- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Joe:
That's sounds interesting. Please tell me about some of your experiences with liner lock failures.
That's sounds interesting. Please tell me about some of your experiences with liner lock failures.
Liner locks
- Thread starter spoonslayer
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
Spoon,
Most of the guys here have seen me do this rant about a hundred times. For you guys, there's nothing new here, feel free to ignore me (as usual
)
Okay spoon, my distrust of liner locks comes from both testing and hard use. As a result of my outspokeness on the issue, a lot of people email me with their own experiences. The results of all the above have led me to a distrust of liner locks. In fact, my policy at the moment is that I simply won't buy another one. It'd take something special to change my mind, especially considering there are some other locking types coming to market (e.g., REKAT's and now Spyderco's Rolling Lock, Benchmade's Axis lock, etc.).
It should be pointed out that if you're like most people, and just use your knife to open mail and the occasional box, you have nothing to worry about, by all means don't fear the lock.
There's a few ways liner locks typically fail. The first can be found with the "white knuckle" test. Hold your knife in your hand and really white-knuckle it, as if you're under stress. On many locks, the flesh of your hand can sink in and around the lock, and partially unlock it. While white-knuckling the knife this way, if any wiggle or play is introduced in the lock-up or if you feel the liner move *at* *all*, it will almost certainly auto-unlock on you in use. For examples of knives that don't have this problem, check out the Benchmade AFCK (liner is hidden below the scales) or Pat Crawford'd latest models (e.g., the KFF).
The next problem is that many liner locks will auto-disengage from spine pressure, either slowly applied, or applied as an impact. Keeping your fingers well out of the way, open the knife, put the spine of the blade against your palm, and slowly apply pressure (as much as you can) against the spine. Often I can get the lock to slightly disengage (which means total disengagement in actual use) or even disengage completely just from this. Next test is spine impact. Open the knife, hold the handle between thumb and index finger, keep all other fingers out of the way. Smack the blade against a handy desk top -- you don't pound it like a hammer, instead just use medium-impact at most, and trip to slap it down like a whip instead of a hammer. An upside of this test is that the spine whack can "set" the lock against the blade, so after the lock fails once, it never fails again. From time to time, you can actually make your lock safer doing this test!
Lastly, the tight pivot-fit tolerances required can lead to torquing disengagements. Stick the blade in something and torque it to the side while also applying pressure as if trying to close the knife. If the fit at the pivot isn't perfect, the tang will move and the lock will disengage.
Lastly, what really worries me is that I've heard numerous reports (and seen it myself first-hand) of liner locks that held perfectly for months or years through all tests -- then suddenly began failing, who knows why. So testing needs to be redone from time to time.
I can pop so many liner locks with these tests it would boggle your mind. There's a skill to doing the tests -- you will get better at popping the locks with practice. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether or not the tests I've described are relevent and fair. Like I said, if you use your knife lightly, they're probably irrelevent. If you use your knife hard or carry for possible defensive use, maybe you'll think my tests are perfectly reasonable.
One last note. High $$ custom knives are no more reliable than factory knives in the safety of their liner locks. To be sure, there are some custom makers who are incredibly good at making a safe, secure lock. For many, they'll turn out mostly good locks and some occasional bad ones. For many others, there's just too many bad ones.
Anyway, that's it. If you have a lot of liner locks, I GUARANTEE you at least one (and probably several) will fail one of these reliability tests. Practice doing the tests until you can make at least one fail, so that you know you've developed the skill of properly testing the lock. From there, I recommend testing all your liner locks before buying, or at least before using.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
Most of the guys here have seen me do this rant about a hundred times. For you guys, there's nothing new here, feel free to ignore me (as usual
Okay spoon, my distrust of liner locks comes from both testing and hard use. As a result of my outspokeness on the issue, a lot of people email me with their own experiences. The results of all the above have led me to a distrust of liner locks. In fact, my policy at the moment is that I simply won't buy another one. It'd take something special to change my mind, especially considering there are some other locking types coming to market (e.g., REKAT's and now Spyderco's Rolling Lock, Benchmade's Axis lock, etc.).
