CQC6 variation

F

Fenris

Joined
Oct 5, 1998
Messages
464
I just got a CQC6, aftermarket, I still have two years of wait on my order.

The knife is great! It has a satin finished blade, green micarta scales and bead blasted titanium liners and bolsters. I haven't done that much with it yet but train and it feels great. Definitely better than the CQC8.

Has anyone encountered other CQC6's? When I orderered mine I didn't get any choices. I've seen a few different versions such as ones with black handles (the one Les had a few months ago), a titanium bladed one, and the ones in the catalogue. John, who has order 579 posted that his will be serrated Black T, with a checkered texture handle.
Les, do you know if the green handled one is the standard CQC6 or are there others floating around?

Thanks in advance,

Jason
 
Hi Jason,

Yes, the green micarta is standard on most CQC6's. Ive seen them with black micarta and black G-10 as well.

I sold one today with the older Emerson Logo and green micarta. You can tell the age of the knife by the amount of work done around the bolster. The older ones have serrations on top and bottom of the bolster as well as a thumb groove on the right side. Youll note the ones with the specwar logo have no serrations anywhere on the bolster and no thumb channel on the right side of the knife (as you hold in you hand with the blade open and facing down).

The CQC6 is the most common and easiest to get(Common and easiest are relative terms).

I seem to come across CQC6's about every 3-4 weeks.

Let me know when your ready to get rid of it.




------------------
Les Robertson
Robertson's Custom Cutlery
http://www.robertsoncustomcutlery.com/rcc/makers.shtml
It is easier to get things done with a kind word and a knife, than with a kind word alone!

 
Fenris,

The CQC8 looks to have a very secure handle compared with the CQC6. What is it that you like better about the CQC6?

Axel
 
Les, thanks for clearing that up. I have seen CQC6's with serrated bolsters. Mine obviously doesn't have one, but, my knife has a "thumb" depression carved on the other bolster. It doesn't mirror the thumb depression on the side of the face of the blade so maybe it's for the pointer finger as it wraps around. Even though this knife is completely new Les, I think it's going to be a keeper, one that I carry whenever I can. I'm not going to use it really hard or abuse it, but this is a knife I've wanted for a long time and now feel a growing attachment. I know, something else will come along in the future, but for now I'm not collecting Emerson's, I'm training with them.

Axel,

I know I was here raving about the CQC8 about three weeks ago commenting on the ergonomics and balance. I still think the knife is exquisite but I have small hands and the CQC6 seems to fit better and it has a little bit thicker width (beefier) for the same diameter of handle than the CQC8 so it accomodates my hands better. Balance for both knives is at the same place, an inch behind the blade. I also like the raised thumb ramb on the CQC6 with deeper serrations. The CQC8 has a downward sloping thumb ramp with light serrations that seem pretty much useless but the knife may not have been designed for a really secure saber grip in mind.

Nevertheless I did not mean that the 6 is much better than the 8. I meant that it accomodates me better because it is smaller and more compact. The CQC8 is also a great fighter but the 6 is just a little bit closer to what I'm looking for.

Jason Yang
 
Jason,

Thanks for your comments. Do you feel that the CQC6 has a secure enough grip for thrusting? The CQC8 looks like you could thrust securely in either the saber grip or natural grip. Is the CQC6 secure in both grips?

Axel
 
Jason and Axel

Guys, both of the knives you are discussing are only built for reverse grip, this is why the grind is on the wrong side.

For a right handed person the grind should be on the right side (as Lightfoot does it, just a note the Lightfoot 458 is superior to the Emerson CQC6.) Since your going to ask, the grind is on the correct side (this in and of itself make it superior), the steel is BG42 (yes, like it or not it is superior to ATS-34, more Cr and Vanadium, this equates to better rust resistance and a tougher blade), also, Greg puts the clip on the correct end (bolster), this provides a better degree of saftey for those things that are just under your pants!

Jason, take your CQC6 and whittle some wood. I know its not a combative thing, but it will bring home the point to the limits your knife has.

When the grind is on the left side, if you were to dig your edge into a 2x4. Youll note as you cut into the wood that the handle is pulling towards your finger tips. This causes fatigue to the hand muscles much quicker as you have to use your strenght to maintain control of the knife.

Where as if the grind is on the right side, youll find using the same 2x4 that youll feel the handle torque into the palm of your hand. This gives you better control and less muscle fatigue.

8 years ago when the knife was designed it was state of the art. There are many makers out there now doing superior work, John W Smith, David Broadwell, Joel Chamblin, Greg Lightfoot, Jim Minnick, Brian Tighe, Phil Boguzewski, Kit Carson, Bob Terzuola as examples.

By the way, why doesnt Marchinko carry his much loved CQC6 in his new book. He gave it up for a Gerber?

Beware of Hype!

