Upcoming Manix 2 sprint runs?

Also do half the run in full serrations.
 
I was just sitting on the couch, minding my business when I heard someone say M4. Naturally, I came running to throw in my vote for M4.:D BTW, anything but hollow ground obviously











Kidding Josh :D
 
Last edited:
orthogonal1 said:
I don't buy any of that reasoning.


As to the reason for the CBL, I was under the impression it had more to do with user operation, the regular BBL being difficult for some users to operate. The CBL is easier to operate based upon what my friends are doing when given examples of the respective knives for an opinion.

The Manix 2 frame area and the P'Kal's is a bit thinner than 710. Overall the knives are close enough in thickness as not to matter once the clips are taken into consideration.

As to width, top to bottom when closed, that has more to do with the blade width - a design difference that has little to do with the lock design. Also, that hole is a design driver that results in a wider knife in many instances - get rid of the hole and use studs and one could make a pretty narrow knife. Of course, then it wouldn't be a "Spyderco" - I suppose a token hole could be used.


As to a future sprint run, I'd be pleased with an M4 version as the Mule is an impressive blade - a Manix 2 in M4 would be my folding version.:D
Click to expand...

You may not buy that reasoning, but that doesn't make it untrue. ;) Take a Dodo, a Poliwog, a D'Allara and a P'Kal or Manix 2, open them and lay them all down side by side. Look at where the pivot is located on each. Then close them all and look again. The design of the ball lock pushes the pivot point off-center in the handle, and it pushes it away from the spine. What happens when you do that? it makes the closed knife wider. (An excellent example of this can be seen with the Benchmade Boguszewski Spike using a liner lock and the auto Spike using the plunger lock) The bigger the ball is, the farther it pushes the pivot off center. Making the ball smaller allows the pivot to be closer to the centerline of the handle, which reduces the closed width of the knife.

If you look inside the Manix 2, you can see the lock ball is only about the size of a BB. That would be really tough to operate without the cage, which is why it is there. I followed the developement of the P'kal as closely as possible without being an insider. These are things Sal mentioned during that time, often in response to people wanting to know what was taking so long.
 
amen74 said:
Make the S90V Manix2 a regular production item, just like the Orange Millie.

Then we can all have one.
Click to expand...

I know you didnt mean that with all your heart. Even if they could do it, that would be lame.

I like the Smaller Runs,Spyderco offers PLENTY of something for EVERYONE! Its nice to see the SUPER NICE STUFF in Limited Runs. Hope to see more offerings like this in the future, thanks Spyderco.
 
dericdesmond said:
I know you didnt mean that with all your heart. Even if they could do it, that would be lame.

I like the Smaller Runs,Spyderco offers PLENTY of something for EVERYONE! Its nice to see the SUPER NICE STUFF in Limited Runs. Hope to see more offerings like this in the future, thanks Spyderco.
Click to expand...

Was it that obvious?:p

FWIW, I agree about the smaller runs. All in good fun.:D
 
yablanowitz said:
If you look inside the Manix 2, you can see the lock ball is only about the size of a BB. That would be really tough to operate without the cage, which is why it is there. I followed the developement of the P'kal as closely as possible without being an insider. These are things Sal mentioned during that time, often in response to people wanting to know what was taking so long.
Click to expand...

I find the plastic cage to be the least attractive bit on the new manix, I also don't trust the little plastic pin that holds the spring in place. Otherwise its a very good looking knife.

Maybe a hole could be drilled through the BB with a pin through it connecting metal studs on each side of it? That may just up the price of the knife a lot. This kind of thing would be cool on sprint runs based on that platform at least where price is less of a factor for people to buy.

I would also have liked to see skeletonized titanium liners with the CF to make it even lighter, possibly with a Ti lowrider pocket clip.

