Are modern slipjoints too small?

- interesting question. I use a custom Dozier in horizontal sheath a lot - it has a blade less than 3" - yet, it can do 90% of what I need.

Old patterns establish 100's years ago in Sheffield had 3" blades.........and now, 3" cutting edge has become the maximum non-locking folder in UK for legal carry 'without good reason'. Again, it does most of the tasks most of the time.

However..! I do love a slightly bigger folder. Mostly for aesthetic reasons. My bigger folders are usually lockers, which often assists safety with the way they're used.

Ultimately, for many people, a smaller blade on a slipjoint is safer to use.
 
An earlier post may have hit on the answer in that most state laws restrict the blade length of pocket knives, here in Colorado it's 3.5" and in a neighboring state it's 3". We could argue about whether the law or knife size came first but the laws are the limiting factor at the moment; I cannot carry a Buck 110 concealed. My preference is for a knife that's around 3.5" closed because it's comfortable in my pocket and the included 3"-3.25" blade is more than adequate for my tasks.
 
Is one factor that table knives were not provided, so a larger folder was carried because you don’t want to cut your steak with a peanut?
 
abcdef said:
In the old days guys carried swords and big daggers.
Click to expand...

Only if you were born lucky enough that you could both afford a sword, and you were in a segment of society that you were permitted to carry it. Swords were as much an expensive badge of rank as a weapon. Im medieval Japan, a peasant caught with a sword was summarily executed on the spot. In England and some places in Europe, it wasn't much different. The landed gentry that ruled the place didn't like the peasants being armed. The lower classes had to make do with quarter staves, agriculture tools, and axes. Everyone had an ax handy to deal with kindling for cooking.
 
Countries around the Mediterranean tended towards larger folding knives historically. Navarra (for example) often had blades exceeding 9". True, these were often used as weapons, but they had other uses, as most could not afford to carry multiple blades on a daily basis. Again this was at a time when the area was mostly rural.
 
I read that the springs on slip joints were difficult to make (or only hand made) prior to the Industrial Revolution in the Mid-1800's. So, the slip joints of today really started in the 1800's.

I also read that slip joints were initially considered weapons. I find that odd, but the lock backs such as the Buck 110 were indeed considered weapons as they were said to be popular with gangs or this type of person.
 
I feel as society modernized and became more civilized, the need for a large blade becomes reduced. In the old days, good steel itself was likely a rare commodity compared to today. Youd get one good knife with a blade big enough to last you for a life time. Opinions on knives as a tool vs knives as a weapon have changed as well, also location and time. If you considered the other patterns that eventually came, some certainly had smaller blades e.g. the congress pattern. Society's cutting needs and opinions have changed and varied over time. Non knife people may view even using a slipjoint as foreign when scissors exist and might seem the better or safer cutting tool. Even though the knife will do in a pinch.
 
JohnDF said:
This was definitely true in the area where I grew up. Buck 110 knives were "weapons", not necessarily cutting tools. That is the reason I've never warmed-up to the Buck brand.
Click to expand...
Weapons are cool too, John. I think of the Buck 110 as a tool, but it could certainly be used as a weapon if necessary. I would only use it in self defense or defense of others. And I love the classic Italian stilleto. And the Spanish navaja. Hopefully, if I ever have to defend myself from a deadly attack I will have one of my handguns with me. I carry my knives as tools, and use them everyday. I have never harmed a human being with a knife (except cutting myself occasinally!).
 
JohnDF said:
This was definitely true in the area where I grew up. Buck 110 knives were "weapons", not necessarily cutting tools. That is the reason I've never warmed-up to the Buck brand.
Click to expand...

its such a beefy knife though, and seems more applicable for hunting purposes. Especially nowadays when ppl convert them to an auto knife.
 
Prester John said:
Weapons are cool too, John. I think of the Buck 110 as a tool, but it could certainly be used as a weapon if necessary. I would only use it in self defense or defense of others. And I love the classic Italian stilleto. And the Spanish navaja. Hopefully, if I ever have to defend myself from a deadly attack I will have one of my handguns with me. I carry my knives as tools, and use them everyday. I have never harmed a human being with a knife (except cutting myself occasinally!).
Click to expand...

