Framelock vs Everything else combined

Obsessed with Edges said:
This applies to ANY locking mechanism.

Which is why I stressed "When it's designed and executed well..." in my post. If I'm given a choice between two well-designed and executed knives (or for that matter, if forced to choose between two poorly-designed knives), one with few moving parts, and one with many more, I'll take simpler construction every single time, if long-term reliability is the main concern.

There's 'a lot going on there' with any lock mechanism, if it's going to work well. Throw in more parts, and there'll be a 'lot MORE going on', with that much more possibility for failure.
Click to expand...

But I think people are confusing complexity with probability of failure. Simpler is not always better.

But, as a matter of engineering common sense, this is certainly false. All modern breaking systems of cars employ a redundant master cylinder design for instance. Electronic fuel injection is far more consistent and reliable than mechanical carburetion despite vastly increased complexity--sometimes as many as 16 fuel injectors over four fuel rails and not taking into the complexity of the ECU controlling it all. The increase in complexity is probably 1000 fold, but the increase in reliability (among other things) is so great that literally every car manufacturer uses it.

Elevators use a secondary fail safe.

Virtually all corporate servers have battery backups, and many have redundant RAID 0 hard drive configurations as well.

The examples of multiple-system redundancy being used in the world of engineering is nearly limitless. The lack of redundancy and fail-safes in a mission-critical part is evidence of an unsophisticated part, not evidence of superiority.

Axis locks are both easier to reliably produce than crosslocks and are proven to be, on average, more reliable. Where a discussion begins to happen is in the 150+ dollar range of framelocks, particularly on up to about 400 with sebenzas, which is really demonstrating how tight the tolerances on these designs need to be to be comparable to axis locks, which have been available in the 50 dollar range for years, yet with an apparently near 0% failure rate.

As a matter of empirical fact, judging from the massive sample size of bladeforums anecdotes, crosslocks (framelocks and liner locks) have a higher failure rate than say, axis locks.

I'm not saying that the anecdotal evidence is conclusive on which lock is superior. I'm saying that this sort of bizarre argument that complexity necessarily increases the failure rate is false theoretically and false empirically.

I mean, I guess you can turn around and try to spin this into the situation that the redunancy built into axis locks harms the axis locks specifically, but on what justification could you possibly base this conclusion? Both theoretically and actually, it is false.

Let's abandon the silly complexity argument and move back to the poll.
 
Aesthetically I love the framelock. It is simple, handsome, easy to clean out, and reliable. I only own one framelock folder, however, because I do not like metal handle scales. I have a few liner locks with FRN or G-10 scales and prefer them for the grip they afford.

I like the backlock because it seems reliable and very unlikely to unlock accidentally in use. I have not tried the Triad uber-lock, but I respect it from all reports.

I like the Axis lock but only own one of them. It seems too close to where I'm holding the handle while using the tool, and the possibility of accidental unlocking concerns me, despite it never happening to me.

The compression lock is my favorite because it is very strong and free of play when locked, it can be operated with either hand, and the location is such that it seems very unlikely to come unlocked by accident during use. I also like that unlocking it does not require me to place my flesh in the path of the edge as the blade closes.
 
Artfully Martial said:
As a matter of empirical fact, judging from the massive sample size of bladeforums anecdotes, crosslocks (framelocks and liner locks) have a higher failure rate than say, axis locks.
Click to expand...

Though to be fair, Artful, it is difficult to compare the number/rate of failures as liner/frame locks are MUCH more common than axis locks.

In addition, as frame/liner locks can be made by any company, there is little control over the quality of any particular frame/liner lock knife: Axis locks are always on knives greater than $65 and are made by a single American company, whereas liner/frame locks can appear on anything from a Sebenza to CCC. The latter being much more common, of course.







But I still prefer my axis locks. ;)
 
Artfully Martial said:
Simple poll: You either vote Framelock or some other lock (you can specify if you want), and ideally, say why.
Click to expand...

AXIS LOCK

Smooth, re-assuring, ambidextrous - one hand operation and NO thumb studs required; making it Extremely safe and easy to close with just your first finger or thumb!
 
Axis for me, I love the smoothness and positive feel to the lockup and I can't overbend the lockbar and induce play. I also feel is it stronger in a realistic scenario.

For instance, I am never going to put enough load on the spine of a well made lock to make it fail, however, I can see myself under the hood of a car to cut a hose and when I pull on the hose, it breaks free and spine of the knife strikes something metal with some force and speed.
An axis wouldn't flinch, but liner and framelocks don't like a fast shock to the spine of the blade. I have seen alot of those types of locks fail with light raps to spine, similar to the force my scenario would impart to the knife.

I don't think any well made lock will fail on me under normal use, I just hate when people tout the axis lock as weaker because of the omega springs, they hardly ever break.
You probably trust your life to a simple spring everyday and don't realize it, the throttle return spring in your car is the only thing that closes the throttle when you take your foot off the pedal, imagine if that spring failed, the pedal would just drop to floor and you would have a toyota on your hands.

Ironic how if that spring fails your life and car could end, but if your omega spring breaks you are looking at what, a broken knife and possible cut on you finger, big deal. Why do we over analyze the omega spring and not the throttle return spring?
 
I prefer the more traditional backlock as per Buck 110 or the mid positioned Spyderco styles.

I don't really like framelocks or liner locks but that is based on aesthetics and personal preference rather than science.

The axis lock is good fun to play with and would be my second choice after the backlock.
 
darthsoaker said:
Though to be fair, Artful, it is difficult to compare the number/rate of failures as liner/frame locks are MUCH more common than axis locks.

In addition, as frame/liner locks can be made by any company, there is little control over the quality of any particular frame/liner lock knife: Axis locks are always on knives greater than $65 and are made by a single American company, whereas liner/frame locks can appear on anything from a Sebenza to CCC. The latter being much more common, of course.
Click to expand...

I think you're absolutely correct here, and the prevalence of $10-$30 liner locks and so on has to take some percentage of the fail rate.

But I think what's really telling is that people basically go right to Striders, Sebenzas and Hinderers to fight off the humble minigrip. And I think it's entirely possible that those models offer as good a lock in many ways. But Benchmade has shown that they can cheaply mass produce the axis without compromising the reliability--while you're certainly right that there are countless liner locks of varying qualities on these forums, I've got no doubt that a couple thousand minigrips have passed through here as well--and, all things being equal, I'd presume the cheapest axis lock would be the most obvious candidate for failure.

And my only conclusion from this data is basically that the axis lock is not some complex failure prone nightmare, but it's incredibly consistent, especially price considered. I believe that it is easier and cheaper to mass produce a great axis lock than a comparable crosslock.


All of this said, I've never had a liner lock or frame lock fail on my before, including relatively cheap ones like CRKT M16s under "heavy use." I have no problem trusting a good one like my new Tyrade. I tend to prefer the axis (+ axis clones) and the hawklock just because i find them more convenient.
 
darthsoaker said:
Though to be fair, Artful, it is difficult to compare the number/rate of failures as liner/frame locks are MUCH more common than axis locks.

In addition, as frame/liner locks can be made by any company, there is little control over the quality of any particular frame/liner lock knife: Axis locks are always on knives greater than $65 and are made by a single American company, whereas liner/frame locks can appear on anything from a Sebenza to CCC. The latter being much more common, of course.
...

But I still prefer my axis locks. ;)
Click to expand...

You can get China made Axis lock knives and, based upon the two I have, they are reliable $20 knives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top