So, metal BB cage, Ti hardware and perfect fit and finish (centered blade, no play) would make the S90V Manix II a grail folder for me. I wonder how much it would be to have it customized to these specs... :cool:
 
yablanowitz said:
You may not buy that reasoning, but that doesn't make it untrue. ;) Take a Dodo, a Poliwog, a D'Allara and a P'Kal or Manix 2, open them and lay them all down side by side. Look at where the pivot is located on each. Then close them all and look again. The design of the ball lock pushes the pivot point off-center in the handle, and it pushes it away from the spine. What happens when you do that? it makes the closed knife wider. (An excellent example of this can be seen with the Benchmade Boguszewski Spike using a liner lock and the auto Spike using the plunger lock) The bigger the ball is, the farther it pushes the pivot off center. Making the ball smaller allows the pivot to be closer to the centerline of the handle, which reduces the closed width of the knife.

If you look inside the Manix 2, you can see the lock ball is only about the size of a BB. That would be really tough to operate without the cage, which is why it is there. I followed the developement of the P'kal as closely as possible without being an insider. These are things Sal mentioned during that time, often in response to people wanting to know what was taking so long.
Click to expand...


Now you discuss "pivot" geometry, while previously you discussed "That throws the entire blade geometry in a different direction".

All that is required is an eccentric pivot in relation to the centerline of the blade, as you note. There is nothing new or unique in this design consideration when dealing with locks, or slippies for that matter.

The actual lock area of the Dodo, for example, occupies about the same space as does the lock area on the 710 - as regards width - as does the Manix 2.

The P'Kal is different since the design is less wide. There appears to have been some serious effort in the design of the lock area due to the desired finger grooves limiting the space available. Note the thinness of the blade metal about the pivot in the P'Kal. Spyderco managed to pack a lot of features in a small space. The P'Kal lock area is less wide than the 710, Manix 2, and Dodo.

Also, look at the side view area occupied by the CBL versus the Dodo BBL versus a full size axis. Pretty close to being equal. Note to look at the LOCK area and not the extension of the handle scales that are provided for design considerations such as providing finger grooves, etc.

Comparing apples to oranges, liner-locks can be made pretty compact at the expense of strength. But, then, so can plunger locks as witness the various "center button" designs, e.g. Protech Godson, which have a weakening channel in the blade. Plunger locks can also be made longitudinally offsett or simply with smaller diameters to allow for a a less wide handle. The plunger lock design in and of itself is not the reason for any increased handle width, top to bottom.
 
I wasn't talking about just the handle width, but the overall closed width of the knife. When the pivot is off-center in the blade, the spine and edge sides may line up with the handle when the blade is open, but the spine of the blade will stick out of the handle when closed. That is what I meant when I referred to the geometry of the entire blade. The position of the pivot with respect to the centerline of the knife affects the entire blade, which affect the overall width of the knife.

Note here the width of these two knives in the open position. The plunger lock knife is only 1/16" wider than the liner lock, but note the position of the pivots. The liner lock pivot is centered, the plunger lock is not.
DSCF0364.jpg


The same two knives closed. Now the plunger lock knife is just over 1/4" wider than the liner lock knife, because the off-center pivot increases the overall width of the knife when closed.
DSCF0363.jpg


That is the clearest illustration of my point that I can make, so I will leave this thread to you now.
 
As written above: "Comparing apples to oranges, liner-locks can be made pretty compact at the expense of strength. But, then, so can plunger locks as witness the various "center button" designs, e.g. Protech Godson, which have a weakening channel in the blade. Plunger locks can also be made longitudinally offsett or simply with smaller diameters to allow for a a less wide handle. The plunger lock design in and of itself is not the reason for any increased handle width, top to bottom."

Benchmade chose to do that, it is not a requirement.
 
That is the clearest illustration of my point that I can make, so I will leave this thread to you now.
Click to expand...

That was brillantly clear!
And educational.
And I thought you were too busy using knives to know stuff like this.
Thank you, I kinda wondered why the Manix 2 is a bit wide.
 
I like the smaller runs on the knives, it gives it a more specialty feel. Like it was said in another post (they already make lots of other great knives in quantity it is nice to have some limited ones)

keep up the good work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top