Is the Spydercard THE answer?

[blastjv]

I have read (and felt) all the concerns over the years about accidentally disengaging a liner lock due to grip or torque. This makes sense. I have never had it happen, but I certainly see how it could.

It seems to me that the PERFECT solution to this problem which one might encounter with 'normal' liner locks is COMPLETELY negated in the design of the Spydercard!!!

Imagine if you will, a large Spydercard of a more conventional shape and size, with the addition of G-10 scales and a very slightly larger hole to release the lock.

With the exception of total lock failure (which I think is usually much less of a concern than accidental disengagement) I don't see ANY way in which a lock such as this could accidentally disengage!!!

Why, then, has this not become THE way to make liner locks? Am I the only one that sees how great this is, or am I the only one that is missing some obvious reason why it's not a FANTASTIC idea?


-John


PS - for those of you not familiar with the Spydercard, it is essentially a liner lock with only liners for handles. If you look at a photo of one the hole on the left side of the handle is where you access the liner lock to close the knife. I hope that's an adequate explanation. Take a look at the photos here, I think they make it pretty clear: http://www.onestopknifeshop.com/store/spyderco-spydercard-info.html

 

[Joe Talmadge]

Any liner lock can fail if the geometry at the tang and liner junction isn't just right. I don't see what's special about the Spydercard's lock that would prevent it...

That said, the Spydercard is awesome.

Joe

 

[blastjv]

Joe,

Yes, that is true, of course. But it seems to me that taking the 'user error' out of the equation is itself a pretty BIG step forward.

That's what I meant when I said:

"With the exception of total lock failure (which I think is usually much less of a concern than accidental disengagement) I don't see ANY way in which a lock such as this could accidentally disengage!!!"

I suppose I should have said:

"Assuming that the Liner Lock itself was well designed and well manufactured and the geometry of it's engagement surfaces was correct the virtual inability to accidentally disengage the lock in any kind of a normal grip would make such a knife nearly foolproof!!!"

Also, I think Spyderco has a pretty good reputation for doing things 'right'. If the liner lock was done properly, and incorporated the design ideas found in the Spydercard I think it would be a significant step toward building the 'perfect' liner lock.

Also, I'd say that what's special about the Spydercard's Lock itself is that it's very well executed. The lock itself is not unusual, but the attention to detail counts for a lot. It's unfortunate that it's remarkable that a knife works as it should, but it's true, it does!


Thanks,

-John


PS - Regardless, I agree, the Spydercard is AWESOME!!!

 

[Tohatchi NM]

Never having handled a spydercard, is it like a framelock (think ATR) but with a hole to disengate the lock instead of a half-circle notch in the handle?

 

[blastjv]

It's really sort of somewhere between a liner lock and a frame lock. If you look at the pictures on 1sks.com (see link in above post) I think it's pretty self explanitory. If it's not, then I'm not sure I could really explain it (I'm not sure I've done such a good job of explaining it so far).

I'm sorry I can't be much more helpful,

-John

 

[dialex]

Yes, during his short life E. Bradichansky didn't make two many knives (I only know of the Shabaria and the Spydercard), but what he conceived was quality stuff. The hole in the blade is an interesting feature:

 

[Walking Man]

IMO, it does seem very clever, BUT the Jot Singh Kalsa model also had a method that helped removed linerlock accidental pressure, and that was simply to have small disengagement area just below the finger notch. So your fingers could not touch the liner while using.

 

[Walking Man]

http://www.newgraham.com/spyderco_retired.htm See it?
Anyhow why do certain brilliant innovations modifications never take hold? Because they are not recognized, or because they don't sell well.
Unforetunetly, sometimes the failure of a product to sell means that little or no attention will be given to the innovation, which isn't the same thing, but that's how it is looked at.