big vs. small

O

outdoorsman196

Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
66
okay, so was wondering, what does everybody think. big knife or small knife? i have carried big knives (4 in.) and small knives (2 1/2 in.) but which is honestly more useful? or is it better to carry a big and a small? and for what kind of tasks? thanks.
 
I prefer smaller since most of my uses necessitate precision rather than force.

Even when I'm camping, I rarely need a knife larger than 4". Anything larger and I'll just use a hatchet.
 
both. some days I prefer smaller and lighter (delica 4) if I'm wearing shorts or whatever and then with jeans I'll carry the 0560 or something similar.
 
I always carry both, and I'm talking about folders. I carry a larger knife, usually 3.5" blade and up. Most of my large edc's are in the ~4.0" range. I carry a smaller knife, a slipjoint that ranges anywhere between 3.5 to 4.0" in the closed position. I usually carry the larger knife just to carry it. It is rare for me to use it, but it is usually a unique knife and one I really like and carrying it is something I do. The smaller knife is what I usually use and it will be anywhere from 2 to 4 bladed.

So I don't know if this really helps or not since the large folder I carry is usually a "show" piece.
 
I admire the design work that goes into making a functional small folding knife, and I tend to find them aesthetically appealing. However, they end up staying at home most of the time. I favour larger folders for actual use, blades between 3.5 and 4 inches are what I carry the most.

My most used fixed blade knives are in the 4 to 5 inch size range.
 
It's personal preference. I don't carry any folders over 3", and I can't think of anytime I've needed or wanted something bigger.
 
I'm most comfortable with a blade length of 3.25 - 4 inches. Anything shorter and it doesn't work so great for food (liking cutting up loaves of bread or tomatoes on the road), and anything too much longer seems unwieldy. It also maybe makes me think that one is trying to compensate for something ;).
 
I personally feel under knifed if I have anything less than 3.5 on me. I know it's bad form but if I require precision I just choke up in the blade behind the tip.

I work in a warehouse and very rarely need precision.
 
I prefer Paramilitary 2 and my Umnumzaan; both in the 3-4" category.
Sonny
 
Smaller knives (2 1/2 - 3 1/2), to me, seem to be a lot more practical than larger ones. I do carry larger knives but for a lot of tasks I find myself thinking that a smaller knife would be less awkward for the situation. Everyones use is going to be different, but overall I lean smaller since 80% of my uses would make no difference with a larger knife.
 
for every day I prefer a knife a about 3 to 3.5 inches of blade. With this size I can do most tasks but The knife isn't to big and unwieldy.
 
I prefer blades around 3.5". The best argument I can make is that a smaller knife has a smaller handle and it is hard for me to get a good enough grip on it for serious use. For just opening envelopes and so forth I can get by with a 3" blade, and I did carry a mini-grip for many years. I've bought some new knives for EDC that are all in the Para 2 size range. There are a lot of knives available at 2.5" or less and I think for some uses those can even be dangerous because they are too small to safely hang onto.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top