- Joined
- Oct 9, 1998
- Messages
- 1,767
Long ago I was considering getting one of these but didn't know which to get. Well, I finally decided. Both.
As the subject would suggest, this is a thread/review for comparing the Benchmade Stryker and the Emerson CQC-7B. A quick overview of each knife:
Stryker - An Allen Elishewitz design. This knife has a 3.6" long tanto blade ground on both sides. An alternative to all those chisel ground tanto's out there. The handle scales are G-10 and it has dual 6AL-4V titanium liners. The blade shape seems pretty unique for a geometric tanto. Overall a very well done knife. Tip down positioned pocket clip.
CQC-7B - I got a black-T coated plain edged CQC-7B. This has a 3.3" long chisel ground geometric tanto blade. Handles also use G-10 scales and titanium liners. Came initially with tip up position pocket clip, but there are three extra screw holes to allow tip down.
Now that I have introduced the contestants, lets begin the match.
Handle Overall Fit and Finish - On this, the Stryker wins hands down. The Stryker was with perfectly even and consistent G-10 and the titanium liners were perfect and well polished. The CQC-7B, while still a very nice knife, did not possess as clean fit and finish work as the Stryker. The G-10 scales on the CQC-7 were differing slightly in texture from left to right scale. One scale was a little rougher feeling on the rounded corners than the corners of the other scale. The result was a slightly inconsistent coloring on the corners of one scale compared to the other. This can probably be changed by very fine sandpaper on the corners of the rough scale. I can disassemble my CQC-7 without voiding the warranty, but with the Stryker I cannot. This is a plus for the Emerson I suppose, because you can perform your own finish work without voiding your warranty. I still wish they would have done it for me like Benchmade had. As said earlier, the winner of a fit and finish contest would definately be the Stryker.
Benchmade - 1
Emerson - 0
Blade Overall Fit and Finish - Since my CQC-7 was black-T coated and Stryker didn't have the coating (I got satin finish), it is hard to compare smoothness of a coating of one knife to something that does not exist on the other knife. From the BT2 coated models I have seen, I would say the smoothness and consistency of the coatings are about equal, though black-T is slightly superior to BT2 in quality.
Other than the coating, the Stryker would again win this match of fit and finish. The reasons are that the Emerson had a slight dent in the steel on the spine near the tip. This is a very minor blemish at worst. Nothing too serious, but the Stryker blade was perfect in about every way. The grinding on the Stryker was so much more complex too, and it was perfect, so there is no excuse for Emerson Knives leaving this minor blemish in the spine. This however would only really matter if you wanted your knife to be a display toy. The truth however is that Emerson knives are hard use knife, and because the CQC-7 doesn't have as superb a finish job, I'm actually looking forward to beating this ugly mug up by cutting something. This CQC-7 is obviously a working knife and nothing but. However, this section of the contest is just for appearance of fit and finish, so the Stryker will have to get the nod. BTW, did I mention that there was a small dent (very small, but noticeable) on the CQC-7's tang? This dent wasn't placed in a way that would compromise the liner lock, but they really should have looked into that!
Benchmade - 2
Emerson - 0
Thumb Mechanism - The CQC-7's thumb disk is not as well placed, but a lot more comfortable to use. The Stryker's thumb disk started to flake away skin on the tip of my thumb because of the texture. Eventually I'll grow calluses, but I really wish they made the texture on the disk more subtle! Emerson thumb stud is definately more comfortable.
