What's with "The Hole"??

S

spoonslayer

Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
141
First of all, let me say that this is in no way an attack on Spyderco. I am a big fan of them myself.

I have noticed a lot of people on the forums and in the general knife world are really hung up on the Spyderco blade hole. I like the hole and think it is a unique idea. However, many people seem to have the attitude that the hole is the Supreme Being of opening methods and that all others(thumbstuds, discs) are tactically inferior. While I think the hole is as good as any, I dont see how it could be better than others. Just wanting some input and your thoughts on this.

Brock
 
Brock :

While I think the hole is as good as any, I dont see how it could be better than others.
Click to expand...

All one-handed opening devices are far from equal. Different geometries are bound to produce different results even with very similar designs. Both Reeve and CS make thumb studs but yet they fell quite different and one is much better than the other. I would much rather have a Spyderco hole than a CS stud.

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 20 April 1999).]
 
Lets see it won't break,you never have to replace a stud or disc. It's ambidextrous.Won't snag or get caught in your clothes.Its easier to open holding the blade and snapping the handle down then with a disc or stud.Thats all I can think of at the moment.Anyone else?
Bob
 
Strider:

First of all, I think the "never having to replace a stud or disc" excuse isnt' a very good one. That's like saying screw attached pocket clips are no good because you have to replace them.

As for the other reasons, the disc on my CQC7 is also ambidextrous, has never snagged or gotten caught on my clothes, and why would I want to open a knife by holding the blade when theres a perfectly good handle there to hold on to?
wink.gif
 
Studs and disks wear your clothes and your finger or thumb. The hole is so much easier, as well as ambidextrous.

------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh
 
Fuller:

My CQC7's disc doesn't wear my clothing because it doesn't stick out past the handle. The handle itself and the clip cause more wear than the disc ever thought about. And as previously stated, the disc IS ambidextrous(as are many studs too)

Brock
 
I've used the rest, the hole is best! Doesn't snag, doesn't change blade crosssection, easy on the thumb, can be used SAFELY with the two finger flick, nothing to break or come loose, and coming from a lefty, absolutely ambidextrous. Downside? NONE!

phantom4

------------------
who dares, wins


 
My only complaint about the hole is that the blade must protrude from the handle a bit, but this is no big deal. Why do people take these "little" things and start criticizing other people's opinions. I like the combination of all my one-handed opening features. I like the disk, stud, and hole equally, but for different knife designs. Why would anyone want the same old boring thing all of the time. What is it that is soooo wrong with using different design, style, materials, and functions of different companies? No offense, but I don't care what any of you think about the hole, disk, or the stud. If I don't ask for a review or an opinion...you shouldn't criticize one or the other just for fun. Am I wrong??? True spoonslayer asked for opinions, but many of you can't handle that. Some let it get unnecessarily waaaay out of hand for no good reason. I haven't seen this here yet, but I'm afraid it could explode into the "Military vs. ALL!!!" again. Sure I like to agrue a point just as many of you do, it's human nature, but it would be nice to recieve polite, factual info. rather than straight attacks. -AR
 
I can't say for sure if "dropping" a Blade Spydie-style and then "hopping" it into your hand is any faster than spinning it and flicking the hole with your thumb. I have a lot of practice with both and would say that I lean towards the "drop," but it's close. I do think thumbing it open is a bit more secure.

Either way, the hole has the HUGE advantage of faster indexing than a stud. It's big and easy to find with your thumb (and forefinger in the drop), and there is NO chance of slipping your thumb off it as you push the blade open. I realize that with practice this concern may go away for thumb-stud users, but when you are opening a knife VERY fast, under pressure, why take the chance?

Also, the hole cannot fall off or break, and it cannot snag in the pocket or in whatever you are cutting in the way a thumbstud can. Yes, it compromises blade strength, but not in a way I consider at all a concern on a folder; no knives are prybars, but for folders that goes double!

Also, there is something very reassuring about hooking your thumbs into your pocket and feeling one sitting in the blade hole of that Police, Civilian, or AFCK...already indexed to leap out at a moment's notice.

