Benchmade Volli on top, Kershaw Blur on bottom.

I just got my hands on a Benchmade Volli, and thought I’d do a quick comparison to the EDC knife that it’s replacing, the Kershaw Blur (black non-serrated blade). Here are my observations so far:

• The Volli is clipped so that it sits tip-up in the pocket. The Blur is tip-down, so that’s taking some getting used to.
• The handle on the Volli is noticeably thicker/fatter than the handle on the Blur. Since the clip also has a higher profile, the entire package is quite a bit bulkier in a pocket
• The AXIS lock on the Volli is really nice, and the locking mechanism along the spine is a nice touch — you can double-lock the blade open for heavier work.
• The Blur has a faster spring-assist, and a more satisfying “clunk” when coming open. I think the sound/clunk comes partially from the aluminum frame (vs the Volli’s “G10″ handle, which is some kind of plastic/fiber stuff).
• The Volli has zero blade-play, which the Blur has a bit.
• The thumb-stud on the Blur is “one-sided”, and has a bit sharper of an edge on it, which can be good or bad.
• Because of the slightly wider handle (and thus wider arc to get around it), I find the Volli harder to close one-handed.
• The straight edge on the Volli’s blade is a big plus for me. The slightly curving blade on the Blur really annoyed me when sharpening it.
• Handle length is (almost?) identical. Blade is a little longer on the Blur.
• The Blur is a little heavier .
• I really like the blade grind on the Volli.
• The Volli’s blade is a little thinner than the Blur, and is also ground down along the spine to make it appear even thinner still.
• Since the handle on the Volli is plastic, I guess I won’t be able to use it as reliably as a bottle opener (note the scratched out surface on the Blur, where the blade meets the handle ).

Overall, I’m happy with the Volli, and will definitely keep is as my EDC (at least for now). I do think that if you could take the Volli blade and put it on something resembling the Blur handle, but keep the AXIS lock, you might really have a winner.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){ var gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b = { positions : { 589 : new google.maps.LatLng( ‘39.7392358’, ‘-104.990251’ ) }, bounds : new google.maps.LatLngBounds(), // empty for now, we’ll dynamically extend it later map : new google.maps.Map( document.getElementById( ‘gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b’ ), { mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP, center: new google.maps.LatLng( 0, 0 ), zoom: 16 // Seems to be a good zoom for a single point } ), markers : {}, }; // end of gmap // Extend the bounds of interest based on our positions for ( var m in gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.positions ) { gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.bounds.extend( gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.positions[m] ); } // Render markers for ( var m in gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.positions ) { gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.markers[m] = new google.maps.Marker( { clickable: true, map : gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.map, position : gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.positions[m] } ); } // Redraw map to fit our new marker-based bounds gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.map.setCenter( gmap_m7fcecca58b6f68930085731d5e9a816b.positions[589] ); });