It should be pointed out that if you're like most people, and just use your knife to open mail and the occasional box, you have nothing to worry about, by all means don't fear the lock.
There's a few ways liner locks typically fail. The first can be found with the "white knuckle" test. Hold your knife in your hand and really white-knuckle it, as if you're under stress. On many locks, the flesh of your hand can sink in and around the lock, and partially unlock it. While white-knuckling the knife this way, if any wiggle or play is introduced in the lock-up or if you feel the liner move *at* *all*, it will almost certainly auto-unlock on you in use. For examples of knives that don't have this problem, check out the Benchmade AFCK (liner is hidden below the scales) or Pat Crawford'd latest models (e.g., the KFF).
The next problem is that many liner locks will auto-disengage from spine pressure, either slowly applied, or applied as an impact. Keeping your fingers well out of the way, open the knife, put the spine of the blade against your palm, and slowly apply pressure (as much as you can) against the spine. Often I can get the lock to slightly disengage (which means total disengagement in actual use) or even disengage completely just from this. Next test is spine impact. Open the knife, hold the handle between thumb and index finger, keep all other fingers out of the way. Smack the blade against a handy desk top -- you don't pound it like a hammer, instead just use medium-impact at most, and trip to slap it down like a whip instead of a hammer. An upside of this test is that the spine whack can "set" the lock against the blade, so after the lock fails once, it never fails again. From time to time, you can actually make your lock safer doing this test!
Lastly, the tight pivot-fit tolerances required can lead to torquing disengagements. Stick the blade in something and torque it to the side while also applying pressure as if trying to close the knife. If the fit at the pivot isn't perfect, the tang will move and the lock will disengage.
Lastly, what really worries me is that I've heard numerous reports (and seen it myself first-hand) of liner locks that held perfectly for months or years through all tests -- then suddenly began failing, who knows why. So testing needs to be redone from time to time.
I can pop so many liner locks with these tests it would boggle your mind. There's a skill to doing the tests -- you will get better at popping the locks with practice. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether or not the tests I've described are relevent and fair. Like I said, if you use your knife lightly, they're probably irrelevent. If you use your knife hard or carry for possible defensive use, maybe you'll think my tests are perfectly reasonable.
One last note. High $$ custom knives are no more reliable than factory knives in the safety of their liner locks. To be sure, there are some custom makers who are incredibly good at making a safe, secure lock. For many, they'll turn out mostly good locks and some occasional bad ones. For many others, there's just too many bad ones.
Anyway, that's it. If you have a lot of liner locks, I GUARANTEE you at least one (and probably several) will fail one of these reliability tests. Practice doing the tests until you can make at least one fail, so that you know you've developed the skill of properly testing the lock. From there, I recommend testing all your liner locks before buying, or at least before using.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Joe,
First of all, thanks for taking time to reply. While I love knives and have some knowledge of them, Ill admit I probably haven't had as much hands on experience with as many different models as you have. I however do disagree with many of the statements you just made.
My favorite of my knives is my Benchmade CQC7, which is of course a liner lock. I have had this knife for at least 4 years and while I don't make it a point to misuse a knife, it is safe to say that my knife recieves much more use and abuse than most. The knife has been a damn good one and has never failed.
I tried the tests you described in your post. I did the "white-knuckle" test; squeezing 'til my hand hurt like hell. I even tried squeezing with both hands for more pressure and tried every type of grip I could think of. In all this, the lock didn't so much as budge. Ditto with the spine pressure tests. I tapped the back of the opened blade in every way possible.Hard, medium, soft, quickly, slowly, etc.; and once again I couldn't get the lock to budge. Same results with the torque test too! As for your fourth reason, the stories you mention about liner locks eventually failing and "nobody knows why" sounds pretty vague and unproven to me.
