I remember a thread a few weeks back where Sal mentioned (not sure of the exact words) that Spydercos fixed blades do not enjoy the same popularity as most of the folders, and that they just never seem to catch on. At the time, I really couldn't comment, because i hadn't handled many of Spyderco's fixed blades.
Now I feel more able to express my shock at such information. I still have only handled a few of the fixed blades, namely the Temperance, Ronin, and Kumo, but I cannot for the life of me understand why these knives aren't more popular.
The Temperance is a ROCK of a knife. I swear the thing would survive a nuclear blast with nothing more than a few scratches. The Ronin is the sharpest knife I've handled. It's so sharp I'm almost afraid to pick it up. And the Kumo is simply put, a work of art. I can't find a single thing wrong with any of these fixed blades. I've not handled the Moran, Perrin, or Spot, but I think Spyderco's knives tend to be consistent for the most part, and I would expect these knives to function as well as the ones I mentioned.
Which brings me back to my point. Why are these not more popular?
Are fixed blades just not as desired as folders? Are Spyderco's fixed blades being underestimated because they're primarily known for folders? Is it because fixed blades are not as easy to carry? Perhaps I'm just jumping to conclusions having only handled a few of Spyderco's fixed blades?
I'm really at a loss here, can anyone explain why this is the case. I would love to see more fixed blades from Spyderco, they do a D*** good job with them, better in fact than a lot of companies whose ONLY products are fixed blades. Not to mention that for what Spyderco's knives are capable of, they are infinitely cheaper than other comparable knives. The best quality for the money spent, in my opinion.
This just doesn't make sense.