Now dont get me wrong, I give emerson his due for helping to bring Tactical Folders to the forefront of folder collecting. It appears he is happy with the status of his folders and is now concentrating on his factory knives.

The main thing is your happy with the knife. Im sure this knife is the pride of your collection as it is with many. All design flaws aside, I think the CQC6 in future years will be put in with the great tactical knives of all time.

------------------
Les Robertson
Robertson's Custom Cutlery
http://www.robertsoncustomcutlery.com/rcc/makers.shtml
It is easier to get things done with a kind word and a knife, than with a kind word alone!

 
Les,

Thanks for clearing some things up. I have a question though. You mentioned that since the grind was on the left side, the knife was designed for reverse grip. This makes a lot of sense because it works. Nevertheless, was it actually designed this way because of this reason? I always thought the left grind was for aesthetics. I've seen pictures of Emerson with two knives, reverse grip though.

Axel,
The CQC6 is definitely secure for thrusting in sabre grip. There is the bolster that flares out and the angled thumb ramp. In naturally grip you only have the bolster however. Not to get too much off topic but in Arnis, there is only one basic thrust which is kind of like a punch, full force, twist the arm, seing the hips and waist complete with step. Sabre grip is recommended. The other "thrusts" are just quick pokes which make smaller wounds, kind of like jabs or tight hook punches where you're not trying to completely bury the knife all the way in, so natural grip works fine here. I don't know how often the full fledged thrust is used in your training but I would stick to sabre for those purposes.

I have to admit, there is a lot of hype that goes along with this knife but I haven't really heard a lot of people talk about how great the knife is. Sure, Dick Marcinko speaks of it in his first couple of novels which I've read but beyond that no one really talks much about this knife. I'd actually like to hear a review of the CQC6 from a person knowledgable about handmade knives. Usually there are just one-liners about how the knife is so awesome. I've heard far more talk and read many more quality reviews and opinions on the makers you have just mentioned. Words such as "perfect, overbuilt, tank, smooth, solid lock-up" describe, Lightfoot, Terzuola, Smith, Carson, Chamblin. I've handled these knives at your table at knife shows in NYC and they never really fit my hand properly. I think Emerson does do exquisite work though and his knife fits my purposes and the intangible quality of owning a knife you like.

Thanks,

Jason Yang
 
Ernie ground (grinds) his knives on that side for aesthetics. When he asked the guys that he designed the knife for if they cared whitch side it was ground on, they said they did not care as long as it was sharp(and it most certainly is). Bottom line, the CQCs' are a weapon. They were never intended for cutting sushi or tomatoes.

hope this helps,
Derek
 
Derek,

There is a problem with your statement. Weapons are not designed with asthetics in mind. The should be designed for maxium efficency. Because Emereson went for "looks" instead of performance the design chosen short changes those of use who buy knives to be used as weapons. No, I dont use my knives for slicing tomatoes or cutting up sushi, but its nice to know that I dont have to carry an extra knife for that purpose.

As far as sharpness, Emerson's knives have always needed a little tune up on the edge as did alot of his lockups (this problem still plagues even his factory knives).

By the way Derek what is your background and what other custom knives do you own. Its always nice to know where people are coming from and what they judge the effectiveness of their knives on.



------------------
Les Robertson
Robertson's Custom Cutlery
http://www.robertsoncustomcutlery.com/rcc/makers.shtml
It is easier to get things done with a kind word and a knife, than with a kind word alone!

 
I have heard the same reasoning that Derek gave for the left handed grind. The side of the grind is important for utility use, but not for use as a weapon. Apparently, Emerson went for aesthetics and many other makers grind their chisel grinds the same way because Emerson's are like that. I agree that the left handed grind is not very good for right-handed utility work. That's why my knives are double ground. The CQC7 is ground the same way, and it has a thumb ramp. All the advertisements I see show it in a saber grip so I don't think that it was designed exclusively for reverse grip use.

As far as the custom knives I own, my first was over 15 years ago. It was a custom Balisong butterfly knife. I think it was ground by Jody Samson (sp?). I then bought a Randall Model 1 which is more like bench made, but they did rework the single finger grip shape handle to my liking which is something a factory wouldn't do. More recently I purchased two Crawford KFFs and a damascus mini KFF. My last custom purchase was a Polkowski Scorpion which I picked up from Les.

Axel

 
I have several custom knives and I couldn't care less what people spend their money and I just hope they are happy. However, I have a point or 2 to make about Emerson knives. I personally like the designs (I know the pros and cons of the chisel grind) and if I could get one at Ernie's list prices ($475 for the cqc6) in 2-3 months, I would jump right on it. In no way, shape, form, or fashion are these knives worth $800-$1200 or a 4-5 year wait. For the same money I could get 2 or even 3 knives from Kit Carson, RJ Martin, Allen Elishewitz, Pat/Wes Crawford, or Greg Lightfoot. All of these makers knives are as good or better than Emersons and can be had double ground. I personally wish I had the money to snatch up the Roy Helton LDC knife that is on Les's website right now. If you like Emersons that's great and I hope you enjoy them, but they are not inherintly superior to other makers knives just because everybody who's read about he SEALS wants one.
 
