- Joined
- Sep 8, 2002
- Messages
- 1,351
Spyderco ATR review (with some comparisons at the end to the Buck/Mayo)
I've had the passaround ATR for about a week now and I've gotten to know and like the knife. I'm not a professional edge tester, so I won't be commenting much on the edge holding ability and such, I'll be concentrating more on fit-finish, ergonomics and blade shape.
Externals
The ATR comes packaged in a standard Spyderco black paperboard "slideout" case. It was surprisingly hefty, despite it's Ti handles, weighing in on the Pitney-Bowes scale at work at 5.0 oz. Unopened, maximum length is 5 1/8" (13cm), opened 8 1/2" (21.5cm). Thickness of the handles was 3/8" (0.9cm) (measured using a ruler so probably not really accurate). It looks and feels like a serious piece of steel and metal when it is opened. The handles are the standard Spyderco brushed metal finish. This tends to look really good when new, but character marks show up easily on it. However, despite the fact that 5 people had used it before me, there didn't seem to be that many on it, just of few of them near the pivot. I think this knife will wear extremely well and continue to look good. All of the screws are torx, except for the three holding the clip on, which were philips. All of the holes lined up perfectly, including the holes on the clip.
When I showed it to one of my coworkers, he mentioned how sharp the edges of the holes felt. I have to agree with him that I'd have liked a little beveling or polishing of the edges of the holes. Other than that, there were no sharp edges with everything beveled nicely, even the lockbar for pain free manipulation. The lack of a back spacer bothers me for some reason, although from a design standpoint, the ATR certainly doesn't need one.
Blade
The blade is S30V, edge length 3.25" and overall length 3.5". The blade is a hollow saber grind with a weight relieving swedge along the back and a unique "snout tip" about 1/2" (1.2cm) from the tip. The grinds were perfectly even, I mean perfectly even, the whole length of the blade, both sides.
Personally, I'm not in love with the "snout tip". It seemed a little too sharp and, although it doesn't project beyond the contours of the handle, it still seemed like it would rub against my pocket lining. If it were my ATR, I'd definitely take a fine file and smooth it down just a hair. Also, the top edge of the blade is not radiused at any place. I don't know if this was a deliberate decision or just a cost-saving measure. Given the design details in other areas of the knife, I think it is a design decision.
Mechanics
So how does it work? The ATR has an integral compression lock. There is a lock bar, similar to a frame lock, but instead of pushing against the tang, it is on the back side of the handle and interposes itself between the back side of the tang and a pin: the lock bar is "compressed". The pin also serves as the blade stop. It works very simply, seems like it would be just as resistant as a framelock to "gunking" and allows you to unlock the blade without getting you fingers in the way of the closing blade (although if you use your thumb, you have your fingers in the way anyway).
So how is the lock on the ATR? There is a definite detent holding the knife closed (the lock bar rides into a groove, evidently) after this first resistance, opening resistance was very smooth and consistent with only a slight hint of roughness near the end. The lock clicks into place with a satisfying "snick". When I first got it, the lock bar seemed to move too far to the right (100% coverage), leaving play in the blade and almost no tension in the lock bar. I loosened the pivot and rotated the bushing on the other side (it was a standard eccentric pivot setup), there is now 30% coverage and perfect lockup. There is zero blade play front to back or side to side. If you loosen the pivot slightly, you can get the blade to swing more freely, but then you get a slight side to side movement. Because of the smooth opening, it flicks open easily, and it won't "fall open" either.
The blade is centered almost perfectly with a extremely slight bias towards the lock side. Nothing rubs or scrapes and, other than the slight bias, the fit and finish of the ATR is flawless.
Ergonomics
Note: I have small/medium hands, short fingers, but wide-ish palms. I'm still ambivalent about the cobra-hood. Some days I like it since it provides "push" surface, some days I think it's an ugly projection on top of my pretty blade. Other than the cobra-hood, the ergonomics of the ATR are very good. The blade+handle choil is very nice for choking up on the blade. The filipino, saber and reverse/icepick grip were all comfortable and secure. The filipino grip seemed especially good with my thumb ending up on the cobra-hood for maximum grip.
I'm not a MBR expert so I can't comment on the usefulness of the holes for grip switching etc.
