Help me understand : Why does a pure slicer needs a strong lock ?

DocJD said:
Why carry a folder , even a thin bladed slicer that's potentially unsafe ? :confused:

You might need to use a folder in some emergency or just chaotic situation that results in force being accidentally applied the the spine .

Iv'e been involved in a handful off such events and decided that would be the worst time to cut you hand . Trouble compounded .
Click to expand...

A lock can be safe without being built like a tank. Take a Rat-2 linerlock for example. It's not the strongest lock ever made, but it's safe and strong.

In your situtation, I doubt a slicey FFG would be the better choice, maybe a knife with a more sturdy blade would fit better (Griptilian for example).
 
sharp_edge said:
Why not? It's not like a strong lock would compromise the slicing ability or operation of a folder.

Strange question.
Click to expand...

I agree. In addition the knives are engineered to be pretty lightweight for their size using modern materials and design so the size and lock design works together in an ergonomic fashion which is why many of us came to Spyderco to begin with. I want a knife I can use that fits me correctly so I don't get hand cramps. Try using a tiny peanut slipjoint some time for heavy work to see what I'm talking about. Those thin blades are wicked slicers with a good edge yet the handle is way too small for repeated heavy cutting.

And Why a backlock? Mostly because lots of us want them. It's a very popular design. That makes it Simple. Spyderco is filling a demand in the market.
 
I have almost lost a finger a few times... Mostly cutting bales of hay and having the hay/baling string close the slip joint. Other most notable time my grandfather lost his footing while fishing and I was cutting bait with a new folding fillet knife (I threw that thing overboard asap while looking for electrical tape for the cut).

I try not to carry slip joints anymore, would love to switch to fixed blades but I live in California. I have switched to pocket clip knives with lock backs. I do miss my Swiss Army knives features but that is an excuse to go get my tools.
 
You don’t really need a lock on a folding knife. I have and many other people have carried slipjoint knives for many years.

With that said I do enjoy the extra security a locking blade brings when I am trying to do certain things with knives. I like a strong and simple lock design. My current EDC is a CRK Mnandi, a strong and simple frame lock. For 99.99% of the time a slipjoint will work just fine for me but it is nice to have a lock.
 
Simplicity, strength, and reliability are the traits of a well made lockback. They might be slightly slower to unlock and more difficult to dis/reassemble if you're into that. I'll take that tradeoff, I really like them.

A certain knife retailer released a video a while back where they set various Spyderco knives up in a rig and tried to pull them closed with a winch to see which was strongest. All locks eventually failed, but on the Delica it was the blade that failed. I'd like to see that redone with something like a Native or other thicker blade, I have a feeling the failure would be catastrophic if the lock is made right.

When they are designed well and properly assembled a locking folder can handle light duty fixed blade work just fine, but I don't think careless or hard use of any folding knife is wise. I don't buy a locking knife to treat it as a delicate slipjoint, if that were the case I would probably toss everything but my non locking and fixed blades.
 
As others have said there is a bit of a "why not" mentality especially with something as unobtrusive as a compression lock. With that said, the PM2 has a bit of a LE/Duty lineage to it as a smaller folder in the Military line. Its not uncommon to find these blades overseas or in Law Enforcement roles. So the though process is probably also taking that fact into account. There are going to be far better tools for self defense than a PM2, as well as there are going to be far better tools for batoning or rescuing someone from a car...but sometimes the folder is all that you have on you if you are in those professions so having a lock that can flex into some real hard work without closing on your fingers is advantageous.

That being said, we are seeing a bit of a shift in the EDC market away from super strong locks and thick blades in recent years. Three Rivers mfg has gotten all kinds of plaudits from the community for their thin, slicey knives that all feature a humble liner lock. For the intended role their knives are made for, the liner lock and thin blade are going to serve just fine.
 
The back lock is a simple old lock that has been in use for some time and is considered old enough to fit in the "traditional" realm so its use to me is not as much about it's strength at times and more about other factors. The compression lock is another beast but it is a proprietary lock design and if the company who holds the rights to it were to forgo it's use when there is no reason for an alternative style lock would weaker the branding that went into the lock already. From a business view there are many reasons to use these locks and little to no reason to not use them. This will hold true for most locks and much of this is decided in the design process as weight, easy of use, complexity of assembly, cost, and intended use along with an array of other factors are considered. On a similar line of thinking we could often question why liner locks, arguably one of the weakest lock designs, are ever used at all.
 
Short answer:
People value their fingers.

Long answer:
Despite the knife being a slicer, you might find yourself in situation you have to use it for something else.
Also, accidents do happen, and as someone said, a slicer can reach your tendon very fast and without much force.
There's nothing wrong with some extra security if it doesn't hinder the performance.
 
sharp_edge said:
Why not? It's not like a strong lock would compromise the slicing ability or operation of a folder.

