Bark River Northstar, first impressions.

[geneepi]

As a very smart man once told me, difference of opinion is what makes ugly women marry and poor land sell. If you like Barks, and they do the job for you, buy 'em. If not, don't. Also, let's not get nuts when someone doesn't have the same outlook as us. I'm not an engineer, and don't have a PhD. I like what I like, and what works for me. Bark Rivers do. Have a great day. Bill

Exactly my point. If you don't agree about the "grind" or whatever started this then thats fine no need to jump in and inform everyone that your view is the only correct view without ever using the knife in question.

 

[hardheart]

this guy won't last long

 

[Thomas Linton]

"Memorial is one of the top universities in Canada" : It is classified a a comprehensive univeristy i.e. comparable to a university like Illiniois State University in the US. Now not to knock schools like this but it is well known that the standards for schools like these are simply not the same as top-notch schools. Its beyond easy to get in, the academic standards are low, and there is little relative research coming from these schools. You can get a decent education at most universities but making comparisons at the between these types of schools is ludacris. There you go gramps.

:yawn:

Must be wonderful to be a bright, young graduate student. Certainly, no one over the age of, say fifty, was EVER bright.

The issue is not whether Memorial is "top-notch," although it clearly is. You said is was "extremely mediocre."

And once again, you present no facts to support your claims. I suspect, with all associated risks, that you know nothing whatsoever about Memorial University, except that Stamp got his Phd there in Physics.

The "comprehensive" category is used by McLeans to distinguish a university like Memorial, which has significant research activity, from those univeristies with no significant research or no graduate programs or no profssional programs. Or do you know better than McLeans what it means when it uses, and defines, that category? Must McLeans accept your definition?

I don't know Stamp personally but from reading a number of his posts he strikes me as the type of person I have dealt with on numerous occasions. They have a PhD from a low level program and they think they know it all when, in fact, they don't. You can find dozens of posts where people are discussing something and he jumps in and basically calls them stupid and proceeds to inform everyone that his view is the only correct one. A typical person who thinks they know it all but in fact don't.

We "got" that you don't like Cliff.
I don't like people who defame an entire university -- thousands of people -- as a convenient tactic to try to strengthen an ad hominum attack.

Course, this is often easier than dealing with the arguments actually presented.

You disagree with Cliff? Who has not at one point or another? Reasoned controversy can be a path to truth. Join in -- or keep slinging mud. Either way, we learn about you.

 

[geneepi]

:yawn:

Must be wonderful to be a bright, young graduate student. Certainly, no one over the age of, say fifty, was EVER bright.

The issue is not whether Memorial is "top-notch," although it clearly is. You said is was "extremely mediocre."

And once again, you present no facts to support your claims. I suspect, with all associated risks, that you know nothing whatsoever about Memorial University, except that Stamp got his Phd there in Physics.

The "comprehensive" category is used by McLeans to distinguish a university like Memorial, which has significant research activity, from those univeristies with no significant research or no graduate programs or no profssional programs. Or do you know better than McLeans what it means when it uses, and defines, that category? Must McLeans accept your definition?

Okay this is getting old. Read this from their website: "HOW WE PLACE THE UNIVERSITIES IN PEER GROUPS
Using such factors as research funding, diversity of offerings and the range of Ph.D. programs to define peer groupings, Maclean's places each university in one of three categories. Primarily Undergraduate universities are largely focused on undergraduate education, with relatively few graduate programs. Those in the Comprehensive category have a significant amount of research activity and a wide range of programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels, including professional degrees. Medical-Doctoral universities offer a broad range of Ph.D. programs and research, as well as medical schools."

If you are going to attack me then make sure you at least get the facts right. You have shown your ignorance. My definition was exactly as Maclean's. I don't know where you got yours but your attempt is pathetic. And if you are going to keep citing a source, for god's sake, get the name correct. It is Maclean's NOT McLeans. I had some respect for you until this last post. I know what I am talking about because I dealt with these exact issues on a commitee I was on at the university where I was faculty before I went back to grad school.

I don't dislike or like Stamp. I can't because I never have met him. All I can say is that from his posts I think he believes he is the king of the knife universe.

And yes, it is wonderful to be a bright, (not that) young graduate student

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I don't consider myself a king, I have more of a socialist viewpoint and if I though I knew everything I would not be asking questions on a fairly regular basis to Landes, Verhoeven, Cashen, etc. . Plus I would obviously never change my perspective on any issue such as was done recently with Possums commentary on issues of balance.

