Where Spydercos Fall Short

bearfacedkiller said:
Spyderco likes choils. No denying that. They definitely do not focus on blade to handle ratios.

Three of the four you picked have backlocks. A backock usually implements a kick to prevent the blade from touching the backspacer. This kick automatically requires a ricasso of some sort thus reducing this ratio even on knives which lack a choil. Unless the kick is omitted a backlock will never be competitive in blade to handle ratio. It has nothing to do with being a flipper but is about the lock choice and lack of a choil.

You will need to look at Spydies which are not backlocks and which do not have choils. Most of those are collaborations and not in house designs. There are a few exceptions.


Pattada
Mantra
Southard
Positron
K2
Centofante Memeory
Slysz Bowie

I realize this is important to a lot of people but I am not one of them. Personally to me this is bench racing. In use their tools just flat out work. This is just my take on it. To each their own. :)
Click to expand...
Very true, very good points. However one exception is the very nice Baby Jess Horn model. At 0.39, it isn't too shabby for a lockback... but is even better possible? or has the upper limit of edge/OAL ratio for lockbacks been reached? I think even better is possible but maybe I'm being too optimistic
 
Not all backlocks use a kick. The Centotante3 does not. If you squeeze it closed the edge will touch the backspacer but the backspacer is frn so it isn't too big of a deal. It does not have a great ratio but it is a rare example of a backlock without a kick so it is possible.
 
I have to admit, I used to value blade-to-handle somewhat, but at this point I find it doesn't register with me at all.

Personally, I like to have a variety of blades that are at or under certain lengths so I can have a reliable knife on me even when I travel to places with particular blade length restrictions.

What I want them all to have is a largeish, comfortable handle that accommodates all 4 of my fingers and doesn't cause issues in extended use.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
What I want them all to have is a largeish, comfortable handle that accommodates all 4 of my fingers and doesn't cause issues in extended use.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And if that knife could have 2.8 inches of cutting edge instead of 2.4, wouldn't you prefer the former?
 
Indoril said:
Agreed. And if that knife could have 2.8 inches of cutting edge instead of 2.4, wouldn't you prefer the former?
Click to expand...
Not if I sacrifice literally any aspect of the knife that I like. And, since it seems you're referring to the Delica, it must sacrifice that space to have a back lock, which I significantly prefer to a liner or framelock.

To clarify, if you're all about great blade-to-handle, that's all good, it's just literally a nonissue for me, personally. I want a specific blade length and I want it attached to a big enough handle. Beyond that, the relationship between the two just isn't important to me.
 
Not sure of the exact ratio, but the Spyderco Southard squeezes out every bit of blade length it possibly can. Hell, if you stick the fat of your thumb in the end if the handle, while closed you can slice your thumb on the tip. I've done it.
 
Only gripe I have is how wide they are when folded up in the pocket due to the large Spydie hole. Not bad on my Delca I had, but its very noticeable on the Salt 1SE. Its feather light, but wide. I have to always keep shifting the knife forward to return it to my pocket. Gets hung up a lot. Still my prefered maker as far as production folders.
 
Looking at the ratios, most of the knives are within a few percent of each other. The Endura is 39.6% to the Chill's 44.4%. Not even 5% difference. Aside from that, it seems inconsequential. I've never seen anyone complain that their 3 inch blade wasn't enough but a 3.15 inch blade would really have gotten the job done. That's 5% difference. Or even at 10% difference like the Chill and the Delica, that's 3 to 3.3 inches. That's under 1/3 of an inch. I can't imagine any normal scenario where 1/3" extra blade length would matter.

Looking at blade length to mass might make sense but there are so many factors including blade thickness. lock style, pocket clip design, liners or linerless, and obviously the scales and scale design. I see why it could matter to an ultralight backpacker, but for me it's a nonissue. The overall knife is important.

Also, for knives like the PM2 and Military, they're designed to be used with gloves on (or to be usable with gloves on). That's why they have big handles and the "oversized" Spyderhole.
 
Fanglekai said:
Looking at the ratios, most of the knives are within a few percent of each other. The Endura is 39.6% to the Chill's 44.4%. Not even 5% difference. Aside from that, it seems inconsequential. I've never seen anyone complain that their 3 inch blade wasn't enough but a 3.15 inch blade would really have gotten the job done. That's 5% difference. Or even at 10% difference like the Chill and the Delica, that's 3 to 3.3 inches. That's under 1/3 of an inch. I can't imagine any normal scenario where 1/3" extra blade length would matter.

