strider/ buck strider

Thanks for your posts, it's nice to read somebody who knows knives by their mechanical aspects. My PT has the defect you show on your first pic but i don't see any mark of wear on the blade or on the lock. The liner of my 881 mated perfectly the tang but is weared enough to give the blade a play.
I try to find an explanation. If you agree a wear is due to a play associated to a pressure, don't you think the important rigidity of the PT limits the damages and "saves" the knife? And i add: in normal use.
An other question please: lubricate the pivot lubricates too the mating surface of the lock, do you think it has an influence on the play and so on the wear?
I will read your reply with pleasure.

dantzk.
Click to expand...

I have owned several of the little 881 knives from Buck/Strider. Upon close examination of the locks on both the models 880 and 881 as well as an 882 that I had I discoverd that the play is not because of the way the lock mates to the blade but simply because the lock bends slightly when the blade is pushed in (spine pressure). This is really apparent on the thin locks seen on the Tarani 882 knives. Those locks are secure though. My little 881 combo edge has a very reliable lock. I've beat that knife up. In fact I beat the hell out of the one I have and tried every Cliff Stamp move on that one I could to make that lock fail and the thing took it and asked for more. The lock moved a bit farther across the tang after I was done with it but it never once defeated or gave in more than just a little bending in the middle that you an actually see if you look closely when using it. I doubt your PT lock is going to be as easy to bend being that it is .125 thick vs the .065 thick lock of the 881. You can really see the bending affect on the thinner .040 steel locks of the Tarani 882 folder. It was another one of those that you initially think is not very secure, (mostly because it just looks so flimsy) but believe me it takes a good bit of abuse. I trust the lock on the one I had. It took a lot of twisting and sideways torques with ease and although it did give and bend and allow some blade play it never defeated.

I might add this on the 881 Mini Buck/Strider knives: I've owned four of those. And all but one of them had some give to the blade when you push down on the spine of the blade into the lock. They were like this from the day I opened them new in the box. This is apparently a 'characteristic' of this knife and usually the first question asked when you go to sell them. More have a little give than not based on my observations and this carries over to the model 880 as well. Both the model 880s I owned had blades that moved ever so slightly when pressure was applied to the tang. It has been told to me by someone at Buck knives that this is by design so the lock does not stick. It does appear to allow a slight movement but it is so slight as to be within what I'd call acceptable parameters. Others disagree though.

As for oil on the tang. I've also noticed this on occasion and for some reason rather than make the lock up slippery the oil seems to make the lock stick all that much more. In some cases it made it quite painful to make the lock release. Painful to my thumb. Oil on the tang that gets to the lock face just makes it even harder to release the lock in my experience. It must be something akin to water on a suction cup sticking to a table top. That is all I can figure. Whenever I oil the pivot and it gets on the lock face I can tell you blind folded that it has affected the lock release pressure. I wipe it with the corner of my shirt or a towel and it is back to normal where it moves better with less sticking until more oil builds up on it. This is one of the reasons I prefer a grease type lube like miltec over liguid when I use it but truth be known, I rarely oil my pivots because it just makes it a lint attraction point where ever the oil residue remains.

STR
 
I don't think there is any reason to stop buying these knives or worry much. Its apparent to me that the warranty coverage is quite good on them. These guys stand behind their product. I just simply threw out my observations based on how I see it.

As to the concave lock question. I think this technique simply put, forces the pressure points to specific areas on the lock and blade tang where it can in effect create a better galling affect at those specific points that is more profound on the extreme edges of the lock rather than in the middle. Again focusing on staying away from the center line of the pivot. Looking at my Ka-Bar Dozier designed Thorn it is made in a very similar way to the BM idea where the middle of the lock is bowed in in an arc so that just the 5 mm or so on each end of the lock is what is used to contact the blade creating the classic triangle mentioned in Bob Terzuola's book. Of course this lock is much wider than a typical frame or liner lock since it is one of Bob's Dozier's "Tab Locks" where it is both the lock and the blade stop.

STR
 
STR,

Thanks for all those explanations. About the 881 i never was very at ease with this knife. It simply didn't fit my hand and you know what it is: if you don't like the knife, the knife doesn't like you! The PT is something else, since i've opened the box i carry it every day in town as in the woods. It's for me all what a folder has to be.

dantzk.
 
