- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Thoughts? They're about the same size, style and price.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
Strider RCC versus ZT300
- Thread starter Artfully Martial
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2003
- Messages
- 726
How do you figure that they're the same size? From the stats, it seems like the 0300 is much bigger. In addition, it's a framelock and assisted opening. I think that it's a little strange to compare these two. The RCC has a 3.5" blade, which in my experience, is a medium sized knife. The 0300 I handled felt more like a Skirmish, AKA, a big knife. YMMV.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Supposedly the stats are wrong on the 0300, according to an owner's review I read a awhile back. Apparently the blade is much shorter. But, that said, I haven't played with it in real life....so who knows.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
The 300 is usually compared to the RC, not the RCC. And it drives me nuts when people comapre SnG's and Manix's. Should be an SMF. Maybe it's the fact that Striders seem to "act" bigger. You find yourself OK with a smaller but sturdier knife.
Anyway, the ZT300 is considered the "poor man's RC". Had a 300, wasn't for me. I now happen to be waiting for the arrival of an RC tomorrow. Maybe I just like the warranty. (Oh and the 4 way clip holes on the ZT300 are HIDEOUS).
On an interesting note, the advantages of the crazy tang radius cut for the framelock that Strider uses and is often critiqued for became apparent when using the ZT300.
The 300 had a "normal" tang angle, meaning a very large radius (almost flat surface, but at a slight angle). Striders start normally, then about halfway across the tang, the radius decreases drastically. This can contribute to minor slipping before engagement once the knife is worn and in need of bigger blade stops to re-adjust the lock. Most people complain about this. However, when chopping wood for a campfire this past summer with the 300, the impacts pressed the blade "more open" and the lock quickly overengaged, nearly touching the G10. It was then a pain to unlock, and the lock now travelled further during normal use than before. Chopping had singlehandedly put years of use on that lock because of it's design.
Which made me realize...the steep angle at the end of a Strider tang (aka much smaller radius) prevents this from happening. The lockbar momentarily tries to push itself further, but the impossible angle change to overcome keeps it in the middle of the tang. Results in a knife that chops securely without any short term effects. The only downside is that eventually, once the lock tries to wear past the halfway point, the lockbar will slip ever so slightly back to the middle of the tang before digging in. So perhaps the more stable lock for hard use comes at the expense of needing it adjusted more often to keep it in the sweet spot. But once a "normal" knife passes the halfway point of engagement, most people send them in anyway.
Anyway, the ZT300 is considered the "poor man's RC". Had a 300, wasn't for me. I now happen to be waiting for the arrival of an RC tomorrow. Maybe I just like the warranty. (Oh and the 4 way clip holes on the ZT300 are HIDEOUS).
On an interesting note, the advantages of the crazy tang radius cut for the framelock that Strider uses and is often critiqued for became apparent when using the ZT300.
The 300 had a "normal" tang angle, meaning a very large radius (almost flat surface, but at a slight angle). Striders start normally, then about halfway across the tang, the radius decreases drastically. This can contribute to minor slipping before engagement once the knife is worn and in need of bigger blade stops to re-adjust the lock. Most people complain about this. However, when chopping wood for a campfire this past summer with the 300, the impacts pressed the blade "more open" and the lock quickly overengaged, nearly touching the G10. It was then a pain to unlock, and the lock now travelled further during normal use than before. Chopping had singlehandedly put years of use on that lock because of it's design.
Which made me realize...the steep angle at the end of a Strider tang (aka much smaller radius) prevents this from happening. The lockbar momentarily tries to push itself further, but the impossible angle change to overcome keeps it in the middle of the tang. Results in a knife that chops securely without any short term effects. The only downside is that eventually, once the lock tries to wear past the halfway point, the lockbar will slip ever so slightly back to the middle of the tang before digging in. So perhaps the more stable lock for hard use comes at the expense of needing it adjusted more often to keep it in the sweet spot. But once a "normal" knife passes the halfway point of engagement, most people send them in anyway.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Very interesting results on those liner lock variations. A bit disappointing on the zt300 though. The RC is one of the only attractive Striders, in my opinion, I only wish I could drop another 600 on one.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
Framelocks actually. The fact that the RCC is a linerlock though, no matter how well done it might be, is why I'll never own one. Had a solid GB though, and it's tang was typical Strider angles. Just mentally didn't trust it.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
It was a great knife for many reasons, but I had wanted it for a chopping folder (I know I know, kind of an oxymoron), and that was not it's best use. Great edge vs. OAL ratio though, while still having a full size, secure handle. Speedsafe was cool on something like this too, but for my personal uses, I've had a hard time finding anything to compete with my Striders. And I try to look at function above all else, regardless of who makes it. I'm not a biased collector.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
They're all liner locks to me, I'm afraid. Variations on the crosslock.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
I won't bother to get into it. Framelocks are not the best lock made, but they are one of the ones I will trust from most quality manufacturers. They are barely above my cutoff for safety, but are so common among high-end folders that I have become accepting of them.