You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense. If the tests require such unusual and obscure circumstances that it it takes "skill" to make it happen, then the chances of the failure occuring in actual use or combat would be almost non-existant. If I took enough time and practiced enough to become skilled at doing so, I could probably even consistently make a fixed-blade knife fold up! You can make ANY knife fail if you try hard enough.
Let me also say that I am in no way saying that all liner-locks are perfect. I realize that there are good and bad products in anything. But for you to stereotype all liner locks and say they are unreliable is absurd. Im sure I could find a poor and unreliable example of just about every kind of lock made,but I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad examples.
First of all, thanks for taking time to reply. While I love knives and have some knowledge of them, Ill admit I probably haven't had as much hands on experience with as many different models as you have. I however do disagree with many of the statements you just made.
My favorite of my knives is my Benchmade CQC7, which is of course a liner lock. I have had this knife for at least 4 years and while I don't make it a point to misuse a knife, it is safe to say that my knife recieves much more use and abuse than most. The knife has been a damn good one and has never failed.
I tried the tests you described in your post. I did the "white-knuckle" test; squeezing 'til my hand hurt like hell. I even tried squeezing with both hands for more pressure and tried every type of grip I could think of. In all this, the lock didn't so much as budge. Ditto with the spine pressure tests. I tapped the back of the opened blade in every way possible.Hard, medium, soft, quickly, slowly, etc.; and once again I couldn't get the lock to budge. Same results with the torque test too! As for your fourth reason, the stories you mention about liner locks eventually failing and "nobody knows why" sounds pretty vague and unproven to me.
You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense. If the tests require such unusual and obscure circumstances that it it takes "skill" to make it happen, then the chances of the failure occuring in actual use or combat would be almost non-existant. If I took enough time and practiced enough to become skilled at doing so, I could probably even consistently make a fixed-blade knife fold up! You can make ANY knife fail if you try hard enough.
Let me also say that I am in no way saying that all liner-locks are perfect. I realize that there are good and bad products in anything. But for you to stereotype all liner locks and say they are unreliable is absurd. Im sure I could find a poor and unreliable example of just about every kind of lock made,but I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad examples.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Joe,
First of all, thanks for taking time to reply. While I love knives and have some knowledge of them, Ill admit I probably haven't had as much hands on experience with as many different models as you have. I however do disagree with many of the statements you just made.
My favorite of my knives is my Benchmade CQC7, which is of course a liner lock. I have had this knife for at least 4 years and while I don't make it a point to misuse a knife, it is safe to say that my knife recieves much more use and abuse than most. The knife has been a damn good one and has never failed.
I tried the tests you described in your post. I did the "white-knuckle" test; squeezing 'til my hand hurt like hell. I even tried squeezing with both hands for more pressure and tried every type of grip I could think of. In all this, the lock didn't so much as budge. Ditto with the spine pressure tests. I tapped the back of the opened blade in every way possible.Hard, medium, soft, quickly, slowly, etc.; and once again I couldn't get the lock to budge. Same results with the torque test too! As for your fourth reason, the stories you mention about liner locks eventually failing and "nobody knows why" sounds pretty vague and unproven to me.
You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense. If the tests require such unusual and obscure circumstances that it it takes "skill" to make it happen, then the chances of the failure occuring in actual use or combat would be almost non-existant. If I took enough time and practiced enough to become skilled at doing so, I could probably even consistently make a fixed-blade knife fold up! You can make ANY knife fail if you try hard enough.
Let me also say that I am in no way saying that all liner-locks are perfect. I realize that there are good and bad products in anything. But for you to stereotype all liner locks and say they are unreliable is absurd. Im sure I could find a poor and unreliable example of just about every kind of lock made,but I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad examples.
Brock
First of all, thanks for taking time to reply. While I love knives and have some knowledge of them, Ill admit I probably haven't had as much hands on experience with as many different models as you have. I however do disagree with many of the statements you just made.
My favorite of my knives is my Benchmade CQC7, which is of course a liner lock. I have had this knife for at least 4 years and while I don't make it a point to misuse a knife, it is safe to say that my knife recieves much more use and abuse than most. The knife has been a damn good one and has never failed.
