-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
New ZT Construction
- Thread starter sutherland
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2011
- Messages
- 671
Unlike some of other folks on here, I do not have any experience tapping titanium or steel. I can't speak to whether or not the method of screwing through the front scale of the knife and threading into the locking scale of the knife would be easier or more cost efficient. What I can say as somebody who has taken apart lots of knives with standoffs is that I prefer the construction where you screw into threaded standoffs from both sides of the scales. Screwing into the standoffs from both sides allows me to only unscrew one side leaving the standoffs securely screwed in place while taking the knife apart. This eliminates the issue that I sometimes have of my spacers moving around and not being in the exact right place when I'm reassembling the knife. Personally I hope moving forward that ZT uses the construction technique of screwing into the standoffs from both sides.
Last edited:
stabman
Gold Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 21,327
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2011
- Messages
- 671
I have wondered before while looking at the construction of my 0350, which has small...nuts? in the locking side of the handle that are seperate pieces from the g10 handle scales, if this method of construction is a legacy of ZT's early collaborations with Strider. Both the SMF and SNG also have little threaded nuts or sockets or whatever on the lockside that are not a piece of the titanium slab that you screw into. Kershaw also uses this construction technique on some of their knives, like the Skyline.
sharp_edge
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,937
So with previous construction, if I strip a screw or even break it and leave half of it inside the standoff, the worst I need to do is to buy a new standoff and a screw, which are super cheap. With the new construction, I may mess up the thread in a ti slab, thus rendering the ti scale useless. I imagine it's going to cost MUCH more to replace a ti scale than a standoff. What am I missing?
Plus (this could be a personal preference), it looks nicer and symmetric with screws on both sides of the standoff (i.e., the old construction).
I'm having a hard time understanding this new move of ZT.
Plus (this could be a personal preference), it looks nicer and symmetric with screws on both sides of the standoff (i.e., the old construction).
I'm having a hard time understanding this new move of ZT.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
- Messages
- 842
Agreed. The 804 is a big step up in price, that being said, it is a step down (IMHO) in construction (when compared to the 808 and 801).
Last edited:
115Italian
Gold Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2015
- Messages
- 2,913
The lock side dies look cleaner and smoother without screw heads. Maybe thats what the designer wanted. Also that is a very small area to have a screw head. Another down side to this type of construction is you have less ajustable play on the scales to get everything centered if need be.
How is that obvious?
Have you machined titanium?
Have you seen how bloody cheap stand-offs are to buy?
I've done both.
Obviously whoever designed the knife wants it that way it is.
Obviously some people here don't like how it looks.
Obviously, they should buy a different knife.
It's obvious because it cheapened the knife, in cost and looks.
I never had the desire to machine ti and I know the cost of standoffs.
The only thing obvious about whoever designed the knife is that they were under instructions to cut corners and save money on the design.
I hate the way it looks and wouldn't buy the knife.
Further questions?
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2014
- Messages
- 17,936
Some of these new models have backspacers and not standoffs. A designed like this would eliminate the need to a) mill a hole through the spacer and add something that is titanium or steel to tap into, and b) give the maker more flexibility of materials to use for said spacer (this knife has an aluminum spacer). I have a knife from Matt Diskin that has this design, it has a LSCF backspacer.
Since the backspacer is aluminum, not only would it be a poor material to tap into, but it allows more freedom of design (I.e. the Jens Anso collab has an orange anodized aluminum spacer...try anodizing ti orange).
In the case of the 0450cf (which has this design with aluminum standoffs), I would theorize that using a single screw would add more support between the mating surfaces. With 2 screws, you essentially have 2 surfaces that are joined with 2 separate supports (screws), and with one screw you have 2 surfaces joined by 1 solid support. Imagine a pair of scissors where the handle and blade are divided into 2 separate pieces at the fulcrum rather than 1 solid piece.
Since the backspacer is aluminum, not only would it be a poor material to tap into, but it allows more freedom of design (I.e. the Jens Anso collab has an orange anodized aluminum spacer...try anodizing ti orange
).In the case of the 0450cf (which has this design with aluminum standoffs), I would theorize that using a single screw would add more support between the mating surfaces. With 2 screws, you essentially have 2 surfaces that are joined with 2 separate supports (screws), and with one screw you have 2 surfaces joined by 1 solid support. Imagine a pair of scissors where the handle and blade are divided into 2 separate pieces at the fulcrum rather than 1 solid piece.
brancron
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,052
Strictly opinion. Should I go back and add "IMO"?