Benchmade - 2
Emerson - 1
Opening Movement Human Engineering - This part is to compare the human engineering aspects of the knives for just the opening sequence using the thumb mechanism. The Stryker handle near the pivot end slopes in more, so it doesn't get in the way of your thumb movement. It is not hard to open it with the thumb and very easy to use. The Emerson takes a lot more getting used to. The back of the blade near the tang is a little obtrusive and beats into the fleshy part of my index finger during openings, thus slowing it down. Stryker wins this because of its strategic placement of the thumb disk and the more easy shape of the handle near the pivot.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 1
Pivot Smoothness - The Emerson was a lot smoother than the Stryker. The pivot was tight and blade play was non-existant. Simply amazing. When the Stryker was tightened to the point where blade play was made extremely difficult or non-existant, the knife became too tight to open comfortable, especially with its rough thumb disk. I'm extremely impressed with the smoothness of the Emerson's pivot and how well it takes care of side-to-side blade play. Emerson will definately take the trophy for smoothness.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 2
Lock Mechanism - The Stryker, like in the pivot smoothness contest, was a little tighter than comfortable. The lockup was solid in both knives, and both passed the spine tap test (performed upon my knee). I know the CQC-7's liner lock will wear out a lot slower, because the tang of the blade was slightly steeper in the angling to accomodate for wear of the liner. You'd think this steepness would affect the liner lock strength before failure, but both knives passed the spine tap test. Because the lock was not as uncomfortably tight in the CQC-7, this knife did not cause me as much skin removal from the tip of my thumb as the Stryker did with its tight liners and its rough thumb disk.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 3
Out of the Box Sharpness - Surprisingly, Benchmade didn't live up to its reputation for having unbelievably dull knives out of the box. This knife actually was shaving sharp. During a local community college C-programming course I was taking, I showed this knife to the person sitting next to me and he drew the blade up his arm, leaving a patch of baldness. The Emerson was also extremely sharp out of the box, and probably sharper than the Benchmade. I brushed this lightly against the hair on my head, and hair started to fall out. The Benchmade could also do this, but not nearly as well as the Emerson did. Perhaps the chisel-ground edge ground at a total of 30-degrees will be sharper than the 40-degree+ total edge angle on the Stryker. I don't really care about why the Stryker didn't feel as sharp as the Emerson. We can discuss chisel-ground properties/advantages/disadvantages at another time. The simple fact is that this Emerson knife was sharp!
Emerson - 4
Benchmade - 3
Handle Biotechnology/Ergonomics - The design of the Stryker handle is simply more comfortable. The gradually rounded back end of the handle fit against my palm perfectly. While the new Emerson CQC-7 from Emerson Knives (not from Benchmade) had removed many of the sharp corners, the butt of the knife still was slightly less comfortable than that of the Stryker. This is a very slight discomfort. The main one was the finger groove aspects of the knives. The Stryker had both G-10 scales and both liners finger grooved, thus making it more comfortable to the index finger during usage. The Stryker also had a indentation in the index finger area on both scales. The CQC-7 was only finger grooved on one side. The other side stuck out to allow for easier access to the liner lock. In the previous section, the liner lock on the CQC-7 won because it was easier to get too and not as tight. Now its backfires, as this handle now puts too much pressure from one area onto the index finger via an obtrusive liner and scale. It seems to be a trade off between easier liner lock accessability and comfort during cutting usage. I suggest that they make an in between and finger groove the liner lock side's liner and scale slightly, but not as deep as the other side. That way they could have easier access to liners, and more comfortable handles for usage.
Benchmade - 4
Emerson - 4
Pocket Clips - Before I begin on this, I must say that I am slightly biased toward tip down carry with a slightly less tight clip. The Benchmade clip is not as tight as the Emerson. Neither is overly tight or overly loose, so this is really up to a person's preference. I will pass no judgements on this aspect of the clips. The Emerson had screw holes tapped into the liners for both tip up and tip down positioning. Mr. Emerson forgot something when he designed the new CQC-7... the pivot screws are not the Benchmade ones that have the head of the screw tucked into a depression in the G-10. These screws pop out. And when you try to place the pocket clip on the CQC-7 for tip down carry, the big fat screw won't allow it to be placed in a position to be screwed down. Its the thought that counts though, and Emerson considered the possibility of people wanting tip down, but the results was a teaser. Screw holes with a pivot so big that they are useless. The Stryker simply did not have a reversible clip. It could only be tip down. That means both of these wonderful knives can only have one clip position... though the CQC-7 was meant to have two, only the second one doesn't work! The frustration of having these teaser screw holes (no comments about this, please
) is unbearable at times. Since I know there are many people who prefer tip up carry, the Stryker's clip may be frustrating. Also, many people like tip down carry, like myself, so the Emerson's clip may be frustrating, and the teaser screw holes (shush! no comments about this
) are frustrating and act as bait. Overall for this section... a tie. No points for either side.
