and finally... a 91mm mod

[AimlessWanderer]

The last of the SAK mods I want to do is on the 91mm frame:

Take a CT41
Remove the pliers
Replace the small blade with pruner blade
Replace the main blade with a serrated blade

.... but I'm undecided if I want to go a step further and take apart a Voyager Lite for this mod too

Add the Phillips and light layer
Swap the hooks over for the nail file
Add the Voyager clock scales

Is it a waste of a Voyager lite? Is the Phillips superfluous if I already have the Cybertool layer? Or will this actually be a significantly better tool because of the extra add-ons?

Thoughts?

[Toolslinger]

Just my 2 cents based on my CT usage.

I prefer the driver on the CT over the philips layer as it covers the same functions and I don't need the light or mag glass that sits opposite it and the associated thickness that it adds.

If you're going to add the CT layer, leave the philips out.

As to the nail file and scales, I have no input as I don't use the nail file and use a dedicated watch.

[hiraethus]

Yeah, I'd not bother with the light/phillips, or the Voyager scales either.  But I'd not use the serrated blade, or the pruner blade and I wouldn't remove the pliers either, so what do I know?

[eddie1115]

You're a modding machine these days 

I like the first set of ideas, especially if you have a plier based MT nearby with plain edge blades.  It would make a great combo.  I had a CT Lite for a while, with the light and mag glass, and found not enough function for the added thickness, for me.  As others said, the phillips is pretty well covered (especially if a paired MT happens to have one).  And unless you often use the scale functions on the Voyager Lite and would miss them otherwise, I'd leave that one in tact.

[AimlessWanderer]

I'm making best use of my kitchen table before I sell it 

Chris, so you'd mod it exactly as it is?  Seems like a waste of brass rod to me 

Cheers fellers  The Voyager Lite is one of those SAKs I really like, but never used. I wondered if I incorporated in into this I might like it better and get benefit from it, but your suggestiongs are making it sound quite a wasteful thing to do 

[hiraethus]

Chris, so you'd mod it exactly as it is?  Seems like a waste of brass rod to me 

Yep.  I had a CT41, traded it and wish I hadn't.  Must get another sometime.  Actually, I'd take a CT41, remove the woodsaw and add the phillips/magnifier layer.

[AimlessWanderer]

So you do think there's merits to adding the Phillips to a Cybertool? Or is that just so you can get the magnifier?

[lowtech]

I think the layer-Phillips can take more torque than teh one in the CT´s Bit holder, so it has a benefit.
What about adding the Wenger wrench opposite teh Phillips? I think that has been done a few times? 

[AimlessWanderer]

Thanks for the input Thomas 

If you look at the Wenger mod I'm currently doing, you'll see I'm adding the snap shackle as the Wenger wrench is not something I'd use. I also quite like the little light on the Voyager. It's low on lumens, but still useful. The only issue I have is how easily it turns itself on in the pocket. However, with the size it may end up, especially if it has the Voyager scales on, it's not going to be something you'd just chuck in your pocket with your coins and keys. Aside from size, I'd have to thing about not damaging the clock. It would end up being a knife for a travel kit, and carried a little more thoughtfully.

Point noted on the torque issue though 

[lowtech]

If you should need one, I have a travel kit, whose inhabitant is missing. I sent the Swisschamp out to have teh main blade replaced but did not hear back from the guy wanting to do teh repair.
So the sheath and kit is quite useless to me and a reminder of a lost tool - I can be talked out of it cheap or in a nice trade, if you want.

[AimlessWanderer]

That sounds quite tempting... depending on how thick this ends up  how snug does the Swisschamp fit, and does anyone know the size of a Swisschamp?

[lowtech]

From memory, the swisschamp fit perfectly into the main compartment. I can´t measure actual width, though for obvious reasons.

[AimlessWanderer]

 

[AimlessWanderer]

SAKWiki says 33mm, so I'll work on that 

[hiraethus]

So you do think there's merits to adding the Phillips to a Cybertool? Or is that just so you can get the magnifier?

To get the magnifier, but also so I could ditch the no. 2 phillips/4mm flat driver bit and replace it with the T6/T8 Torx bit (if I can find one).

[AimlessWanderer]

So you do think there's merits to adding the Phillips to a Cybertool? Or is that just so you can get the magnifier?

To get the magnifier, but also so I could ditch the no. 2 phillips/4mm flat driver bit and replace it with the T6/T8 Torx bit (if I can find one).

Nice plan  to be honest, for the magnifier I prefer a fresnel lens in the wallet. I find the SAK ones never show a big enough picture. The True Utility Eyeglass is quite good though 

[Toolslinger]

FWIW I've put a fair amount of torque on the CT driver and it has never let me down. I would imagine the limit will be the brass rod holding the SAK together and not the tool itself.

[AimlessWanderer]

Well the CT41 starts out about 33mm, and losing the pliers takes it to about 29mm. Adding the Phillips layer adds about 5mm and the Voyager scales bumps it up by another 3mm ..... and now I'm wondering if losing the pliers is a good idea after all

 

Thomas, let me have pics of that kit thingy when you get chance please, and in the meantime I'll try to figure out what I'm gonna do with this Cybertool

 

[AimlessWanderer]

FWIW I've put a fair amount of torque on the CT driver and it has never let me down. I would imagine the limit will be the brass rod holding the SAK together and not the tool itself.

You're probably quite right there 

[Sakpan74Gr]

I would only replace the blades. I have a soft spot for victorinox serrations and the pruner blade.

[AimlessWanderer]

I would only replace the blades. I have a soft spot for victorinox serrations and the pruner blade.

They are excellent  It seems there's a lot of benefit from upgrading to those two blades, and the only real downside I've experienced is the reduced ease of sharpening. They work better on clam shell packaging, scoring cuts, fibrous materials, and don't seem to struggle on any task I've set them on.

[firiki]

Another downside of the pruner blade is that the thicker the SAK gets the less the pruner blade can be used close to a surface to cut towards the right or the left, depending on it's position.

Make a cybertool + pliers only build? I think I'd like that. Maybe add a third layer between these two for better grip and structural integrity?

[AimlessWanderer]

I specifically wanted this one to be based on the CT41 and keep as much of the features as possible, but with the addition of those two blades. However, I really can't see the need for adding a second blade layer with another plain large blade like I did in the Mega84. Tasks that specifically benefit from a plain edged blade such as sharpening a pencil, can still be achieved with the pruner blade, and tasks such as cutting up an apple can still be done with the large serrated. Besides which, there's no need to add a backspring Phillips, and so I'd have to decide what to do with the void there.

I did consider turning my CT34 into a CyberYeoman with file, but generally speaking if I expect to need pliers, I want something more capable than the Vic 91 ones

[firiki]

SAK pliers can be very useful in small tasks where precision is needed. They're made of soft metal however. I tried to undo a screw with them once, I only managed to get the tips marred. Still I like them for what they are.

On paper, I find the CT41 the greatest SAK, but for me it's too bulky to use. Vic Handyman is where I draw the line concerning comfortable use. Also, since I believe in tool combos I think the cybertool + something (fish scaler? ) + SAK pliers could be combined with many other options.