Knife comparison: Marine Combat Knife vs Airforce survival kit?

Neither of the blades we are discussing were designed with batoning in mind, no Bowie/clip point really is unless you have one quite a bit longer than these. In the 5" blade of the AFSK about 2" of that are lost from the spine for the recurve. Not much left after that to baton with.

Knives are not pry bars. If you are bending the blade of a knife the solution is not to get a stronger knife the solution is to get a pry bar.

The USMC knife was designed as a fighter/utility knife. The AFSK as a knife that could be used for defensive purposes but more with utility in mind. Both are multi-purpose. Neither takes the place of an ax or machete nor was intended to. Yep you can chop through some small diameter branches or saplings but these are not primarily choppers.

Both can skin game. The AFSK has an edge here as it is a handier size for that purpose. The USMC knife is a better choice for a fighter given it's length and weight but the AFSK ain't bad at that. Both are good at wacking up some kindling. The AFSK is a tad better for attaching to the end of a branch for an improvised spear. The butt of the AFSK is meant to be used as an improvised hammer for light pounding, as with a stake or such.

A few decades back when I worked on a commercial crab boat I had a AFSK and a Ka-Bar to work with on boat. I preferred the AFSK for it's size.

Both knives are classics and useful to have around. There are stronger knives about and better camp knives or hunting knives but both the knives we are discussing can be good friends in the field. Spending some time with them you can learn the strengths and weaknesses of both.

tipoc
 
I wouldn't recommend the AFSK unless you have small hands. That hexagon pommel digs into the palm and handle itself is smaller around than the USMC. The 5" blade is handier but I couldn't deal with the grip.

Frank
 
Actually for the price that both are available at pick up one this month and the other in another month or two. Try out both and see which you prefer.

tipoc
 
adrolak said:
Well actually that makes sense, your right about the fact it was probably designed to be used as more of an axe, wouldn't the be required though? If you were stuck in the woods wouldn't you want to be able to chop, cut, and hammer all with the same knife? The low budget aspect sounds right though.
Click to expand...

If I had a choice, I wouldn't take either in the woods. Maybe that's a better way to put it. They are not woods knives. That's why I asked what situation you were talking about.

This probably doesn't go anywhere to answering your question, but if I were stuck with one knife in the woods...I would never hammer with it. I'd use a rock. Why risk your only sharp?

If I was stuck inside a WWII vintage aircraft, and the AFSK and the Marine KaBar were my only tools available to make my escape...I'd go with the AFSK.
 
marcinek said:
If I had a choice, I wouldn't take either in the woods. Maybe that's a better way to put it. They are not woods knives. That's why I asked what situation you were talking about.

This probably doesn't go anywhere to answering your question, but if I were stuck with one knife in the woods...I would never hammer with it. I'd use a rock. Why risk your only sharp?

If I was stuck inside a WWII vintage aircraft, and the AFSK and the Marine KaBar were my only tools available to make my escape...I'd go with the AFSK.
Click to expand...

Amen. Not to mention that there is not much striking real estate on either pommel-any error can potentially result in severe injury to your hand. If you were hammering wood stakes for instance, you miss to the wrong side, and you can tear the flesh on the back of your hand, and even with gloves, you could potentially get an nasty splinter.

Injury is something that has to be avoided at all costs in a survival situation. I too would use a rock, for the reason you stated, and because it is much harder to miss.

I disagree about neither knife being well suited. I think that any knife of solid construction and materials, is a great survival knife. The Native Americans tamed out wilderness with knives made of stone, bone, and obsidian. Neanderthals and Cro-magnon Man as well. We have the luxury of having knives forged from impurity free alloys, tempered/heat treated for enhanced performance and strength.

Survival has much more to do with the user than the knife.
 
I've got the AF pilot's knife. I'd recommend both. There's some good videos of both knives over at knifetests.com. Also check out the D2 KaBar video while you're there. BarkRiver/Blackjack also makes a new version of the pilot's knife with and without a saw. Knivesshipfree.com should have them.
 
the ka-bar marine model heads up. the pilot knife doe'nt belong in the woods , after all how many of us are going to be cutting plastic or aluminum. the ka-bar doubles as a great camp knife & i certainly realize there are better hunters or pack knives but this is about 2 military issues.--dennis
 
As I understood the original question (between these 2), I'd go with the AFSK having owned and abused both in my younger primitive camping days. As to what I have in my 72 hour pack (I get to pick and purchase), a mora, a multitool and a hatchet.

as always, this is just my opinion, YMMV
 
My personal preference would be the U.S.M.C. F/U knife but i don't think you can go wrong with either one, both of them have been around for a long time.
You don't get the kind of history these two knives have for nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top