Al Mar Nomad. What do you think?

K

kgriggs8

BANNED
Joined
Jan 28, 2002
Messages
1,634
I have so very impressed with my Al Mar Shrike since I got it that I have been thinking about getting one of the Nomads. I like the smaller size, flat ground blade, VG-10 steel blade, G-10 scales, SS double liners, liner lock, blade shape, dual thumb studs, and thumb serrations on the back of the blade. The only thing I am not fond of is the finger choil. I'm not a fan of finger choils but it is not a huge deal.

How is the quality? How does it compare to other knives in the same price range ($100-140)? How does it compare to knives of the same size?
 
Because I think like you do, after I bought and fell in love with a SERE 2000 I got a Nomad. It was OK, but there were things I didn't like about it. The blade was off-center in the handle, which I've heard is a problem common to that model. I like finger choils, but this one was too small to really use without cutting yourself unless you have REALLY skinny fingers. It's also tip-down carry only.

Maybe I should have tried the Shrike and maybe YOU should try the SERE 2000 instead. ;)
 
Something tells me a Sere is in my future whether I like it or not. :D I have heard that many people like it better than the Shrike so it must be very nice. It is just a little large for me though. The Shrike is about as big as I like to carry.

You should at least handle a Shrike. I would have never bought one if I didn't pick it up in a store and get blown away by it. I handled a bunch of Benchmades because I was planning on replaceing my BM 885SBT with a newer BM but after handleing all the $100-200 BMs, I happen to ask if they had any flat ground blade knives I hadn't seen and after he showed me the Shrike, I knew what I was getting. It was more comfortable than any BM and it felt like it was higher quality because of how smooth it opened and felt in the hand. It is very good looking as well.

Maybe I should take my own advice and pick up a Nomad to see what I think.
 
fulloflead- How long have you had your SERE? I carried one for about 2 years (loved it!) when I started having serious blade play and lock problems that the factory failed to correct. Mine was purchased in 03 and should have been one of the first black chrome models. How is the QC and durability on the newer SERE's?
 
regarding size of the SERE 2000. I've never handled a Shrike to compare it to, but the SERE is really not that big. It is a little wide and heavy, but the pocket clip design is just great - it carries very comfortably so you don't really notice the weight and basically the entire knife rides below the top of the pocket so it is less noticeable to others than a much smaller knife with a pocket clip attached in the usual way.
 
Is your Shrike the micarta handled one? I understand they are also making a g-10 version now.
 
kgriggs8 said:
You should at least handle a Shrike. I would have never bought one if I didn't pick it up in a store and get blown away by it.
Click to expand...

Same with me and the SERE. Even with all the hooplah, it didn't look at all special in the photos - just an unremarkable tactical folder made of the usual materials - until I saw one on a table at a gun show and walked over and picked it up. It just took me picking it up and opening it once for me to go "Wow, hey..." and fall in love with it. It just feels right and feels like it wants to be used hard.

I actually haven't had mine long or even used it yet, so I don't know about the durability. It sounds like Lobo103 just needs to tighten his pivot.

The only thing that's been keeping me from the Shrike is that I don't care for fighting knives. IMHO, it seems that most fighting knives aren't good for much else, but a working knife can always be used in self defense.
 
"The only thing that's been keeping me from the Shrike is that I don't care for fighting knives. IMHO, it seems that most fighting knives aren't good for much else, but a working knife can always be used in self defense."

I didn't even know that the Shrike was considered a fighting knife until just now. With it's Micarta scales and mirror polished flat ground thin blade, I considered a larger more robust gentlemans folder. There is a lot of upsweep on the blade and that is one thing I would change. That is why I was looking at the Nomad, I figuired that the drop point was more my style. I thought the Shrike was more usable than the Sere because of the thinner blade. I guess it all depends on what you are going to use it for. I definatly don't feel unarmed when all I have is my Shrike but it is not what I would consider a fighting knife. The Syperco Manix is more of a fighter in my book.
 
kgriggs8 said:
I didn't even know that the Shrike was considered a fighting knife until just now. With it's Micarta scales and mirror polished flat ground thin blade, I considered a larger more robust gentlemans folder. ......but it is not what I would consider a fighting knife. The Syperco Manix is more of a fighter in my book.
Click to expand...


I was assuming, based on the design, but this could be another clue:

FROM DICTIONARY.COM

shrike ** (*P*)**Pronunciation Key**(shrk)
n.

Any of various carnivorous oscine birds of the family Laniidae, having a screeching call and a strong hooked bill with a toothlike projection and often impaling its prey on sharp-pointed thorns or barbs of wire fencing.


Shrike

n : any of numerous Old World birds having a strong hooked bill that feed on smaller animals
Click to expand...

I'm almost positive the Manix was designed to be a working knife.

I came to these conclusions based on what I'm used to seeing in fighters. They're often pointy and slim and often designed to be held in one grip - the saber grip. Just as and example, check out: www.kreinknives.com and it's obvious the difference he sees in designing a working and a fighting knife.

But I could be wrong about the Shrike. It just seemed obvious to me by looking at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top