If I was to pick a king, it would have to be a trinity and I would select Johnston, Swaim and Talmadge. Johnston and Swaim presented a massive amount of knowledge to rec.knives which was based on actual materials data and comparative use and not indended to sell anything to anyone. The interesting thing about Swaim was that as far as I know his background wasn't in a research based field, but he did some very nice work and made a real effort to be very quantative, far beyond what the majority of knifemakers at that time (or even now) were doing.

Johnston has spent years making knives for free and giving them to anyone who is a serious user to simply show people what can be obtained with optimal grinds/heat treatment. Joe compiled a lot of that information as well as from other sources into very well written FAQ's and did some significant work of his own expanding on what Mike had done with a few knives. Landes has done a lot of very detailed research as well recently, unfortunately (for us) it is in german and not translated yet. Does anyone know approximately what even a rough translation of that magnitude would cost?

There has been a lot of work done, unfortunately most of it is scattered across forums, usenet groups, emails and lists. I am compiling much of it now into a series of review articles. Writing them is fairly straightforward but chasing down all the references is pretty time consuming. I can remember for example the exact conversion I had with Swaim about steeling and the effect it has on the lifetime of a knife but finding that one particular usenet article takes a little work.

-Cliff

 

[Thomas Linton]

Okay this is getting old. Read this from their website: "HOW WE PLACE THE UNIVERSITIES IN PEER GROUPS
Using such factors as research funding, diversity of offerings and the range of Ph.D. programs to define peer groupings, Maclean's places each university in one of three categories. Primarily Undergraduate universities are largely focused on undergraduate education, with relatively few graduate programs. Those in the Comprehensive category have a significant amount of research activity and a wide range of programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels, including professional degrees. Medical-Doctoral universities offer a broad range of Ph.D. programs and research, as well as medical schools."

If you are going to attack me then make sure you at least get the facts right. You have shown your ignorance. My definition was exactly as Maclean's. I don't know where you got yours but your attempt is pathetic. And if you are going to keep citing a source, for god's sake, get the name correct. It is Maclean's NOT McLeans. I had some respect for you until this last post. I know what I am talking about because I dealt with these exact issues on a commitee I was on at the university where I was faculty before I went back to grad school.

I don't dislike or like Stamp. I can't because I never have met him. All I can say is that from his posts I think he believes he is the king of the knife universe.

And yes, it is wonderful to be a bright, (not that) young graduate student

All here can read what I said and what you quoted and decide if there's a dime's worth of difference. Obviously, if a university does not have the quoted criteria of research, graduate and professional programs, the very words that I used, it does not fit the "comprehensive" category for McLeans purposes. Memorial University fits that caregory. Others do not. You, not me, used "comprehensive" as a derogatoy term, as if "comprehensive" is a lesser category. IMO, you were simply incorrect.

And they might also notice that you still have produced no evidence that Memorial is an "extremely mediocre" university.

Cliff has opinions. He presents facts that he says he finds. It would be sufficient to disagree and to present alternative facts. I allow that anyone can be wrong, and Cliff has previously acknowledged error and need for changes in approach (as you would know if you were not so new here). Instead, you elect to deride the university where Cliff got his Phd. as "extremely mediocre" -- as if that were a response to any opinion or fact Cliff presents. That is not a discussion of the merits of the North Star.

So from "Gramps," whose "ignorance" so offends you, here's another "pathetic" question: Where is your evidence?

 

[Ebbtide]

And once again a thread about a knife turns into a thread about cliff.

Has this happened before or is it Deja vu all over again?

 

[geneepi]

All here can read what I said and what you quoted and decide if there's a dime's worth of difference. Obviously, if a university does not have the quoted criteria of research, graduate and professional programs, the very words that I used, it does not fit the "comprehensive" category for McLeans purposes. Memorial University fits that caregory. Others do not. You, not me, used "comprehensive" as a derogatoy term, as if "comprehensive" is a lesser category. IMO, you were simply incorrect.

And they might also notice that you still have produced no evidence that Memorial is an "extremely mediocre" university.

Cliff has opinions. He presents facts that he says he finds. It would be sufficient to disagree and to present alternative facts. I allow that anyone can be wrong, and Cliff has previously acknowledged error and need for changes in approach (as you would know if you were not so new here). Instead, you elect to deride the university where Cliff got his Phd. as "extremely mediocre" -- as if that were a response to any opinion or fact Cliff presents. That is not a discussion of the merits of the North Star.