I tried the tests you described in your post. I did the "white-knuckle" test; squeezing 'til my hand hurt like hell. I even tried squeezing with both hands for more pressure and tried every type of grip I could think of. In all this, the lock didn't so much as budge. Ditto with the spine pressure tests. I tapped the back of the opened blade in every way possible.Hard, medium, soft, quickly, slowly, etc.; and once again I couldn't get the lock to budge. Same results with the torque test too! As for your fourth reason, the stories you mention about liner locks eventually failing and "nobody knows why" sounds pretty vague and unproven to me.
You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense. If the tests require such unusual and obscure circumstances that it it takes "skill" to make it happen, then the chances of the failure occuring in actual use or combat would be almost non-existant. If I took enough time and practiced enough to become skilled at doing so, I could probably even consistently make a fixed-blade knife fold up! You can make ANY knife fail if you try hard enough.
Let me also say that I am in no way saying that all liner-locks are perfect. I realize that there are good and bad products in anything. But for you to stereotype all liner locks and say they are unreliable is absurd. Im sure I could find a poor and unreliable example of just about every kind of lock made,but I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad examples.
Brock
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Sorry about the double post! Dont know how that happened!
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
spoon --
Fair enough. Lemme go through point by point.
First, the 970. Benchmade's liner locks are pretty good. Last time I tested my way through someone's collection, I *think* the only two I couldn't make fail are a 970 and an AFCK. Don't get me wrong, I've heard of both these type failing, but they're usually pretty good. I'm glad yours held up. I have an AFCK that is rock solid as well. My mini-AFCK was rock solid for 2 years, then spontaneously started failing on me one day. Again, best to test from time to time, these spontaneous failures do happen and I'm not the only one who has run into them.
You wrote: "You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense."
Okay, perhaps I should explain what I mean by skill. I never meant that the tests require "unusual and obscure circumstances". In fact, I've hoped to avoid doing such things. But doing anything -- including testing something -- can take skill. In this case, the skill is that due to their makeup, liner locks take some kinds of pressure well, and other kinds badly. By testing lots of locks lots of different ways, you'll get a feel for what might pop a particular lock -- that's skill. Again, you can decide for yourself if my tests are unreasonable, but in the end they are merely squeezing the handle, torquing the blade, and tapping the spine.
More importantly, keep in mind that many of these are sold as hard-use or defensive folders. Anything can happen in these circumstances, e.g., a stick can hit the back of your blade just right. Trying to pop the lock one way and then declaring the lock safe is an unwise way to go, in my opinion. If it takes a little skill to learn the several ways to fail a lock, then that skill is worth learning. I'm not convinced I do anything that's even remotely "unusual and obscure"!
Okay, in your conclusion you say, "But for you to stereotype all liner locks and
say they are unreliable is absurd ... I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad
examples."
I agree completely with what you say, and would happily retract my statements if indeed I had stereotyped based on a few rare bad examples. However, I've taken some pains to try to get across the fact that the examples are neither few nor rare. I'm glad you tested one knife and it worked. I've tested lots and lots -- and the bad ones are *not* rare! And I've talked to people who use their liner locks hard -- like FMA guys who use their knives hard on bags and the like -- and heard how often liner locks have popped. And, as I said, people are emailing me all the time. You dismiss my considerable evidence and pretty hard work testing much too casually, and at the peril of your fingers.
Let me add one last thing. You notice I'm not complaining about, say, lockbacks. Now, lockbacks do fail occasionally. But I can not go through a collection of lockbacks and fail 25%-50% of them, like I can with liner locks. No amount of skill has allowed me to torque or spine-whack any significant number of lockbacks into failure -- these failures with lockbacks are *few* and *rare*. I don't hear reports from hard-use users about failures, except the *rare* report of a lockback that released while white-knuckling. If this were simply a matter of unrealistic tests requiring specialty skills, that only popped a few rare bad examples, I should be popping lockbacks as often as liner locks, no?
