I'm torn between these two daggers. I want one, but I cant choose. I own a Gerber LMF II and it is the best knife I have ever had. On top of that, the MK II has a legendary heritage. I have also owned a Boker pocket knife. It kept a great edge. The Applegate was designed by a legendary H2H instructor. I hear nothing but praises for both knives. I just don't know the deciding factor. Keep in mind I will be joining the US Army soon and one of these may see use (although I HOPE to God I don't). I will of course take my LMF with me for general purpose. For the past 4 years I have owned it, it went where I went. I am looking for sheer dependability.
Gerber Mk II or Boker Applegate
- Thread starter PbLead
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
- Messages
- 475
Personally, I would take the time to find a vintage MK II, made by Gerber and not Fiskars or whomever owns the trademark now.
DennisStrickland
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2009
- Messages
- 5,040
many daggers have edge profiles which are obtuse.daggers are 1st & foremost thrusting knives designed to penetrate primarily & cut 2nd. i would favor the bowie type blade in a combat scenario since it is much more versatile. although stabs are more likely to be fatal, i would opt for stopping the encounter by disabling advesary. slashes & face cuts although rarely fatal they usually deter an enemy so as to allow one to win the day. sentry removal leans towards the dagger, modern combat usually has force recon or seals doing this work.
gryphons are great knives but not much like a A-F or a mark 2 if for no other reason than they arent double edged daggers.
i dont know if you will be able to pick and choose what gear you carry in the army, i would wager certainly not at 1st anyway, if i could & was looking for a fixed blade i doubt i would go with a A-F or a mk2, i would go with something a bit more utilitarian vs a fighting dagger with very little utility use, you use something like that 1000's of times to open boxes/etc and would probably never use it to dispatch sentries/etc, i would go more like a mad dog SEAL ATAK2 or with one of the busse fixed blades myself FWIW. your LMF would also be ok i suppose.
i have a '71 mark 2 i got new in '72, and have had a A-F or 2 thru the yrs and i prefer the mark 2, it just seems more robust and heavy duty to me, IIRC boker makes (or possibly made?) a A-F, those are gonna be a lot better than some A-F i have seen which are cheap and not very well made, both are pretty much strictly fighters with very little utility ability, though i have dressed a rabbit or 2 with my mark 2, a job it sucked at lol.
i have heard the new gerber mark 2's are not as good as the old, and old mark 2's are hard to come by and expensive, i have not handled a new mk2 though, but i have not heard much good about them and have heard they just dont compare to the old.
i dont have a clue as to why a "wider blade is the key to putting on an edge" that depends on the grind imho, mostly, and the angle of the grind, FWIW neither an A-F nor a mark 2 is gonna slice like a bowie (ie a SEAL ATAK2 or a busse) but what the width of the blade would have to do with it i havent a clue, ya got me on that one lol.
anyway, imho neither the mk2 or the A-F would be what i would pick if i was going into the infantry heading for iraq tomorrow, i would pick something like a bowie so ya would have some utility value and use my M4 for killing vs my knife, & if i was gonna get into a knife fight i would go with my ATAK2 over the mk2 or a A-F anyway, it can slash and stab vs just pretty much stab,
and i love my old mk2, i have had it for almost 40 yrs now, and it looks cool for sure, and is well made and rugged, but i think its just too much strictly a stabber to be of much use in the military, to be honest if i was shipping out tomorrow the knife i might choose would be a leatherman multi-tool lol vs any of the others.
i dont know if you will be able to pick and choose what gear you carry in the army, i would wager certainly not at 1st anyway, if i could & was looking for a fixed blade i doubt i would go with a A-F or a mk2, i would go with something a bit more utilitarian vs a fighting dagger with very little utility use, you use something like that 1000's of times to open boxes/etc and would probably never use it to dispatch sentries/etc, i would go more like a mad dog SEAL ATAK2 or with one of the busse fixed blades myself FWIW. your LMF would also be ok i suppose.
i have a '71 mark 2 i got new in '72, and have had a A-F or 2 thru the yrs and i prefer the mark 2, it just seems more robust and heavy duty to me, IIRC boker makes (or possibly made?) a A-F, those are gonna be a lot better than some A-F i have seen which are cheap and not very well made, both are pretty much strictly fighters with very little utility ability, though i have dressed a rabbit or 2 with my mark 2, a job it sucked at lol.
i have heard the new gerber mark 2's are not as good as the old, and old mark 2's are hard to come by and expensive, i have not handled a new mk2 though, but i have not heard much good about them and have heard they just dont compare to the old.
