Okay, I don't kill people with knives, I wouldn't want to, but I do kill three species of powerful wild animals with them, sharks, aligators, and wild boar. I also make frequnt extended jaunts into the wilderness, in my area(Fl.), that means swamps, scrubland, oak hammocks, and estauries/gunkholes. Not being a combat veteran, or even a soldier, I can't speak form that angle. However, I do feel qualified to say that those knives are just silly display pieces that could be pressed into service just like a el cheapo deluxe import or some crappy kitchen knife could. No offense to the member that posted the link. Most people would take this time to explain why these aren't really such good knives, since I'm an a$$hole, I'm gonna do my darnedest to rip them apart;
Essentialy my main man Corduroy got it right in that these knives are jokes. They are the result of feeding consumer trend, not functional analysis. I suggest sending a prominent knife combatives instructor, James Keating, reachable at KnifeMaster@Combattech.com I believe, an e-mail asking what he thinks about the SpecWar. Use oven mits when you open that e-mail, it will be scathingly hot.
Tanto points, in the American sense(100 hail Mary's for blaspheming the Sacred Name of Liberty), suck because they lack any belly which is so useful in slicing and slashing. Traditional Japanese tantos had belly. These points also are poor performers when it comes to thrusting. They present a large flat surface with an obtuse angle of entry that must penetrate a target by shear brute force. This is compounded by the fact that the tip is not only out of line with the handle, but is also at the apex of an obtuse angle which will make it want to slip off anything that offers resistance like bone or kevlar. In fact, they perform really poorly against kevlar in comparison drop or clip points, as well as spear points. They offer no advantage in terms of tip strength. This has to do with the thickness of the grind and narrowness of the point. Any point may be made thick and strong and still have excelent penetrative qualities. See the Chris Reeve Project 1 and 2. Oh, traditional tanto points are meant to thrust with the spine down, edge up, so the point make contact first to minimize the deflection inherent in the design. Check out a Japanese swordsman some time. For that matter, it was not uncommon practice among Western cavalrymen who were issued sabers with curved blades that lacked some form of swedge. Note: Not all sabers were curved, and some had clip or drop points.
However, these knives don't have tanto points. They have clip points. The maker must have realized that tanto's suck at thrusting, so gave it a clip. But, rather than give it a *real* clip point, he kept the inefficient angular intersection where the belly should be of the trendy "American tanto"(100 lashes in penance of repeating the heresy). This drives home the fact that these are wall-hangers, pieces made for show and display, to be bought by people who won't use them, based soley on looks.
Speaking of stupid features based soley on looks, check out the blade cut-outs. They serve no purpose other than to please the eye(not mine, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder) and weaken the blade. Unneccessarily weakening a blade does not fit in with my criteria for an ultimate combat knife.
The same goes for the sawbacks. I don't know of anybody who does serious work with knives that has anything good to say about them. Oh yeah, since these are combat knives that may see use as a weapon, it is worth noting that sawbacks have a harpoon-like effect and will become lodged in your adversary. While that seems real viscious, and is, it's not very efficient. The blade will plug the hole and reduce bleeding. This could really suck if you were some sort of elite soldier who needed to kill a sentry silently.
I'm not too pleased with the handles either. They don't look teribly secure given the tiny speed bumps on some models that are the only thing that stand between your fingers and the blade. I am pretty certain you could give yourself a nasty cut if you tried to drive that point home. Also, you will note that what passes for a gaurd is made from and integral with the thin stock(relatively for a gaurd) the blade is made from. These to are a liability when delivering a thrust, and can be a burden even for chopping, as the thin cross section concentrates the force of a given action on a small area and delivers it to you finger and thumb with the result of an uncomfortable pinch or even a cut.
Chisel grinds have been taken apart elsewhere, the upshot is they belong on chisels, not knives, as they suck for delicate work and have a tendency to vear off to one side when slicing.
These knives were made with one purpose in mind, to appeal to the collector and the arm-chair Navy Seal wannabe. The goal, though it has failed to be met, was to make as strong a knife as possible with little regard for anything else. I use knives as hard or harder than most. I can tell you that I look for performance features before raw strength, and after I find some knives with the right features, I pick the strongest. I don't find the strongest knife(which I sincerely doubt any of these are), then buy it and say it's the knife of God, sent from above to satiate all our cutlery needs, featuring the latest in "tactical trends" to make a "street-lethal silent partner" and "blow the competition away".
These are silly afectations, equivalent to Medieval "bearing swords", designed purely for ostentatious display, and quite different from the tools and weapons actualy used. If you realize and accept this, you can buy them for what they are and put them in a display case and show them off. But don't pass them off as something they're not.(I use "you" in the impersonal, general sense of the word)
Again, I'm an opinionated and abrasive a$$hole, so if I sound like I'm knocking you, I apologize. I am dissing the knives. I have no ill feeling towards you at all.