife on its side looking down on the clip side of both the differences in the not ony the angles of the lock the way it contacts the blades, but the relief cuts regarding shape, depth, sizes, placement and more like rounded vs squared off, the length of the long cut, and when broken down on the inside you can immdiately see why so many Striders are floating around out there with vertical blade play compared to any Sebenza when you see how little of that massive looking contact and lock surface is actually in physical contact with the blade. This is noted actually before breaking them down on these knives because you can see the gap under the locks just looking them over. Compare that to a Reeve knife.
This goes on and on in the industry though and this is just one short example. In short no they don't make their locks like Chris does at all, they only think they do.
STR
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,955
My wife read this first few posts and said to me, 'what the heck are you talking about?' In other words whats a lock relief?
So for those that don't follow in case you don't let me show a visual. The lock relief is a cut out of a thicker slab lock to make it easier to bend or spring the lock. Trying to bend a .125" thick titanium lock would be fruitless so you have to thin it down to pull that off to spring the lock when you make one thicker in a frame lock style. Again I can't speak for the other makers or why they do things the way they do. I can only report on what I see.
Here at this link you can see a typical lock relief cut out compared to a thinner factory liner lock. Note that the lock relief is typically taken down to near or even below the actual thickness of the liner locks on a lot of factory knives. This one is one of my conversions to a frame lock with a double cut lock relief hovering around .059-.062 thickness compared to the factory Emerson CQC14 .050 liner lock.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77503&d=1187897894
Here are two more. A factory Camillus Cuda Maxx on the left compared to another of my conversions on the right.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77295&d=1187628137
And here is a factory CQC12 frame lock in .125 thick 6AL-4V titanium with a lock relief I measured myself at like .033 as I recall. I know it was surprisingly thin and I had to do a double take. Since then I've seen it again from several other harder use type tacticals also. My SnG is .044 at the relief. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=63384&d=1164952855
STR
So for those that don't follow in case you don't let me show a visual. The lock relief is a cut out of a thicker slab lock to make it easier to bend or spring the lock. Trying to bend a .125" thick titanium lock would be fruitless so you have to thin it down to pull that off to spring the lock when you make one thicker in a frame lock style. Again I can't speak for the other makers or why they do things the way they do. I can only report on what I see.
Here at this link you can see a typical lock relief cut out compared to a thinner factory liner lock. Note that the lock relief is typically taken down to near or even below the actual thickness of the liner locks on a lot of factory knives. This one is one of my conversions to a frame lock with a double cut lock relief hovering around .059-.062 thickness compared to the factory Emerson CQC14 .050 liner lock.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77503&d=1187897894
Here are two more. A factory Camillus Cuda Maxx on the left compared to another of my conversions on the right.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=77295&d=1187628137
And here is a factory CQC12 frame lock in .125 thick 6AL-4V titanium with a lock relief I measured myself at like .033 as I recall. I know it was surprisingly thin and I had to do a double take. Since then I've seen it again from several other harder use type tacticals also. My SnG is .044 at the relief. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=63384&d=1164952855
STR
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,955
Yes I thought so also. Compared to the Sebenza which I consider the standard by which to judge all the others its like twice as thin in all but two small middle spots on Chris Reeves cut outs which are still thicker by far though.
Honestly I've never heard of one of the thinner ones failing during use but they sure have in testing. Still, the way I look at it why tempt fate? If you can make that cut with a lot more metal in there than that, especially in a 'hard use' folder you know people are going to beat the crap out of why wouldn't you? My thoughts are with the two CQC frame locks I saw this thin and even some other makes that were equally as thin that the makers could have stopped grinding or cutting that relief to spring the lock at .050 and or even .060 thickness just like Chris Reeve does as well as many other makers and they could do this without anyone noticing much if anything at all in how easy the lock would be to use. In my testing using free weights the thicker locks hold more weight before defeat or kinking so I just don't understand it. I make mine more like Reeves than these other guys and I think personally that Chris has the right idea and that these other guys making them thinner must have skipped class that day.
But of course how dare I question right? I mean afterall its not like I'm saying I'm perfect, I'd just like to know the mindset behind why and I guess some of you had questions also. I guess what I'm saying is this. If I were going to hang a cord or cable through the lanyard of the Emerson pictured and again in my large Sebenza with free weights progressively stacking up to add more and more weight on the lanyard end of the folder with the blade locked open and clamped in a vice I'd bet on the Sebbie lock relief holding up better and to more weight at .058 thickness overall compared to the CQC12 at .033 or there abouts. I've played with enough titanium to know how flimsy .032 ti can be and I'd elect not to get one that thin personally. Based on my measurment even the small Sebenza is thicker at the cut outs than either the Strider SnG or the CQC12. What really surprises me is this. Most of the knives I see with the thinnest cut outs are the ones that are supposed to be for the hardest use or deemed tactical. You look around at others that are smaller by far and they are actually beefier. My A.G.Russell SeaMaster is a good example but there are many more. It has .050-.052 relief cuts x 3 for each lock. Go figure.
STR
Honestly I've never heard of one of the thinner ones failing during use but they sure have in testing. Still, the way I look at it why tempt fate? If you can make that cut with a lot more metal in there than that, especially in a 'hard use' folder you know people are going to beat the crap out of why wouldn't you? My thoughts are with the two CQC frame locks I saw this thin and even some other makes that were equally as thin that the makers could have stopped grinding or cutting that relief to spring the lock at .050 and or even .060 thickness just like Chris Reeve does as well as many other makers and they could do this without anyone noticing much if anything at all in how easy the lock would be to use. In my testing using free weights the thicker locks hold more weight before defeat or kinking so I just don't understand it. I make mine more like Reeves than these other guys and I think personally that Chris has the right idea and that these other guys making them thinner must have skipped class that day.
But of course how dare I question right? I mean afterall its not like I'm saying I'm perfect, I'd just like to know the mindset behind why and I guess some of you had questions also. I guess what I'm saying is this. If I were going to hang a cord or cable through the lanyard of the Emerson pictured and again in my large Sebenza with free weights progressively stacking up to add more and more weight on the lanyard end of the folder with the blade locked open and clamped in a vice I'd bet on the Sebbie lock relief holding up better and to more weight at .058 thickness overall compared to the CQC12 at .033 or there abouts. I've played with enough titanium to know how flimsy .032 ti can be and I'd elect not to get one that thin personally. Based on my measurment even the small Sebenza is thicker at the cut outs than either the Strider SnG or the CQC12. What really surprises me is this. Most of the knives I see with the thinnest cut outs are the ones that are supposed to be for the hardest use or deemed tactical. You look around at others that are smaller by far and they are actually beefier. My A.G.Russell SeaMaster is a good example but there are many more. It has .050-.052 relief cuts x 3 for each lock. Go figure.
STR