i dont have a clue as to why a "wider blade is the key to putting on an edge" that depends on the grind imho, mostly, and the angle of the grind, FWIW neither an A-F nor a mark 2 is gonna slice like a bowie (ie a SEAL ATAK2 or a busse) but what the width of the blade would have to do with it i havent a clue, ya got me on that one lol.
anyway, imho neither the mk2 or the A-F would be what i would pick if i was going into the infantry heading for iraq tomorrow, i would pick something like a bowie so ya would have some utility value and use my M4 for killing vs my knife, & if i was gonna get into a knife fight i would go with my ATAK2 over the mk2 or a A-F anyway, it can slash and stab vs just pretty much stab,
and i love my old mk2, i have had it for almost 40 yrs now, and it looks cool for sure, and is well made and rugged, but i think its just too much strictly a stabber to be of much use in the military, to be honest if i was shipping out tomorrow the knife i might choose would be a leatherman multi-tool lol vs any of the others.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- Messages
- 412
i would choose (and own) a new edition MK II. the knife has a good history and is well built of 420 HC. If the soldiers and S.O.G. guys from Vietnam era carried one, it'll work great for you. i also have an LMF II and the Yari II , love all my Gerber stuff. best of luck to you!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
- Messages
- 1,821
If you are even allowed to take personal property into combat, I would opt for the bayonet. Since the army is discontinuing bayonet training, and will probably stop issuing them, I would take my own. Still useable as a knife, but you can turn your rifle into a spear (reach).
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2006
- Messages
- 3,734
I own both an older MkII and a BlackJack AF. To me there's no comparison and I'd take the AF if I had to choose. I think the handle shape/size on the AF is superior to the Gerber and I prefer the wider blade.
I do agree that you'd be better off taking something along the lines of your LMT than either knife though. Both the MkII and the AF are very specialized tools and not good for much outside of their intended purpose; there are lots of other knives which can do the job of the MkII or AF if the situation warrants.
I do agree that you'd be better off taking something along the lines of your LMT than either knife though. Both the MkII and the AF are very specialized tools and not good for much outside of their intended purpose; there are lots of other knives which can do the job of the MkII or AF if the situation warrants.
ahhh, it's not rocket science.
but it's agreed that there exist a physical correlation between blade thickness and edge size.
and that eventually a wider blade would make a difference in setting a proper sharpening angle.
if for instance, one were to compare the cutting edge between two daggers with similar stock thickness but different blade widths;
it's found that a wider dual sided blade surface affords the maker or user to set a sharpening range which can better execute fine cuts or slices.
hence a correlation does also exist between blade thickness and blade angles through the existence afforded in a wider blade surface...
in short, wider daggers are necessary if one were to require a dagger which can slice.
which reminds me of the narrow F-S dagger.
it's been said that Fairbairn had originally envisioned for a "sharp" fighting dagger.
the cross section of the F-S suggest that it's angles would indeed be capable of slicing in this manner had the blade been zero grind.
unfortunately, daggers aren't the most easy things to ground being symmetrical.
and so it ended that secondary bevels were instead employed to facilitate an easier wartime production solution which probably explains the common present state of complaints which still exist about how just how dull an F-S is...
but it's agreed that there exist a physical correlation between blade thickness and edge size.
and that eventually a wider blade would make a difference in setting a proper sharpening angle.
if for instance, one were to compare the cutting edge between two daggers with similar stock thickness but different blade widths;
it's found that a wider dual sided blade surface affords the maker or user to set a sharpening range which can better execute fine cuts or slices.
hence a correlation does also exist between blade thickness and blade angles through the existence afforded in a wider blade surface...
in short, wider daggers are necessary if one were to require a dagger which can slice.
which reminds me of the narrow F-S dagger.
it's been said that Fairbairn had originally envisioned for a "sharp" fighting dagger.
the cross section of the F-S suggest that it's angles would indeed be capable of slicing in this manner had the blade been zero grind.
unfortunately, daggers aren't the most easy things to ground being symmetrical.
and so it ended that secondary bevels were instead employed to facilitate an easier wartime production solution which probably explains the common present state of complaints which still exist about how just how dull an F-S is...
again, it depends on the bevel angle more than anything and how wide the blade is has nothing to do with the bevel angle, if the bevel angle is steep its gonna be sharper than if its not, the edge wont hold as well, and might chip easier but it can be plenty sharp, i have seen plenty of thin bladed knives with steep bevels that were as sharp as anything else, thick knives too, but it all boils down to the bevel angle vs how wide the blade is,