And not nearly all framelocks are created equally.
And liner locks fall well below this line for several design reasons.
My favourite from a design point of view? Easily the compression lock. It's what the liner lock always should have been, despite many consumers not understanding the vast difference is strength.
"It's like a liner lock, but on the back?"
"Not even close, it comes down to directions of force and pivot points....ah nevermind"
However it's too bad Spyderco designed it so well that they are happy making them with standard dimensions of liners and stop pins and such. This design in the right hands could be the ultimate lock for abusive use, which clearly isn't Spyderco's intentions.
It's like many aspects of technological advancements. Some accomplish more, some simply get the same job done for less money or this or that... The latter is the case for the compression lock. It's like how Lexus makes more efficient engines for the IS series, then decreases displacement for similar output as the "old" motors, but less fuel, instead of the same sized powerplant simply making more power. It's an advancement, but not necessarily putting all the benifits, or any, towards performance.
PS: Strider on the other hand, took an inefficient design and simply overbuilt it. Drastically. Like taking a V8 that only makes 50 horses per liter, but hell it's an 8 liter so who cares.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
I guess I can't fault myself for sidetracking my own thread.
In any case, I agree--compression locks are the best crosslock out there. But not because of strength--even my CRKT liner locks are stronger than I can break. I do agree that compression locks are stronger, my point of difference is that it's irrelevent since strength didn't ever seem to be an issue anyway with medium thickness lockbars and up. (Perhaps even super thin lockbars. I don't buy them based on this assumption, but having not tested them also, perhaps they're stronger than they look).
The complaints about the liner lock's reliability should not be addressed in the compression lock though. If your fear is poor engagement (or inconsistent lockup), or that in twisting the blade stuck in something, the compression lock should be dead even with a comparable liner lock. It does, however, address the issue of grips sometimes unlocking the knife. That said, as best as I try, I can't ever make that happen on my knives, so it's a non issue as far as I'm concerned.
The compression lock really wins out in its ease of use--that you can easily flick open and closed your blade, in addition to the minor reliability increase and significant strength increase make it the clear choice.
In regards to liner locks and framelocks, the only relevant issue in my study of them is their usual thickness. But as my experience has shown, even moderately thick lockbars can take more force than I can put out even when I'm trying to break them (barring QC problems in said lockbar). Even if we believe that thick lockbars are sigifnicantly more reliable (they're not), this doesn't address all kinds of liner locking knives, like the 425 Gravitator I've been playing around with lately, where the liner lock is actually thicker than some frame locks. And if this is the distinction you're making, we should discuss things as thick crosslocks versus thin for reliability (again, I don't think we should, but if we reject my former premise). But some people chalk up all kinds of added strength by reinforcing the lockbar of a framelock with your grip. This is sometimes true, but with many lockbar stabilizers that use the pocket clip, your grip can't be put on the lockbar itself (as it's mostly blocked by the clip). In which case, we'd have to say that, given a liner lock of similar thickness (provided, once more, we reject that premise about thickness) it would be equally reliable.
But, if you perceived that I was incorrectly grouping compression locks with my claim that liner locks and framelocks are essentially the same thing, I can see where you'd get that, and ultimately I wholeheartedly agree that compression locks should be distinct, despite their crosslock origin.
In any case, I agree--compression locks are the best crosslock out there. But not because of strength--even my CRKT liner locks are stronger than I can break. I do agree that compression locks are stronger, my point of difference is that it's irrelevent since strength didn't ever seem to be an issue anyway with medium thickness lockbars and up. (Perhaps even super thin lockbars. I don't buy them based on this assumption, but having not tested them also, perhaps they're stronger than they look).
The complaints about the liner lock's reliability should not be addressed in the compression lock though. If your fear is poor engagement (or inconsistent lockup), or that in twisting the blade stuck in something, the compression lock should be dead even with a comparable liner lock. It does, however, address the issue of grips sometimes unlocking the knife. That said, as best as I try, I can't ever make that happen on my knives, so it's a non issue as far as I'm concerned.
The compression lock really wins out in its ease of use--that you can easily flick open and closed your blade, in addition to the minor reliability increase and significant strength increase make it the clear choice.
