Chronovore
Gold Member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
- Messages
- 12,738
So I finally got a Bodacious. There are things to like here but also things I don't. Some of that is pure preference, such as wishing it was on bearings or wishing it had a wire clip instead of this kind of shallow-carry clip. My wish for bearings isn't just because I like slicker action but that in closing it, it sometimes doesn't get all the way home and needs an extra step. It tends to hang up very close to home. That's better than the nub-bump on some other compression lock models but that robs some of the advantage gained in avoiding that problem. I'm also not a fan of the hump in the scale but I feel the same way about lots of models, wherein the "skinny scale" mod to more neutral ergonomics is definitely in my future.
I feel like the Bodacious deserved a little more ergonomic love from the factory. The outer scale edges aren't exactly crisp but they don't feel good. I'll take the time to round them myself but why not do it that way from the factory? Does anyone like the blocky feel? Even if they do, the inner scale edges are very crisp. They are crisp enough to scrape off skin if I rub them across my arm. Not that you'd do that on purpose but I feel that crispness in hand and it isn't good. Where that kind of crispness would be good would be up against a back spacer but that's another issue.
The back spacer isn't flush with the scales. It sits just below the scales. It's a curious choice that I don't understand. Why do that? Aside from looking or feeling weird, it allows that crisp inner scale edge to form an anti-ergonomic ridge along the sides of the back spacer. That said, a steel back spacer feels out of place on a $236 knife in 2026. Yeah, I get that it's an American-made folder but I've long become accustomed to titanium back spacers on much less expensive knives. (Heck, I've become accustomed to well-made titanium frame locks at half this price.) If material cost was the issue, why not just do a G-10 back spacer? It would match the scales and do the job without adding the weight.
Some other ergonomic criticisms include the crisp spine edges, hole edges, and jimping. The former is easily written off as pure preference because some people like a good scraping or striking edge. The hole though... I get the idea of catching traction on gloves but this is a big hole. Would it have been ineffective with a slight chamfer? (I'll find out when I chamfer it myself.) Here, the problem is exacerbated for me by the geometry of the knife. Unlike some other hole or thumb stud knives, the spacing and travel here prolong thumb contact with the hole. As it leaves the detent, my thumb is still pushing for long enough to turn the hole edge against my thumb before achieving escape velocity. That's not comfortable. Using another method, at least with my hands, finger-flicking leads to nail-shaving.
So what about the jimping? I find that sharper jimping can be good if it is finer jimping. This jimping is broader, reducing traction and increasing the negative effects of its sharpness, especially at its corners. Another question is if such aggressive jimping was needed, why does it cover such a small and early section of the spine?
Yeah, I've only had it for a few days and only took this one picture, but I thought I'd share.
I feel like the Bodacious deserved a little more ergonomic love from the factory. The outer scale edges aren't exactly crisp but they don't feel good. I'll take the time to round them myself but why not do it that way from the factory? Does anyone like the blocky feel? Even if they do, the inner scale edges are very crisp. They are crisp enough to scrape off skin if I rub them across my arm. Not that you'd do that on purpose but I feel that crispness in hand and it isn't good. Where that kind of crispness would be good would be up against a back spacer but that's another issue.
The back spacer isn't flush with the scales. It sits just below the scales. It's a curious choice that I don't understand. Why do that? Aside from looking or feeling weird, it allows that crisp inner scale edge to form an anti-ergonomic ridge along the sides of the back spacer. That said, a steel back spacer feels out of place on a $236 knife in 2026. Yeah, I get that it's an American-made folder but I've long become accustomed to titanium back spacers on much less expensive knives. (Heck, I've become accustomed to well-made titanium frame locks at half this price.) If material cost was the issue, why not just do a G-10 back spacer? It would match the scales and do the job without adding the weight.
Some other ergonomic criticisms include the crisp spine edges, hole edges, and jimping. The former is easily written off as pure preference because some people like a good scraping or striking edge. The hole though... I get the idea of catching traction on gloves but this is a big hole. Would it have been ineffective with a slight chamfer? (I'll find out when I chamfer it myself.) Here, the problem is exacerbated for me by the geometry of the knife. Unlike some other hole or thumb stud knives, the spacing and travel here prolong thumb contact with the hole. As it leaves the detent, my thumb is still pushing for long enough to turn the hole edge against my thumb before achieving escape velocity. That's not comfortable. Using another method, at least with my hands, finger-flicking leads to nail-shaving.
So what about the jimping? I find that sharper jimping can be good if it is finer jimping. This jimping is broader, reducing traction and increasing the negative effects of its sharpness, especially at its corners. Another question is if such aggressive jimping was needed, why does it cover such a small and early section of the spine?
Yeah, I've only had it for a few days and only took this one picture, but I thought I'd share.
