Where Spydercos Fall Short

halden.doerge said:
I'd say that the Spyderco Mantra has a pretty good blade to handle ratio. One of the few spydercos that doesn't use a riccaso or forward finiger choil.
Click to expand...
And yet it's not as good as the delica. Handle is funky on that one. It's almost like there isn't enough of it. ;)

Spydercos tend to be more function over form. IME they tend to be better cutters then other knives. I wouldn't trade that for looks.
 
Nah, a little mathematics is more than our kids are using on a daily basis I think. At least we're exercising the principles.

It's at least useful for quantitative comparison. Whether the comparison is relevant to someone is a personal thing, but hey, it's comparable.

Just wait until we get into the "cutting edge vs weight" part of the chart.
marcinek said:
A little mathematics is a dangerous thing.
Click to expand...
 
Shotgun said:
And yet it's not as good as the delica. Handle is funky on that one. It's almost like there isn't enough of it. ;)

Spydercos tend to be more function over form. IME they tend to be better cutters then other knives. I wouldn't trade that for looks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when I owned the mantra I kept always wanting to choke up onto the blade. LOL.
 
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...


Hate to break it to you, but a longer edge does mean less dulling for the same amount of work, so it is a qualitative issue for a given size...

Gaston
 
danbot said:
Look at all these ratios!!
OvcNZ2c.png

Which one is better? And why?;)
Click to expand...

Depends on how much of the body (rather than the tip alone) is used to screw.;)
 
danbot said:
Provided that you use the entire cutting edge for said work.
Click to expand...

At times the length of the cutting edge does make a difference. Try cutting cardboard with a Dragonfly and then a Military you shall know it. Oh well, I know you knew it, or you were just talking about opening envelopes.
 
danbot said:
Provided that you use the entire cutting edge for said work.
Click to expand...

No, because even if you only use part of the edge and wear it more heavily, you still have more pristine length remaining. It is an absolute advantage, with only the eventual cost of a slightly longer sharpening stroke, which in a folder's case is not a disadvantage but beneficial.

A longer sharpening stroke (under 6") makes it easier to control the edge angle precisely, if the belly is not too pronounced. So a longer edge for a folder is not only longer lasting, but easier to sharpen. Especially if, like me, you minimize rocking, free hand, by stroking nearly parallel to the edge (well, more of a very shallow diagonal in my case).

Parallel stroking means the edge portion near the handle is harder to get at, if the edge extremity is not deeply "heeled", which is the case on most folders. On a longer edge, the "hard to get at" portion will be proportionately smaller than on a shorter edge, which is yet another advantage of longer edges on folders (for free hand sharpening).

Longer edges on folders sharpen better and more naturally (if not recurved), and will have less of a dull spot near the handle when sharpened free hand. One sharpened, their edges will last longer.

Gaston
 
Gaston444 said:
No, because even if you only use part of the edge and wear it more heavily, you still have more pristine length remaining. It is an absolute advantage, with only the eventual cost of a slightly longer sharpening stroke, which in a folder's case is not a disadvantage but beneficial.

A longer sharpening stroke (under 6") makes it easier to control the edge angle precisely, if the belly is not too pronounced. So a longer edge for a folder is not only longer lasting, but easier to sharpen. Especially if, like me, you minimize rocking, free hand, by stroking nearly parallel to the edge (well, more of a very shallow diagonal in my case).

Parallel stroking means the edge portion near the handle is harder to get at, if the edge extremity is not deeply "heeled", which is the case on most folders. On a longer edge, the "hard to get at" portion will be proportionately smaller than on a shorter edge, which is yet another advantage of longer edges on folders (for free hand sharpening).

Longer edges on folders sharpen better and more naturally (if not recurved), and will have less of a dull spot near the handle when sharpened free hand. One sharpened, their edges will last longer.

Gaston
Click to expand...
Huh ?
 
I've never ruled out a Spyderco because of a bad blade to handle length ratio.

The one mathematical ratio that sometimes gets me on Spydies is "pocket obstruction factor" or:

[[(closed greatest height)/(available pocket width)]/(usable blade length)]

This is what causes problems for me on Spydies like the Domino, Dice and Sage.

Gaston444 said:
No, because even if you only use part of the edge and wear it more heavily, you still have more pristine length remaining. It is an absolute advantage, with only the eventual cost of a slightly longer sharpening stroke, which in a folder's case is not a disadvantage but beneficial.

A longer sharpening stroke (under 6") makes it easier to control the edge angle precisely, if the belly is not too pronounced. So a longer edge for a folder is not only longer lasting, but easier to sharpen. Especially if, like me, you minimize rocking, free hand, by stroking nearly parallel to the edge (well, more of a very shallow diagonal in my case).

Parallel stroking means the edge portion near the handle is harder to get at, if the edge extremity is not deeply "heeled", which is the case on most folders. On a longer edge, the "hard to get at" portion will be proportionately smaller than on a shorter edge, which is yet another advantage of longer edges on folders (for free hand sharpening).

Longer edges on folders sharpen better and more naturally (if not recurved), and will have less of a dull spot near the handle when sharpened free hand. One sharpened, their edges will last longer.
Gaston
Click to expand...
I ran this through Google Translate and I still didn't understand. Damn this cursed, slow brain of mine!
 
My new hope/wish would have been to have an update on the Shaman even though its new/not yet released. The blade length is almost perfect (im more of 3.75 inches my sweet spot) but the finger choil loses too much cutting edge to my liking.

If you were to remove the choil from blade and from the handle it would have been perfect. The handle choil if removed, move the finger guard a bit forward.

