Is it time to CQI the PM2?

Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
5,346
I was reading a review about the PM2 and it noted that the platform has not gone through a round of CQI like some other popular Spyderco knives. The reviewer's point was that this platform just "got it right" and has never needed significant improvement.

My opinion? The PM2 is a classic, must-have-at-least-one in every knife collection. It would get into the Hall of Fame on the first vote. Among the best knives ever. They can keep making them forever and I'm sure they'll sell forever, just the way they are.

But if (IF) Spyderco were to run it through the CQI process, what do you think should be updated?

I'd maybe suggest they put even a modest chamfer on the scales or do a hint of contouring. Something to soften those edges a bit.

(full disclaimer - if Spyderco has changed this knife in some way, I'm no expert on it's history. Please note what has been done.)
 
Yeah maybe change the stop pin like Colin said. They could also key the standoffs. I love the PM2. I’ve had more PM2’s than any other single knife by a mile - carrying one today. The main thing I don’t like about the PM2 is that it is not pleasant to disassemble and the action seems to be affected by almost all of the screws so it can take a bit of work to get it tuned perfectly.
 
I wouldn’t change anything about it, but I WOULD like to request the addition of a backlock version similar to what they tried with the Manix... take out the steel liners, and give me a smooth (not so smooth it’s polished like the KnifeJoy smock, just smoother than current) g10 backlock version. That would be a sweet knife.
 
The floating stop pin seems like a logical switch; I like that a lot on the Millie. Ditto on chamfering the handles just a bit more.

I'd love to see the flared lanyard tube replaced with a standoff (I'm not a fob guy), or if preserving the hole is important then with a non-flared part. I've never taken apart a PM2 because I'm too worried about that tube.
 
I wouldn’t worry about that, I did too before I tried and honestly it’s pretty easy to pop in and out by using a screw driver to torque the scales apart, just requires slight pressure.

Honestly, to me, it’s perfect. Love everything. Would like a slightly beefier tip but I’ve never had any issue and honestly and the fine tip is definitely nice for a lot of things. Bowie type blades tend to have pretty fine tips anyways.
 
Nothing needs to be changed, maybe except that the scales can be chamfered a bit more, which is frankly a very minor thing. I fail to see the benefits of changing to a floating pin on the PM2 platform. I mean I have owned 10+ PM2s and all of them have or can be easily tuned to have dead-centered blade, drop shut action, and without any blade play. So the floating pin makes disassembly/assemble easier or just two fewer screws to work on?
 
Has anyone noticed a change in the pivot "bushing", for lack of a better term? My 2019-D DLC S30V PM2 had (I've since sold it) a groove down the center of the bushing, whereas my older ones in other steels don't.

Personally, I think a Military 2 needs to happen first.
 
Refresh my memory on what a floating stop pin is.Please
The floating pin method makes it easier to get a great action because you don’t need the pin width to exactly match the blade+washer width. But it’s less strong than the screwed blade stop.
I trust Spyderco’s choice of which design to use in which knife.
It would be difficult to improve the PM2. Yes, chamfering the scales would be nice, but this costs money. Everything is a trade off. At this point, the blocky handles are almost a trademark and I suspect people would complain if they rounded them.
 
Spea
The floating pin method makes it easier to get a great action because you don’t need the pin width to exactly match the blade+washer width. But it’s less strong than the screwed blade stop.
I trust Spyderco’s choice of which design to use in which knife.
It would be difficult to improve the PM2. Yes, chamfering the scales would be nice, but this costs money. Everything is a trade off. At this point, the blocky handles are almost a trademark and I suspect people would complain if they rounded them.
Speaking of which, there are people on this forum who desire the Military model to remain liner lock, when the compression lock is objectively superior. This kind of conservatism is what happens with a very successful model.
 
I was reading a review about the PM2 and it noted that the platform has not gone through a round of CQI like some other popular Spyderco knives. The reviewer's point was that this platform just "got it right" and has never needed significant improvement.

My opinion? The PM2 is a classic, must-have-at-least-one in every knife collection. It would get into the Hall of Fame on the first vote. Among the best knives ever. They can keep making them forever and I'm sure they'll sell forever, just the way they are.

But if (IF) Spyderco were to run it through the CQI process, what do you think should be updated?

I'd maybe suggest they put even a modest chamfer on the scales or do a hint of contouring. Something to soften those edges a bit.

(full disclaimer - if Spyderco has changed this knife in some way, I'm no expert on it's history. Please note what has been done.)
The PM2 design is difficult to improve. But there is a design/manufacturing improvement I’d like to see. People claim the PM2 blade is 0.020” behind the edge. But mine (very new) is 0.022-0.024”. You would get a huge cutting performance gain if they reduced the TBE. I’d like to see it held to 0.018-0.020” over all production tolerances. TBE makes a huge difference in cutting heavy cardboard or wood. Assuming equal edge angle, I find it more important than sharpness.
 
BTW, I have two Taichung Spyderco’s, and both have superior TBE. My GBF 2 is as little as 0.016”, and my Caribbean as little as 0.018”. These outperform almost everything else I have. Does anyone know, are all Taichung models like this?
 
Responses thus far lead me to a question - what makes something CQI versus a new or derivative model?

In my mind, blade shapes and lock backs are derivative or new models.

CQI should be aimed at quality discrepancies, fit and finish issues, systemic warranty issues, no?

On other Spyderco models, what did CQI address, like on the spydiechef, for example?
 
Spea

Speaking of which, there are people on this forum who desire the Military model to remain liner lock, when the compression lock is objectively superior. This kind of conservatism is what happens with a very successful model.

Please elaborate on "superior" in what sense? That compression lock notch will create a hot spot for extended cutting whereas with the liner lock you can cut all day long without any hot spot. I do think the compression lock is stronger than the liner lock though it is debatable whether the increased strength is necessary for a folding knife.
 
Back
Top