The Clip
Everybody seems to have an opinion about the clip. Here's mine. It's perfect. It consists of a single piece of steel about 2" long and 9/16" wide ( 5 x 1.5 cm), three holes which line up with the holes in the ATR, all nicely finished to remove sharp edges, with the grip being provided by the two side "rails" being folded 90 degrees and extending towards the body of the knife. The clip is reversible. It melds well with the overall style of the ATR. It isn't too tight or too loose in either my back or front jean pockets or even IWB (my spare tire proved to be the main problem there). I like the fact that the "grip" is provided by the side rails which allows easy removal and prevents side to side movement. That isn't to say that you can't slide it across your pocket, it's just a little harder than pulling it out, which is how it should be in my mind. The clip is reversible and tip up only
Pocket Feel
Pocket carry is very easy due to the flatness and the smoothness of the handles. The ATR is tip up only, but I never worried about it opening due the wide detent keeping it closed. I carried it both in my front right pocket and my right rear pocket without discomfort although I had to take care getting my keys out from my front right pocket as I didn't want to scratch the ATR. Normally, I don't worry about character marks.
Cutting performance
I was afraid to ruin the edge by trying to sharpen it, so I left the edge as is. Hopefully roadrunner will be able to give it a good sharpening before he puts it through the paces. I didn't really get a chance to cut anything substantial, just a few cardboard boxes, letters and cord. The ATR ate up everything I threw at it, but cutting deep into cardboard met with more resistance than I expected. This is probably due to the nature of the thick blade and hollow grind. The ATR really came into it's element when cutting nylon cord and stabbing into cardboard. The cobra hood gives lots of purchase and confidence to your grip. Given the blade shape and thickness, the ATR seems to be better suited towards emergency self-defense use with occasional utility use. If I carried and ATR, I'd pair it with a thin, flat-ground blade (2") for slicing paper and tape and use the ATR for everything else.
More Subjective Stuff
The ATR is a beast of a knife. It feels extremely solid and sturdy. If I had my 'druthers, I'd probably lose the snout tip and reduce the width of the cobra-hood. I love the integral compression lock; it locks of solidly and is intuitive to disengage. It takes the best of the framelock design and makes it better, in my opinion. If you are looking for a serious, hard use, bad-ass looking knife, look no further than the ATR. That said, I'm probably not going to be adding the ATR to my collection any time soon. The reason is quite simple, I'm not a fan of hollow ground blades, nor do I like thick blades.
Buck/Mayo Comparison
Compared to the ATR, the Buck/Mayo seems more subdued and more of a "gentleman's" knife. Blade: It seems unfair to say which one has the "better blade" since they are so different although both are S30V. The ATR has a thick, saber hollow grind with a strong tip. The Buck/Mayo has a thin, full hollow ground blade with a much thinner tip. Both have substantial belly with the Buck/Mayo having more, due to its full grind. The grinds on the ATR were perfect, while the Buck/Mayo had significant changes in the grind along the belly. Lock: The lock on the ATR was the better of the two, in particular since the Buck/Mayo's seems to move way too far over and it still had a slight amount of blade play. The detent on the Buck/Mayo is also much stronger requiring more pressure to open than the ATR. Ergonomics:The handle on the ATR is superior in every ergonomic way except I prefer the bead blasting of the Buck/Mayo. Also, the rounding of the Buck/Mayo's scales seemed to be more "hand friendly" than the beveled slabs of the ATR. Bead blast the ATR's scales and it wins this category running away. Opening the ATR was also more pleasant than the Buck mainly due to the hole and the hood. They spydie "drop" works for the ATR but not for the Buck/Mayo due to the guards on the handle. Also choking up on the blade is easy with the ATR, but much more uncomfortable on the Buck/Mayo due to the same guards. Oh, and the Buck/Mayo's clip is right-hand tip down only.
Overall, the ATR, with it's cobra-hood and finger choil and indexing holes is much more of a serious hard-use knife, a refined chopper and a stabber, whereas the Buck/Mayo with it's bead blasting, beauty holes and and rounded handles is more of a looker and a slicer. The ATR seems to be the perfect knife for someone who uses their knife alot in hard-use situations with it's thick blade, solid lock and handles and open design. It'd probably be also useful for scaring the heck out of sheeple. The Buck/Mayo, by comparison, seems like much more of an everyday, gentleman's knife, with it's thinner, higher hollow grind and beautiful handles.
edit: spelling corrections and added comments
I've had the passaround ATR for about a week now and I've gotten to know and like the knife. I'm not a professional edge tester, so I won't be commenting much on the edge holding ability and such, I'll be concentrating more on fit-finish, ergonomics and blade shape.
