Request for photos of disassembled S-type Wengers

[Nikos]

I'm pondering what would be the best way to go about de-S'ing an S-type Wenger (e.g., S557). I mean, what's the best way to turn its blade into a non-locking one? File on the locking tab on the back of the blade? Or go about filing the backsrping? I don't want to disassemble my 557 yet, so if anyone has an S* Wenger in pieces, could you please grab a pic of the knife blade layer exploded? Along the same lines, has anyone ever done such a mod before?

[enki_ck]

The lock on the S-type Wengers is basically a backlock like on the Buck 110, but instead of lifting the lock/backspring from the back you push it out of the way with the lock tab. I wouldn't file anything cause you'd have to file both the knife and the backspring notch. I think the simplest and best way to de S an S-type Wenger would be to take out the whole blade layer and replace it with a blade and backspring from a non S-type Wenger. There are plenty of cheap used Commanders on eBay where you can harvest the blade from.

[Nikos]

The lock on the S-type Wengers is basically a backlock like on the Buck 110, but instead of lifting the lock/backspring from the back you push it out of the way with the lock tab. I wouldn't file anything cause you'd have to file both the knife and the backspring notch. I think the simplest and best way to de S an S-type Wenger would be to take out the whole blade layer and replace it with a blade and backspring from a non S-type Wenger. There are plenty of cheap used Commanders on eBay where you can harvest the blade from.

Yes, I know it's a lock-back. Since back locks work in a pull-based fashion, you can usually disable the lock and still have decent blade retention by filing the lock tab on the blade. In my 557 that is just a small nab on the back on the blade, it would be possible to file it away without even disassembling the knife. However, I can only be sure that would work if I could also have a look at the shape of the backspring, and in order to do that I'd have to disassemble the 557. Sort of self-defeating, eh? Hence my request for pics...

[jzmtl]

There is a photo on SOSAK forum in knifeforum, but since they banned me even though I didn't even post anything for months prior to that, I can't help you any further.

[Nikos]

Just logged on myself after several months of inactivity, fortunately with no problem. I'll try to scour around for that photo.

On a sidenote, Jimmy Nowka got the corporate boot? Yikes!

[Nikos]

Got it, by the lord of lime jello nonetheless (hope he doesn't mind my posting the photos here). So it seems I was right; filing away that nab on the back of the blade should make the S557 a proper slipjoint with proper retention, as the backspring remains in full contact and looks pretty much like a modified non-locking backspring. Now to find a narrow enough file...

[Sr.Multiherramienta]

Here you have some pictures with the unlock piece and compared to a normal blade. Springs of this different blades are not compatible, some modification is needed. You are lucky, I'm working with this pieces now.

For example, you can make a normal spring lock, but the unlock piece is not going to work, it needs the bump of the special spring to work.

If you only want to disable the lock, the easiest way is to remove the bump in the blade;then you have to add a little spacer to replace the locking "button". Anyway, I think disassembly is mandatory.

But the locking blade is great! Leave it!

[Nikos]

Here you have some pictures with the unlock piece and compared to a normal blade. Springs of this different blades are not compatible, some modification is needed. You are lucky, I'm working with this pieces now.

For example, you can make a normal spring lock, but the unlock piece is not going to work, it needs the bump of the special spring to work.

If you only want to disable the lock, the easiest way is to remove the bump in the blade;then you have to add a little spacer to replace the locking "button". Anyway, I think disassembly is mandatory.

But the locking blade is great! Leave it!

(Image removed from quote.)

Hey, thanks for the pics mate.

The issue with your photos is that the non-locking backspring is from a SAK without a back tool, that's why it's so totally different. Contrast that to the 2nd photo attached to my post above. Comparing the two backspring photos above, you can see how the locking backspring is just a non-locking one with some material removed to accomodate the lock nab. Moreover, as Spork mentioned in that SOSAK thread, the two blades are of identical width, so the lock lever is replaced by a spacer in the non-locking SAK. What this boils down to is that a s557 (or other s* Wenger) can be slip-jointed by filing away that nab on the back of the blade tang, and also taking a hacksaw and file to the unlock lever. No disassembly/reassembly required. I have nothing against locks, but some countries have rather strict laws prohibiting carry of locking knives (see UK).

[Sr.Multiherramienta]

[/img]Hey, thanks for the pics mate.

The issue with your photos is that the non-locking backspring is from a SAK without a back tool, that's why it's so totally different. Contrast that to the 2nd photo attached to my post above. Comparing the two backspring photos above, you can see how the locking backspring is just a non-locking one with some material removed to accomodate the lock nab. Moreover, as Spork mentioned in that SOSAK thread, the two blades are of identical width, so the lock lever is replaced by a spacer in the non-locking SAK. What this boils down to is that a s557 (or other s* Wenger) can be slip-jointed by filing away that nab on the back of the blade tang, and also taking a hacksaw and file to the unlock lever. No disassembly/reassembly required. I have nothing against locks, but some countries have rather strict laws prohibiting carry of locking knives (see UK).

You're welcome! I'm just trying to do something with Wengers now.

My back spring is the same as the one in your pictures, it's just that... I made a mistake in the second picture and I inverted the spring But it is the same spring. The Wenger spring with no tools in the back is different from these two.

Anyway, I was thinking and I agree that you can do the change with just a thin file, you only have to remove that "hook" of the blade and then, if you want, cut the lock lever and leave it only as a spacer. Maybe it's not perfect, but no disassembly needed with this solution. I had an old locking Wenger whose lock didn't work only because of wear. It's the same thing.

I didn't know that about the UK!