spyderco military lock test

Stupid test.
What is it for? What actual situation does it immitate? Like, you want to make sure that the knife is good for you to safely stab somebody?
Why would you care? I have heard that stabbing is out of fashion with modern knife combat experts anyway... It is not particularly advisable a move for a number of reasons.
I always wander what people were doing with the knife when they tell stories about knife folding cutting fingers. I suspect that it could happen mostly if they were doing that test or if they were stabbing a tree for some strange reason...
Does it make sense to discuss what moved where and so on? Does it has any relevance to the ways you normaly use the knife? Why could that be imprortant?
 
Please link to videos when you decide to test the airbags on your car, your steel toe boots, any safety glasses you own, etc.
I've always felt watching others maim themselves and /or destroy their own property to be quite entertaining.
 
If you don't really need a knife that actually locks open, liner-locks are fine. If you need/want a lock that will dependably work, just about anything else is a better option.
People will tell you that thicker liner-locks and a liner-lock made by a reputable company are as reliable and tough as anything else. That's just not the reality, no matter how bad people'd like to believe it.
Sure, there's times when they'll hold up fine. But they are unpredictable and unreliable at a level far higher than other locks.
Lots of people have no need for thier knife to actually "lock" open. To them, spine-whacking is stupid, as is most anything but using a knife purely for cutting. That's okay, and I respect that. Personally speaking, I want my knife to stay open no matter what I choose to do with it.

Addition:
On a side note, I think that if this thread was about a knife from a different company, the conversation would be slightly different. And if it was a different type of lock, it would be more news worthy. In general, a liner-lock failing a spine test is pretty old news.
 
Last edited:
Regardless of what some say, i had a Kershaw Ti Bump that would come unlocked if you looked at it wrong and IMO was dangerous. The spine tap test does not have much value, but rarely as in my case, it proved an unsafe lock with the LIGHTEST of taps.
 
The funny thing is that if you read bladeforums enough, you might find some people saying that spine whack is stupid, but same people would later complain about cutout being too deep on frame lock or liner being too thin on a liner lock. This I never could understand. I think movement at the lock is somewhat a valid concern. Lockbar slipping from the blade tang is a lot more common and requires a lot less force than one to deform the liner or frame at the cutout. I have no clue under what circumstances would spine whack or pressure applied at the spine would be valid concern, but I do check my knives from time to time. I usually don't whack them, but apply steady pressure at the spine to see if lockbar would move and slip from the tang. Again, in all honesty I don't really know why would it really matter, but it does give me some peace of mind (and just a satisfaction) if lock holds. Blade tang angles on some folders do scare me a bit. I keep wondering what's the point of making super thick frame and doing a tang angle that would contribute to the lock failure. I don't really bother too much with the lock strength, but knowing that lock on my folder is fool-proof is a good thing.
 
bluntruth on the tube uses a spydie military to show you how to even baton by unlocking the knife 90 degrees
 
I recently read an article on one Russian knife forum about testing of four knives: Spyderco Military s30v, BM Dejavoo, Cold Steel American Lawman, and BM Ritter Griptilian. http://knifelife.ru/articles_mildej.htm
the tests involved (in the sequence performed): food cutting (kitchen chores), 1" rope cutting, paper slicing, wood cutting, stabbing a phonebook, testing lock clogged with syrup and sand mix functioning, nail shaving, and finally spine whacking.
In the spine-whack test the liner on Spyderco Military also moved a bit to the disengagement side but never failed. they hit each knife around 15 on a wooden bench quite vigorously. dents left on the wood after the blows are seen in the pic below.
30.JPG

as a side-note, of the four knives only BM Dejavoo failed the spine whacking test twice, while the other three passed it successfully.
 
Last edited:
nimbusdeluxe said:
I understand that spine whack test is a controversial way to test lock integrity. But I have performed in on my spyderco military and i realized that the locking liner shifts slightly over to the left (the disengaging direction) after a whack, it does not fully disengage, but my main concern right now is, is this normal for the liner lock on the military? and also, by doing this test have i damaged or compromised the integrity of the lock? Would performing this test actually have made the lock weaker than it was in the first place?
Click to expand...