Look at the failure percentages I quoted in the above paragraph. I stand by them. Either I'm a liar, my testing methods are completely ridiculous, or I'm onto something. There are guys here who have stood next to me while I tested their knives -- maybe they'll comment on the probability of the 1st or 2nd choices.
Again, I'm not saying that all liner locks are unreliable, and that's the end of the story. I am saying that WAY too many are unreliable, and that even the reliable ones occasionally spontaneously become unreliable.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
Fair enough. Lemme go through point by point.
First, the 970. Benchmade's liner locks are pretty good. Last time I tested my way through someone's collection, I *think* the only two I couldn't make fail are a 970 and an AFCK. Don't get me wrong, I've heard of both these type failing, but they're usually pretty good. I'm glad yours held up. I have an AFCK that is rock solid as well. My mini-AFCK was rock solid for 2 years, then spontaneously started failing on me one day. Again, best to test from time to time, these spontaneous failures do happen and I'm not the only one who has run into them.
You wrote: "You stated that these tests require "skill" to make the knife fail. This makes no sense."
Okay, perhaps I should explain what I mean by skill. I never meant that the tests require "unusual and obscure circumstances". In fact, I've hoped to avoid doing such things. But doing anything -- including testing something -- can take skill. In this case, the skill is that due to their makeup, liner locks take some kinds of pressure well, and other kinds badly. By testing lots of locks lots of different ways, you'll get a feel for what might pop a particular lock -- that's skill. Again, you can decide for yourself if my tests are unreasonable, but in the end they are merely squeezing the handle, torquing the blade, and tapping the spine.
More importantly, keep in mind that many of these are sold as hard-use or defensive folders. Anything can happen in these circumstances, e.g., a stick can hit the back of your blade just right. Trying to pop the lock one way and then declaring the lock safe is an unwise way to go, in my opinion. If it takes a little skill to learn the several ways to fail a lock, then that skill is worth learning. I'm not convinced I do anything that's even remotely "unusual and obscure"!
Okay, in your conclusion you say, "But for you to stereotype all liner locks and
say they are unreliable is absurd ... I dont judge all of them by a few rare bad
examples."
I agree completely with what you say, and would happily retract my statements if indeed I had stereotyped based on a few rare bad examples. However, I've taken some pains to try to get across the fact that the examples are neither few nor rare. I'm glad you tested one knife and it worked. I've tested lots and lots -- and the bad ones are *not* rare! And I've talked to people who use their liner locks hard -- like FMA guys who use their knives hard on bags and the like -- and heard how often liner locks have popped. And, as I said, people are emailing me all the time. You dismiss my considerable evidence and pretty hard work testing much too casually, and at the peril of your fingers.
Let me add one last thing. You notice I'm not complaining about, say, lockbacks. Now, lockbacks do fail occasionally. But I can not go through a collection of lockbacks and fail 25%-50% of them, like I can with liner locks. No amount of skill has allowed me to torque or spine-whack any significant number of lockbacks into failure -- these failures with lockbacks are *few* and *rare*. I don't hear reports from hard-use users about failures, except the *rare* report of a lockback that released while white-knuckling. If this were simply a matter of unrealistic tests requiring specialty skills, that only popped a few rare bad examples, I should be popping lockbacks as often as liner locks, no?
Look at the failure percentages I quoted in the above paragraph. I stand by them. Either I'm a liar, my testing methods are completely ridiculous, or I'm onto something. There are guys here who have stood next to me while I tested their knives -- maybe they'll comment on the probability of the 1st or 2nd choices.
Again, I'm not saying that all liner locks are unreliable, and that's the end of the story. I am saying that WAY too many are unreliable, and that even the reliable ones occasionally spontaneously become unreliable.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
spoon,
I have a quick URL for you. Please check out Steve Harvey's note in this string:
http://www.knifeforums.com/ubb/Forum34/HTML/000062.html
Steve's description and his conclusion should give you an idea of whether my testing methods were extreme!
