Blades of WW2

N

Needle Mouse

Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
81
I know this may be an Easy question to answer but think about it Which one is the Better Blade in a combat situation,
The American KBAR or the Brittish Fairbairn and Sykes???
lets be logical in our assesments...
 
It depends on what you mean by “a combat situation.”

The Fairbairn-Sykes is an example of a fighting knife. A single purpose blade, and that purpose is killing. It’s just right for a commando removing sentries guarding enemy headquarters.

The Kabar Model 2 is a combat knife. A utility knife serving many purposes in a theater of combat. Making camp, opening crates and 55 gallon drums, cutting stretcher poles. Killing when necessary.

When GIs were issued the Fairbairn-Sykes they hated it. It was no combat knife and it broke when they used it as one.
 
The Ka-Bar. Why?

Both have too-narrow tangs, but the F-S tang is far narrower. The Ka-Bar has the sturdier point; the F-S was noted to have tip and even blade breakage. The F-S handle is too narrow and gives no idea of edge orientation. The Ka-Bar's handle can be sanded to an oval for increased comfort as well as edge orientation, and is more comfortable--albeit less durable unless waterproofed--than that of the F-S.
 
Raymond1000 said:
It depends on what you mean by “a combat situation.”

The Fairbairn-Sykes is an example of a fighting knife. A single purpose blade, and that purpose is killing. It’s just right for a commando removing sentries guarding enemy headquarters.

The Kabar Model 2 is a combat knife. A utility knife serving many purposes in a theater of combat. Making camp, opening crates and 55 gallon drums, cutting stretcher poles. Killing when necessary.

When GIs were issued the Fairbairn-Sykes they hated it. It was no combat knife and it broke when they used it as one.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent answer, what I intended to say but said better. +1
 
I have examples of both and I'd take the K bar 10 out of 10 times. There is no comparison. Now if the choice was between a smatchet and a k- bar I'd have to make a much more difficult decision.

Have you ever held a FS?

Joe
 
Yes I suppose Your right it would depend upon diffrent variables and diffrent aplications upon witch one makes the more suppiorior blade
 
Both common sense and several historical accounts favor the more robust bowie blade over the stiletto style blade for hand to hand combat. Yes the fairbairn or Raider stiletto look more lethal, but do you really think a bowie stabbed into you would do less damage? Its not really an issue of the damage as both knives would cut deeply if used right, but the facts were the more robust knife performed better.

I have read several times how the Marine Raiders were mostly unimpressed with the Raider stiletto, infact the bolo style hospital corpsman knife (basically a bolo matchete) was the knife of choice, followed by the Raider bowie and Ka-bar.

It would seem that in the heat of real hand to hand combat, men were far more likely to go all "caveman simple" vs. "skilled assassin". I suggest reading a little about the Marine Raiders to learn more.
 
Um....both? They're both prooven designs. In the hands of someone trained they could both be incredibly deadly. The Kabar is a little more utilitarian in nature, but just as effective a killer. I guess the fairburn sykes is a purpose built killer....IDK I'd go with a tie on these.
 
Better grip wise than the FS but I'd still take the bowie style blade. Just personal opinion though.

Joe
 
hardheart said:
anyone think the V42 fares better in comparison?
Click to expand...

They got good feedback from their users as killing instruments. The hollow ground edges probably cut much better than the steep bevels of the F/S blades. I read a story where the pointy butt was used to finish an enemy soldier at least once. The only knock was the needle point breaking off when it stuck in bone, & a lot of those got reground to sturdier configurations. They had to suck horribly for any other use, though.

I'm a huge dagger fan, but I'd pick the Ka-Bar if I was a combat soldier for the utility value alone. On top of that, it's sturdier, has a more stable grip with the ability to be sanded down to fit my hand, has better cutting ability, & it gives up very little in thrusting ability. The F/S carries easier & thrusts a bit better while leaving a slightly smaller wound channel, but that's it.

So are there any other WW2 fighting blades in the mix? Some Commandos liked the M3 better than the F/S knife.
 
Ka-Bar vs FS?
Two VERY different knives and not really comparable.

One is a knife specifically for killing and though flimsy, its an excellent knife for its intended purpose.
WWII sentry removal, where you sneak up and stick someone in the neck and scramble nerves - top points.
Opening SPAM cans - not so good.

The other is a utility knife, which can be used in combat.
Far more sturdy though may not work as well as mentioned in the exact scenario mentioned above.
For combat it still works to some extent.
For all sorts of camp work, opening cans and in general boosting the confidence of the GI - top marks.

Its a testimony to BOTH knives, that they are still highly regarded as national iconic designs of their respective countries.

To my surprise, the FS is STILL sought after and brought by soldiers to mission areas.

With the the knives currently available, I would have thought, that a more modern and more sturdy design was chosen, but the FS is still the knife of choice for some.

That the Ka-Bar is still sought after and in widespread use goes without saying.

I like some MKII knives better than others, but of all the generic utility knives of WWII, I prefer the quality of the CATTARAUGUS 225Q.
I prefer the beefy handguard and overall quality and design.

Could I only choose one WWII knife for the purpose of going to war and bringing a utility knife (and if my MOS was not limited to sentry removal at night), I would bring the 225Q.

Here is my original (post WWII) FS and my WWII 225Q. The FS is still in fine condition although a British soldier brought it on missions decades ago (the wear on the handle indicates, that it spent most of its time if not all in the sheath on a vest or ruck, as the blade is mint).

The quality of the Cattaraugus has to be seen to be believed. Especially when compared to how many were made and the price. Amazing that this relatively cheap knife and this design has held up so well after 60+ years.

IMG_0431.jpg


IMG_2214.jpg


Disregard the USMC stickers - the 'Q' was never specifically a USMC knife (I just sent the pics to a member of the USMC). The Cattaraugus was never specifically designed as a quartermaster knife either for that matter. Though some seem to still think so on account of how beefy the knife is and because of the 'Q.'
 
I would also pick the 225Q. This one was my grandfathers and was likely carried in combat. I stripped it down and refurbished it.

IMAG0030_zps1a6df698.jpg
 
IMO the Kabar can do what the F/S can better than vice versa, the F/S is a much more specialized tool.

I would bet most GI's used (and still use) their knives for general utility about 50x more than actual fighting so it's not surprising that the more utilitarian design seems to find more favor.
 
Charlie Mike said:
I would also pick the 225Q. This one was my grandfathers and was likely carried in combat. I stripped it down and refurbished it.

IMAG0030_zps1a6df698.jpg
Click to expand...

Awesome knife, thanks for posting!

Great, that you have your grandfathers knife. Impossible to put a value on that. I hope you treasure that particular 225 - I know, I would.

I like the finger groove modification, that (I assume) you made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top