"Frame Lock Conversion" Idea...

[Kaizen1]

Hey Steve,

I remembered an idea that I thought of some time ago, the other day. I wouldn't be surprised if you and many others have already thought of this and determined if it's even a doable idea. But I'd like to know because I just gotta know if it would work.

This is for G-10 handles with liner locks, to convert them into a frame lock-sorta. I was wondering if it would be possible to:

-Cut into the G-10 on the liner lock side and separate the part that covers the part of the liner that moves under the tang to lock the knife open.
-Then screw that piece of G-10 onto the moving part of the lock

Basically, this would look like a frame lock, but it's really a liner lock with a piece of the G-10 attached to the liner, allowing the users grip to keep the lock in place like a normal frame lock.

One of the problems I can think of for this idea would be that the lock kind of bends, as where the G-10 doesn't. I imagine that that could be taken care of by just attaching a slightly shorter pience of G-10 to the lock and not something that would cover the enitre section of the lock bar.

I really think I'm not explaining this too well. Let me know what you think.

 

[STR]

I think I follow you and I vaguely recall seeing something once from Schrade if I'm not mistaken.

However I think the G10 would have to be two separate pieces and then its like why even use it you know?

An overlay or partial scale cut short to allow the index finger and other fingers to get behind the lock to support it would probably work just as well and for that matter you could just as easily screw a separate piece of titanium equal in thickness to the G10 scale to the lock to effectively make it thicker where it contacts the blade if you wanted and if not that at least to give your fingers something even with the scale so it sticks out the same distance with no drop off. This would probably act to aid securing the lock contact just like a frame lock but being a thinner lock that is actually sprung it may just inhibit the proper spring action for all I know. I've not heard of anyone doing such a thing before.

I have inlayed hard stainless to the ti locks at the contact before to decrease indenting and wear but that is another story really and the jury is still out on whether that was even necessary. I've also thought at times to myself that with frame lock folders with extreme wear and over travel to the lock where the owner was very attached to the folder that if the stop pin had already been bumped up and the lock was to the point that it is time to remake the whole lock side that it would be much easier to simply buy a Case hardened 4-40 socket head screw and create a new one piece blade stop contact with the hardened 4-40 screw seated into it so the hardened head of the screw was what the blade actually hit when you opened it. This way your new blade stop could be made out of even something as soft as aluminum if you wanted because the blade would actually be hitting the head of the screw as the new stop pin.

Then each time the lock worked its way across the tang contact from wear you could simply back the screw on your blade stop out a bump and refresh the contact with the simple twist of a torx or hex driver. If you wanted you could even incoporate a secondary 2-56 or 1-70 size screw hidden on the inside of the new spacer/blade stop that would function as a set pin preventing the blade stop screw from moving once you set it where it needed to be for the proper lock function.

Lastly, its just my thoughts but its probably far less work to just remake a liner lock into a true frame lock using thicker titanium than it is to mess with any of this stuff but we can always dream I guess. :thumbup:

STR

 

[biogon]

I think I've seen a number of custom makers do something similar, but basically separating out a composite overlay and screw it onto the lockbar.

Elishewitz comes to mind... the rest, I'm drawing a blank.

I'm not sure it has much function besides appearance/comfort.

-j

 

[Kaizen1]

I think I follow you and I vaguely recall seeing something once from Schrade if I'm not mistaken.

However I think the G10 would have to be two separate pieces and then its like why even use it you know?

An overlay or partial scale cut short to allow the index finger and other fingers to get behind the lock to support it would probably work just as well and for that matter you could just as easily screw a separate piece of titanium equal in thickness to the G10 scale to the lock to effectively make it thicker where it contacts the blade if you wanted and if not that at least to give your fingers something even with the scale so it sticks out the same distance with no drop off. This would probably act to aid securing the lock contact just like a frame lock but being a thinner lock that is actually sprung it may just inhibit the proper spring action for all I know. I've not heard of anyone doing such a thing before.

I have inlayed hard stainless to the ti locks at the contact before to decrease indenting and wear but that is another story really and the jury is still out on whether that was even necessary. I've also thought at times to myself that with frame lock folders with extreme wear and over travel to the lock where the owner was very attached to the folder that if the stop pin had already been bumped up and the lock was to the point that it is time to remake the whole lock side that it would be much easier to simply buy a Case hardened 4-40 socket head screw and create a new one piece blade stop contact with the hardened 4-40 screw seated into it so the hardened head of the screw was what the blade actually hit when you opened it. This way your new blade stop could be made out of even something as soft as aluminum if you wanted because the blade would actually be hitting the head of the screw as the new stop pin.

Then each time the lock worked its way across the tang contact from wear you could simply back the screw on your blade stop out a bump and refresh the contact with the simple twist of a torx or hex driver. If you wanted you could even incoporate a secondary 2-56 or 1-70 size screw hidden on the inside of the new spacer/blade stop that would function as a set pin preventing the blade stop screw from moving once you set it where it needed to be for the proper lock function.

Lastly, its just my thoughts but its probably far less work to just remake a liner lock into a true frame lock using thicker titanium than it is to mess with any of this stuff but we can always dream I guess. :thumbup:

STR

I just thought that it might be easier to do that rather than make a whole side out of titanium. I was curious if the contact area mattered that much.

Your idea on the use of a screw sounds interesting. It sounds kind of like what I was able to do with a compression lock on a Yojimbo.

 

[Kaizen1]

I'm not sure it has much function besides appearance/comfort.

-j

I think from a practical perspective, this modification if successful would at least make the lock more secure because it would allow one's grip to support the lock up.

 

[biogon]

Yes... this is true.

To add some more thought to the issue...

If you look at when leaf-style locks fail, it's largely because the lockbar's mate face area slips on the tang, not because the lockbar crushes.

So you do have a good point that adding manual pressure onto the bar would cause it to stay engaged.

On the other hand, leaf-style locks in the 0.050" category tend to be flimsier, and will overengage with pressure due to the bar itself bowing and foreshortening the entire lock (You also see this happening on framelocks, but my guess is that it's because there's give elsewhere in the system -- maybe the frame bending, maybe the washers/pivots?)

I guess all I'm saying is that I've played with enough 0.050" class leaf locks to be wary of putting much manual pressure on it in the way that a framelock has pressure on it. They're kind of, well, wiggly and flimsy.

-j

 

[Kaizen1]

Yes... this is true.

To add some more thought to the issue...

If you look at when leaf-style locks fail, it's largely because the lockbar's mate face area slips on the tang, not because the lockbar crushes.

So you do have a good point that adding manual pressure onto the bar would cause it to stay engaged.

On the other hand, leaf-style locks in the 0.050" category tend to be flimsier, and will overengage with pressure due to the bar itself bowing and foreshortening the entire lock (You also see this happening on framelocks, but my guess is that it's because there's give elsewhere in the system -- maybe the frame bending, maybe the washers/pivots?)

I guess all I'm saying is that I've played with enough 0.050" class leaf locks to be wary of putting much manual pressure on it in the way that a framelock has pressure on it. They're kind of, well, wiggly and flimsy.

-j

IIRC, I saw some comparative pictures of a Spyderco Military and a Strider folder with a liner lock (it might have been a frame lock). What was interesting about it was there was a section on the lock bar at the lower section on the Strider and it was thinned down to allow the bar to bend. It was as thick as the Military's liner lock at that section.

So if the liner on the liner lock was thick enough, then maybe the conversion would work. My question would be if it would make it any easier or cheaper to do than doing a full on frame lock conversion, assuming the liner was thick enough for this type of mod.