Is the Benchmade opening hole wrong?

How close is the compression lock (edit- I meant ball lock) to the axis? Never played with one, but it seems similar.
 
Last edited:
In my eyes there is no right or wrong "hole" there is spyderco that made it first and made it better, but there is no set standard of hole. I do prefer spyderco's hole more!
 
coop1957 said:
The next Sage should have the compression lock.
Click to expand...

You do know what the Sage line is about right? Will Sal do it? We'll see.

What the next Sage should be, well I have no horse in that race, just suggested jokingly that there should be an Axis lock Sage in the future. It could be a Sage 10 for all I care.
 
How many companies call a Reeve Integral lock that, or a frame lock? Yet Benchmade is supposed to because they are such a morally bankrupt company.

I have never seen any credit given to the AXIS when it comes to the Caged Ball Bearing lock. I'm have seen people defend this and say the CBBL is sooo different. But come on, if the AXIS didn't exist I doubt the other would either. It's like just enough was changed to make it look different enough. I'm not a patent lawyer but I'm not sure there isn't some infringement. No one seems to get upset about that.

And I'm not a Benchmade fanboy since I was recently called one. In fact I have far more Spyderco knives than any other brand. If anything I could be called an AXIS lock fanboy. A piece of great engineering. And I can't wait for the patent to expire so others can use it.
 
FlaMtnBkr said:
How many companies call a Reeve Integral lock that, or a frame lock? Yet Benchmade is supposed to because they are such a morally bankrupt company.

I have never seen any credit given to the AXIS when it comes to the Caged Ball Bearing lock. I'm have seen people defend this and say the CBBL is sooo different. But come on, if the AXIS didn't exist I doubt the other would either. It's like just enough was changed to make it look different enough. I'm not a patent lawyer but I'm not sure there isn't some infringement. No one seems to get upset about that.

And I'm not a Benchmade fanboy since I was recently called one. In fact I have far more Spyderco knives than any other brand. If anything I could be called an AXIS lock fanboy. A piece of great engineering. And I can't wait for the patent to expire so others can use it.
Click to expand...

The bbl is patented so...
 
The BBL uses a different spring format entirely... People have had the Benchmade omega springs break, but I haven't yet heard of a single BBL spring breaking.
 
FCM415 said:
This is why I think Spyderco should do a Sage with an Axis lock... hehe
Click to expand...
The Axis lock is patented, the SpyderHole is not. Spyderco using an Axis lock without a license would be illegal. I think it would be awesome if they did license it, though.

Strigamort said:
How close is the compression lock to the axis? Never played with one, but it seems similar.
Click to expand...
Nowhere close. Very different design. The Ball Bearing Lock is close. Spyderco needs to use it on more knives so they have more ambidextrous knives (says this lefty).

Strigamort said:
The bbl is patented so...
Click to expand...
That means nothing. The people at the patent office know so little about the things they patent that they grant patents for things that are almost identical. Things that are incredibly similar and almost identical can still get patented, even if one steals the idea from another. The archery world is a perfect example of this as there are two patents for a two-track binary cam system that are almost identical, yet one guy stole a lot of his idea from the other guy (who stole from who is still up for argument between the two guys -- they're both arrogant @#&$es).
 
Good ideas always pop up in competitors, imitation is the greatest form of flattery right? Spyderco's new southard uses a ball bearing open system, reminds me of the kvt that KAI puts in some kershaws and zero tolerance knives. As long as it doesn't hurt the other company in any way I say it's great for us. Those of us who are serious fans of a particular company will always support them.
 
loonybin said:
The Axis lock is patented, the SpyderHole is not. Spyderco using an Axis lock without a license would be illegal. I think it would be awesome if they did license it, though.
Click to expand...

Yes I know that, I was really just trying to put a light hearted spin on the OP's question. Who knows though, patents do end, and it would be called a McHenry Williams design.
 
FlaMtnBkr said:
How many companies call a Reeve Integral lock that, or a frame lock? Yet Benchmade is supposed to because they are such a morally bankrupt company.

I have never seen any credit given to the AXIS when it comes to the Caged Ball Bearing lock. I'm have seen people defend this and say the CBBL is sooo different. But come on, if the AXIS didn't exist I doubt the other would either. It's like just enough was changed to make it look different enough. I'm not a patent lawyer but I'm not sure there isn't some infringement. No one seems to get upset about that.

And I'm not a Benchmade fanboy since I was recently called one. In fact I have far more Spyderco knives than any other brand. If anything I could be called an AXIS lock fanboy. A piece of great engineering. And I can't wait for the patent to expire so others can use it.
Click to expand...

In that case, someone should be paying the Blackie Collins representatives, because he came up with the Bolt Lock, long before the Axis was developed. ;)
 
RevDevil said:
In that case, someone should be paying the Blackie Collins representatives, because he came up with the Bolt Lock, long before the Axis was developed. ;)
Click to expand...

Way back in the late 70's, certainly predates the Axis lock. Benchmade was only making Balisongs back then... The Bali-Song company they were called. Fast forward 15 some years and McHenry Williams develops their version of the caged ball lock licensed to BM and the rest is history!
 
I don't think that it's wrong. All they did was come up for an alternative to a thumbstud. For some reason the Spyderhole is Spyderco's trademark and it has to be on all of their knives; even though it literally ruins the design of some knives. I feel that if the creator of the Spyderhole really cared about knife making, that they would let anyone use their method, but they'd want credit for creating it.
 
oneNdone said:
Nah, I don't see how it's wrong. It'd be like Apple suing Samsung because they copyrighted a basic geometric shape. It's a fairly simple concept, and, after all, competition is the drive for innovation.

Honestly, I don't think that there's any real advantage to a hole, when you could have a thumb stud. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

A real advantage to me, is that a thumb hole does not hang up on the pocket lip like a thumb stud sometimes does.
 
knife2Agunfight said:
I don't think that it's wrong. All they did was come up for an alternative to a thumbstud. For some reason the Spyderhole is Spyderco's trademark and it has to be on all of their knives; even though it literally ruins the design of some knives. I feel that if the creator of the Spyderhole really cared about knife making, that they would let anyone use their method, but they'd want credit for creating it.
Click to expand...

I don't really have an opinion wether its wrong or not. What does BM call the Spyderhole? Deployment hole? (honestly I dont know). What do they call the Reeve integral lock? Monolock right? I'm not Sal Glesser but I think his record with honoring peoples innovations (re;Sage series) shows that he cares about knife making. You surely cannot patent what literally is a hole, but with the same logic, BM should allow for other knifemakers to utilize their Axis lock which McHenry Williams innovated for them if they really cared about knifemaking also. Just trying to keep it fair, just saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top