Externals
The ATR comes packaged in a standard Spyderco black paperboard "slideout" case. It was surprisingly hefty, despite it's Ti handles, weighing in on the Pitney-Bowes scale at work at 5.0 oz. Unopened, maximum length is 5 1/8" (13cm), opened 8 1/2" (21.5cm). Thickness of the handles was 3/8" (0.9cm) (measured using a ruler so probably not really accurate). It looks and feels like a serious piece of steel and metal when it is opened. The handles are the standard Spyderco brushed metal finish. This tends to look really good when new, but character marks show up easily on it. However, despite the fact that 5 people had used it before me, there didn't seem to be that many on it, just of few of them near the pivot. I think this knife will wear extremely well and continue to look good. All of the screws are torx, except for the three holding the clip on, which were philips. All of the holes lined up perfectly, including the holes on the clip.
When I showed it to one of my coworkers, he mentioned how sharp the edges of the holes felt. I have to agree with him that I'd have liked a little beveling or polishing of the edges of the holes. Other than that, there were no sharp edges with everything beveled nicely, even the lockbar for pain free manipulation. The lack of a back spacer bothers me for some reason, although from a design standpoint, the ATR certainly doesn't need one.
Blade
The blade is S30V, edge length 3.25" and overall length 3.5". The blade is a hollow saber grind with a weight relieving swedge along the back and a unique "snout tip" about 1/2" (1.2cm) from the tip. The grinds were perfectly even, I mean perfectly even, the whole length of the blade, both sides.
Personally, I'm not in love with the "snout tip". It seemed a little too sharp and, although it doesn't project beyond the contours of the handle, it still seemed like it would rub against my pocket lining. If it were my ATR, I'd definitely take a fine file and smooth it down just a hair. Also, the top edge of the blade is not radiused at any place. I don't know if this was a deliberate decision or just a cost-saving measure. Given the design details in other areas of the knife, I think it is a design decision.
Mechanics
So how does it work? The ATR has an integral compression lock. There is a lock bar, similar to a frame lock, but instead of pushing against the tang, it is on the back side of the handle and interposes itself between the back side of the tang and a pin: the lock bar is "compressed". The pin also serves as the blade stop. It works very simply, seems like it would be just as resistant as a framelock to "gunking" and allows you to unlock the blade without getting you fingers in the way of the closing blade (although if you use your thumb, you have your fingers in the way anyway).
So how is the lock on the ATR? There is a definite detent holding the knife closed (the lock bar rides into a groove, evidently) after this first resistance, opening resistance was very smooth and consistent with only a slight hint of roughness near the end. The lock clicks into place with a satisfying "snick". When I first got it, the lock bar seemed to move too far to the right (100% coverage), leaving play in the blade and almost no tension in the lock bar. I loosened the pivot and rotated the bushing on the other side (it was a standard eccentric pivot setup), there is now 30% coverage and perfect lockup. There is zero blade play front to back or side to side. If you loosen the pivot slightly, you can get the blade to swing more freely, but then you get a slight side to side movement. Because of the smooth opening, it flicks open easily, and it won't "fall open" either.
The blade is centered almost perfectly with a extremely slight bias towards the lock side. Nothing rubs or scrapes and, other than the slight bias, the fit and finish of the ATR is flawless.
Ergonomics
Note: I have small/medium hands, short fingers, but wide-ish palms. I'm still ambivalent about the cobra-hood. Some days I like it since it provides "push" surface, some days I think it's an ugly projection on top of my pretty blade. Other than the cobra-hood, the ergonomics of the ATR are very good. The blade+handle choil is very nice for choking up on the blade. The filipino, saber and reverse/icepick grip were all comfortable and secure. The filipino grip seemed especially good with my thumb ending up on the cobra-hood for maximum grip.
I'm not a MBR expert so I can't comment on the usefulness of the holes for grip switching etc.