Les and others,

What is your opinion of tactical folders? Many disdain this phrase as an oxymoron and I realize that it is a relatively new phenomenon. When I started buying "good knives" this idea was just taking off. Within a few years, everyone was making them.

I've heard that Bob Terzuola was one of or the first that began making them. Regardless of the fact that Ernest Emerson has a SpecOps support for his folders he does have many years of martial arts experience and I believe that this is reflected in his work. Elishewitz also has studied martial arts for the majority of his life and he has many great designs.

How many other makers of handmade (Les, I try to never use the word custom anymore) "tactical folders" actually have the weapons training? I just received my Jaws IV from Laci Szabo and after handling a lot of his work his knives really only have two purposes, (combat-UUK series) or fighting (Jaws series, Lightning UUK,Kerambit etc.). I trust Szabo designs because of the thought and hours of training and refinement that go into them.

Are other tactical makers just coming up with designs that do work pretty well (I know that Lightfoot and Carson accept any customer criticism and have made changes) instead of having the actual background and understanding that allows one to come up with a truly effective weapon? Everyone understands the principles of good tactical knife design (it's been forced down our throats and preached over the years) and if you pitted and Emerson folder against a Carson or Lightfoot in a tactical situation there may not be much difference but I think the maker with the fighting experience that trains daily will come up with a design that is effective in a way that cannot be grasped by just looking at it but only through demonstration and explanation. Szabo has had to show me a few things about a knife just as Keating has done many demonstrations. Knife magazines are always too eager to come up with waht makes a knife tactical. Reviews say inane obvious things like "the pocket clip makes it very tactical" or "the carbon fiber scales or G-10 scales give you a solid tactical grip" or "at 3.5 inches, the knife is the ideal length for a tactical knife."

Anyone can think up a good knife design that logically makes sense, but it takes years of experience to get it right and come up with something that isn't just effective in the basest form of the word but is extraordinary.

JMHO,
Jason

P.S. Les, I hope you'll be at the East Coast Custom Knife show in NYC because I would love to learn more about some of the other handmades you mentioned.

[This message has been edited by Fenris (edited 15 February 1999).]
 
Jason,

I think that a folding knife has merit as a defensive knife. Because of laws and the attitudes towards fixed blades, often the only knife which can be carried is a folder. It is also likely to be with you always. If the laws and attitudes were different, I would carry my Scorpion everywhere. However in Maryland, a "penknife" is legal all other weapons are borderline illegal. At work, if human resources finds out I carry a folder, then it shouldn't be a problem. If they found out I carry a double edged fixed blade, then I would probably be terminated.

That being said folders have obvious disadvantages to a fixed blade. The most obvious is strength. The lock is the most important element here. Liner locks can be done well, but often they can fail. Regular testing is advised. New locks like the Rolling and Axis lock have promise.

Handle shape is often lacking with folders. However, makers are beginning to address this. The Crawford KFF and Rolling lock custom knife have excellent handles. The Szabo/Elishewitz folding UUK has a substantial guard integral with the blade. Even your CQC8 has a very protective handle.

Many instructors of knife combatives such as Bob Kasper, James Keating and Kelly Worden teach the use of a folder for defensive use. All of them have also designed defensive folders.

So in my opinion, folders can serve as defensive knives. The concept of a folder as a defensive knife is still developing and we should see more advances in the future.

Axel

 
Axel,

I definitely think that folders can be tactical in fact 90% of my folders are for that purpose. (I'm from Maryland, now in NY for college. Aren't their knife laws ridiculous?)

Unfortunately, I've seen companies come out with folders that are supposedly tactical (a dime a dozen) but aren't really that great regardless of lock strength. I'm interested in how handmade makers measure up to each other in design when their knives are called "tactical."

JAson Yang
 
Jason,

As far as custom tactical folders go I have only purchased from Pat Crawford. The Kasper designs are designed by a knife combatives instructor. One good thing about having a knife used by a combatives instructor is that the kinks get worked out by hard use. If the locks start failing, then the instructor will complain to the maker and the maker will have to make it right. Pat has begun to intall Rolling Locks. I'm sure this has to do with the feedback he receives on the potential shortcomings of the liner lock.

Most people don't work their folders very hard, especially if they're custom. Those serious about knife combatives tend to do live cutting drills and speed openings. It is with these hard drills that the weaknesses of the folder is discovered. How secure is the grip for thrusts and slashes? How well does the lock hold up with live cutting drills? If the maker can learn from this and improve the design, then a great defensive folder is the result.

As far as other makers are concerned, I'll let others jump in.

Axel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top