Custom Tactical Folders?

Hi KBS,

Im going to guess you don't understand much about marketing and publishing. The reason that photo was chosen was for 2 reasons.

1) the publisher picked it.

2) They liked the way it took you through three iterations of the same knife. Starting with the basic knife and going to the Damascus version.

BTW, my reference to this book had nothing to do with the cover or page 13. It had to do with page 4. Where Bob Terzuola thanked myself and Bob Neal for "defining" what a tactical knife is.

Which page in Bob's book would I find reference to you or anything you have ever said or thought about tactical knives? Feel free to include any other book(s) or Magazine(s) articles you have authored or were interviewed for your opinion on what a tactical knife is. Perhaps we can discuss this during the judging of the tactical knife category at Blade next year. Oh that's right you won't be judging. Surely that is just an oversight...given your extensive knowledge of the subject.

BTW, I never claimed ownership to the marketing term...I just pointed out that the word tactical does have inherent parameters. As such the word has become part of the lexicon of custom knives.

Any particular reason that every other style of knife with a Damascus blade and/or natural handle materials are called Damascus knives or presentation knives. That when these materials are added to a base tactical folder....you and others do not call them Damascus or Presentation or Art knives?

I would think when you upgrade a base knife...you would also want to upgrade the category the knife would now be a part of. Especially when showing the knife to outside the custom knife community.

You guys keep trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

You might want to read my article on the cycles of custom knives in the upcoming Knives Illustrated Buying Guide.
 
Just came across this tactical folder, and I thought I'd share it with everyone:
emersonfulldresscqc7-01.jpg
 
Emersons sure do dress up well!
To be honest, I'm not really a fan of most, but something about those sixes and sevens (and their little brothers) really draws me in. Polished bolsters and MOP makes this a pretty interesting tactical folder. I think it might even look nicer on this five:
999996070.jpg
 
Man, I've been away from BF way too long! This whole thread has been very entertaining. The pictures have been nice, but so has Les' "chats" with some of the posters. I'll have to pay up my dues so I can post pictures of my "tactical" knives, both the Les versions and the non-Les knives!

Back to work.....

David Broadwell
 
BTW, my reference to this book had nothing to do with the cover or page 13. It had to do with page 4. Where Bob Terzuola thanked myself and Bob Neal for "defining" what a tactical knife is.

I'll set aside all the rest of your comments for now and respond only to this, which was what honestly spawned my comments in the first place. You are clearly proud of your citations and achievements and chose to point out that Bob thanking you in his book as some testament to your credibility.

This all began, you remember, when you insisted that materials involved in the construction of a knife define its classification. You stated this as a fact.

There is a simple flaw in developing and using an ontology to classify knives the way you are.

"Tactical" implies intended use and is a valid description of a category.

"Damascus" is a material.

I think this quote from the exact book you are so proud of contributing to sums up the genesis of my frustration with your attitude quite nicely:

From "The Tactical Folding Knife: By Bob Terzuola"
Chapter 1: What is a tactical knife?
Page 15:
"Finishes to the blade and handles, materials from which they are made and decorative embellishments, I believe are of no real consequence to the definition of a tactical folder and these features are left to the good judgement of my fellow knife makers."

With that, I can bow out of this.
 
To Knifebystander, I'll testify to Les Robertson's credentials. Everything he's said going back several months on this thread is accurate. "Tactical" is nothing more than a specific category of knives based upon a look formed by a narrow group of materials. Those materials are what Les described. If, as you seem to say and others have said, a "tactical" knife can have wood, MOP, damascus, mokume, etc - in other words, any material you want - then ANY knife is a tactical knife if you want it to be! Anyone think this is a "tactical"? http://broadwellstudios.com/jadedagger.htm

David Broadwell
 
I think this thread needs some Marlowe! There was a picture of, I think, an A4, and Charles had jigged out the titanium to match the popcorn-effect of the stag. Really incredible stuff, but I can't seem to find it. I'm on the look out now and I'll post it if I do, but in the mean time, this should hold everyone over:

999994400.jpg
 
I think this thread needs some Marlowe! There was a picture of, I think, an A4, and Charles had jigged out the titanium to match the popcorn-effect of the stag.

1. Looks like a Spyderco.

2. Photographically playing the agent provocateur does not suit you...do you have a statement to make?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Well this may be "shaking up" the category a bit, but I love Don Hanson's "upscale tacticals". No statement here, just wondering if there will be a "tacticool" category? an evolution of the category?
Btw, I know for a fact the term "tactical" was used by marine force recon and LEOs in the late 80's early 90's. I heard it from my cousin,Marine, who bought a "tactical" knife from Mick Strider. I then heard it agian when a Sheriff friend of mine was showing me his Spyderco Stainless police.
My "working" definition is just like the regs. For sunglasses and such now that the Army has. My son-in-law is 82nd air and a very white Irish buoyo. We were buying him sunglasses for his deployment to Afghanistan and he said they needed to be flat color and no reflective surface, with impact resistant lenses. To me a tatical knife is a real tool that won't give your position away. I also sent him a ZT0300 tactical knife:p

Y'all be good
 
Last edited:
K2012 or K2013?