Oh I agree with you. I too fell hard for the little PT when it was here in my home. In fact I gave a pretty good plea for the purchase of it trying to acquire it from my friend Harry before sticking in the mail to him to return it along with the SNG and HD 7 he allowed me to handle but he wouldn't have it. Even still I made him promise me first refusal on it should he go to sell it in the future. I think it is a super little knife.

My only real issue on any of these style frame locks is that I've never been all that comfortable with knives that don't have dual liners of titanium or steel. Something about trusting all the forces of use to just G10 or in some cases Micarta by itself on one side of the knife has never sat well with me. Especially the stop pin part of the make up. I'm sure on a smaller knife like the PT that it is fine though and it may be that the G10/Micarta is strong enough to hold a stop pin just fine. I guess I don't see why a thinner .032 thickness titanium liner couldn't be used under the G10 for added support though.

STR
 
If the spring contacts the top portion of the blade bevel,
the blade will rock up and down. Ajust the play by
removing material at the top part of the front of the
spring to allow a little light to pass through there (Fig. 136)
Click to expand...

here's my translation of this passage:

"If you are unable to make the lock bar so that it evenly mates along it's entire surface, and instead hits first on the lock bar face area closest to the pivot, then whack down that area until it doesn't engage first anymore"

In other words, how do I make a questionable lock work kinda sorta.

Thanks but no thanks, on an expensive knife that is totally unaceptable.

This would be an interesting think to do: Magic market the lock faces and blade tang, use it a bit. see where it's really engaging.
 
Now you have it Dave. This goes back to what I said eariler. Its called "cheating the lock up" by many folder makers and even considered standard procedure by many as well. Cheating isn't the right word though. It isn't cheating because I think all are made this way to some extent. It is just the gap that bothers me. The degree of difference at the interface is massive on these two knives pictured compared to anything else I've seen.

When I build a liner or frame lock these days I always cut the lock last after the blade is made, and the angle for the contact area where the blade and lock mate up is mapped out, and the stop pin or one piece spacer bar/blade stop as I do in many of my folders is already in place and mounted in its final position. Then as the last step in the make up of the folder lock up I cut the lock along the line drawn or scribed exactly as the blade outline dictates. If there is blade rock after I make it then I take off some of the lock on one end only which I guess is what most would call the top.

In the end the lock usually lines up just as it should with a nice even contact or mating of both the lock and the blade with as much lock as possible contacting the blade while still allowing no blade play or rocking. It isn't full proof of course but its the way I was taught to do it. Many other makers do the stop pin last. Still others feel that a sticking lock that is painful to move when you close the knife is unacceptable so no matter how good it is if the lock sticks to cause a pinch of pain on the finger or thumb they polish it down until it moves just free but still locks within acceptable parameters. Lots of guys use the pencil trick by coating the blade contact area with lead.

We've discussed those earlier in the Buck/Strider 880 and 881 because many of those have a slight give in them from the factory. If they didn't the lock would stick bad in most situations. It has been discussed before on other forums as well that more complaints are heard about sticking locks that cause pain than ones with slight give so many companies and makers go with the lesser of the two evils. There are two schools of thought there and it just varies on who you talk to.

Now lets say that in the event that you didn't do something right the way I do mine and you accidentally cut the lock short by cutting on the wrong side of the line you scribed. You are now stuck with a blade that wobbles when open. AKA know as vertical blade play. What do you do?

You are stuck with the dilema of either recutting the lock out (a major part of the making of a folder of this type since it means redrilling all the holes and rethreading them also as well as the pocket clip mounting) or you can remake the stop pin to a bigger diameter or in the case of this pic of one I did, make your one piece spacer bar/blade stop all over again only longer when you redo it. Or you can try to adjust the play out of the lock up by using the punch method I described earlier if the lock is pretty close but no cigar. (so to speak). If the lock up is real bad this method won't work though. Like the .018 gap on that Strider pictured in my first post. That is way too big a space to repair this way. As a final choice you can just leave well enough alone if it is very close and have a knife that will always have just a tad of blade play in it from spine pressure. Surprisingly this is done quite a bit and not just by production companies. As I said earlier every knife I've had in my shop made by Bob Terzuola (5 in less than two years) has been similar to the Buck/Strider 880 and 881 knives where the blades had obvious movement when locked open. From what I've gathered by the owners of these knives they had been this way since new. Some are worse than others though. At any rate it doesn't mean all of Bob's are this way or that all of Buck's are either. I typically won't get to see the good ones in my shop when sent in for lock work since they only come to me when they need work usually.