To your last 3 questions, yes it will happen with any liner or frame lock, yes, and yes.

Next time just don't do it and you won't risk breaking things. It is a useless test.
 
I understand that spine whack test is a controversial way to test lock integrity. But I have performed in on my spyderco military and i realized that the locking liner shifts slightly over to the left (the disengaging direction) after a whack, it does not fully disengage, but my main concern right now is, is this normal for the liner lock on the military...

'Normal' is relative. Has the lock been broken in? Does it have lube on the lock face?

...and also, by doing this test have i damaged or compromised the integrity of the lock? Would performing this test actually have made the lock weaker than it was in the first place?

Quite possibly. Spine whacks are an abuse that no folder lock will normally be subject to. A better test is a static load placed on the blade spine, IMO.

In general, if you manage to defeat a liner lock through normal use, you aren't using the knife correctly, or it is a cheap POS.
 
I am surprised why people always blame the test instead of the lock for failing.

A static load is not a good replacement for the spine-whack. The spine-whack doesnt depend on strenght if done correctly, it doesn't test how strong the lock is, it tests the integrity of the lock.

For people who don't want a lock on a knife to do what it should - lock the blade in position - this may indeed be a stupid test. Yet, there's tons of knives that pass this "stupid" test without any trouble. But when a knife doesn't pass it, the test is at fault. The logic behind that escapes me.
 
richardallen said:
I am surprised why people always blame the test instead of the lock for failing.

A static load is not a good replacement for the spine-whack. The spine-whack doesnt depend on strenght if done correctly, it doesn't test how strong the lock is, it tests the integrity of the lock.

For people who don't want a lock on a knife to do what it should - lock the blade in position - this may indeed be a stupid test. Yet, there's tons of knives that pass this "stupid" test without any trouble. But when a knife doesn't pass it, the test is at fault. The logic behind that escapes me.
Click to expand...

This is the best written post about the spine whack that I've ever read. :thumbup:
 
I spine-tap all my users that I carry. I say spine-tap as opposed to spine-whack because I only use the force generated by quickly whipping my wrist in a snapping motion while keeping the shoulder and elbow stationary.

I DO NOT raise my hand above my head and slam the back of my blade down. That might very well be an even better test of lock integrity/strength, but its an unrealistic test of what my knife will be exposed to. Not to mention it is likely to damage/weaken the lock in some way.

The only knife I've ever had fail on me while in use was an Emerson Commander (liner lock) that I was fortunate enough to not get hurt when it happened, though it was close. This happened before I started testing my locks a few years back and this same knife that I still own is the only folder that fails the spine-tap test for me.
 
the test is at fault? I think what everyone is saying is that any test that doesn't replicate normal or even obscure, random tasks you may use the knife for is irrelevent.

i'm not understanding why this test matters. Is there a standard test in the industry for this, and if so what is the threshold for design and such? along with that is the difference in pressure/technique/what everyone is using to tap against....

Besides the mental aspect of losing trust in the knife, has anyone that had a knife do this actually had the same knife fail while using it?
 
richardallen said:
I am surprised why people always blame the test instead of the lock for failing.

A static load is not a good replacement for the spine-whack. The spine-whack doesnt depend on strenght if done correctly, it doesn't test how strong the lock is, it tests the integrity of the lock.

For people who don't want a lock on a knife to do what it should - lock the blade in position - this may indeed be a stupid test. Yet, there's tons of knives that pass this "stupid" test without any trouble. But when a knife doesn't pass it, the test is at fault. The logic behind that escapes me.
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

My Sanrenmu 723, 710, 763, Enlan EL02 and EL01 all pass. Also my old CRKT Point Guard AUS6.

I am happy with how it turned out.
 
For the test to be valid to me it has to be something you would come across in normal use of a knife. In what situation would you bang the spine of the knife towards yourself?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top