How Effective is LAWKS?

[Confederate]

The Lake and Walker Knife Safety employed by CRKT seems like a great solution to linerlock failures, but how good is it really? I've spent a lot of time playing with knives that have it and I began wondering if this safety is as solid as it appears. I'm generally unfamiliar with the effect forces have on a knife, so if a LAWKS failed, how would it fail? And has anyone ever had a LAWKS fail on them? If so, did the liner find its way between the safety and the blade?

It appears to be a brilliant device, simple and strong. Still, I strongly doubt it would be the same as using a fixed blade knife like CRKT claims.

 

[antonanton]

The Lake and Walker Knife Safety employed by CRKT seems like a great solution to linerlock failures, but how good is it really? I've spent a lot of time playing with knives that have it and I began wondering if this safety is as solid as it appears. I'm generally unfamiliar with the effect forces have on a knife, so if a LAWKS failed, how would it fail? And has anyone ever had a LAWKS fail on them? If so, did the liner find its way between the safety and the blade?

It appears to be a brilliant device, simple and strong. Still, I strongly doubt it would be the same as using a fixed blade knife like CRKT claims.

Honestly ... I doubt it too ...

 

[Phil Elmore]

No multiple-component item is going to be as strong as a single piece of unbroken steel, all other factors being equal, but the LAWKS places a physical barrier between the liner and the travel necessary to close the lock. That's as close as you're going to get in a folder. It works well, and given that it's a backup to the lock in the first place, your fingers are well protected. What are you doing to a LAWKS-equipped folding knife that you might conceivably make both the liner and the LAWKS fail?

 

[Halbie]

I have a couple CRKTs with the LAWKS mechanism. It does a very effective job of keeping the liner lock from ever moving out of position when the blade is open. As far as liner locks go, I can't imagine what more one could want.

 

[stormyone]

I've never heard of one failing. I have a Harsey Lone Wolf T3 with a LAWKS. I like the LAWKS a lot.

 

[winz]

Err...some people have believed that the LAWKS makes a knife "like" a fixed or as strong as one.

Where this notion ever came from, I don't know....The LAWKS is merely a FAIL-SAFE for the liner-lock. It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement.

 

[Abacus]

Err...some people have believed that the LAWKS makes a knife "like" a fixed or as strong as one.

Where this notion ever came from, I don't know....The LAWKS is merely a FAIL-SAFE for the liner-lock. It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement.

Sounds like a very slim distinction...what would a reinforcement do that the "fail-safe" doesn't? Sounds like both would be to stop the liner-lock from moving....

I don't think there is a practical difference.

 

[hardheart]

I remember seeing pics of a failed lawks. can't recall what caused the failure, but the thin steel of the lawks mechanism was squashed out of the way, forced over as the liner lock failed.

 

[Halbie]

Err...some people have believed that the LAWKS makes a knife "like" a fixed or as strong as one.

Where this notion ever came from, I don't know....The LAWKS is merely a FAIL-SAFE for the liner-lock. It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement.

You are correct, and I missed this in the original post. It is not a lock reinforcement, but merely keeps the liner from moving out of position. It does NOT make the blade "like" or as good as a fixed blade. A good frame- or back-lock will, in my experience, do a better job than any liner lock, including one equipped with LAWKS. Still, pretty good for a liner lock.

 

[Halbie]

I remember seeing pics of a failed lawks. can't recall what caused the failure, but the thin steel of the lawks mechanism was squashed out of the way, forced over as the liner lock failed.

Thin steel? Not on the CRKTs I own (M16 14T and Crawford Triumph). You'd have to ram the thing full force into a concrete block (at a good angle) to squash either the liner or the LAWKS mechanism. The force required, I'd bet, is enough to destroy the knife and your hand, in the process.

 

[Confederate]

What are you doing to a LAWKS-equipped folding knife that you might conceivably make both the liner and the LAWKS fail?

Absolutely nothing. I've never abused good tools, nor do I misuse knives. I thought it was quite a stretch for CRKT to liken their LAWKS-equipped knives to fixed blades; however, it seems brilliant in its simplicity. I must disagree with Winz's statement: "It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement." I think that's exactly what it's supposed to be. Of all locking devices on knives, the liner lock is perhaps the most susceptible to failure based solely on design. True, one can mitigate it by the use of titanium liner locks, but it seems that LAWKS can turn a liner lock knife into a highly dependable knife when exposed to stress.

I would never use a liner lock knife without LAWKS, for example, for self preservation. I've never had one fail on me because I've never subjected one to those types of stresses. Still, looking at the lock on my M16-14T, I would bet my life on it not failing. Without the LAWKS, I wouldn't trust it at all.

