So there's a ton of big ZTs out (or on their way)... when do we get little ones?

Personally, in the small folders my concern is not weight but a 3-3.25" blade and for the folder to be narrow and thin. For a thicker blade I'm willing to give up some thinness.

The two little Kershaws with small blade and quality build are in my estimation and possession the Speedform II 3550 (Elmax 3.25" blade and one of the best machined G10 scales ever) and the Random Leek 1660GRYST (S30V 3" blade and SS handle).

Unfortunately, the Speedform II has now been discontinued but can be easily found. Another disadvantage it has is the tiny and sharp thumbstud. It's actually beefy enough to be a ZT with minor adjustments.

The Random Leek 1660GRYST could do with thicker blade and a different handle (weight and it gets scratched a lot) to be a ZT.

I carry two other small folders often.

The CRKT Ken Onion Eros K455TXP with 3" Acuto stainless steel blade. Great flipper action like Random Leek, incredibly sharp. The blade is thin and the clip stupid. This knife is actually quite incredible! In its current form though it couldn't be a ZT.

The Chris Reeve Small Sebenza with a 3" blade is great but I'd prefer a thicker blade.

The two smallish ZT folders I have come with issues of their own.

The 0780 has a lot of potential even though discontinued. It's too thick at the bottom, the flipper doesn't work well and the thumb stud is stupid. With some fixing and shorter blade (it's 3.5" now) and narrower bottom it has great potential. The thickness is great.

The 0750 is actually great with superb action and beefiness. The blade length is good at 3.2" but the talon shape makes it limited in use. It's also too thick.

I'm looking forward to the ZT 0566 with the 3.25" blade. I have no doubt it'll be the most successful "small" blade ZT ever.
 
TotalDbag said:
Well you got to compromise somewhere, because your wants are most likely not going to be filled, because like you said, you're in the minority. And companies tend to design for the majoritie's wants.
Click to expand...

Right again. But to give up one proven area of the marketplace (customers who love high-quality "little ones") to satisfy the desires of another (customers who love high quality "pocket bricks") may not be the wisest business decision. Given its resources and relationships, I have to believe that KAI could easily figure out a way to address both areas. If not, KAI's loss will continue to be its competition's gain.
 
RamZar said:
Personally, in the small folders my concern is not weight but a 3-3.25" blade and for the folder to be narrow and thin. For a thicker blade I'm willing to give up some thinness.

The two little Kershaws with small blade and quality build are in my estimation and possession the Speedform II 3550 (Elmax 3.25" blade and one of the best machined G10 scales ever) and the Random Leek 1660GRYST (S30V 3" blade and SS handle).

Unfortunately, the Speedform II has now been discontinued but can be easily found. Another disadvantage it has is the tiny and sharp thumbstud. It's actually beefy enough to be a ZT with minor adjustments.

The Random Leek 1660GRYST could do with thicker blade and a different handle (weight and it gets scratched a lot) to be a ZT.

I carry two other small folders often.

The CRKT Ken Onion Eros K455TXP with 3" Acuto stainless steel blade. Great flipper action like Random Leek, incredibly sharp. The blade is thin and the clip stupid. This knife is actually quite incredible! In its current form though it couldn't be a ZT.

The Chris Reeve Small Sebenza with a 3" blade is great but I'd prefer a thicker blade.

The two smallish ZT folders I have come with issues of their own.

The 0780 has a lot of potential even though discontinued. It's too thick at the bottom, the flipper doesn't work well and the thumb stud is stupid. With some fixing and shorter blade (it's 3.5" now) and narrower bottom it has great potential. The thickness is great.

The 0750 is actually great with superb action and beefiness. The blade length is good at 3.2" but the talon shape makes it limited in use. It's also too thick.

I'm looking forward to the ZT 0566 with the 3.25" blade. I have no doubt it'll be the most successful "small" blade ZT ever.
Click to expand...

You sir are in the market for a Laconico Slim EDC. Trust me on this one! :)
 
bld522 said:
Right again. But to give up one proven area of the marketplace (customers who love high-quality "little ones") to satisfy the desires of another (customers who love high quality "pocket bricks") may not be the wisest business decision. Given its resources and relationships, I have to believe that KAI could easily figure out a way to address both areas. If not, KAI's loss will continue to be its competition's gain.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but you got to think about how easy it would be to produce a new niche of knives. Kershaw has two (?) Places producing their knives while Spyderco has 3(?) And even when Spyderco has three sites, they still can't keep up with the pm2 demand.
 
PURPLEDC said:
But I understand that Kai may not want to diversify they ZT brand like that. And may have set certain standards in which they wont deviate from. But if thats the case I would be perfectly fine with a Kershaw product in the 3" range with a titanium handle and KVT. Keep the ZT name for the larger stuff. But i would still love to see a 3" KVT titanium knife. And im sure plenty of others would too if designed right.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'd like to see the 3" quality material and action folder under the ZT brand. Kind of like a little big folder!

Take elements of 0750, 0780, Speedform II, random Leek, etc. and while staying at a 3" blade give us a thick quality blade and a somewhat thin & narrow handle with G10/Titanium (later CF/Titanium) with framelock.

Alternatively, the action on the 0750 is superb but make it a shorter 3" traditional blade. Shave the G10 scales to make it thinner and with steel liner lock it's somewhat inexpensive. I could fix the scales but the not the balde shape.
 
TotalDbag said:
Maybe, but you got to think about how easy it would be to produce a new niche of knives. Kershaw has two (?) Places producing their knives while Spyderco has 3(?) And even when Spyderco has three sites, they still can't keep up with the pm2 demand.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. I seriously doubt it would have been more difficult to scale down the 0560 than to supersize the Cyro. But ZT obviously chose the latter approach in designing the 0566. I don't think it takes a degree in rocket science to figure out why they did that.
 
