thumbstud or hole?

Originally posted by knifenerd
...the hole is probably more versitile, especially with gloves.. but you do have to put up with the "hump".
Click to expand...

That's why you buy the Native and use its choil!

I'd say it depends. For most folders with <3" blades, I think a hole works great. For Vaquero Grandes and the like, a thumbstud or a flipper device is better.

However, with axis locks, you can wave them open (not the same as the Emerson wave. You can do this without pants), so there's no need to put your thumb against the side of the blade.
 
The hole, pure and simple. The hole lends itself to better "purchase" of the blade as you are opening the knife.
 
StreamChucker,

We're not the entire market. We're probably a large population of the Spyderco market and hope to increase its numbers. We're also the Griptillian and AFCK market.
 
It's probably easier to put a small hole in a blade and then screw on some thumbstuds.

Plus thumbstuds have been around for a longer time than holes in the blade. People still aren't used to seeing them yet, so more traditional designs don't have holes.

There's also the hump/scale-cutout issue. I like how the AFCK works, I don't like how the Spyderco humps look.

I prefer thumbstuds, since for most cases the thumb doesn't need to shift as far to open the blade. They also look better on a larger variety of knives (to me).
 
I prefer the thumbstud simply because I think it looks nicer. I don't often have gloves on when using my knives, but if I did I might prefer the hole for ease of operation with gloves.
 
No gloves? If you can't afford gloves, maybe you've bought too many knives.

:D Just kidding. Like 'too many' really exists...
 
I've been one-handing for 20 years now. Began with a Spydie bought directly from Spyderco at the Great Western Stock Show in Denver in 1983. I've tried that thing that sticks out, but I remain a hole man. Just been doing it so long it feels natural.

Chris
 
hmmmm... At the risk of sounding rude, I must say I do find the slit to be rather an attractive feature.

Of course, some call it a nail nick.
 
I prefer the round Spyderco hole.I've tried the oblong holes like Gerber and the later BM offerings but didn't like them as much.Discs are easy to hit but catch in some items I want to slice.Studs are harder targets and also limit the use of the entire blade.I saw a picture in an American Handgunner Magazine of an Emerson knife.It looked like a Commander but had a round hole and wave feature.I thought that might be the best set up going.tom.;)
 
I already said I "fall" into the "hole" camp... but something I had not thought of was mentioned:

The hole is the only design in the Hole/Stud/Disc triad that is flush with the blade and will not impede the blade traveling through a material being cut. BIG plus for the hole.

I have no real preference for round holes or oval holes. Actually, I think the oval hole helps give tactile orientation of the blade position as it's being opened.

I don't like the un-simplicity of drilling a hole into a blade, threading it, and adding another PART to the knife. I am a firm believer in the "fewer parts the better" ideology. If you can assure that a thumbstud cannot ever unscrew, I might consider it. But anything that is made of two parts can much more easily be rended into two parts again than something that started out as a single part can. Simpler is better, and holes are simpler than studs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top