If you choose the stop pin change method now the blade contacts the stop sooner; as the angle of the lock up has been changed by the longer or bigger diameter stop and what happens is that the blade will appear solid in its lock up because it hits the stop sooner than it did before and the top part of the lock goes into the blade locking it up tight leaving the degree of interface greater now than it was before the blade stop was changed. What that means is that the rest of the lock beneath that portion that contacts the blade is not contacting anything and for the most part on a liner lock it is concealed conveiently inside the folder where it can't be seen. Its very hard to cover up something like this in a frame lock though which is why it stood out to me on the ones I've seen and shown in pictures here in this thread. Again that big gap or the degree difference at the interface is what stands out to my eyes anyway. Tolerances are so high these days that it is surpising to me to see gaps like that.

There is no wonder that so much controversy surrounds these style of locks because even the makers of them have different ideas of what is right and proper and what is not.

STR
 
BadKarma05 said:
can anyone tell me the difference in quality or features between the strider and the "Buck" Strider? i never see them in any of the stores around here and i hear a lot of talk about them. just a little curious....ty in advance!:)
Click to expand...

I've got an 889 that I smoothed the scaled down with a dremel. It is a bit too wide, blade spine to handle back, for me to EDC (slacks). But I'd carry it when I help my friend remodel his house, etc. It works well with jeans, think HD/good beater EDC. Mine locks up nicely and doesn't fold with a spine-whack. I asked one of the Buck guys when they first came out if the Strider warranty applied. He said if it has the Strider logo, it carries the Strider warranty. I like it.



EDIT: Inspired by jefff in this link, thanks jefff. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=361260&highlight=SBMF
 
ROM831 said:
He said if it has the Strider logo, it carries the Strider warranty. I like it.]
Click to expand...
so, if I break it in any way, can I send it to repair right to Strider? Too good to be true…
 
Rom831, what a great idea!
Id never thought of smoothing down the scales, Ive mounted a green glowring vial in the non-clip side of my knife, but I think I'll have to invest in ANOTHER 889 to have a go at sanding-down the grips!
Thanks for the inspiration!
 
That does look great. I had one of those knives for a time and sanded mine down also but not as much. New those things are hell on pockets. Super abrasive from the factory is the way I'd describe them.

STR
 
I cannot take credit for the scales. Someone posted a whole thread about modifying his own back around Sept. of last year, close to when they came out. He made pronounced ridges and even Strider striped it, clip and all. It looked real nice, his is what inspired me to get one and then later start grinding.

Ah-ha found it, it's jefff's fault. :D

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=361260&highlight=SBMF

The scales themselves feel MUCH better without the aggressive grip on them, it thins the knife out nicely also.


Lenny, I think you still would have to go through Buck for service.
 
Jefff made a great job of that, didnt he? I just gotta order another one now to modify. The Stripes look superb.
Thanks for the info on your knife, & Jefffs original posting, ROM831.
 
Sorry for the late post, but I just got my SMF yesterday.

I got my SMF from Plaza Cutlery, and I looked at all of the SMFs they had in stock (3 green and 2 or 3 black). They all had locks like in STR's pics on the first page. Between this and Strider's explaination from the FAQ, I personally believe this is part of the design and not just horrible QC.

I know many of the people debating in this thread know far more about knives than I do, but I have some questions.

If the way Strider made their locks is a problem, then why are there no stories (that I know of) of their locks being probamatic? Why do the Buck Strider models (which have locks that STR deems acceptable) have so many reported lock problems?

It seems to me that there are different ways to make a liner or frame lock. Chris Reeve does it one way, and Strider does it another. Some strive for as much lock/tang contact as possible (CRK). Some want only the portion of the lock furthest from the pivot to contact the tang (Strider) and some believe that it is best to start with the lock moving across the tang as little as possible while still maintaining a secure lock so it leaves more room for wear (seen this on Emersons).

In my experience, they all have merit and they all work when done right. My Sebenza and my SMF both lock up better than any other knives I own (with my Skirmish in 3rd), both have no blade blade, and both pass a VERY hard spine wack.