Anyway, sorry for the intensity of the previous note. If you want to continue loving your liner locks that's fine with me. You can make your own judgements on what I'm saying. I just got a little irritating about you reducing my experiences to "stereotyping" a few "rare" bad locks, without really having any idea how rarely or not I've seen failures.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
I have a quick URL for you. Please check out Steve Harvey's note in this string:
http://www.knifeforums.com/ubb/Forum34/HTML/000062.html
Steve's description and his conclusion should give you an idea of whether my testing methods were extreme!
Anyway, sorry for the intensity of the previous note. If you want to continue loving your liner locks that's fine with me. You can make your own judgements on what I'm saying. I just got a little irritating about you reducing my experiences to "stereotyping" a few "rare" bad locks, without really having any idea how rarely or not I've seen failures.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Joe,
I think the problem is the second choice you referred to. The reason you cant force as many lockback failures is because liner locks are simply more succeptable to these kinds of odd tests. A good comparison for this arguement would be autoloading pistols compared to revolvers. You could much easier cause the autoloader to fail if you set out to do so. Though it is a more complicated tool and would be more succeptable to the kind unnusual tests you refer to, If you are dealing with a quality autoloader that is properly maintained, it is usually comparable in reliability to the revolver.
I think the problem is the second choice you referred to. The reason you cant force as many lockback failures is because liner locks are simply more succeptable to these kinds of odd tests. A good comparison for this arguement would be autoloading pistols compared to revolvers. You could much easier cause the autoloader to fail if you set out to do so. Though it is a more complicated tool and would be more succeptable to the kind unnusual tests you refer to, If you are dealing with a quality autoloader that is properly maintained, it is usually comparable in reliability to the revolver.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
No problem with the intensity of your post. I enjoy intense discussions. It has been a pleasure talking with you.
Brock
Brock
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
I agree, it's been a pleasure. I also enjoy these types of discussions, but on the 'net a spirited defense of one's position is often interpreted as a personal attack. So you gotta be careful.
Okay, your comparison of revolver to auto is a good one. Yes, you can make an auto fail more easily, I just continue to believe that the things I'm doing to test are not only reasonable for a hard-use or defensive knife, but pretty typical. Let's enumerate them again: white-knuckling, torquing the blade, putting pressure on the spine. And I'm further emboldened by the fact there seem to be many many more field failures of liner locks. Some of these I hear from email, some I just find out about from martial arts guys (again, these guys are typically just thrusting and cutting into some medium, VERY typical movements for defensive use, not odd movements).
I will note that while I can make (say) 25%+ of liner locks fail, there is definitely not a 25% failure rate in the field. I feel that's because most people don't use their knives very hard at all, "tactical" knives or not. Among the real hard users, the percentage starts rising precipitously, however. Still not quite 25% failures, but at what point does the risk become unacceptable if multiple stitches (at least) are guaranteed? The real failure rate for hard use is way too high.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
Okay, your comparison of revolver to auto is a good one. Yes, you can make an auto fail more easily, I just continue to believe that the things I'm doing to test are not only reasonable for a hard-use or defensive knife, but pretty typical. Let's enumerate them again: white-knuckling, torquing the blade, putting pressure on the spine. And I'm further emboldened by the fact there seem to be many many more field failures of liner locks. Some of these I hear from email, some I just find out about from martial arts guys (again, these guys are typically just thrusting and cutting into some medium, VERY typical movements for defensive use, not odd movements).
I will note that while I can make (say) 25%+ of liner locks fail, there is definitely not a 25% failure rate in the field. I feel that's because most people don't use their knives very hard at all, "tactical" knives or not. Among the real hard users, the percentage starts rising precipitously, however. Still not quite 25% failures, but at what point does the risk become unacceptable if multiple stitches (at least) are guaranteed? The real failure rate for hard use is way too high.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Thanks for taking time to chat. I will keep your tests in mind and try them on other knives I come in contact with. If I find anything interesting, ill let you know.
