Medium Sized Knives

You guys are going to think I'm crazy.
But I carry my HH on a drop leg sheath my RMD on the other side at a slant and then my HRLM in a horizontal carry in the small of my back.
Then in my PSK a DJ with an adjustable sheath.

Back in Desert Storm I carried 3 med-large knives all the time. I was voted most likely to survive a close encounter.
I guess some things die hard:rolleyes:
 
Tyrkon Lawson said:
Hey! I'll have to give that a try. Cool. :thumbup:

BTW pbusby . Thanks for the suggestion on the mechanic's gloves. I used some today and boy did they help without effecting up blade control. :thumbup:
Click to expand...
It's a great belt...for me at least...also got a decent leather one from Ace uniforms out here...any uniform store should have some decent leather gun belts in the law enforcement area. Glad you like the Mechanix gloves. I still snag them on Ebay when they come around with the right price. They're good gloves for everything except very heavy work...I've torn many a pair :p but for normal use they're fine.

MORIMOTOM said:
i tried the liger gun belt. is that the one, or is it a web belt?

i found the liger to be too flexible.

i prefer something reinforced like the galco. with the liger i found my holster drooped unless i made the belt real tight.


then my stomach drooped.
Click to expand...

Yea, it's the liger...I haven't found it to be too flexible for me...the flexibility it does have helps comfort a little...I wear my belts REALLY tight though. I also carry my SHBM in a drop leg with a leg strap that I also wear tight so there really isn't too much weight on the belt. I carry my SH-e on my backpack when I DO carry it and my smaller knives aren't a problem on my normal belt.

I like the Galco stuff...the Miami shoulder holsters are sweet! I've got one.
 
Tyrkon Lawson said:
That's why I am trying to see why some people might prefer RW or SFNO or ASH1 size blades. Let's take the RW for example. It was born to chop. But if something like an FFBM is much better why would someone want an RW. Ergos? Weight? Room in the pack? Those characteristics just are not a big enough factor for me to give up the superior chopping of the FFBM. So I am curious as to what other reasons some people might have.

Make no mistake about it I LOVE medium sized knives. I am just exploring this.

And I was not trying to compare my chopping abilities to Phill's. He may very well clean the floor with me. I was just comparing the two tests.
Click to expand...

I know you were not trying to compare physical chopping ability. Given the circumstances, I was just trying to point out that you may personally have done better with the RW narrowing the gap between your FFBM and the RW.

In my hands a RW will cleanly and soundly outchop the CGASH1 by a very noticeable margin. For Phil, the results were 50/50.

I think that many people prefer the SFNO, RW, SHe size range because it is not too big and heavy to carry yet still do a very reasonable amount of chopping if called upon. The size and weight difference may not matter much for you. But to others.... that difference is significant enough to chose one over the other.

I tend to favor the lightest weight possible to get the job done in a reasonable manner. That is why I prefer the FABM which happens to be the same weight as a CGASH1. My FABM may not be a unbreakable pry bar like the ASH1 but I can certainly do a whole lot more chopping with it even though the weight are the same.
 
This thread is making me miss my NO-E. :(

Ban: Good answers. I think with three kids I have not been able to be a minimalist in a long time. I am always used to carrying a lot. ;)
 
The weight really isn't an issue for me...if I can physically do something, an extra lb isn't a biggie. I'm at 278 right now, but fluctuate anywhere from 260-290 :p depending on if I'm running a lot, how much I've been lifting, :D and how much I've been eating. Plus when I'm training I lean out a LOT!!

The difference between a BM and a SH isn't too big, but I just like different flavors...I could get along fine with either and don't NEED both, but I just like a little selection :D. I'd have a bigger one if I could afford to ;)!
 
Tyrkon Lawson said:
This thread is making me miss my NO-E. :(

Ban: Good answers. I think with three kids I have not been able to be a minimalist in a long time. I am always used to carrying a lot. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah Kids tend to do that you. I am much more of a pack rat since having a kid. I just need to make sure that I have everything ready all the time :D God knows what those little buggers would try and mess up next :D
 
pbubsy said:
The weight really isn't an issue for me...if I can physically do something, an extra lb isn't a biggie. I'm at 278 right now, but fluctuate anywhere from 260-290 :p depending on if I'm running a lot, how much I've been lifting, :D and how much I've been eating. Plus when I'm training I lean out a LOT!!

The difference between a BM and a SH isn't too big, but I just like different flavors...I could get along fine with either and don't NEED both, but I just like a little selection :D. I'd have a bigger one if I could afford to ;)!
Click to expand...

