smcfalls13 said:
Just my thoughts though, I'm likely the minority.
Well, a minority shared by Joe Talmadge, and I think both Joe and smcfalls13 have a good point.
As if everyone hasn't already done the Bowie thing to death.
=====
All of my ideas involve a double edge.
I understand many states and localities have laws prohibiting double edged knives, and I suppose Spyderco's lawyers have concerns about liability and the like.
Those laws exist because of the tremendous martial advantage a double edged knife has.
I struggle for an analogy.
I guess, for a knife manufacturer, it could compare to an automobile manufacturer who builds a race car but must handicap it with a tiny engine because of liability lawyers and state laws regarding speed limits.
That doesn't seem right.
Why have a large fixed blade knife for anything other than self-defense or combat?
A big camp knife?
A machete and wood chopper?
For a camp knife, I use a chef's knife.
For clearing brush I don't use a machete, but a swing blade.
For chopping or splitting wood, I use an axe, hatchet or maul.
During my nine years in the Marine Corps, I carried a Kabar for awhile, and then realized I never used it for anything and it amounted to needless weight on my belt.
For those very rare cutting chores in the field, a folding knife weighed less, fit in my pocket, and did everything I needed a knife to do.
The only justification for a large fixed blade knife, then, to me, involves self defense or combat.
And then, how large and why?
If too large, I can't carry it for social and practical reasons.
I say practical because of the weight and cumbersomeness, and the absolute improbability of ever needing a self-defense or combat knife.
I could carry a sword, but I don't because it would alarm people and I have very little likelihood of needing a sword.
Even soldiers and Marines have very little likelihood of needing a sword or large mini-sword.
Despite what "uncle Joe" said about his exploits during WWII and removing sentries, it just doesn't happen.
Therefore, for me, a fixed blade knife large enough for ultimate self-defense must fit into a size picture that makes it large enough to do the job, small enough to carry concealed or inobtrusively, and light enough to keep me from resenting the weight on my belt.
In the above regard, then, a double edge multiplies the effective size of a self-defense knife without actually requiring large dimensions and weight.
This brings me to the second knife I would like to see Spyderco make: a double edged, fixed blade Chinook II.
I guess that would make it the Chinook III.
I see a Chinook III as very similar to the Chinook II, except with a fixed blade.
It would have the same handle, exactly, including the cut-out in the scales of the Chinook II, which presently facilitate opening.
I find those cut-outs perfect for my index finger, and my index finger would miss them if a Chinook III did not have them.
I also like the thumb hole.
The thumb hole would lighten a fixed blade Chinook III (without weakening it), and mark it as a Spyderco knife; and, for some types of cutting chores, where I hold my present Chinook II horizontally and choke up on the grip, I actually put my thumb in the hole as a stabilizer.
I consider the outline of the Chinook II perfect.
I guess one would call that the "elevation" view.
For those who have not noticed, a line drawn lengthwise through the center of the Chinook II's handle continues on and intersects the point of the blade.
This makes the Chinook II very effective for stabbing.
It doesn't seem that way: it looks as if the Chinook II can only slash and such, but because of the point on line with the grip, and the thumb rest and the forward finger hook, a determined person could easily thrust a fixed blade Chinook III through automobile sheet metal.
The trick with a fixed blade, double edged Chinook III would involve fitting the double grind into the present outline, without making the blade too thin in plan view, and thus fragile.
That represents quite a challenge.
A flat grind might leave enough steel all the way to the tip of a fixed blade Chinook III, but maybe not enough to stake one's life on it.
However, if one looks at the Chinook II's handle in plan view, he will see that the center spacer and two liners all combined measure about .25".
If Spyderco made the Chinook III out of a slab of .25" thick premium stainless steel, Spyderco could easily grind a double edge and leave enough center spine to fight a grizzly.
Spyderco could then hollow out the handle, following the design of the present liners, and this would make the Chinook III light enough to carry on the belt or in a pocket.
Yes, in a pocket.
I have carried a .25" thick, 8" long Greco Persian in the front pocket of my pleated trousers for years, and very comfortably.
Similarly, a belt sheath with a clip will fit in the waist band, as a high ride, or on the belt, as a high ride.
The handle of a high ride belt knife disappears behind the wearer's elbow, and the blade does not go far enough down the trousers to interfere with sitting, nor does it make itself too obvious.
I have found that people will accept, or fail to notice, a larger high ride knife than they will a "dangler."
Not everyone can afford a Ferrari, nor do very many people have a need or a place to drive a Ferrari.
Nonetheless, Ferrari builds Ferraris.
A double edged, .25" thick, fixed blade Chinook III, in a high ride clip-sheath (for inside or outside the waistband), would represent Spyderco's version of the Ferrari.
I can wear such a knife, legally, here in Oregon, as long as I don't conceal it.
In other states, people could have a Chinook III as a collector's item, much as people collect Ferraris (who actually
drives those things?).
A Chinook III would make a much more practical knife for a soldier or Marine than the present fixed blade offerings, because of its compactness and relative lightness; and yet, in a desperate situation, I think anyone would feel more than well armed with a double edged, fixed blade Chinook III.
It would also make a great all-purpose field knife.