Brock
Brock
i have also performed many of joe's liner lock tests to just about all of my liner locks. more than half have failed miserably. i must admit, i was totally shocked when i realized just how much blade play there is in a liner lock that could lead to failure. spoon, have you handled a benchmade axis lock or a rekat rolling lock knife? this is what finally did it for me. i saw the obvious weaknesses in liner locks (thanks to joe's tests) and then i handled a pioneer and axis lock. liner locks do not even compare to these two locks. i also love GT's locks. white knuckle tests to me, are the most serious. if one of my knives fails this test, i am scared. i have also decided not to purchase another liner lock. an excellent alternative to the actual liner lock is the integral or mono lock.
marco
marco
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Marco,
That's interesting. Which of your knives failed and which ones didn't? Thanks for the info.
That's interesting. Which of your knives failed and which ones didn't? Thanks for the info.
Having also read Joe's comment about linerlock failures, I tested my linerlocks using the spine tap. My Apache failed with a modest tap. This scared the #### out of me because I was using it for slashing/stabbing drills against hanging targets made up of rolled newspaper. If I accidentally went the wrong way or the target bounced back...
I sent the Apache back, got it repaired and promptly gave it away. I got a MOD Tempest a couple of weeks ago. Right of the bat, the there was a discernable vertical wobble in the blade and the liner lock was already close to opposite scale. I didn't bother to test it because I think the lock will fail sooner than later. I called MOD and they said send it back. I wouldn't have even thought of testing the linerlocks being new to knives, except for I read in the forums.
To be fair, none of my Benchmade knives have failed nor my one SpyderCo linerlock (although I wouldn't use the latter for defensive purposes). But, I am definitely less confident about linerlocks and will lean away from them in future purchases. I will also continue to test periodically the knives I carry and use to be safe.
sing
I sent the Apache back, got it repaired and promptly gave it away. I got a MOD Tempest a couple of weeks ago. Right of the bat, the there was a discernable vertical wobble in the blade and the liner lock was already close to opposite scale. I didn't bother to test it because I think the lock will fail sooner than later. I called MOD and they said send it back. I wouldn't have even thought of testing the linerlocks being new to knives, except for I read in the forums.
To be fair, none of my Benchmade knives have failed nor my one SpyderCo linerlock (although I wouldn't use the latter for defensive purposes). But, I am definitely less confident about linerlocks and will lean away from them in future purchases. I will also continue to test periodically the knives I carry and use to be safe.
sing
spoon - my crkt apache failed the spine whack test quite easily. my kershaw tiats34 failed the spine whack and the white knuckle tests. my benchmade stryker failed the white knuckle test miserably. my benchmade 970 failed the white knuckle test. my microtech socom failed the white knuckle test. my spyderco terzoula failed the white knuckle and spine whack tests.
all of my lockbacks (mostly spydercos) passed all tests. benchmade stryker and 970 passed the spine whack tests. my benchmade afck passed all tests. my benchmade leopard also passed all tests. microtech socom passed spine whack test.
i don't trust liner locks at all! have you had a chance to hold a benchmade 710 axis lock or a rekat pioneer rolling lock?
marco
all of my lockbacks (mostly spydercos) passed all tests. benchmade stryker and 970 passed the spine whack tests. my benchmade afck passed all tests. my benchmade leopard also passed all tests. microtech socom passed spine whack test.
i don't trust liner locks at all! have you had a chance to hold a benchmade 710 axis lock or a rekat pioneer rolling lock?
marco
- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 141
Thanks for the info Marco. No, haven't held one of the axis locks, though I am a bit curious about them. People are talking about it a lot on here. I guess Just got lucky with my knife, which I couldn't get to fail any of the tests. oh well.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 1998
- Messages
- 2,395
The only liner-lock knives I have owned that would NOT fail are the Benchmade 970 and 975, and AFCK. Those are the ONLY ones. Check that. In all fairness, I can't remember how my Military faired in such tests, but I don't remember the lock ever disengaging.
