I was checking out knife sites and wandered over to Cold Steel. I strongly recommend any knife buff interested in a good laugh head over and check out the "Read These Articles!" section.
Cold Steel undoubtedly makes a fine knife, at least in terms of raw performance and not aesthetics (which IS a secondary concern). But I hope that I am not alone in finding their grand-standing and endless outrageous and arguably meaningless tests a bit tiresome (does Lynn Thompson dream of battling soldiers whose bodies are 50-gallon drums and whose limbs are manilla rope?) This set of articles highlights that special self-aggrandizing, slightly off-center flair that has gotten Cold Steel where they are today. An enjoyable read if you could use a chuckle to brighten your day.
Let me highlight my favorite, "The Truth About Tactical Folders." After the odd, but not original, notion that tactical knives originated because military leaders disliked their troops carrying sheath knives (?), this article enters into a straightforward discussion of the appeal of tactical folders as small, easily carried defensive items. There are only a few Cold Steel plugs, and things are going fine until we hit the "Disadvantages."
Mr. Thompson begins this section, "While a folder with a short, thin blade can admittedly deliver effective slashes and thrusts, it still leaves a lot to be desired
when used to confront an opponent of equal stature and skill who is armed with a longer, heavier fixed blade knife." Already he has lost much of my interest, as I do not see the role of the tactical folder as engaging in sparring with an individual wielding a Bowie knife. I see the tactical folder as an emergency defensive weapon for sudden use to disable an opponent armed with bare hands, a makeshift weapon, or (in desperation) a gun, allowing me to flee or otherwise end the encounter. In short, I think of being jumped by a criminal with a baton or box-cutter more than facing off against Crocodile Dundee.
Despite this, Mr. Thompson continues to expound upon how much he would rather have a Trail Master Bowie than a tactical folder. Yeah, so would I! Was that the question? He also gives further highly graphic descriptions of the failure of your tactical folder in a violent encounter with Jim Bowie ("...his heavy blade merely smashes
down on top of yours, causing the lock to fail and....cutting off 3 of your fingers!") or perhaps a North Vietnamese regular ("...your point meets stiff resistance from an AK-47 magazine...") before launching into the final, and most bizarre, section of the article.
In "Get Shorty," Mr. Thompson tells us that we know a 4" blade is inadequate to reach some "vital targets buried deep in the human body" because the FBI requires a bullet show 14" of flesh penetration. As if bullet ballistics had anything to do with knife performance! That bullet doesn't NEED to travel 14", it only carries the ENERGY to do so because it may have to go through clothing and/or body armor, and the shot may be from an odd angle like directly below. Given enough force provided by the user, a knife will ALWAYS penetrate its full length, so it doesn't need the extra "distance" of a bullet's penetrative value, and also I am unlikely to try to stab someone's heart up through their pelvis. 4" seems quite sufficient to me, though I could say something about some people having more flesh to penetrate than others (but you know what they say about people in glass houses
).
The article also spends a great deal of time (and diagrams) illustrating the weaknesses of a tactical folder in parrying a large fixed-blade. That's right, I said "parrying." Others more knowledgeable than I may disagree, but I don't see parrying as a big part of the likely defensive technique of someone weilding a tactical folder. These knives are not for hunkering down in a Sandbar Duel, but for defending oneself against rapid, brutal assault from a dissimilarly-armed opponent!
In the end, Mr. Thompson's main point (aside from "Buy Cold Steel Knives!") seems to be that "the best of the mouse knives are no match for a full-sized fighting knife, not to mention a Bowie or Kukri." Well, um, that's a shocker. Luckily there aren't many Gurkhas waiting to jump me in an alleyway. I suppose I might write an article entitled "Don't Attack AH-64 Apache With A Spear," but I think folks can figure that out for themselves.
Sorry if I waxed a little bitter towards the end there, I just do find Cold Steel's advertising and opinion-slinging tiresome (so I figured I'd sling some of my own.) Once again, they really do make great knives if you can find them through the hype. Check out their site: read the articles for a laugh, then go pick out a nice SRK or Bush Ranger.
All that quoted stuff is copyright Lynn Thompson, Cold Steel is a registered trademark, etc.