The Clip
Everybody seems to have an opinion about the clip. Here's mine. It's perfect. It consists of a single piece of steel about 2" long and 9/16" wide ( 5 x 1.5 cm), three holes which line up with the holes in the ATR, all nicely finished to remove sharp edges, with the grip being provided by the two side "rails" being folded 90 degrees and extending towards the body of the knife. The clip is reversible. It melds well with the overall style of the ATR. It isn't too tight or too loose in either my back or front jean pockets or even IWB (my spare tire proved to be the main problem there). I like the fact that the "grip" is provided by the side rails which allows easy removal and prevents side to side movement. That isn't to say that you can't slide it across your pocket, it's just a little harder than pulling it out, which is how it should be in my mind. The clip is reversible and tip up only
Pocket Feel
Pocket carry is very easy due to the flatness and the smoothness of the handles. The ATR is tip up only, but I never worried about it opening due the wide detent keeping it closed. I carried it both in my front right pocket and my right rear pocket without discomfort although I had to take care getting my keys out from my front right pocket as I didn't want to scratch the ATR. Normally, I don't worry about character marks.
Cutting performance
I was afraid to ruin the edge by trying to sharpen it, so I left the edge as is. Hopefully roadrunner will be able to give it a good sharpening before he puts it through the paces. I didn't really get a chance to cut anything substantial, just a few cardboard boxes, letters and cord. The ATR ate up everything I threw at it, but cutting deep into cardboard met with more resistance than I expected. This is probably due to the nature of the thick blade and hollow grind. The ATR really came into it's element when cutting nylon cord and stabbing into cardboard. The cobra hood gives lots of purchase and confidence to your grip. Given the blade shape and thickness, the ATR seems to be better suited towards emergency self-defense use with occasional utility use. If I carried and ATR, I'd pair it with a thin, flat-ground blade (2") for slicing paper and tape and use the ATR for everything else.
More Subjective Stuff
The ATR is a beast of a knife. It feels extremely solid and sturdy. If I had my 'druthers, I'd probably lose the snout tip and reduce the width of the cobra-hood. I love the integral compression lock; it locks of solidly and is intuitive to disengage. It takes the best of the framelock design and makes it better, in my opinion. If you are looking for a serious, hard use, bad-ass looking knife, look no further than the ATR. That said, I'm probably not going to be adding the ATR to my collection any time soon. The reason is quite simple, I'm not a fan of hollow ground blades, nor do I like thick blades.
Buck/Mayo Comparison
Compared to the ATR, the Buck/Mayo seems more subdued and more of a "gentleman's" knife. Blade: It seems unfair to say which one has the "better blade" since they are so different although both are S30V. The ATR has a thick, saber hollow grind with a strong tip. The Buck/Mayo has a thin, full hollow ground blade with a much thinner tip. Both have substantial belly with the Buck/Mayo having more, due to its full grind. The grinds on the ATR were perfect, while the Buck/Mayo had significant changes in the grind along the belly. Lock: The lock on the ATR was the better of the two, in particular since the Buck/Mayo's seems to move way too far over and it still had a slight amount of blade play. The detent on the Buck/Mayo is also much stronger requiring more pressure to open than the ATR. Ergonomics:The handle on the ATR is superior in every ergonomic way except I prefer the bead blasting of the Buck/Mayo. Also, the rounding of the Buck/Mayo's scales seemed to be more "hand friendly" than the beveled slabs of the ATR. Bead blast the ATR's scales and it wins this category running away. Opening the ATR was also more pleasant than the Buck mainly due to the hole and the hood. They spydie "drop" works for the ATR but not for the Buck/Mayo due to the guards on the handle. Also choking up on the blade is easy with the ATR, but much more uncomfortable on the Buck/Mayo due to the same guards. Oh, and the Buck/Mayo's clip is right-hand tip down only.
Overall, the ATR, with it's cobra-hood and finger choil and indexing holes is much more of a serious hard-use knife, a refined chopper and a stabber, whereas the Buck/Mayo with it's bead blasting, beauty holes and and rounded handles is more of a looker and a slicer. The ATR seems to be the perfect knife for someone who uses their knife alot in hard-use situations with it's thick blade, solid lock and handles and open design. It'd probably be also useful for scaring the heck out of sheeple. The Buck/Mayo, by comparison, seems like much more of an everyday, gentleman's knife, with it's thinner, higher hollow grind and beautiful handles.
edit: spelling corrections and added comments