Looking at blade length to mass might make sense but there are so many factors including blade thickness. lock style, pocket clip design, liners or linerless, and obviously the scales and scale design. I see why it could matter to an ultralight backpacker, but for me it's a nonissue. The overall knife is important.

Also, for knives like the PM2 and Military, they're designed to be used with gloves on (or to be usable with gloves on). That's why they have big handles and the "oversized" Spyderhole.
Click to expand...

I agree with this -- I feel that the larger/more ergonomic handles allow for different and better grips that then translate to additional uses/performance. An extra .25-.5 inches doesn't translate to "more useful" in the same way that additional grip/better purchase might.
 
jalcon said:
Not sure of the exact ratio, but the Spyderco Southard squeezes out every bit of blade length it possibly can. Hell, if you stick the fat of your thumb in the end if the handle, while closed you can slice your thumb on the tip. I've done it.
Click to expand...
.435 ratio for what it’s worth. I’ll stick with my “poor” ratio PM2/GB1/Millie though :thumbsup:
 
Having a long enuf handle is key to providing the leverage that you can put on the bvilade.
I'm a Spyderco nut and would not say a bad word about that brand.
But, I am also a fancier of high quality fixed blades: here are two fixed that I enjoy:
Here is my GSO 2.7 (CPM-20CV) and CPK EDC in D2.
On top, the Carothers Performance Knives 3" model: measured 3.2" blade, 4.25" grip length, 0.135" spine thickness.
The Survive Knives GSO model 2.7: measured 2.82" blade length, 3.8" grip length... 1/8" spine thickness.

Although neither of these two would do well in your "chart"... I value them highly...as do others.
The Carothers grip is said to provide greater leverage to the blade, due to its unique curved grip...
The Survive Knife also provides my large hand with a full grip on that rather short blade, and I love it.
There is more to total knife performance than your blade/grip ratio might indicate...

yCPK EDC in D2, S!K 2.7 in CPM-20CV2.jpg
 
Last edited:
My CRK small Inkosi is an overall smaller knife than the Delica, but its 2.75" blade has a longer cutting edge than the Delica's 3" blade.

However, the Delica's handle-to-blade ratio has never bothered me in the least. And that also goes for several other Spydercos as well.

If you want a Spyderco with the most edge possible for the handle, look into the SS-handled Police model.

Jim
 
I used to care about blade to handle ratios, but over time I started to realize that some of my absolute favorite knives had terrible blade/handle ratios. For example, the Fantoni Dweller:

ew1RslL.jpg


It has a 2.52" blade and a 6.38" overall length, so .39 in blade/OAL. But the knife just wouldn't be the same with a longer blade.

Trying to pack more blade into a handle just for the sake of a ratio can come at the expense of aesthetics and functionality. There's a good reason why many knives made for actual serious cutting tend to have large handles and small blades. Blade to handle ratio is just not meaningful. That's just my attitude, mind you, but it's a very liberating one!
 
Attempting to use quantitative analysis to push forward a qualitative agenda is just another way to blow smoke. People see tables and graphs and get intimidated by numbers, but the only thing here is a handful of cherry-picked data points. If the sole criteria for Quality is this ratio of blade to handle, then by all means get out the ruler--but it's not mine. It doesn't matter how many charts you use if your argument boils down to, "Spyderco suxxorz cuz I say so."
 
BitingSarcasm said:
Attempting to use quantitative analysis to push forward a qualitative agenda is just another way to blow smoke. People see tables and graphs and get intimidated by numbers, but the only thing here is a handful of cherry-picked data points. If the sole criteria for Quality is this ratio of blade to handle, then by all means get out the ruler--but it's not mine. It doesn't matter how many charts you use if your argument boils down to, "Spyderco suxxorz cuz I say so."
Click to expand...
I promise you I did not cherry pick data points to push a "qualitative agenda", and in no way do I mean to imply that the sole criteria for Quality is the blade/handle ratio. It's just one metric among many, but it is one that I think shouldn't be disregarded. But you're absolutely right in that the data points are more or less an arbitrary sampling, as I simply picked popular blades that I thought to be representative off the top of my head. It's in no way a comprehensive list; now THAT would certainly be an intimidating graph!
 
At the end of the day when the work is done, the thing that matters most is that you don't have a blister, didn't get aggravated because the tool you used wasn't sufficient for the job and you enjoy the knife you have.
So what if it takes a little more stroke to get something done, hell, I'm use to that :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top