I am sure one way is better than the other, but from all real life accounts, the difference seems to be very slight. Some CRK-theory knives get play, and some Strider-theory knives get play. However, the Sebenza and the SMF are both very respected knives that are surely used hard by many knife knuts, and I have heard no real life accounts of either lock getting problems.

Theory is nice, but I go by results. And judging from all of the lock problems with Buck Striders and the lack of problems with real Striders, I trust my SMF more than a Buck Strider no matter who has what theory about why my SMF should be this or that.

No offense STR. I respect you a whole lot. I just think you follow one way of doing things while some other knifemakers (who are just as deserving of respect as you are and certainly more renowned) have another way of doing things. There are also many knifemakers that agree with you. It would seem that both methods can get the same goal: a good lockup that will last a long time. It would also seem that both methods can fail. I propose it is more important how well the lock is done than what school the maker follows. As different as their locks may be, I would consider Sebenzas and SMFs to be trustworthy. The lock on a Buck Strider may be more like the lock on a Sebenza in theory, but I would consider it to be less trustworthy than an SMF.

No offense to Buck or their Strider line either. I am actually a big Buck fan and want to purchase a Buck Strider sometime soon. Just going by ancedotal evidence instead of theory, Strider has few if any real lock problems, and Buck/Striders have very many. Ancedotal evidense isn't proof nor the end-all, be-all of a discussion, but I think it is worth more than theory.
 
Hair said:
If the way Strider made their locks is a problem, then why are there no stories (that I know of) of their locks being probamatic?
Click to expand...

In general people use production blades more than expensive customs, there are many more of them on the market and they are more likely to be publically critized if there is a problem, these factors all combine for a massive distortion effect.

-Cliff
 
Very interesting thread.

I recently bought a Stirder SnG and the way the lock bar contacts the blade is like the pic that STR showed early in the thread. It actually caught my eye when I was first looking over the knife. Even after reading over this whole thread I can't say as though I know which way is the best for a frame lock. I have to think that Strider does this by design though. It is just too much off for it to be a QC issue. Also if it were a QC issue you would expect to find some that were off in other ways too; I would think at least.

Does anyone have or has anyone seen an SnG or SmF that has the lock spring fully engage the blade, ala CRK Sebenza?

Also I have to wonder the same thing as HoB. If the fully engaged way is better, why have I heard of several instances of bad locks on the Buck/Striders, but never on the actual Striders? Then again I don't ever recall hearing about a bad lock on a Sebenza. This is another set of things that makes me think that Striider is making there locks as they are designed. No offence to Buck, but I would expect more lock problems to be found on Buck knives than on either Striders or CRK's. Due in part to the volume differential of knives coming out of the respective companies, and due also to the price differential in said knives.

Bottom line though is that I am confident in the lock on my SnG, and there is no play in the blade whatsoever. Should it ever develope any or should I ever loose confidence in it for some other reason, it sounds as though Strider has no problems with fixing it up. Thats good enough for me.
 
I have spoken to many folks about this since these posts came up. I even got some contacts recently about it even though this thread has been dead for a while. Some of these guys are mechanical engineers with years of experience, others are just out of school or still in school. Others, like Ernie Emerson are not only mechanical engineers with years of experience there but knife makers with years of experience in that as well.

In the end it is apparent that there is more than one school of thought on how to do this type of folder. To try to be brief, I've had numerous contacts with Ernie over this to try to understand what is going on. He is such a gentleman and I really appreciate his valuable time spent with me over these concerns. Everything that was talked about here was shared with Ernie recently and after numerous contacts I'll go ahead now and add this.

First: I've also had several other knife makers of less repute contact me with their ideas, of 'old school vs new school, old technology vs new technology" theories as to why there is a split in the makers of these style knives. In the end I have learned a lot, particularly from Ernie who learned from the likes of Michael Walker himself. (the inventer of this type of lock)

Emerson and Strider knives, have a bigger gap at the lock interface than some other models out there so it stands out more to some. I have studied many frame locks since the advent of this thread and I have found the CUDA Max by Camillus to have similar lock up to the Striders while CRKT, Kershaw and Gerber as well as BUCK knives seem to have more contact area and on many the locks appear to be fully contacting the blade at the interface. When broken down and held up to a window to check for light shine through there are major differences seen in how these locks mate up. Consistancy is not even really seen in them regardless of maker even when you see two of the same model. Some that appear to have full contact have contact in the middle only. Others on the top or on the bottom only. Still others have full contact. The lock mating at the interfaces of these style of locks vary as much as finger prints. It is one of the stand out points of concern for many testers on these type of locks and it is my opinion that this inconsistancy is one of the reasons there is so much variance in results and defeats of the locks from knife to knife.


