Clip Point Question

ones a bit more slicey i guess? I remember at one rendezvous picnic, waynorth waynorth had this cool 48 diamond jack that had snakeskin micarta, but it had the muskrat clip, and he shown it to me and I said, it wouldve been perfect if it had the big clip. Charlie chuckled and put the knife away.
 
I guess I'd probably consider them redundant. Put them together in a double end trapper pattern, and you have a Muskrat. I never saw much difference between the Turkish clip and a regular clip. Although the regular clip might be a sturdier more robust blade. Either is great for skinning small critters. Two blades and you can skin twice as many before taking them to stone.
 
Redundancy always makes me think of the old Firesign Theatre skits. A quote.

"From the department of redundancy department"

I think it was from "Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers!"
 
I have a very small bias against the so-called 'Turkish' or 'California' clip, simply due to their narrower spine-to-edge width (in some, not all examples). I tend to favor the (usually) broader regular clip blades, as I believe that allows for a more gradual, thinning taper in cross-section, towards the edge. A narrower blade, from spine-to-edge, needs a quicker taper to the edge from the spine, to keep some thinness behind the edge. The few Turkish/California clip examples I have, like a Camillus muskrat pattern, are all pretty narrow and a bit thicker behind the edge than I'd ideally prefer. That's my priority in almost all the knives I use & carry - I REALLY favor the thinner grinds overall. And for clip blades in general, I also place emphasis on making the tips as pointy as possible. I like them for reaching into tight spots to stab and retrieve things, like picking out fruits from cactus, for example.

But again, I also realize not all Turkish clip grinds are the same, and some can be thinner than others if they're well-executed in advance. Same can be said for the 'regular' clips. Some are better and thinner than others. My slight bias is just that - it's not that I'd pass one up based only on the blade's overall profile, if I could see for myself it's as thin as I want it to be.

I don't think I'd feel a need to deliberately carry two different clip blades, unless they just happen to be incidental in the knives I choose to carry for other purposes everyday. And today, in fact, I am carrying a Buck 301, with its nice, pointy clip, and a lightweight Buck 110, with its clip. ;)
 
The Western Lowland Gorilla's scientific name is Gorilla gorilla gorilla (look it up)
So redundancy may be quite important ... scientifically speaking

nqMJ5rn.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think if you compared the clip blade on a Schrade 897UH and the clip blade on a Case Copperlock you might have a hard time realizing they're both the same type of blade. So I would consider carrying both to be both diverse and redundant. As in power plant design where not only do you want two of some things (redundant) but they should be of different design (diverse) so they don't share the same failure modes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top