Last edited:
bld522 said:
Hmmm. I seriously doubt it would have been more difficult to scale down the 0560 than to supersize the Cyro. But ZT obviously chose the latter approach in designing the 0566. I don't think it takes a degree in rocket science to figure out why they did that.
Click to expand...

I honestly dont really know why they did that. I mean the 0566 has none of the reasons I bought a 0560. And the 0770 has none of the attributes that attracted me to the 0777. Obviously they didnt make these new knives to market to the type of buyer I am. I just didnt know that so many people bought a 0560 simply because it was a hinderer design. I would have sworn the bearings and titanium had something to do with it.
 
PURPLEDC said:
I just didnt know that so many people bought a 0560 simply because it was a hinderer design. I would have sworn the bearings and titanium had something to do with it.
Click to expand...
D'ya think? ;)
 
Last edited:
A bit offtopic but since its been mentioned in this thread....

Is there something wrong with a steel framelock other than weight? I'm kind of a gym rat so I don't tend to notice these things.

The differences between the 0560 and 0566 other than size seem to be:
Titanium vs Steel lockbar (shouldn't the steel wear slower, leading to longer lock life?)
Manual vs AO (you can take the torsion bar out, they are drilling manual detents into the blades now)
KVT vs PB
Texturing on lockbar vs smooth
 
Krazy Cash said:
Is there something wrong with a steel framelock other than weight?
Click to expand...
Nothing at all as far as I'm concerned provided it doesn't try to pass itself off as a Hinderer design. It takes more than manufacturing a knife that looks like an XM to be worthy of associating it with the Hinderer trademark . . . or at least it does for me. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
PURPLEDC said:
I honestly dont really know why they did that. I mean the 0566 has none of the reasons I bought a 0560. And the 0770 has none of the attributes that attracted me to the 0777. Obviously they didnt make these new knives to market to the type of buyer I am. I just didnt know that so many people bought a 0560 simply because it was a hinderer design. I would have sworn the bearings and titanium had something to do with it.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the bearings and titanium did have something to do with it. I think the 0560/1 being a Hinderer design was kind of like icing on the cake, but it could really go either way depending on how you look at it. Personally, I wouldn't buy it just because it's a Hinderer design, but more because it's just an all around great knife. I know when I bought my Cryo, I forgot it was a Hinderer design. I just bought it because it seemed like a nice knife. The Cryo being a Hinderer design is like icing on the cake for me, but it could be different for someone else. They could've bought it for the sole reason of it being a Hinderer design. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
 
bld522 said:
Hmmm. I seriously doubt it would have been more difficult to scale down the 0560 than to supersize the Cyro. But ZT obviously chose the latter approach in designing the 0566. I don't think it takes a degree in rocket science to figure out why they did that.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about the 0566. You said Kershaw/ZT should make knives to fill the light small, HD blades niche, and that's what I was talking about when I said that.
 
For a small 3" folder with a beefy blade I'm getting the upcoming LionSteel SR2 Mini made from a block of titanium for the handle and Sleipner steel blade. The blade is a stout 0.157" thick (thicker than the ZT 0550) and overall weighs in at 4.9 oz.

If ZT makes something as compact and beefy I'll get one of those too.
 
While the 0560/0561 are heavily based on Rick Hinderer's XM-18 with all premium parts and designs the same cannot be said of the 0566. I'm sure many like me would've preferred a scaled down 0560 with a 3" blade. Regardless, I still think that the 0566 will be quite successful. Perhaps even more so than a scaled down 0560 since it'll cost quite a bit less.
 
KnottyEagle said:
I'm sure the bearings and titanium did have something to do with it. I think the 0560/1 being a Hinderer design was kind of like icing on the cake, but it could really go either way depending on how you look at it. Personally, I wouldn't buy it just because it's a Hinderer design, but more because it's just an all around great knife. I know when I bought my Cryo, I forgot it was a Hinderer design. I just bought it because it seemed like a nice knife. The Cryo being a Hinderer design is like icing on the cake for me, but it could be different for someone else. They could've bought it for the sole reason of it being a Hinderer design. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. But I suspect most people are initially taken with the notion that they're buying something similar to a Hinderer XM for a fraction of the aftermarket price for an original. In the case of the 0560/0561, I think they're on the right track. In the case of the 0566, I think they're deluding themselves. RamZar hit the nail right on the head for me . . .

RamZar said:
While the 0560/0561 are heavily based on Rick Hinderer's XM-18 with all premium parts and designs the same cannot be said of the 0566.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bld522 said:
That makes sense. But I suspect most people are initially taken with the notion that they're buying something similar to a Hinderer XM for a fraction of the aftermarket price for an original. In the case of the 0560/0561, I think they're on the right track. In the case of the 0566, I think they're sadly mistaken. RamZar hit the nail right on the head for me . . .
Click to expand...
That also makes sense, but I think the two main reasons for the creation of the 0566 is people wanted a smaller version of the 0566, although it's not an exact scaled down version like some people were hoping for. The second reason is ZT wanted to get the 0566 in as many hands as possible, sort of like the 0350. If ZT used the same exact materials as the 0560/1, than the whole idea of a cheaper 0560/1 would be thrown out the window.
 
I agree on the marketing/design force argument of making a smaller cheaper 056x with the 0566.

That is the same reasoning behind a smaller cheaper 030x with the 0350.

The 0350 has been a huge success in both numbers and variety.

I'm sure KAI is aiming for similar plateaus with the 0566.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top