• The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
    Price is $300 $250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
    Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.

  • Today marks the 24th anniversary of 9/11. I pray that this nation does not forget the loss of lives from this horrible event. Yesterday conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was murdered, and I worry about what is to come. Please love one another and your family in these trying times - Spark

What is the purpose of a lockbar cutout and why are they so thin?

Lock cuts are a confusing issue even for many makers because even they as it turns out, don't always know all the reasons for why the lock cut or for where it is placed and how. Like with most things there is a reason. Originally it was just as Chris Reeve needed it to be. Thin enough to be workable for most users yet thick enough to be strong enough to work for a good stout folding knife in the field. To slide on the pocket smoothly Chris put the cut on the inside and for whatever reasons he did a double half moon with some tweaks proprietary to Chris to this day for how he does his Sebenza, probably to do with testing for strength and related issues with thumb pressure deemed 'sweet enough for a woman to work' yet still masculine enough to pass muster for most men.

Later most adopted a variance and if you were a tester or someone curious like early testers such as Cliff Stamp among others many times in reviews these variances such as one Strider/Buck being .080 while another was off that by a variance or one lock cut thin to such a thinness while another sometimes shipped at the same time only with a different blade would be something else. So even with same model knives there was a variance and most lock cuts were on the inside following the original frame lock maker Mr. Reeve. That is until Strider and a few other tactical makers came on the scene and put them on the outside. As is usually the case there was reasons for this as well. I mean honestly if you are going to be crawling around in combat with a folder clipped to your pocket do you really want it being pulled out so easy? No not in that case I guess but I speculate that this was why they chose to put the Strider tactical folder lock cuts on the outside. It could be a happy coincidence there but it made sense. So the SMF among others were made to snag the pocket if done with forethought and boy they do that so well one has to consider it must be purposeful. I heard about it all the time from a lot of the civilian users. It appears tho that some want to say it can't be that many because they never had anyone post about it or saw anyone post about it but if one stops to think about that it makes sense. They are on a obscure hard to find forum for most and they have such a rep for chewing on people that many ask questions about Striders in private since just asking what SnG means or SMF or anything else brings the house down on many. As a result when they have an issue they go elsewhere to solve it I guess. With Striders only. The number one request with some was can you make a clip that doesn't snag and tear up my pocket? Many wanted to know how to fix it so it can't catch. Spring it out is my only answer. So pros and cons yes.

Again my opinion. If you wear a uniform and are technically out of uniform if you fray your pockets frame locks with lock cuts on the outside can be an issue. I have listened to that also from some and when I designed certain of my clips it was geared toward pocket kindness and a happy medium for all features as a result of feedback like this. For some applications in the military or for combat the lock cut grabbing the pocket for you is a good thing but most consider it a nag. I hear about that too but not as bad now as at earlier times but of course I don't do the custom making stuff like I did either. I have a write up somewhere on my blogger but too busy to search. I had some time to type and I type fast so no issue there but if I have time later I'll post it unless someone else did. I should have read it first I guess. Anyway, lock cuts have a purpose and are needed. Besides they can be thin and still dig a fox hole cause we did just that with a ZT 0301 in testing and even with a thin cut the knife didn't fail or cry about it. Well, the edge did a bit yeah but it goes with diggin' dirt! :thumbup::p I see now that someone posted the link. Thanks I guess I got in late.
 
Last edited:
Some people feel the need for their pocket knife to serve as an entire toolbox. You know...chop trees, wood, stab things, hang weights off of them.

Here's a thought - when I'm really putting some force behind my knife during a cutting task I generally exert most of my force/weight into my thumb which is almost directly above the pivot. Every time I see these weight hanging 'tests' they're hanging the weight at the middle of the handle, or worse yet the end.

I guess the bottom line is I know how to use my knives and I won't let some knucklehead mcspazitrons (see: spongebob) tell me I'm in danger after I stab my knife into a tree and hang from it.
 
Sweet, but not everyone is so sophisticated. I want a strong reliable lock, with no unnecessary weaknesses due to design. If I didn't want a strong lock I would use a slip joint.
 
Sweet, but not everyone is so sophisticated. I want a strong reliable lock, with no unnecessary weaknesses due to design. If I didn't want a strong lock I would use a slip joint.
Don't you think if the cutouts were unnecessary that we'd see framelocks without them? They're there so we can disengage the lock with a reasonable amount of force. Evidently the placement (inside, outside, middle, bottom) isn't extremely important - unless your pants are being eaten by it.
 
Don't you think if the cutouts were unnecessary that we'd see framelocks without them? They're there so we can disengage the lock with a reasonable amount of force. Evidently the placement (inside, outside, middle, bottom) isn't extremely important - unless your pants are being eaten by it.