Again, it's a wonderful innovation and I'm impressed by its seeming reliability.

The metal shim drops into place with the LAWKS
is engaged.

 

[darthsoaker]

Makin' the best out of a bad situation.

 

[Halbie]

Absolutely nothing. I've never abused good tools, nor do I misuse knives. I thought it was quite a stretch for CRKT to liken their LAWKS-equipped knives to fixed blades; however, it seems brilliant in its simplicity. I must disagree with Winz's statement: "It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement." I think that's exactly what it's supposed to be. Of all locking devices on knives, the liner lock is perhaps the most susceptible to failure based solely on design. True, one can mitigate it by the use of titanium liner locks, but it seems that LAWKS can turn a liner lock knife into a highly dependable knife when exposed to stress.

I would never use a liner lock knife without LAWKS, for example, for self preservation. I've never had one fail on me because I've never subjected one to those types of stresses. Still, looking at the lock on my M16-14T, I would bet my life on it not failing. Without the LAWKS, I wouldn't trust it at all.

Again, it's a wonderful innovation and I'm impressed by its seeming reliability.

The metal shim drops into place with the LAWKS
is engaged.

Thanks - you put it best!

 

[winz]

Sounds like a very slim distinction...what would a reinforcement do that the "fail-safe" doesn't? Sounds like both would be to stop the liner-lock from moving....

I don't think there is a practical difference..

I thought it was quite a stretch for CRKT to liken their LAWKS-equipped knives to fixed blades; however, it seems brilliant in its simplicity. I must disagree with Winz's statement: "It is not intended to be a lock reinforcement." I think that's exactly what it's supposed to be. Of all locking devices on knives, the liner lock is perhaps the most susceptible to failure based solely on design.

Ok. It may be a matter of wording/terminology, but I maintain that the LAWKS is a form of fail-safe rather than a reinforcement support to strengthen the ability of the lock itself.

The ability of a liner-lock depends on the liner's tensile strength. Should it fail, bend, collapse, crumple due to any reason, the LAWKS block is there to prevent the failed liner from moving completely out and thereby avoiding the blade from slamming on the fingers.

So as you can see in your own knife, the LAWKS 'blocker' if you will is not in contact with the liner-lock. If the liner-lock fails due to physical failure or simply being bumped, the LAWKS is there to block the liner from moving to an 'UNSAFE' location allowing the blade to close.

Let's use an analogy. You motorcylists with single-side rear swingarms will obviously note that you have a clip pin that you slip on after the center nut is torqued tight. That clip pin(safety) isn't some super rod that's going to make your hub area more tight. The nut is torqued tight for that. If for whatever reason it was not or had become loose, the clip is there to prevent your wheel from flying off and you hurdling down the tarmac.

Pic for my analogy:

 

[SIFU1A]

i think LAWKs is a good idea on CRKT's due to the fact that there liner locks arent exactly the industries best, and imho they do work ok.

on a propery designed and executed liner lock they are hardly neccesary.

and i agree i dont think they add any strength to the basic LL, its a fail safe thing.

 

[allenC]

Still, I strongly doubt it would be the same as using a fixed blade knife like CRKT claims.

They didn't specifiy what type of fixed-blade.
Not every fixed-blade is super strong....remember, even a cheap plastic McDonald's knife is still technically a "fixed-blade".
I've seen many folders that are stronger than the typical kitchen steak knife or paring knife, which are fixed-blades.

I also think that the LAWKS is a great invention.
In fact, I wish every liner-lock had the LAWKS.

 

[vwb563]

I had several CRKT'S with the LAWKS feature. Never had one to fail with it engaged. If you manage to overide the LAWKS on a CRKT you probably need to reconsider what you are doing with a folding knife and maybe take a look a Busse fixed blade!,,,VWB.

 

[Matador]

Of the CRKT's I "had" with the LAWKS, they proved beneficial, considering I had one CRKT liner fail. It's a great concept and I sure wouldn't mind all the other brands to join in the fray with a similar if not identical feature on their respective liner locks. Nothing like a little extra "backup" on anything.

Matador-

 

[carrot]

On one sample model (Walmart M16) I tried, the LAWKS did not appear to be very effective. The thick nylon washers, combined with the thin liner lock, made it seem like there was plenty of ways for the lock to fail such that the LAWKS would be bypassed. Also, Auto-LAWKS is fairly awkward to disengage and I found it more of an annoyance than anything else.

As for a safety fallback, it seems good on paper but makes me wonder why CRKT has so little faith in their own locks. IMHO, this is safer failure mode as typical of better-designed liner locks.