Here is a brief summary of what I've gathered from my friend Ernie.
From Ernie who I know the best of everyone I spoke with, I gather that there is supposed to be a gap at the lock interface. How many degrees of gap is what varies from maker to maker. According to Ernie Emerson, the degree of gap doesn't matter. What matters is whether the blade rocks or not when the lock is engaged. Some like myself have been taught to make the whole lock contact the blade first and to shoot for that when building the knife and then check for blade rock. If any is evident you take some material off the lock until the blade rocking goes away but only enough to remove the rocking and it leaves you as much material as possible contacting the blade at the interface. Many times no material is needing removed and the lock up is solid and nearly full contact looking to the naked eye.

Makers like Strider and Emerson simply don't see the need to pay as much attention to the degree of gap evident to the naked eye but simply focus on the contact area only so there is no rocking of the blade when its opened. Since that is the most important factor the minor issue of gap is of little or no concern to them. This explains some of the inconsistancy I noted and why some have less gap than others while others have more surface area of contact at the lock interface. They look for blade rock. Not contact area or gap differences.

According to Ernie Chris Reeve does make his the same way as the knives pictured. He told me that Chris is a friend of his and that he does make them just as he does. I have not heard back from CR but I have studied his knives and they have far less gap at the lock interface so it looks like 100% to me but Ernie says it is not. So far I have not found this to pan out. The ones I've seen have what appears to me to be full contact with much more metal on metal contact at the lock interface than any comparable Strider or Emerson, or CUDA, STING, or pretty much anything else I've compared it to.

This method like seen in my pics of the Emerson and Strider knives is the same taught by Terzuola in his book on how to make a tactical folder. According to the diagrams in this book and contrary to my original thoughts when I first noticed this lock up and more specifically the huge gap at the interface, this is not believed to be a faulty lock up by the makers so I'll eat my foot on that part of it. According to the makers they are made that way on purpose. This is the method used by Ernie, Strider, Walker, Mel Pardue, Charlie Morris, Bob Terzuola and many other custom makers and apparently some of the production companies as well.

So in the end you can focus more on if the blade rocks or not and if so that would be the one considered faulty and the knife to sway away from according to this information.

Contrary to what I've been told I'm still not sure what I believe to be better. In my own mind further testing needs to be carried out to determine if more contact is better than less or vicea versa or if there is little need to be concerned with either method so long as the blade is solidly locked up without blade rock, strong and reliable.

I still tend to believe that severe sudden shock and blunt forces applied to a small surface area will cause more damage than the same forces applied to a larger surface area but in the end all that really matters is this: If the guys making the knives stand behind the way they make them regardless of the method, have at it and use the shit out of them! All the questions are of little concern if they are covered.

STR
 
Cliff Stamp said:
In general people use production blades more than expensive customs, there are many more of them on the market and they are more likely to be publically critized if there is a problem, these factors all combine for a massive distortion effect.

-Cliff
Click to expand...

I've got bad news for you Cliff. You are retarded.
 
Thank you STR, that was yet another very informative post from you and though I would expect no less from you, it is nice to see a forum-member admit that they have found new information contrary to their original stance.

I agree with you that the locks with more contact front to back (and to a lesser extent, side to side) such as the Sebenza appear to be stronger (and I believe them to be stronger). I also believe that method results in more even wear and a longer life. But I am glad that the lock on my SMF is the way it is supposed to be. And based on Strider's reputation, but I don't think my SMF will present lock problems through wear anytime soon. Luckily, I live in the same county as Strider Knives, so warrenty work is a 10 minute drive away.

Cliff- I don't think you are retarded, but I disagree. Striders are definitly users- many people use them hard and buy them to use them hard. Of course real Striders are less common than Buck Striders, but I would expect some talk of Strider lock failure if it really were an issue- yes the reports would be more rare than with the far more common Bucks, but they would be out there. When people buy a 400-500 dollar knife as a hard-use user, I don't think they would hold back any bad luck stories with the lock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top