Just wishfull thinking, Spyderco loves their finger choils. Its just not me.
 
You're lucky Google didn't crash and burn trying to translate that!
:p

Hackenslash said:
I've never ruled out a Spyderco because of a bad blade to handle length ratio.

The one mathematical ratio that sometimes gets me on Spydies is "pocket obstruction factor" or:

[[(closed greatest height)/(available pocket width)]/(usable blade length)]

This is what causes problems for me on Spydies like the Domino, Dice and Sage.


I ran this through Google Translate and I still didn't understand. Damn this cursed, slow brain of mine!
Click to expand...
 
Gaston444 said:
No, because even if you only use part of the edge and wear it more heavily, you still have more pristine length remaining. It is an absolute advantage, with only the eventual cost of a slightly longer sharpening stroke, which in a folder's case is not a disadvantage but beneficial.

A longer sharpening stroke (under 6") makes it easier to control the edge angle precisely, if the belly is not too pronounced. So a longer edge for a folder is not only longer lasting, but easier to sharpen. Especially if, like me, you minimize rocking, free hand, by stroking nearly parallel to the edge (well, more of a very shallow diagonal in my case).

Parallel stroking means the edge portion near the handle is harder to get at, if the edge extremity is not deeply "heeled", which is the case on most folders. On a longer edge, the "hard to get at" portion will be proportionately smaller than on a shorter edge, which is yet another advantage of longer edges on folders (for free hand sharpening).

Longer edges on folders sharpen better and more naturally (if not recurved), and will have less of a dull spot near the handle when sharpened free hand. One sharpened, their edges will last longer.

Gaston
Click to expand...
You do realize that the OP is talking about a ratio that works out to less than 1/8 of an inch difference between the example knives right?
And about 3/8 of an inch from his ideal 0.5 ratio right?

I prefer to leave my worries to real world practical implications.
I don't sweat the small stuff!
On a longer edge, the "hard to get at" portion will be proportionately smaller than on a shorter edge, which is yet another advantage of longer edges on folders (for free hand sharpening).
Click to expand...
If there is a "hard to get at" portion to sharpen.....won't it also be "hard to get at" to cut with? And if someone is really good at sharpening the entire edge, won't they have a major advantage over your sharpened edge no matter how long or short the edge may be?
 
I'm not sure how this multi-quote thing works, but it should be up there. Gaston, leading off with "hate to break it to you" implies that you are letting me in on some secret knowledge to which you are privy. But I don't even agree with your general premise that greater length leads to less dullness, as it ignores the variables of edge hardness vs. the hardness of the material being cut. I could see that being a logarithmic progression, but not linear. Also, qualitative refers to properties that generally cannot be measured numerically. There are ways to get at a mathematical relationship here, but not without a whole lot more data.
 
danbot said:
You do realize that the OP is talking about a ratio that works out to less than 1/8 of an inch difference between the example knives right?
And about 3/8 of an inch from his ideal 0.5 ratio right?
Click to expand...
Actually, if you read the example in the OP, it can make a real difference. On an 8 inch overall length knife the difference between a 0.45 and 0.35 ratio is 0.8 of an inch. On a 10 inch long knife, the difference is an entire inch of cutting edge. To me that seems significant
 
Indoril said:
Actually, if you read the example in the OP, it can make a real difference. On an 8 inch overall length knife the difference between a 0.45 and 0.35 ratio is 0.8 of an inch. On a 10 inch long knife, the difference is an entire inch of cutting edge. To me that seems significant
Click to expand...
I was just using the examples of folders that you provided.
And I'm pretty sure your ideal 0.5 ratio of handle to blade does not apply to a 10" long blade. Correct?:)
 
Another way to think about it.

I have a 4" long grip, more or less. I want a knife grip to comfortable and not slip out of my hand. If I want a full hand grip, then I also want the blade to be as big as the law allows that works with that handle length. All other things being equal, the longer the blade in this case, the better the knife and the longer the cutting edge that I can decide to use or not use and preserve a pristine sharp section, or the longer the edge I have to maintain a longer cutting time before sharpening.

Then there is another case. I want a full grip, but have legal restrictions on the length of the blade. All other criteria are out because there is no choice. A nice handle and a blade that works within the law.

Another case. I don't care if I have a full grip, just one that works. I still want the biggest blade that can fit in that handle for the same reasons as mentioned in the first case. If I go for a shorter handle, like a Victorinox Cadet, I still want the biggest blade that will fit too.

Last case. I need a very small blade for precise work, surgical type cutting for example. All you need is a handle big enough to control the light use and have fine control, and the blade must match the work being done. The a 1.5" blade with a 3.25" handle might be good like one of my Victorinox has in addition to its 2.5" blade.

If you have a knife works the way you want, has the right ergonomics, has a blade that does what you want, and isn't too big to carry when you need it, good! If you want a knife that gives you the most cutting edge for the size of the knife overall, who can argue that a person should not be concerned about that criteria? Oh yes, many obviously for some reason.
 
Last edited:
Ideal blade length for a task depends on the particulars of that task. The more distant the tip is, the harder it becomes to make precise cuts with it. By the same token, too short of a blade reduces your ability to make long uninterrupted cuts. As a result, the average blade length for most folders is in the 3-4" range, as this is the generally agreed upon sweet spot for balancing those factors. Hand size, however, tends to be bigger than that for most individuals, and so if you want a full sized handle with a controllable general-use blade then that's kind of the proportion you're going to end up with as a matter of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top