Mini 15?

Spyderdog

Spyderdog

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
635
I've been putting off trying out an Emerson for quite a while, but I think it's about time I snag one. I really like the looks of the mini 15 with the stonewash blade. I haven't seen much talk about them. Anyone have one, and what are your opinions of it if so? Does it feel "mini"?

Also, does the wave feature seem to work better with ceratin models?

thanks
 
Spyderdog said:
I've been putting off trying out an Emerson for quite a while, but I think it's about time I snag one. I really like the looks of the mini 15 with the stonewash blade. I haven't seen much talk about them. Anyone have one, and what are your opinions of it if so? Does it feel "mini"?

Also, does the wave feature seem to work better with ceratin models?

thanks
Click to expand...

I have a Mini 7B, and the size is roughly similar to the Mini 15. Keep in mind that unless you have very large hands, no Emerson really feels "mini". I'd say that the Mini Emersons are just a better EDC size- but you will not be mistaking these for gentlemen's folders or dainty pocketknives. The blades and handles are exactly as thick as on the full-size versions- which is to say that they are still quite substantial. For day-to-day tasks that may require some heavier work, but not a long cutting surface, the Emerson Minis are the best knives for the money. The 15 is a very versatile and functional design- it should work well for many tasks, and for that reason it is next on my list of Emersons.
 
mrpinkbullets said:
I have a Mini 7B, and the size is roughly similar to the Mini 15.
Click to expand...

Not really. The Mini 15 has a 3.5" blade and the Mini 7 has a 2.9" blade with the Mini 7 also being .8" shorter overall. Quite a substantial difference IMO. In reality, the mini 15 is much closer in size to the standard 7B.
 
Most of the "mini" EKs are IMO basically "standard" size. The mini CQC7 is an exception in that it is noticeably smaller than the other mini EKs. That's a roundabout way of agreeing with the post above. ;)
 
I carry a stonewashed mini 15 often in rotation with a mini cqc8. I love the mini 15. The handle shape is excellent and the blade profile combines the cqc7 and commander into one. I have never been sorry that I purchased a mini cqc15 or a mini cqc8. In fact.....I've never been sorry that I purchased any Emerson knife. I would agree with the above response that the mini cqc15 is larger than the mini cqc7 and to me the ergonomics of the handle make the mini cqc15 a real winner.

Also......the stonewashed finish cannot be beat!
 
I carry a standard CQC15 daily in a horizontal belt pouch on the left for cross draw deployment.
I love the do anything blade design and the handle ergonomics are superb.
The thing is...the mini blade is .6 inches shorter than the standard CQC15 and .8 inches shorter overall. That apparently makes the handle .2 inches shorter.
It would seem the pocketabillity of the mini is pretty much the same as the standard.
For this reason I have never understood why anyone would choose a mini Emerson of any kind, unless it was to conform to the local carry laws. And for that Emerson has the CQC14...Stubby.
As for the wave feature, I love it. It truly works as advertised.
Personally, when I want my CQC15 to feel mini to me I just pull the Persian from my right pocket!
At any rate, buy an Emerson be happy.

CP
 
Uh, I (belatedly) checked the Emerson website and the standard CQC15 is actually .9 inches longer overall than the mini, with the blade being .4 inches longer.
So the handle is .5 inches shorter for the mini.
That can make a bit of a difference for EDC, but not enough for me.
Sorry, I should have checked the dimensional differences before I posted, but it's late and I was getting tired and lazy.
Seriously though...you will be so happy when you get that Emerson in your hands you'll find yourseslf trying to decide which one to acquire next even as you break this one in flipping it out with a thumb and wrist flip, or snapping it from your pocket using the wave.
AW...now I have to go and flick one of my Emersons a few times or I won't get any sleep tonight!
Welcome to the addiction!

CP
 
cp2u said:
Uh, I (belatedly) checked the Emerson website and the standard CQC15 is actually .9 inches longer overall than the mini, with the blade being .4 inches longer.
So the handle is .5 inches shorter for the mini.
That can make a bit of a difference for EDC, but not enough for me.
Sorry, I should have checked the dimensional differences before I posted, but it's late and I was getting tired and lazy.
Seriously though...you will be so happy when you get that Emerson in your hands you'll find yourseslf trying to decide which one to acquire next even as you break this one in flipping it out with a thumb and wrist flip, or snapping it from your pocket using the wave.
AW...now I have to go and flick one of my Emersons a few times or I won't get any sleep tonight!
Welcome to the addiction!

CP
Click to expand...


That's what I was thinking. Although the Emerson mini folders are really "mini" when compared to other smaller folders they are still smaller than their larger twins that do not carry the "mini" name and the difference is noticeable enough. It's a big enough difference to me. The mini CQC15 seems just right in my pocket and in my hand as an EDC folder.
 
cp2u said:
I have never understood why anyone would choose a mini Emerson of any kind, unless it was to conform to the local carry laws.

CP
Click to expand...

I realize this references your first post but this is more about OAL than handle length: to me ~8.25" is the perfect size for me to carry around and I would have a hard time with a 9" folder like many of the full sized emerson knives tend to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top