I think in most cases some kind of cut out is necessary. I don't think they need to be as extreme as most seem to be. In a knife that locks open and is very heavily marketed as for hard use I would prefer to half the smoothness of opening and closing and double the strength.
 
I think in most cases some kind of cut out is necessary. I don't think they need to be as extreme as most seem to be. In a knife that locks open and is very heavily marketed as for hard use I would prefer to half the smoothness of opening and closing and double the strength.
I can agree that I wouldn't mind trying both. Or what about a thin piece on each side with a hollow center? I imagine that would significantly strengthen it (ie. keep it from crinkling one way or the other) yet still allow the user to close it with reasonable force.

Too bad I don't make knives... :(
 
I think in most cases some kind of cut out is necessary. I don't think they need to be as extreme as most seem to be. In a knife that locks open and is very heavily marketed as for hard use I would prefer to half the smoothness of opening and closing and double the strength.

But who says you're compromising strength? If the lock bar is designed to be sufficiently strong with the cutout for the knife's intended level of use, then anything more is just unnecessary.

Am I missing something here? Clamping a blade open while putting weight on the handle doesnt accurately depict anything you should actually be doing with a folding knife. Neither does spine whacking or anything similar. You're supposed to cut with the other sharp side. Where are the videos of framelocks disengaging while someone is actually using the knife properly?
 
edit: eeek :eek: did not see Steve had already posted above! :D

There have been some exceptionally good posts on this topic by STR over the years. I think the ultra-short version is that "it all depends." Thickness affects strength, but so does length of the cutout, distance from cutout to lock face, etc. It was/is fascinating reading.
 
Last edited:
But who says you're compromising strength? If the lock bar is designed to be sufficiently strong with the cutout for the knife's intended level of use, then anything more is just unnecessary.

Am I missing something here? Clamping a blade open while putting weight on the handle doesnt accurately depict anything you should actually be doing with a folding knife. Neither does spine whacking or anything similar. You're supposed to cut with the other sharp side. Where are the videos of framelocks disengaging while someone is actually using the knife properly?

If it is thinner so that it can be opened easier then you are compromising strength. That's what compromising means, losing something to gain something. It's not relative to anything.

If you prefer smoothness to strength that's totally fine, I do as well in a normal folder. As I said in that post, I am speaking of knives claimed to be designed for hard use. If a knife is designed for hard use the design should emphasize strength. The whole point is that some think knives designed for hard use should have thicker cut outs.

I don't think anyone is seeing every knife should be as thick as possible. I'm not anyway.
 
If it is thinner so that it can be opened easier then you are compromising strength. That's what compromising means, losing something to gain something. It's not relative to anything.

If you prefer smoothness to strength that's totally fine, I do as well in a normal folder. As I said in that post, I am speaking of knives claimed to be designed for hard use. If a knife is designed for hard use the design should emphasize strength. The whole point is that some think knives designed for hard use should have thicker cut outs.

I don't think anyone is seeing every knife should be as thick as possible. I'm not anyway.

And what I'm saying is that unless there are hard use folders having issues with framelocks failing then you aren't gaining anything by making it thicker. If you're not gaining anything by making it thicker, than you're not compromising anything by making it thinner. By your logic every part of a hard use folder could be made bigger and beefier but what would be the point? If the knife is fully capable of doing what it is advertised to do without the lock failing, then why are we worried about the lock failing some fabricated test that doesn't depict what the knife was intended for.
 
And what I'm saying is that unless there are hard use folders having issues with framelocks failing then you aren't gaining anything by making it thicker. If you're not gaining anything by making it thicker, than you're not compromising anything by making it thinner. By your logic every part of a hard use folder could be made bigger and beefier but what would be the point? If the knife is fully capable of doing what it is advertised to do without the lock failing, then why are we worried about the lock failing some fabricated test that doesn't depict what the knife was intended for.

I think hard use knives are intended to be able to withstand over 80 pounds of force against the lock bar. But I think we just have differing views, so let's leave it there.
 
I think hard use knives are intended to be able to withstand over 80 pounds of force against the lock bar. But I think we just have differing views, so let's leave it there.

Yeah I suppose. I'd just like to see some instances where some frame locks failed during use as opposed to fabricated tests. I always assumed part of the advantage of a framelock vs a liner lock was that when you're gripping the knife you're essentially holding that lock bar in the engaged position. It'd have to basically break before giving out. But that's just me personally. I have seen what my little Cryo was capable of, so I'll use my ZT without worry.
 
It's a weight thing. I'd rather have a thicker lock bar.
 
Back
Top