Benchmade - 4
Emerson - 4
Ease On Your Pants - The rough thumb disk on the Stryker makes me hear this gripping and ripping sound as I draw it from the clip out of my pocket. This is the sound from the thumb stud rubbing against my pockets. When using the CQC-7, I do not experience this, and its not all because of the clip positioning. I tried pretending with my Stryker that it was tip up positioning, and drew like I would with the CQC-7, and I still heard a ripping sound. The G-10 texturing on the CQC-7 is much more subtle as well, so it won't tear up your clothing nearly as fast as the rough Stryker's G-10 will do it. CQC-7 is definately more clothing friendly.
Emerson - 5
Benchmade - 4
Everyday Encumberance - The Stryker is 3.8 oz. in weight. The CQC-7 feels a little heavier, probably around 4.6 oz.
The Stryker is much more comfortable to wear, despite its .3" longer blade. It curves make it less troublesome to wear or carry in your pockets. To most people, weight might not be too annoying, but I find the Stryker to be nice and light at 3.8 oz. I started my folding one handed knife daily carry with a Gerber EZ-Out, and that is a really light knife. I carried that for 2 years. So extra weight really feels odd to me.
Benchmade - 5
Emerson - 5
Chang's Final Thoughts - The Stryker is a nice extremely well made knife. Excellent fit and finish. Some improvements would be a smoother thumb stud and slightly less rough G-10. This knife is going to be painful at first as its rough surfaces flakes skin from your thumb off. That is if you haven't already grown calluses. The CQC-7, while suffering some fit and finish QC errors, is still a solid made knife with good design features, while having annoying ones at the same time. Stryker is tip down only, and the Emerson is tip up only, even though it disguises itself as both up and down clip position (the pivot pin gets in the way for the other position). I know I will carry both on a regular basis.
-Chang, Asian Janitorial Apparatus
[This message has been edited by Comrade Chang (edited 06-21-2000).]
As the subject would suggest, this is a thread/review for comparing the Benchmade Stryker and the Emerson CQC-7B. A quick overview of each knife:
Stryker - An Allen Elishewitz design. This knife has a 3.6" long tanto blade ground on both sides. An alternative to all those chisel ground tanto's out there. The handle scales are G-10 and it has dual 6AL-4V titanium liners. The blade shape seems pretty unique for a geometric tanto. Overall a very well done knife. Tip down positioned pocket clip.
CQC-7B - I got a black-T coated plain edged CQC-7B. This has a 3.3" long chisel ground geometric tanto blade. Handles also use G-10 scales and titanium liners. Came initially with tip up position pocket clip, but there are three extra screw holes to allow tip down.
Now that I have introduced the contestants, lets begin the match.
Handle Overall Fit and Finish - On this, the Stryker wins hands down. The Stryker was with perfectly even and consistent G-10 and the titanium liners were perfect and well polished. The CQC-7B, while still a very nice knife, did not possess as clean fit and finish work as the Stryker. The G-10 scales on the CQC-7 were differing slightly in texture from left to right scale. One scale was a little rougher feeling on the rounded corners than the corners of the other scale. The result was a slightly inconsistent coloring on the corners of one scale compared to the other. This can probably be changed by very fine sandpaper on the corners of the rough scale. I can disassemble my CQC-7 without voiding the warranty, but with the Stryker I cannot. This is a plus for the Emerson I suppose, because you can perform your own finish work without voiding your warranty. I still wish they would have done it for me like Benchmade had. As said earlier, the winner of a fit and finish contest would definately be the Stryker.
