S&M Mountain Man vs Canal Street Folder Hunter Question

coaltrain

coaltrain

Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
482
I know this is a long shot to find someone who has or had both these knives, but I need to know how the pull is on both of these as well as how hard the lock is to press. I've narrowed my choices down to these two as my large hunter type folder. I have RA which affects my fingers and hands and would like to know which of these is easier to operate.

To give an example, I just received a new GEC #73 and find the pull too hard for me.

Schatt & Morgan Mountain Man w/D2

IMG_0792_zpsa994c7c8.jpg


Canal Street Folding Hunter

9193985861_080b03d268_z.jpg


I realize that both may be difficult for me to operate, but I have my mind made up to get one. I would like to choose the one that operates the easiest of the two.

Thanks for any help!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0792_zpsa994c7c8.jpg
    IMG_0792_zpsa994c7c8.jpg
    30.6 KB · Views: 14
A lockback is almost always going to have an easier pull than a slipjoint, because the lockback spring doesn't have to keep the blade open, the lock does. The pulls on GEC's #72 and #42 lockbacks is light and smooth, but the #73 slipjoints and even the linerlocks have much heavier spring action, along with half-stops, which also increase the pull rate.
 
I have both the slip joint and lockback versions of the Queen Mountain Man. Obviously, as Jeff said, the lockback is the easier.

However the slipjoint version is relatively easy to open. I don't like super strong springs on my folders and I find the slipjoint satisfactory.
 
the slipjoint version of the Mountain Man is easy to open. It is definately not a nail breaker. The lockback version is easier than the slipjoint but keep in mind, of the 3 or 4 Mountain Man lockbacks that I have owned over the years, all have had severe blade play. In my opinion Queen needs to stick to slipjoints. The Buck 110 it is not...
 
Most Mountain Man lockbacks will have a little play, the antique bone in your picture has been the exception of the last couple years. For some reason they are fairly tight for a shimmed locking bar mechanism instead of a real spring. But the disengage has been really tight on MM lockbacks lately for some reason. It will work out over time, but I would hate to recommend it to someone with RA. I stopped carrying CS a few years ago when they went thru a momentary downturn in quality; but they seem to be in fine order now - but no experience with the respective FH.
 
Thanks for your input folks - I guess I better stay away from these. I get caught up with certain handle materials that look so good to me, but I have to concentrate on knives that I can operate.

I was pretty excited to get the #73 only to find it too hard to open once again. For some reason I thought a larger knife with a lock back might be easier with these, but then of course is the fact of pressing the locking mechanism to close it.

Onward with my quest!
 
I don't think you should be discouraged; the locking Queen MM is generally a very light pull (at least one mine and the several others I've handled).
 
puukkoman said:
I don't think you should be discouraged; the locking Queen MM is generally a very light pull (at least one mine and the several others I've handled).
Click to expand...

Something that I didn't think of when looking at the Mountain Man - a couple folks said the pull isn't bad at all, but to operate the lock is tough. I have to look at that part also which I neglected to do until kinfeswapper mention this:

But the disengage has been really tight on MM lockbacks lately for some reason. It will work out over time, but I would hate to recommend it to someone with RA.
Click to expand...
 
I've never owned a folding hunter from CSC but all their other patterns have extremely light pulls especially compared to GEC and Queen.

Hopefully someone who owns both or a dealer that sells both will chime in for you.
 
Stan, you live up there in Knife Country USA, just run over to Titusville one day and pick one fresh off the tree.
 
Ahh, I missed that part (about disengaging the lock). I've never seen one with that issue, but then again I suppose I wouldn't have if it's only on the new ones.

I still wouldn't write it off as a viable option, though, especially if it's the kind of thing that "wears in" with use.

How about a Case Copperlock, or one of the Queen or S&M #1L (like this one)? These are available with and without folding guards.
20130823_000030.jpg
 
As others pointed out, the lock back takes some strength to push in. I own the Mountain Man in white bone (S&M) and can attest to that. I also have a Boker lock back that takes force to push in. Maybe the nature of lock backs.
 
Locutus D'Borg said:
As others pointed out, the lock back takes some strength to push in. I own the Mountain Man in white bone (S&M) and can attest to that. I also have a Boker lock back that takes force to push in. Maybe the nature of lock backs.
Click to expand...

I think it is an example of a maker trying to solve one problem and causing another. They get the interconnect as tight as possible to alleviate any blade movement complaints when in locked position. But in getting it tight, there is more resistance in the connection when trying to lift the lockback out of the blade slot.
 
My Queen Mountain Man with the lock is easy to open with a pleasing snap but has a fairly strong lock when closing the blade. You have to really press on it, but it is easier to press on near the rear portion. No blade play on mine. Really a nice knife by the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top