Strange question.
Click to expand...

That's because you didn't understand the question. I never said a lock would compromise the functionality of any knife.

And why not ? Because I see knife design as a whole.

The PM2 handle is built like a tank, but the blade is quite delicate (to not say fragile and not hurt some defensive persons). Why does a PM2 features a bulletproof compression lock, while the bigger (intended for bigger task) Military features a linerlock for example ? A linerlock isn't as sturdy as a compression lock usually. Maybe that's uninteresting or strange to you, but to me it's not.

EatingSarma said:
There's nothing wrong with some extra security if it doesn't hinder the performance.
Click to expand...

"Nothing wrong" is debatable. Just to give one argument, the more intricate a lock design is, the more expansive it is to manufacture and the more you, we have to pay for it. We don't have the full details, but it's obvious a compression lock is more expensive to produce than a simple back lock or a linerlock. It has its drawback.

A PM2 with a linerlock would function perfectly for example and probably be cheaper to buy. The Military features a linerlock and it's been fine for years.

A manufacturers could produce an 100% bulletproof lock for 2000$, probably. But diminishing returns is a thing.
 
Last edited:
Chapp said:
That's because you didn't understand the question. I never said a lock would compromise the functionality of any knife.

And why not ? Because I see knife design as a whole.

The PM2 handle is built like a tank, but the blade is quite delicate (to not say fragile and not hurt some defensive persons). Why does a PM2 features a bulletproof compression lock, while the bigger (intended for bigger task) Military features a linerlock that I've personally seen fail twice on different occasion in my life, for example ? Even without my own experience, a linerlock isn't as sturdy as a compression lock usually. So what's your take on it ?
Click to expand...
Am I wrong in thinking that the Military preceded the PM2, which in turn preceded the Manix 2. All have different locks. I haven’t had issues with any of them, lock wise or blade wise. I agree that the tip of a PM2 is somewhat fragile, but not so sure about the blade in general, as long as it is not being used as a pry bar.
 
PirateSeulb said:
On a similar line of thinking we could often question why liner locks, arguably one of the weakest lock designs, are ever used at all.
Click to expand...

Because "strong enough" and diminishing returns are a thing. Me and a bunch of others have been abusing Ontario Rat 1 and 2 for years and the liner lock very rarely fail, if ever. I've learned to trust it. In exchange I have a cheap knife, fairly straightforward to disassembly (unlike a Delica, which is awful to), that you can operate with one hand and with a nice addictive action (let's not lie, it matters a lot those days). And again, it's strong enough.

It's easy to explain and certainly not as puzzling as putting a bulletproof lock on a thin delicate blade.
 
Pilsner said:
Am I wrong in thinking that the Military preceded the PM2, which in turn preceded the Manix 2. All have different locks. I haven’t had issues with any of them, lock wise or blade wise. I agree that the tip of a PM2 is somewhat fragile, but not so sure about the blade in general, as long as it is not being used as a pry bar.
Click to expand...

No you're right, the Military came before afaik. A model could be updated though, especially a model as popular as the Military. Its history doesn't really solve the paradox of the choice of lock for the PM2 and the Military.
 
The liner lock on Military can be easily operated with a glove on. The compression lock does not require the finger on the way of the blade closing. These are the main reasons of the lock choice as far as I know. I never heard the choice of the liner lock (on Military) or compression lock (on PM2) by Spyderco had much to do with manufacturing cost, pricing, or lock strength.
 
Some of the knives have old style locks because no one has invented a time machine yet.

If your pocket contents suddenly and without warning morph into new surprising items then the time machine has been perfected.
 
My best slicers are all thin bladestocks and aren't locking knives.

Manly Wasp - slipjoint
SAK Electrician - slipjoint
Opinel No. 6 - whatever that ring is called on the Opinel

My slicers aren't for stabbing.
No need for a lock
 
My 2 cents. Any folding knife is by definition, a broken knife and the lock just makes it useable. Now an unbroken knife is arguably better than a broken knife. A lock makes a broken knife perform closer to an unbroken knife or a fixed blade. Therefore any lock that allows a broken knife to perform closer to a fixed blade will in effect, make it less of a broken knife than a weak lock.
 
Snacktime said:
would love to switch to fixed blades but I live in California.
Click to expand...

I'm curious about this statement. It's perfectly legal under California state law to openly carry a fixed blade. Even in those parts of California that have size limits on fixed blades they are still allowed, and there are exceptions to the size limits (like work). I carried fixed blades daily in San Diego for many years with never an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top