In regards to liner locks and framelocks, the only relevant issue in my study of them is their usual thickness. But as my experience has shown, even moderately thick lockbars can take more force than I can put out even when I'm trying to break them (barring QC problems in said lockbar). Even if we believe that thick lockbars are sigifnicantly more reliable (they're not), this doesn't address all kinds of liner locking knives, like the 425 Gravitator I've been playing around with lately, where the liner lock is actually thicker than some frame locks. And if this is the distinction you're making, we should discuss things as thick crosslocks versus thin for reliability (again, I don't think we should, but if we reject my former premise). But some people chalk up all kinds of added strength by reinforcing the lockbar of a framelock with your grip. This is sometimes true, but with many lockbar stabilizers that use the pocket clip, your grip can't be put on the lockbar itself (as it's mostly blocked by the clip). In which case, we'd have to say that, given a liner lock of similar thickness (provided, once more, we reject that premise about thickness) it would be equally reliable.
But, if you perceived that I was incorrectly grouping compression locks with my claim that liner locks and framelocks are essentially the same thing, I can see where you'd get that, and ultimately I wholeheartedly agree that compression locks should be distinct, despite their crosslock origin.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
This is off topic now, but I have a problem with this statement. It seems that you are one of many who don't see the strength and reliability differences between a compression lock and a liner lock of equal materials and dimensions.
From what I can tell there are two major design advantages to the compression lock, strictly from a strength and reliability perspective.
The first one is simple. A single layer of bricks in a row will be much more stable at supporting weight from above than a 10 foot high wall made up of these same bricks. Added length increases chances of buckling under any conditions, but specifically when the load shifts slightly and there are slight angles involved, which is the case with a liner lock. Hit the top of the wall with just a 5 or 10 degree angle, and you will likely topple it given sufficient force. That one layer of bricks can take it all day long. And please don't try to say that liner locks have pressure on them along a perfect axis through the length of their body.
So the shorter the better, right? Well that would be the case (up to the compressive limits of the material), if not for the design of liner locks. The best liner lock would be short, and pivot directly under the blade, with zero angle at the tang. Realistically, however, a shorter lock would require a more severe angle of the tang cutout, as the lock needs to fold out of the way of the blade and would be fixed to the handle one way or another. This means a shorter lock would be working against itself in terms of how much of the blade's pressure is being transmitted through the lock as opposed to trying to slide the lock off the tang (like punching someone at an angle) or push the lock downwards (the closer the force applied is to perpendicular, the less resistance to fold).
The second reason for increased strength and reliability is even more important than the first. The direction of the forces applied compared to the axis that the locks pivots on to open and close. Liner locks (getting tired of typing those words) have force applied in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the pivot. Compression locks apply force on the lock in a parallel direction when comapred to the axis of the "hinge". The pivot is slightly offset from where the force hits to allow closing.
What does that mean? Try standing on a 1 foot by 1 foot piece of plywood that's secured to the ground using a hinge, allowing movement to either side. Not gonna be so easy unless you're in Cirque du Soleil.
Now try the same thing with the wood hinged to the wall, not the ground. Different axis. Parallel instead of perpendicular now, in terms of force vs pivot line. Won't be all that hard to stand on.
But a blade doesn't need to balance you say? As I mentioned earlier, it's impossible to have the forces go perfectly down the liner lock and even if they did, that's at a different angle than the blade anyway (which is ultimately applying the force).
But no matter. Let's say the force will be perfectly centered and balanced. How stable will that weight be on the floor-hinged piece of wood? It would be a circus act again, in comparison to the wall hinged plywood.
Now let's incorporate the first point to the second. Depending on models of either lock in question, the lockbar of a liner lock (not even including the portion of the rest of the liner below it that is also under stress) is somewhere between 10 and 15 or 20 times the length of the compressed portion of the compression lock. Let's take the low value and say 10, because I eyeballed only a couple knives.
Back to the hinged plywood. Would you rather support weight (provide a force in the opposite direction, AKA save your fingers) with a 10 foot high piece of plywood hinged hazardly to the ground, free to crumple or simply fold out of the way, nevermind keep the forces trapped upon the top of it (you can't stand on a one foot piece, nevermind 10 foot), or support weight with a much shorter "beam" of sorts, the one foot piece, hinged to the wall?
The lengths and directions of applied forces tell the tale. A compression lock is nothing like a liner lock from a design point of view. It uses the same parts, but in a much more efficient and safe manner.
And to think many knife people still believe it's just a liner lock on the back that happens to unlock easier or with more difficulty, depending on who you ask. That is simply a side-effect of IMHO, one of the best lock designs to date.
