I love this knife. Why?
Pros:
1) The blade shape.
2) The 'double grind' and the VG 10 steel.
3) Very ergonomic handle (fits like a glove).
4) Overall looks are very pleasing to the eye.
5) Plenty of function.
Cons: Just aesthetic ones
1) The proportions of the lanyard hole and Spydie hole in the blade; and the 'pins' in the handle.
For me, these proportions take away from the look of the knife. So, let me explain:
The hole in the blade is good (not too big) and still gives it that Spydie trademark (some people just don't like this but that's not a con). O.K. the lanyard hole is too small and should be at least the same size as the 'Spydie hole' in the blade. The pins in the handle; since they are exposed are also too small and scream 'weak', even though they may not be in reality. A good example of 'strength in pins is the Bark River Gunny; they don't look wimpy and give added 'assurance' that the knife is strong. Therefore I reckon the pins should be bigger in circumference on the Temperance, in order to achieve some much needed balance in the size of the holes and their aesthetic appeal.
I do recognise that this may be a minor point to some, but it's because I love the overall looks of the knife that I felt compelled to comment. To anyone keen on clean lines of this knife, and the simple elegance it portrays; the holes and pins show little thought regarding proportions.
Recap:
1) Spydie hole is fine - If there were no other holes in the handle it would look better overall.
2) Since there are other holes - the lanyard hole - it should be carefully sized so as not to distract from the lines of the knife (draw the eyes away from the form), and yet still be functional.
3) Same for the pins - either don't show them or adjust the size (make them bigger), for two reasons: impression of strength and overall looks.
Any thoughts?
Sorry, I don't have a photo.
Pros:
1) The blade shape.
2) The 'double grind' and the VG 10 steel.
3) Very ergonomic handle (fits like a glove).
4) Overall looks are very pleasing to the eye.
5) Plenty of function.
Cons: Just aesthetic ones
1) The proportions of the lanyard hole and Spydie hole in the blade; and the 'pins' in the handle.
For me, these proportions take away from the look of the knife. So, let me explain:
The hole in the blade is good (not too big) and still gives it that Spydie trademark (some people just don't like this but that's not a con). O.K. the lanyard hole is too small and should be at least the same size as the 'Spydie hole' in the blade. The pins in the handle; since they are exposed are also too small and scream 'weak', even though they may not be in reality. A good example of 'strength in pins is the Bark River Gunny; they don't look wimpy and give added 'assurance' that the knife is strong. Therefore I reckon the pins should be bigger in circumference on the Temperance, in order to achieve some much needed balance in the size of the holes and their aesthetic appeal.
I do recognise that this may be a minor point to some, but it's because I love the overall looks of the knife that I felt compelled to comment. To anyone keen on clean lines of this knife, and the simple elegance it portrays; the holes and pins show little thought regarding proportions.
Recap:
1) Spydie hole is fine - If there were no other holes in the handle it would look better overall.
2) Since there are other holes - the lanyard hole - it should be carefully sized so as not to distract from the lines of the knife (draw the eyes away from the form), and yet still be functional.
3) Same for the pins - either don't show them or adjust the size (make them bigger), for two reasons: impression of strength and overall looks.
Any thoughts?
Sorry, I don't have a photo.