- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
I was reflecting the other day on how my view of knives was over-simplistic. Traditionally, as Aristotle famously postulated, a knife was identified essentially as an object that cuts. Presumably in Aristotle's day they too had handles and sheaths as well.
At the time, he believed that the virtue of a knife could be determined by how well it did its only task: cutting. But I suspect this is only partly true today.
Knives are substantially more complex now, particularly folding knives. Of course, we retain the blade, but even that is now (and in some cultures, has been) a fairly complex group of devices and designs to accomplish different functions.
I suppose the best illustration of this is the so-called san mai blade, or laminated steels generally. We might use a very wear resistant core and clothe it in a very corrosion resistant metal. Two different "parts" of a blade doing two different tasks. Another common example is the katana, where the very hard edge was essentially a separate device than the relatively soft spine--one for cutting, one for parrying.
But more obviously, we now have locks to worry about. In devices like the axis lock, this is actually relatively simple from an engineering point of view--a single device controls both blade retention and locking. In the vast majority of folders there are at least two distinct devices at work since their locks are not inherently capable of blade retention--liner and framelocks generally. They must employ a second device, generally a ball bearing and a detent, to hold the blade shut.
Indeed, some locking systems employ a third or even a forth device. Take a Rick Hinderer knife, or my own ZT0302. These employ a distinct stop for the lockbar to prevent over-extension. In many other framelocks a clip is used for similar effect.
And in at least one knife I can think of, the Lionsteel SR-1, the lock actually has four distinct devices--the framelock itself, the detent, the lock "stabilizer" and the stabilizer itself can be screwed down into the lock while the knife is in the open position.
And then, of course, we have clips or carrying cases, which obviously provide a secure way to carry a knife, but also, as I mentioned earlier, sometimes resist lockbar travel like a "stabilizer." Clips themselves can be quite sophisticated, as can be seen in the Grant & Gavin Hawk customs, some with ball bearings or a pincer-like motion to release.
Of course, there are also a variety of devices to open a knife, ranging from thumbstuds, spyder holes and flippers. Sometimes a thumbstud or spyderhole or flipper is more than they appear at first. For instance, thumbstuds and spyderholes can act as "waves" opening a knife upon draw. Sometimes thumbstuds are used as a blade stop, as in a Strider folder. And flippers tend to have a second rule of offering a finger guard or preventing the blade from closing on your hand.
And that only gets more complex when you take into account assisted opening devices, which often not only release a blade at high speed but also retain the blade.
At any rate, I spent a little time thinking about how complex the modern knife is. There's a lot that goes into the design of a knife, a lot more than it seemed to me at first. Sometimes I feel that certain people here see a knife in the Aristotelean way--i.e., the entirety of a knife's value can be determined by its edge properties. There's definitely reason to believe that. But for me, I see knives as systems--I see them as a technical exercise--engineering within very small confines of potential design.