I'd love to hear if anyone thinks I'm off on any of the above or if I missed a major engineering advantage. Peace.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
Well, I think you misread me. I think I literally said (I'll have to go back and check) that I agree whole heartedly that compression locks are stronger and better in general.
But as I've shown, even the lesser liner locks are stronger than a human being can find trouble with, much less something like the Strider being discussed. I'm not a super strong guy, so if you're a body builder or linebacker or something, you might be able to put more power into your testing than me and break it that way, but at these levels, I don't feel insecure with the strength of my weaker liner locks.
And the two problems with liner locks I've cited, poor lockup and the twisting of the handle relative to the blade (when stuck into something) are not affected by the switch. The latter I've tested in a vice grip on some of my lower end liner locks and couldn't get them to unlock, so I'm not sure if this is a real world issue or more of a rare event. As per lockup, that can be checked with the eye.
I've had a compression lock knife (para) and loved it. Had mine been without its various F&F flaws, I'd still EDC it today. One of my favorite locks.
But to get back to the subject at hand. I've debated that framelocks, all things being equal, are not superior to liner locks. And thus, the RCC doesn't suffer a big lock integrity disadvantage to the 0300. I like to have a combination of framelocks and liner locks in my collection, personally. I like the thinness of framelocks and the gripocity of the liner locks.
But as I've shown, even the lesser liner locks are stronger than a human being can find trouble with, much less something like the Strider being discussed. I'm not a super strong guy, so if you're a body builder or linebacker or something, you might be able to put more power into your testing than me and break it that way, but at these levels, I don't feel insecure with the strength of my weaker liner locks.
And the two problems with liner locks I've cited, poor lockup and the twisting of the handle relative to the blade (when stuck into something) are not affected by the switch. The latter I've tested in a vice grip on some of my lower end liner locks and couldn't get them to unlock, so I'm not sure if this is a real world issue or more of a rare event. As per lockup, that can be checked with the eye.
I've had a compression lock knife (para) and loved it. Had mine been without its various F&F flaws, I'd still EDC it today. One of my favorite locks.
But to get back to the subject at hand. I've debated that framelocks, all things being equal, are not superior to liner locks. And thus, the RCC doesn't suffer a big lock integrity disadvantage to the 0300. I like to have a combination of framelocks and liner locks in my collection, personally. I like the thinness of framelocks and the gripocity of the liner locks.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
I don't think I misread you and even quoted the part in question. If you're happy with liner locks go for it. My only one is an S30V CF Millie that I consider a very light-duty knife that I wouldn't trust my fingers to in a hard stab situation. It's more of a kitchen knife for me. OT, but even if the lock held I've be worried the blade would snap into sharp pieces sticking out of my hand unless it was going into something soft. We obviously have different needs and expectations from our blades.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
Same. I'm hooked on stuff I can't break. The tools become more versatile
Too bad Surefire LED's have been letting me down, I just had a second KL4 poop out in 6 months.
Thomas W
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Messages
- 5,710
a223cat, have you played with a 300 series ZT? I have, and can tell you first hand, it's not a wimp.
talon, I have yet to see your past 300 in for lock warranty of which I find quite strange considering the cost of the knife. Sorry the knife didn't live up to your expectations.
Mick and Duane seem more than satisfied with the execution and performance of the 300's, and were involved with the construction of the piece. I'll keep you posted should it or others like you describe show up. Until then, I'm am putting my trust into all the positive feedback the company has received from actual satisfied ZT300 users.
talon, I have yet to see your past 300 in for lock warranty of which I find quite strange considering the cost of the knife. Sorry the knife didn't live up to your expectations.
Mick and Duane seem more than satisfied with the execution and performance of the 300's, and were involved with the construction of the piece. I'll keep you posted should it or others like you describe show up. Until then, I'm am putting my trust into all the positive feedback the company has received from actual satisfied ZT300 users.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
With the exception of the RC and RCC, I'm more impressed (price considered) with the 0300 than most striders. Of course, I haven't played with the 0300 in real life yet, so we'll have to see, but honestly, I haven't been blown away by the few Striders I've encountered.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 479
It was a nice knife. Great bargain and a well-thought out design.
My very first use of it was at a cottage though, and that's where the lock overengaged at the thought of chopping. After about 2 minutes I was a little dissapointed, and never really gave it a second chance, or sent it in to be looked at.
It's true that I can't complain, as I didn't let anyone make it right. I hope I come off as sharing an honest experience rather than trying to give a knife a bad rep.
It was just easier to pass the knife to a friend who will enjoy it purely for the flipper and AO, as he opens his mail or something with it