So from "Gramps," whose "ignorance" so offends you, here's another "pathetic" question: Where is your evidence?

"The "comprehensive" category is used by McLeans to distinguish a university like Memorial, which has significant research activity, from those univeristies with no significant research or no graduate programs or no profssional programs. Or do you know better than McLeans what it means when it uses, and defines, that category? Must McLeans accept your definition?"


Schools with no significant research or no graduate/professional programs are not considered in ther rankings. Schools like those are generally termed liberal arts colleges. Again, their definiton is not the same as yours. Don't know where you gots yours. Like I said, Memorial compares to a school like Illinois State here in the US. Trust me, a PhD from a school like this is considered mediocre. Now, I am not saying Stamp is not intelliegent. I'm sure he is. I was saying he struck me as a number of people I have dealt with who think they are brilliant because they have a PhD from a low level program.

My evidence that Memorial is medicore: http://www.webometrics.info/top3000.asp

Find Memorial in here.

Once again, it's Maclean's NOT McLeans. You clearly don't have the intelligence to comprehend my agruments because you can't even get the name of your sources correct.

You are a bright one

Now try again, gramps.

 

[Thomas Linton]

"Trust me"

My evidence that Memorial is medicore: http://www.webometrics.info/top3000.asp

Find Memorial in here.

OK. Being old, I just plodded along until I came to it. Memorial is, in fact, ranked 263 of the 3000 universities ranked by Webometrics. Don't take my word for it. See www.webometrics.info/top3000.asp?offset=250

Doesn't sound "mediocre" to me, whatever they're measuring, but then I'm just "gramps." (Gee, I really like the sound of that. Gramps. )

You clearly don't have the intelligence to comprehend my agruments because you can't even get the name of your sources correct.You are a bright one Now try again, gramps.

Awaiting your evidence, I remain, very truly,

Gramps.

(Ebbtide, I vote for dvaoa.)

 

[Dog of War]

Hey, Gramps, you know what they say .... Don't approach a goat from the front, a horse from the back, or a fool from any side.

 

[geneepi]

OK. Being old, I just plodded along until I came to it. Memorial is, in fact, ranked 263 of the 3000 universities ranked by Webometrics. Don't take my word for it. See www.webometrics.info/top3000.asp?offset=250

Doesn't sound "mediocre" to me, whatever they're measuring, but then I'm just "gramps." (Gee, I really like the sound of that. Gramps. )



Awaiting your evidence, I remain, very truly,

Gramps.

(Ebbtide, I vote for dvaoa.)

Exactly, right there with those academic powerhouses of San Francisco State & Montana State. In the academic world, those are mediocre universities except to those of your intellect. So please do us all a favor and enlighten us with your amazing credentials that define you as an expert on these matters. I mean I only have 15 years of professional experience in these matters so I must not know anything.

Awaiting your evidence of your genius.

 

[geneepi]

Hey, Gramps, you know what they say .... Don't approach a goat from the front, a horse from the back, or a fool from any side.

Now this is getting fun. Another cretin enters the game.

 

[Thomas Linton]

:yawn: :yawn: :yawn:

See, guys, if you don't see that ranking in the top 10% of world universities is clearly "extremely mediocre," you're a cretin. "Trust me" on this. Really.

If you don't, I may have to roll out more evidence of the value of years of "higher education" by calling you more names to prove the wonderfulness of me.

 

[Joe Talmadge]

If I had a disagreement with a guy, and the best I could come up with was to attack his university, I'd seriously be thinking about whether I should re-think my position. geneepi, you've added nothing to this thread but personal attacks. It has to stop, this is the only warning. Everyone else may be getting pulled in too easily by the trolls.

For what it's worth, I have a few BRKTs. The two I use the most are the Fox River and Golok. Both are excellent knives, excellent edge geometry, design, and fit & finish. Both have done everything I've asked them to, with no sign of damage. I haven't comparison tested them versus similar knives so can't say anything definitive about how they perform versus the competition, but they have performed excellently in isolation. The one criticism I have is that several of BRKT's models have handles that just barely fit my hands, and I have small hands; that's the main criticism that really sunk the Northstar and I understand it.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

... they have performed excellently in isolation.

