Round hole opener vs other shapes

[vlgd]

The spyderhole always seems to be popular in "favorite opener" polls, but do people differentiate between the round hole opener and other shapes? Would you say that Strider's oval is just as good at blade deployment?

 

[seedubs1]

My fingers are more roundish than the elongated oval of strider/medford and others of that type of shape. The circular hole just seems to feel better to my thumb and to my middle finger when flicking it open.

When the blade rotates open, the circular hole can rotate about your finger, while the ovular shape doesn't spin on my finger. The oval shape tends to grab a bit more as the blade swings. I'm not sure if the wording of that makes sense...but hopefully you get the idea of why the circular cutout feels better to me than the ovals.

 

[toker]

I like the oval hole on my Emerson CQC10 a lot more than the circular hole on my Spydercos.

 

[uxo2]

Round for the win.

The oval just not as smooth. Bryd knives.

 

[XiaolongJackson]

Other shapes don't really feel the same honestly.

 

[Slipperyfish]

It took me a while to warm up to Sperdco's look. Found them ugly. Then they started to grow on me and now I love the way they look. I duped my tie in the water with a Delica and nothing before or since is easier for me to open than any knife with a round Spyderhole.

 

[VictorLouis]

My main issue with studs is not that they're necessarily less easy to open. It's the fact that you can only cut to...or through...your intended material to the limit of the stud. For example, on a healthy 3.5" blade, you may have that stud an inch ahead of the pivot point. So you can insert the blade only 2.5" of its length before you butt-up against the stud. Any hole, Spydie or not, allows full use of the blade.