I am fine with discussion of the Tri-Ad lock when it's actually about the topic at hand. The vast majority of the CS talk has been rather puerile off-topic squabbling about the brand itself. Discussion about whether or not CS is the most bashed brand or not has nothing to do with how tough ZT knives are. Arguing about whether or not there was bashing has nothing to do with it either. Discussion about how awesome Andrew Demko is for inventing the Tri-Ad lock is not helpful.
If we're going to talk about Cold Steel, it would be far more interesting and relevant to me to do a side-by-side comparison of a CS product with a reputation for durability against a ZT product. I have very little interest in purchasing any more CS products, until or unless I end up having more money than I know what to do with (one can always hope).
I have no problem with the thread being contentious. I do prefer to see well-thought out and detailed responses as compared to vague generalizations or off-topic squabbling. There have been many very helpful and interesting responses, which I think are very profitable, and I hate to see those lose their emphasis because others want to fight about CS. It's been really fantastic to hear about the knives from the perspective of the manufacturer, and I'm really glad Thomas W has been chiming in here.
I guess at this point, I'm wondering if there's more to it than just saying that ZT knives have thicker stress-bearing parts.
I mean, if we're going to talk locks, I personally am of the opinion that the locks that ZT seems to use are among the weaker types of locks design-wise. The Tri-Ad and Spyderco BBL are the leaders in lock strength IMO, and can support a lot more stress than a liner lock. I have no experience with the Hawk lock, so I have no opinions about that. They do have the advantage of simplicity.