Kertzman is a minimally knowledgeable tool who got handed the best box of crayons and nicest paper to draw on ever and insists upon putting out consistent crap(he is consistent, though).

I'll accept Les Robertson's definition before I accept how Joe groups the knives.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

K2012.



Hi Virginian,

I like Joe, he is a knowledge editor. However, he is that an editor. As well he works with the photos he has. People love pretty shiny knives. Want proof check out the centerfold of Tactical Knives. Nothing but Damascus, Ivory, etc. I have always wondered with all the tactical knives out there....why are art and presentation knives put in the centerfold. Virginian, perhaps you know.

I am a Field Editor for both Knives Illustrated and Blade. I write for both. I will be the first to admit that I am no BR Hughes and that I know I have very limited knowledge of what it would take to be an editor (especially for the Knife Annual). What I do know is that Joe is limited to what photos are sent to Blade...professionally take photographs. This mere fact limits what knives and makers Joe will have to utilize for the Knife Annual. I would submit to you that the higher end "Hybrids" get as much play in the magazines and Knife Annual that they do; Is due directly to the magazines now requiring professional photographs. The majority of sub $700 don't get professional photographed.

I suspect you didn't get the memo on this.

Clearly I don't get any of the memos.

However, of course I understand that Joe is reliant on getting pictures from guys like Coop, Chuck Ward, etc. And I understand that may not give him pictures of many less expensive knives.

That still doesn't explain why he decided to label those particular knives as tactical knives. Which averyone who has read this thread knows that they definitely are not. He could have called them a lot of things.

You know, a lot of folks read those books. And Blade magazine. If they keep using the term "tactical knife" incorrectly in those publications, other folks may start using it that way, too. Especially after you have shuffled off this mortal coil and are no longer around to correct them. And if enough folks use a term the same "wrong" way for a long enough period of time . . . Well, you may have noticed that Merriam-Webster leeps publishing new editions.
 
Last edited:
My personal take on this will be different from the 'rule'. Les and others know this rule well and helped draft it.

Tactical knife = A type(?) of knife designed and meant for defense or offense in a combative situation. Primary target user is a professional (Police, Military, etc.)

This 'type' of knife has evolved into a 'style' of knife. That's what our industry is referring to now, and I can't see that changing. Therein lies the rub. (Note The Virginian's comment of the dictionary reference evolving)

Bowie knives, traditional knives, fighting knives, are all a 'style' of knife. Lots of leeway within.

This style will have effectiveness measured below:

Effective <-------------------------------------------> Not Effective

Effective:

Non glare finishes
Easily opening
Ergonomics for task
Built sturdy
More I haven't mentioned

Non-effective:
Delicate blade finishes
Polished surfaces
damascus parts
fragile/expensive handle materials

My sense is that it has evolved to a style which is generic, and the candy-coated versions (Thanks for admiring my boudoir shots of them!), are included for the mass appeal.

No one in the Professional category gives a sh1t about dressing them up, and yet the Custom/Handmade industry would fall flat if we relied on only their definitions of effectiveness. Long Live Dress Tacticals!

Dress Tacticals or Tacticools: The style is here to stay, despite the ineffectiveness of them, or the terms used to describe them.

Volley: your round. ;)

Coop
 
Dress Tacticals or Tacticools: The style is here to stay, despite the ineffectiveness of them, or the terms used to describe them.

Volley: your round. ;)

Coop

I've watched this thread develop with great interest, though without any interest whatsoever in tactical knives. Maybe next it will be the Tacticool Tactitool - but hopefully no one will suggest they re-classify "dress" tactical as "art" tactical.

Or maybe this is just "baiting" to start another "round"?:D
 
Last edited:
Great Thread.
Here is the Wikipedia Definition
That is the definition they use in the courtroom
The genie is out of the bottle now.
Respect from Texas.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A fighting knife is a knife with a blade designed to inflict a lethal injury in a physical confrontation between two or more individuals at very short range (grappling distance).[1][2][3][4] In contrast, the combat knife, or a trench knife, is a military fighting knife.[1][5]
Fighting knives were traditionally designed as special-purpose weapons, intended primarily if not solely for use in personal or hand-to-hand combat. This singularity of purpose originally distinguished the fighting knife from the field knife, fighting utility knife, or in modern usage, the tactical knife. The tactical knife is a knife with one or more military features designed for use in extreme situations, which may or may not include a design capability as a fighting or combat weapon.[6] Since World War I, the fighting knife in military service has gradually evolved into a dual-purpose or "fighting-utility" knife, suited for both knife fighting and utility roles. As a consequence, the terms "fighting knife" and "tactical knife" are frequently employed interchangeably.
 
Back
Top