Benchmade - 1
Emerson - 0
Blade Overall Fit and Finish - Since my CQC-7 was black-T coated and Stryker didn't have the coating (I got satin finish), it is hard to compare smoothness of a coating of one knife to something that does not exist on the other knife. From the BT2 coated models I have seen, I would say the smoothness and consistency of the coatings are about equal, though black-T is slightly superior to BT2 in quality.
Other than the coating, the Stryker would again win this match of fit and finish. The reasons are that the Emerson had a slight dent in the steel on the spine near the tip. This is a very minor blemish at worst. Nothing too serious, but the Stryker blade was perfect in about every way. The grinding on the Stryker was so much more complex too, and it was perfect, so there is no excuse for Emerson Knives leaving this minor blemish in the spine. This however would only really matter if you wanted your knife to be a display toy. The truth however is that Emerson knives are hard use knife, and because the CQC-7 doesn't have as superb a finish job, I'm actually looking forward to beating this ugly mug up by cutting something. This CQC-7 is obviously a working knife and nothing but. However, this section of the contest is just for appearance of fit and finish, so the Stryker will have to get the nod. BTW, did I mention that there was a small dent (very small, but noticeable) on the CQC-7's tang? This dent wasn't placed in a way that would compromise the liner lock, but they really should have looked into that!
Benchmade - 2
Emerson - 0
Thumb Mechanism - The CQC-7's thumb disk is not as well placed, but a lot more comfortable to use. The Stryker's thumb disk started to flake away skin on the tip of my thumb because of the texture. Eventually I'll grow calluses, but I really wish they made the texture on the disk more subtle! Emerson thumb stud is definately more comfortable.
Benchmade - 2
Emerson - 1
Opening Movement Human Engineering - This part is to compare the human engineering aspects of the knives for just the opening sequence using the thumb mechanism. The Stryker handle near the pivot end slopes in more, so it doesn't get in the way of your thumb movement. It is not hard to open it with the thumb and very easy to use. The Emerson takes a lot more getting used to. The back of the blade near the tang is a little obtrusive and beats into the fleshy part of my index finger during openings, thus slowing it down. Stryker wins this because of its strategic placement of the thumb disk and the more easy shape of the handle near the pivot.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 1
Pivot Smoothness - The Emerson was a lot smoother than the Stryker. The pivot was tight and blade play was non-existant. Simply amazing. When the Stryker was tightened to the point where blade play was made extremely difficult or non-existant, the knife became too tight to open comfortable, especially with its rough thumb disk. I'm extremely impressed with the smoothness of the Emerson's pivot and how well it takes care of side-to-side blade play. Emerson will definately take the trophy for smoothness.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 2
Lock Mechanism - The Stryker, like in the pivot smoothness contest, was a little tighter than comfortable. The lockup was solid in both knives, and both passed the spine tap test (performed upon my knee). I know the CQC-7's liner lock will wear out a lot slower, because the tang of the blade was slightly steeper in the angling to accomodate for wear of the liner. You'd think this steepness would affect the liner lock strength before failure, but both knives passed the spine tap test. Because the lock was not as uncomfortably tight in the CQC-7, this knife did not cause me as much skin removal from the tip of my thumb as the Stryker did with its tight liners and its rough thumb disk.
Benchmade - 3
Emerson - 3
Out of the Box Sharpness - Surprisingly, Benchmade didn't live up to its reputation for having unbelievably dull knives out of the box. This knife actually was shaving sharp. During a local community college C-programming course I was taking, I showed this knife to the person sitting next to me and he drew the blade up his arm, leaving a patch of baldness. The Emerson was also extremely sharp out of the box, and probably sharper than the Benchmade. I brushed this lightly against the hair on my head, and hair started to fall out. The Benchmade could also do this, but not nearly as well as the Emerson did. Perhaps the chisel-ground edge ground at a total of 30-degrees will be sharper than the 40-degree+ total edge angle on the Stryker. I don't really care about why the Stryker didn't feel as sharp as the Emerson. We can discuss chisel-ground properties/advantages/disadvantages at another time. The simple fact is that this Emerson knife was sharp!
