Framelock vs Everything else combined

Artfully Martial

Artfully Martial

Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
4,761
Simple poll: You either vote Framelock or some other lock (you can specify if you want), and ideally, say why.

Personally, I'll go with the hawk-lock, followed by the axis (and the various axis-copies in the other companies), then framelocks.

I'm a bit puzzled with the enduring success of the framelock. But who knows, maybe it's less successful than I think.

So vote 1, is NOT framelock.
 
I personally love a well made frame or liner lock, I have a SRM axis lock and I find myself not being able to trust a knife thats whole function relies on 1 little spring.
 
My absolute favorite knives are titanium framelocks. It just feels real smooth opening and closing. Something about titanium and framelocks just touches me in the right way. And I'm sure the hundreds of people who happily pay $600 for a Hinderer XM-18 feels the same way.
 
I'd have no problem with having all frame locks, strong, solid, smooth, easy to keep clean, and less likely to have play. The lock strength craze that's been sweeping the knife world is a bit over rated IMO.
 
Robert.B said:
I personally love a well made frame or liner lock, I have a SRM axis lock and I find myself not being able to trust a knife thats whole function relies on 1 little spring.
Click to expand...

I don't know anything about SRM, but the axis lock uses two springs
 
I'm going to go with Ti frame lock as well and then axis lock. All my recent buys have been frame locks and I'm on 3 waiting lists for knives that are frame locks. 2 551's and a Hest.
 
knifenut1013 said:
I'd have no problem with having all frame locks, strong, solid, smooth, easy to keep clean, and less likely to have play. The lock strength craze that's been sweeping the knife world is a bit over rated IMO.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's WAY overrated.
Any modern lock, with a quality build, will be adequate for virtually any real world need strength wise. The part that's worth debating is reliability, opening action, closing action, durability, need to clean and so on.
 
Okay Triad lock hands down. A super strong lock resulting from good old fashioned simple common sense yet genius modern thinking upgrades to one of the oldest most tried and true locks, the lockback.

A prime example of not living off of yesteryears former dusty glories by improving things with new ideas while at the same time preserving old fashion quality.

Too many times manufactures sacrifice either of those in the spirit of being penny wise and pound foolish.

Thank you Mr Demko for this improvement in lock safety.
 
greater said:
Okay Triad lock hands down. A super strong lock resulting from good old fashioned simple common sense yet genius modern thinking upgrades to one of the oldest most tried and true locks, the lockback.

A prime example of not living off of yesteryears former dusty glories by improving things with new ideas while at the same time preserving old fashion quality.

Too many times manufactures sacrifice either of those in the spirit of being penny wise and pound foolish.

Thank you Mr Demko for this improvement in lock safety.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with Greater. I have 30+ year old Buck 110 knives that still lock up solid and dependable. The fact that Andrew improved on the concept is a plus for everyone. Now, truth be known, I have a sampling of every lock in common use and I have never had a failure with any of them. The secret is to buy quality and maintain your equipment.
 
Robert.B said:
even worse, you just complicated the lock 100%. But for the most part I dont care as I am a benchmade junky, I just trust a frame lock over a axis.
Click to expand...

A redundant spring adds basically no complexity to the design, because it is redundant. The design would function fine without it. Fail safes do not categorically make a design worse.

All liner and frame locks have only one spring.
 
I'm a bit befuddled by the newfound desire for the lockback/triad lock. It's by far the most complicated lock that I'm aware of and the hardest to reliably produce. On top of that, it has the worst opening action and the worst closing action of all the major locking systems.

Even if the strength of the triad lock were to exceed that of the axis lock (for instance), at that point I'd argue strength were irrelevant and the myriad other qualities of a lock should be taken into account.

But, I'll give it to the lockback, the blade retention when closed is quite good.
 
Artfully Martial said:
A redundant spring adds basically no complexity to the design, because it is redundant. The design would function fine without it. Fail safes do not categorically make a design worse.

All liner and frame locks have only one spring.
Click to expand...

1 spring that is going to take A LOT to get a fail out of, I dunno about the liner or frame lock you have had but all mine have massive liners of steel holding my blade in place, not a tiny rod held in place by a even smaller spring.
 
Artfully Martial said:
I'm a bit befuddled by the newfound desire for the lockback/triad lock. It's by far the most complicated lock that I'm aware of and the hardest to reliably produce. On top of that, it has the worst opening action and the worst closing action of all the major locking systems.

Even if the strength of the triad lock were to exceed that of the axis lock (for instance), at that point I'd argue strength were irrelevant and the myriad other qualities of a lock should be taken into account.

But, I'll give it to the lockback, the blade retention when closed is quite good.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you are a axis lock fanboy after reading this post, the buck 110 is a lockback and has probably sold more of that particular model then any other folding knife on the planet! and buck are sure enough of their product to offer a lifetime warranty.
 
Isn't lock strength irrelevant at a certain point? If there's enough force to cause the lock to fail or even break, wouldn't the blade itself break first? I kinda felt that the Tri-ad lock's ability to hold up to 500 lbs is a little overkill.
 
Robert.B said:
1 spring that is going to take A LOT to get a fail out of, I dunno about the liner or frame lock you have had but all mine have massive liners of steel holding my blade in place, not a tiny rod held in place by a even smaller spring.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fanboy of any particular lock. I use them all. Just bought a titanium framelock tyrade a few weeks ago.

But your comments are irreconcilable.
"I find myself not being able to trust a knife thats whole function relies on 1 little spring."

And then you go on to criticize that the axis lock uses two springs.

But which is it? Is one spring bad, or is two springs bad? If two springs is bad, why do pretty much all non-linerlock based knives using two springs instead of one? For that matter, why do virtually all engineering efforts where safety is an issue include redundant systems and fail safes?

There's no correlation between the thickness of a liner and the reliability of the lock. Theoretically, there is a strength correlation, but when liner/framelocks fail, it's not due to insufficient strength (for that matter, modern locks on quality knives virtually never fail due to insufficient strength). It's a reliability issue. Redundant springs address that issue. The axis lock, or hawk lock, etc, do not derive their strength from the resistance of a given spring. The spring is just positioning another piece of steel in the path of the tang. The only force needed is to reposition that tiny piece of steel, not to resist the force of the tang.

Besides, the spring isn't the entire lockbar. The spring is that tiny, itty bit milled out part of the liner/frame usually near the base.

74665_662858439394_18308506_37515074_2893190_n.jpg
 
Noctis3880 said:
My absolute favorite knives are titanium framelocks. It just feels real smooth opening and closing. Something about titanium and framelocks just touches me in the right way. And I'm sure the hundreds of people who happily pay $600 for a Hinderer XM-18 feels the same way.
Click to expand...

:thumbup: framelocks or linerlocks are definitely my favorite.
 
Artfully Martial said:
I'm not a fanboy of any particular lock. I use them all. Just bought a titanium framelock tyrade a few weeks ago.

But your comments are irreconcilable.
"I find myself not being able to trust a knife thats whole function relies on 1 little spring."

And then you go on to criticize that the axis lock uses two springs.

But which is it? Is one spring bad, or is two springs bad? If two springs is bad, why do pretty much all non-linerlock based knives using two springs instead of one? For that matter, why do virtually all engineering efforts where safety is an issue include redundant systems and fail safes?
Click to expand...

You have purposely misread my post, trying to compare two completely different locks...I am an engineer (so the other half of your post I wont take the time to dissect), I have made my own knives, two springs on an axis lock and two springs on a lock back are as different as mercury is to jupiter.

But whatever, under normal/safe use of every lock none are going to fail (safe use being the knife is kept maintained)...so it really is a moot point to argue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top