This raises an interesting question, one which I have pondered recently. Consider the construction method noted above in comparison to this:
I have a knife with a G-10 2/3-length backspacer. There are three screws on each side of the handle for six total. All are secured through the handle into the tapped backspacer.
These screws are not aligned with one another on each side, but staggered in alignment, securing backspacer to handle in six places (each going through the G-10 of the handle and a titanium liner into the backspacer), from midway up the handle where the backspacer begins, back to the rear of the handle.
These screws are not aligned with one another on each side, but staggered in alignment, securing backspacer to handle in six places (each going through the G-10 of the handle and a titanium liner into the backspacer), from midway up the handle where the backspacer begins, back to the rear of the handle.
Considering both types of construction on knives of the same size, on one knife it would be three screws, all the way through to the other tapped handle as in the quoted example. The other would be my knife, still with three screws on each side, but staggered providing six individual attachments to the backspacer, three from each side.
Realizing one is held by six screws, the other by three, it's still a net result of three holes on each side of the knife. The difference being alignment where the three screws of one go straight through, the six screws of the other are staggered.
I'd be interested in opinions as to which would make a stronger, more preferable, rigid construction.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
- Messages
- 842
Assuming one never disassembles the knife, I would imagine that either construction method would be fine in the ideal/typical circumstances. If one were to disassemble their knife in some routine basis, I would imagine that wear and tear, be it threaded standoffs or threaded frame/scale would be the same. The issue is the cost of repair should those threads be stripped.
That is my main concern. Ti strips as fast in a standoff as it would in a scale. The cost over time, however, is much less to the consumer if its a threaded standoff vs. a scale.
That is my main concern. Ti strips as fast in a standoff as it would in a scale. The cost over time, however, is much less to the consumer if its a threaded standoff vs. a scale.
brancron
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,052
So it's your "opinion" that this type of construction (as opposed to having screws on both sides) is cheaper, but you have no articulable basis for your opinion? And yet it's also obvious? Maybe instead of going back and adding "IMO" you should go back and replace your post with "I'm sorry for wasting your time."
But doesn't it also give you the impression that you're at the back of the barn where the nails are sticking through?? To me it gives a look of "cheap-side." I prefer both sides to look finished...I'd rather look at screw heads than hind ends looking up through their holes.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2014
- Messages
- 17,936
They might be in seperate locations so that the screws don't run into eachother.
Regarding a rigid construction:
For example: let's say you have a knife with a backspacer that is held with 6 screws (3 on both sides). If said knife had any small amount of play within the screws/backspacer, then each side (scale) of the knife would move independently and in theory would "misalign" the entire knife (possibly an unnoticable amount). This would also hold true for a knife with 3 screws on each side, but with the taps in 6 different sections.
-If there is play within the screws, both scales will move independently
-If there is play within the backspacer, both scales will move independently
Now with the single-screw design (like the ZT's), if there is any small amount of play within the screws/backspacer, the scales would act as one since they are held with the same screw.
-If there is play within the screws, both scales will move independently
-If there is play within the backspacer, only the backspacer will move
I talked to a custom knife maker a while ago, and I was told that a backspacer is much harder to "do right" rather than standoffs. The backspacer has more surface area that needs to be "true" against its mating surfaces.
Good point, 'dat. I think though if they had the same line in mind they'd have at least put them close together. They're obviously spread fairly evenly for (whatever-the-word-is, "torque continuity"?), probably just taking advantage of exactly what you said--the screws would meet so let's spread them.
Every bit of that makes sense to me. But assuming there is no looseness and everything is tight as it should be, is one method stronger than the other?
As to providing rigidity to the handle it seems to me the backspacer might be marginally better, no?
stabman
Gold Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 21,327
If you had done so, you would realize the silliness of thinking it is a cost or time saving move.
Steel and aluminum are both WAY easier to machine.
I hated working in machining, but I did it long enough to learn how annoying certain materials are to work with.