Emerson - 4
Benchmade - 3
Handle Biotechnology/Ergonomics - The design of the Stryker handle is simply more comfortable. The gradually rounded back end of the handle fit against my palm perfectly. While the new Emerson CQC-7 from Emerson Knives (not from Benchmade) had removed many of the sharp corners, the butt of the knife still was slightly less comfortable than that of the Stryker. This is a very slight discomfort. The main one was the finger groove aspects of the knives. The Stryker had both G-10 scales and both liners finger grooved, thus making it more comfortable to the index finger during usage. The Stryker also had a indentation in the index finger area on both scales. The CQC-7 was only finger grooved on one side. The other side stuck out to allow for easier access to the liner lock. In the previous section, the liner lock on the CQC-7 won because it was easier to get too and not as tight. Now its backfires, as this handle now puts too much pressure from one area onto the index finger via an obtrusive liner and scale. It seems to be a trade off between easier liner lock accessability and comfort during cutting usage. I suggest that they make an in between and finger groove the liner lock side's liner and scale slightly, but not as deep as the other side. That way they could have easier access to liners, and more comfortable handles for usage.
Benchmade - 4
Emerson - 4
Pocket Clips - Before I begin on this, I must say that I am slightly biased toward tip down carry with a slightly less tight clip. The Benchmade clip is not as tight as the Emerson. Neither is overly tight or overly loose, so this is really up to a person's preference. I will pass no judgements on this aspect of the clips. The Emerson had screw holes tapped into the liners for both tip up and tip down positioning. Mr. Emerson forgot something when he designed the new CQC-7... the pivot screws are not the Benchmade ones that have the head of the screw tucked into a depression in the G-10. These screws pop out. And when you try to place the pocket clip on the CQC-7 for tip down carry, the big fat screw won't allow it to be placed in a position to be screwed down. Its the thought that counts though, and Emerson considered the possibility of people wanting tip down, but the results was a teaser. Screw holes with a pivot so big that they are useless. The Stryker simply did not have a reversible clip. It could only be tip down. That means both of these wonderful knives can only have one clip position... though the CQC-7 was meant to have two, only the second one doesn't work! The frustration of having these teaser screw holes (no comments about this, please
Benchmade - 4
Emerson - 4
Ease On Your Pants - The rough thumb disk on the Stryker makes me hear this gripping and ripping sound as I draw it from the clip out of my pocket. This is the sound from the thumb stud rubbing against my pockets. When using the CQC-7, I do not experience this, and its not all because of the clip positioning. I tried pretending with my Stryker that it was tip up positioning, and drew like I would with the CQC-7, and I still heard a ripping sound. The G-10 texturing on the CQC-7 is much more subtle as well, so it won't tear up your clothing nearly as fast as the rough Stryker's G-10 will do it. CQC-7 is definately more clothing friendly.
Emerson - 5
Benchmade - 4
Everyday Encumberance - The Stryker is 3.8 oz. in weight. The CQC-7 feels a little heavier, probably around 4.6 oz.
The Stryker is much more comfortable to wear, despite its .3" longer blade. It curves make it less troublesome to wear or carry in your pockets. To most people, weight might not be too annoying, but I find the Stryker to be nice and light at 3.8 oz. I started my folding one handed knife daily carry with a Gerber EZ-Out, and that is a really light knife. I carried that for 2 years. So extra weight really feels odd to me.
Benchmade - 5
Emerson - 5
Chang's Final Thoughts - The Stryker is a nice extremely well made knife. Excellent fit and finish. Some improvements would be a smoother thumb stud and slightly less rough G-10. This knife is going to be painful at first as its rough surfaces flakes skin from your thumb off. That is if you haven't already grown calluses. The CQC-7, while suffering some fit and finish QC errors, is still a solid made knife with good design features, while having annoying ones at the same time. Stryker is tip down only, and the Emerson is tip up only, even though it disguises itself as both up and down clip position (the pivot pin gets in the way for the other position). I know I will carry both on a regular basis.
-Chang, Asian Janitorial Apparatus
[This message has been edited by Comrade Chang (edited 06-21-2000).]