- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 4,971
The question it leaves me with, though, is: how many knives are, in actuality, failing at the plunge line?
Personally I would never snap either knife there. I was sent a LC with the sole purpose of seeing what it could handle and instructed to return it in two or more pieces. It went back a little dull, but perfectly serviceable and I did things to it that I would NEVER do with my own knife, or any knife in normal use.
The point I was trying to make is this.
We're talking about destructive testing. Nothing to do with regular knife use. A comment was made, perhaps not as an intentional troll, but none the less has fueled the latter part of this discussion.
If we are talking about failure, and at which point it WOULD occur when someone references another model in comparison to the FK, as potentially stronger, but fails to identify that the FK has been engineered to resist failure as much as it can within it's intended design, while the other knife was simply made thick and fat. Then ignores it almost looks like a notch was built in to allow controlled failure, hence the pic I referenced, is mistaken in where they have placed their confidence.
So if Nathan says, my knife is designed to cut and slice, it completes that objective beautifully while being as strong as it reasonably can be without sacrificing too much performance and is designed around the material used. While....
The other Guy says, my knife is designed to never fail, to be a survival knife, to be the one tool you can depend on... cutting performance is secondary, (it really is) but then seems to not understand the material used effects that design (same design many materials) and really seems to be missing the fact that the design has a massive introduced weakness, it's not a plunge line in itself, it's the notch (can be choil or jimping)... well I will leave the rest up to you!