I would be interested in your commentary on the Golok as a long time Ontario machete user. Swaim was very positive about the overall versatility of that machete brand against many large knives and small hatchets including even some khukuris (Cold Steel). Would you see the Golok as a direct replacement or a refinement in certain areas? I would assume it handles as a knife more efficiently?

The one criticism I have is that several of BRKT's models have handles that just barely fit my hands, and I have small hands; that's the main criticism that really sunk the Northstar and I understand it.

I get cramped grips on a lot of knives even without gloves. I really don't get why people want small handles on knives just because they have small blades. If it is a serious tool then you need a full size grip. Even precision carving chip knives have full size handles and the blades are 1" long. This issue is made worse with winter use, try using most folders and even small fixed blades with even light gloves let alone heavy mitts.

-Cliff

 

[Lanza]

Many Barkies do have smallish handles. I have medium sized hands and often feel cramped. On the plus side, the more I use them the less cramped my hands feel. I am very pleased with the cutting ability of my Barkies.

 

[the possum]

I really don't get why people want small handles on knives just because they have small blades. If it is a serious tool then you need a full size grip.

Though I can certainly see where you're coming from, one main reason I see see for a small handle (and blade) is simply compactness. I started working on an EDC fixed blade long ago, that will have a 3 finger grip. Would prefer full sized, but that would defeat the purpose of the design.

This issue is made worse with winter use, try using most folders and even small fixed blades with even light gloves let alone heavy mitts.

Here in farm country during winter you will always see farmers wearing those big disposable yellow cotton gloves. They suck for any sort of detail work, and are often just thrown off first. This gave me some problems though because it was so un handy to try using folders while wearing them, so I switched to fixed blades (5"-7" blade) as primary. But then I discovered it's just as un-handy to try resheathing a fixed blade into a belt scabbard beneath my heavy winter coat.

 

[Thomas Linton]

My first NS had micarta handles with a pronounced wedge shape - wider to the butt end. Grippling gave me the feeling that my hand was slipping forward on to the blade. Then I got a Stag Bone on the secondry market. It did not have the wedge shape. I quickly modified the handle on the micarta model to eliminate the taper and found that it felt MUCH better.

The new Aurora has a generous handle.

I have mainly used the BR Golok for trimming small branches and batoning. It is a batoning machine and does well in light chopping. At 11" x 3/16, I don;t know if it is a machete replacement - more of a compromise.

 

[LaBella]

Joe Talmadge you are the man sir.


:cheers:

Ron LaBella

 

[Cliff Stamp]

... compactness.

Yeah, this is the reason most often cited, but frankly from the perspective of a working tool, the loss of performance is simply far too much for me. Unless of course the knife is designed as simply a very light precision cutting tool and never needs to be able to be used with significant force or used for an extended amount of time.

As a different perspective, tie your pinky finger to your hand so it doesn't become part of your grip and see what effect it makes on normal knife use, especially if you have to cut anything difficult. I have done a lot of outdoor work like this, simulating various hand injuries and all of it makes me really appreciate a full sized grip even on a very small blade. Essentially a smaller grip is chopping off your fingers and it better have some huge advantage for me to accept that limitation.

But then I discovered it's just as un-handy to try resheathing a fixed blade into a belt scabbard beneath my heavy winter coat.

I always wear them outside, I clip the folders outside as well, often on the back of one of the gloves.

I quickly modified the handle on the micarta model to eliminate the taper and found that it felt MUCH better.

That handle design (forward taper) comes from swords for which the grip slippage is usually in the opposite direction. The same handle is on an axe for example.

I have mainly used the BR Golok for trimming small branches and batoning. It is a batoning machine and does well in light chopping. At 11" x 3/16, I don;t know if it is a machete replacement - more of a compromise.

Yeah, large machetes are actually fairly task specific tools, they are optimal for cutting light vegetation. It isn't that a primary grind would make it worse, but it simply would not make it any better because there is no need for a greater stiffness and wedging isn't an issue so you just grind an edge on flat stock and done you are. The steels are also so easy to grind there isn't much an an issue with sharpening efficiency either.

I should have been more clear. There are machetes which are the same size as the golok (Ontario makes one) and these are generally used as an all purpose large knife. It would be interesting to see a comparison between the two and how much of a performance and in what area was gained by the much more involved blade design of the golok vs the flat stock/edge geometry of the machete.

-Cliff