Spyderco Manix

[Cliff Stamp]

I gave this to my brother and he fell in love with it, no comparison to the Military and Paramilitary for heavy cutting. The Manix's much bigger and thicker grip just locks in the hand and is ideal for that work. It is the best folder he has seen for heavy cutting and my perspective follow's his exactly. Ref :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/manix.html

I did some heavy twisting, same as I did with the Chinook, and again it was rock solid. The only concern would be overloading the tip as the blade has a fine point, so laterally breaking it would not be difficult with just wrist strain in hard woods.

This one is going out to for some user trials, I'll update the thread in a few months once I hear back on it.

-Cliff

 

[knifetester]

Cliff,
I think this is one of your best reviews to date. I like the slight format changes you have made. Your reviews are becoming more image intensive, which I think is excellent, it makes the revies more interesting, illustrates what you are doing better, and makes the more focused. As well, you are presenting more of the field and practical work you do. While you may have done as much before, it is relaly highlited more in the recent reviews.

One thing I would like to see is a standard reference knife being used through the tests, like Joe Talamdge uses the Spyderco Endura as a baseline.


What I really wanted to see was how the Manix compares to the BM710HS, which I see as the other premier hard use (relative to fodlers) folder on the market.

I think the sheer mass of the Manix makes it a heavier duty knife, and given Spydercp's penchant for high performance grinds, I think it would probably be as efficient a cutter, if not more so than the 710. That would be especially so out of the box, given the disparity in the usual edges that each company is known for applying.

On the other hand, the 710 fits my hand perfectly and has very good edge holding. I am also a huge AXIS lock fan.

I am leary of S30V blades given the number of failures being reported, but Spyderco does have good quality control and customer service. As with any tool, it is important to test and use it enough to gain confidence in it before relying on it in the field.

Again nice work.

 

[SpEcTeR]

Those reviews are interesting but I agree. Without a standard benchmark or test that ALL knives undergo, its kinda hard to gauge all the knife bashing and basic attempts at destroying the knives.

I like the reviews but can't gauge completely what is really going on. Pictures are great too!

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I would like to see is a standard reference knife being used through the tests ...

I had this in the early reviews, it was interestingly enough the most common complaint about them. I used to reference the SHBM heavily (many of the early reviews were on larger knives).

It was argued that this meant I was biased as I was constantly promoting it. This ignored the fact that it rarely if ever came off as directly superior in the comparisons. I was trying to provide a focus point for reference was all.

I didn't stop doing it because of the complaints but because I ended up customizing the SHBM so heavily as it skewed the perspectice, you can see this effect in the Project review which compared a NIB Project to a well used Basic, that is problematic.

I am assembling a set of benchmarks of a type now, I am thinking of :

-opinel (pure cutting)
-calpso jr. (modern one handed precision cutter)
-voyager (medium duty)
-710HSS (high end medium/heavy duty)
-fulcrum IID (heavy / extreme use)

-mora 2000 (precision cutter / bushcraft)
-howling rat (very solid while still cutting well)
-bushman (general bush craft / small machete)
-RD7 (heavy utility / tactical)
-battle rat (small machete, axe class chopper)

-GB Wildlife (woodcraft hatchet)
-wettering SFA (felling capable)
-tramontina bolo (heavy machete / chopper)

Obvously there are a lot of possible substitutions; Deerhunter for Mora, Barteaux for Tramontina.I would like to smear the benchmarks out over a broad maker base. Spyderco could easily fill the first chunk themselves and Swamp Rat the second and GB the third. There are few customs because I would prefer the benchmarks to be easily available and fairly inexpensive.

Ideally then I'll do some work and compare the blade to those in the above at their niches and close to it, and give a ranking based on the stock work and just EDC use in comparison. Long term I'd compile this into a easily viewable matrix which would give a lot of info at a glance and allow a quick X vs Y overview.

I am also going to start putting the knives up for pass arounds after I do the stock work but before they go into extensive EDC use. This will then be another section of the review. Not only will this add grealty to the depth of persepctive, showing the influence of various user points of view, skill levels and strength, but it will also point out to me areas to look at in detail.

I like the reviews but can't gauge completely what is really going on.

Yeah, they need to be more standardized in some sections. Looking back on some of the knives I am hard pressed to rank them against recent ones because I simply didn't do the work in enough control.

-Cliff

 

[knifetester]

Ideally then I'll do some work and compare the blade to those in the above at their niches and close to it, and give a ranking based on the stock work and just EDC use in comparison. Long term I'd compile this into a easily viewable matrix which would give a lot of info at a glance and allow a quick X vs Y overview.

That is exactly what I was thinking about, I think it would really increase the quality of the review.

As well, consider assigning the benchmark a rank (like 10) and use a fractional rank ( like 7.5/10) instead of the bounded percentile ranking (75% +/- 4) you are using now. Yes, the bounded percentile actually acounts for varience and is thus a more accurate measure, however I think it is confusing for many people, and seems to draw a lot of flak.

I would also consider adding a SAK in there somewhere, becuase just about everyone is familiar with SAK performance, so it is a really meaningful comparative benchmark.

 

[blade14]

Cliff,
Is there a particular sharpener you recommend for the Manix and other S30V blades. I've had my Manix for about 5 months now and it's still my EDC knife. I've yet to find production knives with better quality than Mr Glesser's.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Is there a particular sharpener you recommend for the Manix and other S30V blades.

I would not recommend something in particular for that steel except for major sharpening I really like the x-coarse green SiC waterstones. This is only necessary periodically as you reset the primary edge bevel, I do it more often than necessary just to give a fresh edge for comparisons, but for EDC carry it isn't really needed that frequently. I usually shapen by hand finishing on a very soft natural chinese waterstone.

As well, consider assigning the benchmark a rank (like 10) and use a fractional rank ( like 7.5/10) instead of the bounded percentile ranking (75% +/- 4) you are using now.

Some of the reviews had this as well as simple bar charts and similar. I realize that the bounds are going over the head of a lot of people but they are fundamental to meaningful results. Too often you see people making mistakes, concluding things from data that would be very different if variance estimates were used.

This is also why you just can't look at the review but how the makers respond to it. This is why I send makers links to the reviews and discuss it with them to get their perspective and will redo the work if they feel I got a bad sample, or the knife was in some way not representative of the product.

This is pretty rare though for high end pieces as it just represents QC, but for the low end stuff it happens on a semi-regular basis as there is a lot of variance from one knife to another. I try to make note of this in the reviews, for example I got a solid Vapor lockup, but the consistency has problems as reported on the forums.

My early reviews had piles of links to other reviews in them for this reason, but the links kept breaking so I removed them. It is one of the reasons why I think the thread links like these are essential. They provide a feedback mechanism for both support and contention.

I would also consider adding a SAK in there somewhere, becuase just about everyone is familiar with SAK performance, so it is a really meaningful comparative benchmark.

Yes, there should also be mention of saws in particular, plus other wood working tools, draw knife, splitter, etc. .

-Cliff

 

[epoluo]

i trust backlock