Agreed, incident for incident, the only human being ive harmed with a knife is myself.
 
mrknife said:
its such a beefy knife though, and seems more applicable for hunting purposes. Especially nowadays when ppl convert them to an auto knife.
Click to expand...
Why would converting a 110 to an auto make it more useful for outdoor or hunting purposes? I see little need for auto knives in general. They are a novelty to me, and yes, I went through the switch blade interest phase back in the 80's. But I never carried one.

I have told the switch blade story a couple of times.... I had a switch blade in my brief case that I had slipped behind the lining. I didn't even know it was there. I went through airport security many times until one day they asked me what that lump was in my brief case. I had no idea. Found it and sent the brief case through regular baggage.
 
22-rimfire said:
Why would converting a 110 to an auto make it more useful for outdoor or hunting purposes? I see little need for auto knives in general. They are a novelty to me and yes, I went through the switch blade interest phase back in the 80's. But I never carried one.
Click to expand...

oh no, separate thoughts there. I meant as a larger knife it would function as a outdoor and hunting purposes. Converting for auto seems to be a new novelty I learned about a few years ago.
 
mrknife said:
oh no, separate thoughts there. I meant as a larger knife it would function as a outdoor and hunting purposes. Converting for auto seems to be a new novelty I learned about a few years ago.
Click to expand...
Just so you know, I have no problem using semi-auto rifles or handguns hunting. But the AR's trouble me from a hunting point of view unless you are hunting varmints where I think the extra fire power can be quite useful (especially for feral hogs).

The 110's and similar knives are very useful while hunting.
 
Squid61 said:
An earlier post may have hit on the answer in that most state laws restrict the blade length of pocket knives, here in Colorado it's 3.5" and in a neighboring state it's 3". We could argue about whether the law or knife size came first but the laws are the limiting factor at the moment; I cannot carry a Buck 110 concealed. My preference is for a knife that's around 3.5" closed because it's comfortable in my pocket and the included 3"-3.25" blade is more than adequate for my tasks.
Click to expand...
Glad Texas isn't a nanny state.

HB 1935 became effective September 1, 2017 and made it so that there are no restrictions on the blade length of carry of knives in Texas except for location restrictions on knives with blades over 5-1/2 inches.

Knives with blades over 5-1/2 inches are defined as “location-restricted knives” and are not be able to be carried in establishments that receive more than 51% of their revenue from alcoholic sales, high school, college or professional sporting events, correctional facilities, medical facilities, amusement parks, or places of religious worship. There is an exception for someone using a location-restricted knife in a historical demonstration or ceremony in which the knife is significant to the performance of the ceremony.

HB 1935 also removed Bowie knives, daggers, dirks, stilletos, poniards, swords, and spears from the Texas statute 46.02 Unlawful Carrying Weapons and the definition of an illegal knife.
 
I don't know about the 1800's, but I've seen evidence of that leads me to believe that woodsmen and settlers in Tennessee and Kentucky in the mid-to-late 1700's (think Daniel Boone) probably carried fairly large folding knives, probably single-blade friction folders or, if they could afford one, "clasp" (slipjoint) knives. In Seedtime on the Cumberland by Harriet Simpson Arnow, there are many references to "whittling knives" being essential survival tools for the woodsman. For example: "Early, the farm boy learned to use the clasp or whittling knife, the long knife kept razor sharp and sheathed for skinning, and the tomahawk for innumerable jobs...". That suggests that the whittling knife (and tomahawk) was the workhorse cutting tool rather than the sheath knife as we might assume today. She refers to men whittling new gunstocks to replace broken ones on long hunting trips, as well as carving basically every household item that could be made from wood. To me, this implies that the "whittling knife" of the frontiersman was a very substantial tool, strong and large enough to be able to carve the tough woods suitable for heavy-use objects. And while they were folding knives, I think they were generally carried in belt pouches rather than pockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top