- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,842
Well, with the occasional magazine-bashing that goes on here (for good reason), I thought I'd give some kudos. I just got the latest version of Tactical Knives in the mail, and seen some encouraging things.
First article I read was by Steve Dick, on the Carnivour. He did an excellent job of finding both the good points, and those things that could have been executed a bit better. Very rare to find good constructive criticism these days. And more importantly, Steve had the guts to hint that liner locks might not be perfect. He mentions that they are susceptible to several types of failure, and that users are going around with lists of tests before they buy liner locks. In a magazine full of ads for liner lock knives, this was refreshing honesty.
My biggest complaint is the performance testing -- Steve apparently tested the knife and found that (surprise) the ridiculously thick, polished factory edge isn't so great. Since the edge is the one thing that's really adjustable by the user, I feel that when a reviewer finds a knife that doesn't perform up to its potential due strictly to the factory edge, the reviewer should re-sharpen the knife and report the results with both factory and re-sharpened edges. I assure you, with my edge on it, the Carnivour would perform!
Then I looked at the next article, also by Steve, on Kopromed. I just got to the first paragraph, where he talks about the importance of thin edges (and performance).
Then I looked at the front editorial. I wasn't expecting much, because I felt Steve had missed some key points in his ATS-34 editorial last time. But this one was right on, discussing the current over-emphasis of knife strength and under-emphasis of performance. I still wince whenever I see a review that is very light on performance, but the reviewer says, "I could never destroy this knife", as if that says everything. "BUT DOES IT CUT?," I feel like yelling.
That's as far as I've gotten in the magazine, but I'm impressed so far. Hopefully the rest of the magazine is as good, and Steve continues pushing for honesty about weaknesses, and more on performance (still a little light on performance data, from what I can see).
Joe
First article I read was by Steve Dick, on the Carnivour. He did an excellent job of finding both the good points, and those things that could have been executed a bit better. Very rare to find good constructive criticism these days. And more importantly, Steve had the guts to hint that liner locks might not be perfect. He mentions that they are susceptible to several types of failure, and that users are going around with lists of tests before they buy liner locks. In a magazine full of ads for liner lock knives, this was refreshing honesty.
My biggest complaint is the performance testing -- Steve apparently tested the knife and found that (surprise) the ridiculously thick, polished factory edge isn't so great. Since the edge is the one thing that's really adjustable by the user, I feel that when a reviewer finds a knife that doesn't perform up to its potential due strictly to the factory edge, the reviewer should re-sharpen the knife and report the results with both factory and re-sharpened edges. I assure you, with my edge on it, the Carnivour would perform!
Then I looked at the next article, also by Steve, on Kopromed. I just got to the first paragraph, where he talks about the importance of thin edges (and performance).
Then I looked at the front editorial. I wasn't expecting much, because I felt Steve had missed some key points in his ATS-34 editorial last time. But this one was right on, discussing the current over-emphasis of knife strength and under-emphasis of performance. I still wince whenever I see a review that is very light on performance, but the reviewer says, "I could never destroy this knife", as if that says everything. "BUT DOES IT CUT?," I feel like yelling.
That's as far as I've gotten in the magazine, but I'm impressed so far. Hopefully the rest of the magazine is as good, and Steve continues pushing for honesty about weaknesses, and more on performance (still a little light on performance data, from what I can see).
Joe