Look, I WISH that the hole weren't superior because, while I like Spyderco, I would love to carry some of these great knives from other makers (besides the wondrous AFCK, of course). But I honestly do feel it is the fastest, most reliable way to get a folder open quickly, so that makes the range of full-sized defense/utility folders I will carry very small. Lucky thing they are so good.

-Corduroy
 
Spoonsayer
You wanted input and thoughts on this if you are going to dispute every answer why ask at all?
Bob
 
First of all, I believe the method of opening or "dropping" a blade is mostly novel and most would dismiss it as a serious tactical opening method.

Secondly, even IF the hole does have an advantage(and I really dont think it does), it is definately not a HUGE one. It seems like the hole might actually be a little harder to reach because your thumb has to drop down over the edge of the handle to reach the hole, unlike a disc which is almost level with the handle. While a stud may be more slippery than the hole, I think the flat vertical surface of a disc is just as slip resistant, if not more, than the hole.

Let me state that I AM NOT saying the stud or disc is better than the hole; Im saying there isn't enough diference to matter.
 
Strider:

Im not trying to be an a##hole or anything, I am just giving some reasons why I think that "hole worship" and perception of its far superiority is wrong. The reason that I asked was to try and find some new reasons that may be a little more solid than usual.
 
Spoonslayer, you asked my opinion and I gave it. Buying a knife is a purely subjective decision. I happen to prefer the Spydie systems and, so, buy them. For the first time in my life, I have bought a knife without handling it first, a Military. I got it today and it is everything that I expected. I am NOT knocking anyone else's knives, I just prefer my Spydies for my taste. "De gustibus non disputandum."

------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh
 
Spoonsayer
Thats why my prefered carry is a small fixed blade hide away in M-2.No holes no discs no studs.
Bob
 
IMHO there is no question, the hole has an edge in every respect. I submit, that if Spyderco did not have the rights to this design, there would not be any thumb studs. Further, I think that this simple idea, (the hole), has been the most revolutionary idea in knife manufacture in recent memory. A much belated "ATTABOY" from me to Spyderco.

------------------
Live free and buy. It's the American way.
 
Spoonslayer,

What is the point of asking for other people's viewpoints and then contradicting each one?

I could sure wear out a pair of your pants with a thumb disk.

 
Good point strider.

Steve Harvey:

The reason I am contradicting what people say is that I am simply trying to show why(IMO) the reasons given for the hole's superiority are invalid. As for my pants being worn out by a thumb disc, Ive owned and carried my CQC7 every day for about the last 4 years and haven't noticed any appreciable wear on my pants, and I am constantly drawing and flicking my knife. The only thing that has cause even slight wear are the handle/clip.

I like the hole. I think it is a really cool and neat idea, mainly because I love variety in the knife world. However, I dont think its really that "revolutionary" of an idea because it really doesnt' solve any major problem or perform any task that much better(if any) than any method we already had. To me something like the lightbulb or the car is what you would call revolutionary.
 
Steve,

Wearing out a pair of spoonslayer's pants is out of character for you.
wink.gif


I'm sometimes a bit klutzy trying to open my thumb stud folders and hole folders. I find it a little harder to miss the hole than it is to miss the thumb stud. This is particularly true in bad weather for me.

[This message has been edited by Bob Irons (edited 20 April 1999).]
 
Spoonslayer, one of the reasons I think the "hole" is revolutionary is that I believe it predates the stud. My recollection is that Spyderco came up with their one-handed opening system, and the rest of the world played catch-up. If I'm wrong, just ignore me, (my wife and kids do).

------------------
Live free and buy. It's the American way.
 
Bob, I have that same luck with studs such as on my Vaquero, but its not really a prob. with my CQC7

Krom:

Good point. Y'know, I never really even thought about which came first; I just figured it was the thumbstud for some reason. I heard about and came in contact with studs before I did the spydie hole, but I guess that doesnt' necessarily mean the stud came first.

Does anybody else know which came first?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top