------------------
-Corduroy
(Why else would a bear want a pocket?)
Cold Steel undoubtedly makes a fine knife, at least in terms of raw performance and not aesthetics (which IS a secondary concern). But I hope that I am not alone in finding their grand-standing and endless outrageous and arguably meaningless tests a bit tiresome (does Lynn Thompson dream of battling soldiers whose bodies are 50-gallon drums and whose limbs are manilla rope?) This set of articles highlights that special self-aggrandizing, slightly off-center flair that has gotten Cold Steel where they are today. An enjoyable read if you could use a chuckle to brighten your day.
Let me highlight my favorite, "The Truth About Tactical Folders." After the odd, but not original, notion that tactical knives originated because military leaders disliked their troops carrying sheath knives (?), this article enters into a straightforward discussion of the appeal of tactical folders as small, easily carried defensive items. There are only a few Cold Steel plugs, and things are going fine until we hit the "Disadvantages."
Mr. Thompson begins this section, "While a folder with a short, thin blade can admittedly deliver effective slashes and thrusts, it still leaves a lot to be desired
when used to confront an opponent of equal stature and skill who is armed with a longer, heavier fixed blade knife." Already he has lost much of my interest, as I do not see the role of the tactical folder as engaging in sparring with an individual wielding a Bowie knife. I see the tactical folder as an emergency defensive weapon for sudden use to disable an opponent armed with bare hands, a makeshift weapon, or (in desperation) a gun, allowing me to flee or otherwise end the encounter. In short, I think of being jumped by a criminal with a baton or box-cutter more than facing off against Crocodile Dundee.
Despite this, Mr. Thompson continues to expound upon how much he would rather have a Trail Master Bowie than a tactical folder. Yeah, so would I! Was that the question? He also gives further highly graphic descriptions of the failure of your tactical folder in a violent encounter with Jim Bowie ("...his heavy blade merely smashes
down on top of yours, causing the lock to fail and....cutting off 3 of your fingers!") or perhaps a North Vietnamese regular ("...your point meets stiff resistance from an AK-47 magazine...") before launching into the final, and most bizarre, section of the article.
In "Get Shorty," Mr. Thompson tells us that we know a 4" blade is inadequate to reach some "vital targets buried deep in the human body" because the FBI requires a bullet show 14" of flesh penetration. As if bullet ballistics had anything to do with knife performance! That bullet doesn't NEED to travel 14", it only carries the ENERGY to do so because it may have to go through clothing and/or body armor, and the shot may be from an odd angle like directly below. Given enough force provided by the user, a knife will ALWAYS penetrate its full length, so it doesn't need the extra "distance" of a bullet's penetrative value, and also I am unlikely to try to stab someone's heart up through their pelvis. 4" seems quite sufficient to me, though I could say something about some people having more flesh to penetrate than others (but you know what they say about people in glass houses

The article also spends a great deal of time (and diagrams) illustrating the weaknesses of a tactical folder in parrying a large fixed-blade. That's right, I said "parrying." Others more knowledgeable than I may disagree, but I don't see parrying as a big part of the likely defensive technique of someone weilding a tactical folder. These knives are not for hunkering down in a Sandbar Duel, but for defending oneself against rapid, brutal assault from a dissimilarly-armed opponent!
In the end, Mr. Thompson's main point (aside from "Buy Cold Steel Knives!") seems to be that "the best of the mouse knives are no match for a full-sized fighting knife, not to mention a Bowie or Kukri." Well, um, that's a shocker. Luckily there aren't many Gurkhas waiting to jump me in an alleyway. I suppose I might write an article entitled "Don't Attack AH-64 Apache With A Spear," but I think folks can figure that out for themselves.
Sorry if I waxed a little bitter towards the end there, I just do find Cold Steel's advertising and opinion-slinging tiresome (so I figured I'd sling some of my own.) Once again, they really do make great knives if you can find them through the hype. Check out their site: read the articles for a laugh, then go pick out a nice SRK or Bush Ranger.
All that quoted stuff is copyright Lynn Thompson, Cold Steel is a registered trademark, etc.
------------------
-Corduroy
(Why else would a bear want a pocket?)