Heck at that weight a GW and FBM would feel just about the same to you. Hardly Noticeable :p
 
Ban said:
Heck at that weight a GW and FBM would feel just about the same to you. Hardly Noticeable :p
Click to expand...

Not too much different once I get the blood flowing and am moving :D I've got considerable upper body stregnth, but leg and hip stregnth is my strong point....I leg press around 1100-1200 lbs about 275 lbs less than a VW Karman Ghia...thanks to the famous Chamorro legs :p That's why weight isn't an issue.:thumbup:
 
pbubsy said:
Not too much different once I get the blood flowing and am moving :D I've got considerable upper body stregnth, but leg and hip stregnth is my strong point....I leg press around 1100-1200 lbs about 275 lbs less than a VW Karman Ghia...thanks to the famous Chamorro legs :p That's why weight isn't an issue.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

:eek: You ever see Road Warrior? I'm thinking "Master Blaster" the next time we go on our payload hunt. :p:D

master_blaster.jpg
 
Back in Desert Storm I carried 3 med-large knives all the time. I was voted most likely to survive a close encounter.
Click to expand...

and most likely to sink to the bottom of the pool too!
 
it's a different type of fatigue. the fatigue is still there, it's just more spread out.

it's like jogging 5 miles vs. sprinting one mile. you feel like you can keep going at 5 miles - your tired as all get out, but it's a slow pace. once you've truly sprinted a full mile, you feel like collapseing.

anarobic vs. aerobic for the forearms and shoulders.

and I dissagree that the reverse isn't true between big blades and medium sized blades. when you introduce battoning, a basic 7 will acheive the same results as what a moab will do, it will just be done differently. your right or left arm will be fatigued by the baton, where it would otherwise be fatigued by the larger knife.

Given that, medium sized blades are much more manable doing smaller tasks. sure, you can skin a rabbit or foul with a moab, but have you ever tried sharpening a ffbm on a sharpening table? it's a lot like that. the counter weight from holding it near the tip to get good control over a small blade section makes it extremely difficult to control accurately.

where as with an hr, ash1 or a b7, choking up on the spine of the blade is easy because theres not that much weight on the handle side.



I find this thread interesting because it's questioning the value of a midsized knife for woods use, where as historically on blade forums it's always been a question of the practical use for big blades in the wilderness.
 
Tyrkon Lawson said:
Okay. How about:

Medium = 5-8"

Large = 9" +

???
Click to expand...

depends on thickness. a 9" 1/8" thick knife is a large knife, but it's nothing compared to a 9" 1/2" thick knife. the size's still are good, but I'd say 5-7 is a little better. look at the moash - would you call that a medium sized knife?



also, if your carying both, i'd definitely say go with large and small. if you can only have one or are weight and fatigue rate concious, mid sized and very small is a comparable package, it just takes different handling.
 
I too have enjoyed, and still am enjoying this thread. I love medium sized knives but am just exploring some ideas I have heard or read. I tend to always be thinking of how I'd use a knife a little differen't than many on BF. I will most likely never be in a deep wilderness survival situation. My wife is bound and determined to stay in the Los Angeles area for now. :(

But when I think of "survival" type situations I am thinking more along the lines of natural disasters in the big cities. I will probably see less rabbit skinning but you never know.

Great input from everyone. :)
 
Last Visible Canary said:
I find this thread interesting because it's questioning the value of a midsized knife for woods use, where as historically on blade forums it's always been a question of the practical use for big blades in the wilderness.
Click to expand...

You bring up a very good point. Many people underestimate the value of optimized weight to performance ratio. Weight is not a issue to some but to me it is a big one. I always value the ability to be able to move freely and quickly with minimal hindrance.

The only reason to go bigger and heavier is to gain performance. But at what expense? If cutting performance is all we cared about then why not just carry a big giant 8lb viking broadsword or a Chainsaw.

Sure, I would be much better armed with a 10 shot semiauto .50 BMG Barret or mounted machine gun vs a .308 rifle. I just sure as heck won't be going anywhere fast :D
 
Tyrkon Lawson said:
I too have enjoyed, and still am enjoying this thread. I love medium sized knives but am just exploring some ideas I have heard or read. I tend to always be thinking of how I'd use a knife a little differen't than many on BF. I will most likely never be in a deep wilderness survival situation. My wife is bound and determined to stay in the Los Angeles area for now. :(

But when I think of "survival" type situations I am thinking more along the lines of natural disasters in the big cities. I will probably see less rabbit skinning but you never know.

Great input from everyone. :)
Click to expand...

+1 City folks like us with family and kids will most likely have to stay put in the event of a natural disaster. Having said that....the ability to move and move quickly is still of great value to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top