ocelot or manix

A

auto veritas

Joined
Apr 6, 2006
Messages
107
i am trying to decide between an ocelot or a manix if any one is able to post a shot comparison with some pics i would appreciate it:D
 
The Manix is a hard, tank-like worker knife, while the Ocelot is a (rather slim) slicer/cutter. Which one do you want more? :)
 
My Manix is at Spyderco and the passaround Ocelot has passed on. So I am sorry that I can not provide you with the pictures. I disagree with Golbat though. They are both very strong folder and neither slim, neither is very light. Both have excellent handle ergonomics paired with full size handles to yield excellent retention. However, the handle of the Manix has always been a favorite of mine. The blade of the Manix is 4 mm stock but full flat ground and that of the Ocelot 3 mm with a hollow saber grind. In terms of strength they are probably very close, though the tip of the Ocelot is definitly stronger because the blade has no distal taper, while the Manix is a better slicer due to the flat grind. The Manix appears much larger, because of the wide blade and handle, and the edgelength is a bit greater aswell. However, the Ocelot carries much, much easier, because it tugs so nicely in the very corner of your RFP due to the curvature of blade and handle.

In the end, this is really a matter of personal preference. They are both very strong folders and are in the same class, but they are so differently shaped that it is hard to say which one you will like better. The Ocelot offeres more grip variety, better control (even though the control on the Manix is very good), cuts mainly with the belly and has a stout but not very accute tip. The Manix has a very wide blade, best handle ergos in the entire business, blade geometry that make it a real cutter (in the heavy duty knife category, it won't outcut a Caly Jr.), has a very accessible fine, but not fragile tip (much stouter tip in comparison to a Military or a Endura 3).

Personally, I am a big fan of wide, flat ground leaf blades, so for me it is the Manix. Maybe this review helps: http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=398966
Scroll down to the "eye candy" pic.
 
I would say that the Manix is much bigger than the Ocelot, dunno what you're talking about HoB :confused: Sure, the Ocelot is similar in that it has a large, hand-filling handle, but that's about it. The Ocelot is VERY thin, the thinnest knife I own. It is thinner than a BM 940. I don't know what you consider thin, but the Manix is definitely not :eek:


I completely trust the lock on the Ocelot, and if you want something that can be used for every day things AND outdoor chores, I would go with the Ocelot. The Manix is more geared towards heavier work and I think the Ocelot is much more well-rounded.

Whatever you choose, you won't be disappointed in the quality or usefulness of either knife.
 
The Manix is 6.125 ounces of knife on the pocket. Thats a lot of knife. The Ocelot is heavy enough at 4.1 ounces. Besides that it is not a small knife either so I'd go with the Ocelot personally. The Manix is so big that to me it is just impractical.

STR
 
Django606 said:
The Ocelot is VERY thin, the thinnest knife I own.
Click to expand...

Which dimension are you calling "thickness"? I would call thickness the width across the back of the handle (where the lockbar is). You can not seriously call the Ocelot thin :eek:. Alone liner + blade are adding up to 5.6 mm and that is not counting the G-10 which probably adds another 6-7 mm (I do this from memory. I measured the liners and the blade but not the total thickness). That makes it at least as thick as the Yo for example. My thinnest knife is the CF Delica which is about 7 mm thickness in total not counting the pivot head. THAT I call thin. Heck even the Lil'T is only 13 mm thick and that is AFAIK the thickest G-10 Spyderco build.

If you are talking about width (folded spine-to-back of handle) then I would agree. As I said, the Manix appears much larger because of its width.
 
Usually when people say thin or thick, they are talking about the width of the knife, which is how wide it is from a top down view of the spine..

I'd say that it is pretty damn thin, my Chinook II is about 2.5 times thicker (from memory).
 
Mmmh, then we are talking about the same thing. I wish I had measured it, but I am pretty sure that the thickness of the Ocelot and Manix are within about 3 mm of each other.
 
I don't have a Manix, but I thought for sure it had to be at least as thick as a Chinook II. If it's not, sorry, this whole thing is my fault.
 
No faults here, may very well be that my memory is totally skewed. I had the Chinook II as passaround as well and as far as I remember it was the same thinkness as the Manix. Hopefully, someone will post some numbers so that we can get to the bottom of this.
 
I think you should get the Ocelot. The Ocelot can act like a big knife, and still be a small knife, whereas the Manix will always be a (very) big knife.
 
I agree with DJang I am doing a passaround and I tell you what I AM BUYING AN OCELOT. its a small knife that acts like a big one, and I am a hunter and I can skin anything with this knife.......lovin it, and I will buy one when I send this one out.
 
i am a practical person and i decide to get both ... with plain edges ... and also a boye boat knife if i should require a serrated edge... my birthday is coming up it's just gonna be a tough sell seeing as how i have 8 stitches in my finger ... i can be a bit of a putz and butchered my self at work :o


p.s i am new to these forums and i don't really know al the rules yet ... im sorry if i do anything stupid and will try not to be to irritating
 
I just had the passaround Ocelot and the passaround Manix. The Manix seems MUCH bigger than the Ocelot, but the thickness wasn't that dissimilar.

I want to handle a mini Manix now, but here's my breakdown on the full Manix versus the Ocelot.

I love the Manix, but it is almost certainly more folder than anyone actually needs. It's damn near a fixed blade replacement. The blade is SO wide, the grip so hand filling, it puts me mind more of a survival tool than a pocket knife. It immediately and completely outclassed my Chinook I.

More knife than almost anyone needs is no reason not to want one, of course. :)

OK, as I said, I haven't handled a mini-Manix, and I haven't handled a ParaMillie either. That said, the Ocelot just may be the king of the hill in the slightly over 3" blade folder category. Decent ergos (that's individual, of course), great cutter, useful but tough point, very pocketable for its weight, and insanely overbuilt for its size. The Ocelot is, for my money, every bit as solid as the Manix, just not quite as big. It's hard to think of any job that would even vaguely fall into the "I can do that with a folder" task list that the Ocelot couldn't handle. The closest knife that immediately comes to mind is the BM 720, but the Ocelot fits my hand better.

So to me it's a question of what you want. If you're looking for a "Holy crap that's a big knife!" folder, the Manix scratches that itch. If you want a folder that doesn't take up 75% of your pocket and is within a hair of being just as tough and capable, the Ocelot will make you very happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top