As far as Joe's test goes, all he does is hold the knife near the end of the handle, and lightly tap the spine on a bench top near the tip. Ping! They all fall - except for the AFCK and 97X, that is.
Harv
As far as Joe's test goes, all he does is hold the knife near the end of the handle, and lightly tap the spine on a bench top near the tip. Ping! They all fall - except for the AFCK and 97X, that is.
Harv
Hi all. While I haven' t tested all of my linerlocks as per Joe' s "protocol" I did find that my Leopard failed unexpectedly one day! While watching the tube one evening, I was fiddling with my Leopard and just decided to give it a medium whack on its blade spine on the sofa armrest and voila, the lock disengaged! At first I suspected that there might be blade play but I checked and there wasn' t. I never abused it by hacking, hammering or throwing it but did put it thru plenty of rough use. I sent it back to BM and they replaced the liner. The tang was locking a bit high I might add. I tried the whack again and voila, repeat! Well, back to BM again. After receiving it back I gave it to a friend as a gift.
There could be an explanation that makes sense. On another forum, a member posted that to get the liner to lock "correctly" against the blade tang, a tweaking of the scales by loosening its screws and then retightening might do the trick. It is possible in my case, and in others perhaps that the scales have "moved" after lots of rough use. It can therefore change the position of the liner lock in relation to the blade tang. Am I making sense? I guess as in all other maintenance procedures, the scale screws should be checked periodically. Joe?
L8r,
Nakano
"To earn a million is easy, a real friend is not."
There could be an explanation that makes sense. On another forum, a member posted that to get the liner to lock "correctly" against the blade tang, a tweaking of the scales by loosening its screws and then retightening might do the trick. It is possible in my case, and in others perhaps that the scales have "moved" after lots of rough use. It can therefore change the position of the liner lock in relation to the blade tang. Am I making sense? I guess as in all other maintenance procedures, the scale screws should be checked periodically. Joe?
L8r,
Nakano
"To earn a million is easy, a real friend is not."
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
Nakano --
Good timing. Check out my Las Vegas Classic review post. In it I describe a long conversation I had with an excellent liner-lock maker. Liner locks require exceptionally tight tolerances, and with only 2 or 3 screws holding the frame together, the frame can definitely move around. In fact, just taking the knife apart and putting it together again can change the way things line up. This knife maker included a bunch of guide pins to make sure everything is always lined up perfectly -- Darrel Ralph replied that he does the same thing.
Anyway, sure, I think the frame lineup can be part of the problem. I also think the tang/liner interface has to be *perfect*. As far as I can tell, you want the liner to be perfectly squared, and the tang in the 7-ish degrees area.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
Good timing. Check out my Las Vegas Classic review post. In it I describe a long conversation I had with an excellent liner-lock maker. Liner locks require exceptionally tight tolerances, and with only 2 or 3 screws holding the frame together, the frame can definitely move around. In fact, just taking the knife apart and putting it together again can change the way things line up. This knife maker included a bunch of guide pins to make sure everything is always lined up perfectly -- Darrel Ralph replied that he does the same thing.
Anyway, sure, I think the frame lineup can be part of the problem. I also think the tang/liner interface has to be *perfect*. As far as I can tell, you want the liner to be perfectly squared, and the tang in the 7-ish degrees area.
Joe
jat@cup.hp.com
Joe,
The arguments you and others have presented about liner-lock failures have convinced me that my primary defensive carry should be something other than a liner-lock.
A junior member here thanks you.
My normal daily carry is a liner-lock, and does real light duty opening boxes and letters. Now your rants
have me a little concerned about its reliability for last ditch defense. However, since this is very low probability, I will probably live with it until I see a new toy .. oops - tool that is, which isn't a liner-lock.
The arguments you and others have presented about liner-lock failures have convinced me that my primary defensive carry should be something other than a liner-lock.
A junior member here thanks you.
My normal daily carry is a liner-lock, and does real light duty opening boxes and letters. Now your rants