PM2 vs Shaman: A New Look

S

Sharperthansticks

Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,612
We're Shaman
Sing it, I want to Shaman with you
We're Shaman, we're Shaman
And I hope you like Shaman too.

--Bob Marley
*****************************
When the original Shaman came out, @NickShabazz reviewed it, and if memory serves, he concluded that it could handle what the PM2 would fail at. He did not go into specifics to support that claim; instead, he simply said that the Shaman was "beefier," and he probably used the term "beefitude," (a term only he or Hanz and Franz from SNL could come up with).

At that time, I challenged people for a specific case where the Shaman would work and the PM2 would fail, but no one could give me one. All people could do was parrot "beefier." "The Shaman is beefier," they would say, which wouldn't answer the question. So, today, to make the question more precise, here's the challenge: Come up with a case that satisfies these conditions:
  1. The case must be a case where the PM2 will fail: it will chip, bend, break, or simply not accomplish the task.
  2. The case must be a case where the Shaman can perform the task without damage.
  3. The case cannot be vague. The case should be specific to the point of testability, and hopefully, even to the point of falsifiability. Here's a vague, unacceptable type of answer: cutting into really hard stuff. Here's a specific, much more testable, falsifiable case: carving figurines out of maple.
 
To be clear, my own interest isn’t in taking shots at Nick. He has been a very positive presence in the community, and has unknowingly helped me figure out a lot of things related to running a channel.

My specific interest is in course correcting the way we communicate about certain things.
 
I don’t have a Shaman but it’s my perception that the tip is sturdier than a PM2. I have several PM2’s and consider the tip to be a little on the delicate side. Seen many instances of a PM2 with a goobered tip; no Shamans yet. Of course, there are significantly more PM2’s in the wild...
 
Well it's kinda obvious that a knife with slightly thicker blade stock and a thicker tip is going to be slightly stronger. Thus making it "slightly" better than the pm2 for whatever your doing that requires a stronger blade. The pm2 on the other hand cuts slightly better because of the thinner blade stock, but the differences between the two are two slight for me to care to much. I personally own a pm2, but I don't deny the shaman could out perform it as far a durability goes.
 
Banter 247 said:
Based on what?
Click to expand...

Just a guess, but perhaps having a thicker blade, thicker handle, and being heavier. Or beefier if one prefers.


Banter 247 said:
The point is to encourage people to stop making feeling based statements as though they are fact, and to think rationally.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point and I agree with it.

However, I would counter and say that for a rational person that already understands the difference between facts and opinions stated as fact, it is irrational to harp on those types of opinions so much so that you start a thread (what 2 years after?) where you request those foolish opinions be proven. Let it go, or prove it yourself.
 
Last edited:
benchwarmer380 said:
Just a guess, but perhaps having a thicker blade, thicker handle, and being heavier. Or beefier if one prefers.




That's a fair point and I agree with it.

However, I would counter and say that for rational person that already understands the difference between facts and opinions stated as fact, it is irrational to harp on those types of opinions so much so that you start a thread (what 2 years after?) where you request those foolish opinions be proven. Let it go, or prove it yourself.
Click to expand...

I didn’t start the thread.

I expressed interest in the thread because of how often people spread misunderstanding through ripple effect after hearing this like “X is better for hard use” or “Y cuts better because it has thinner stock”.

These are often easy to correct by simply showing somebody that a knife with .16” stock that is .018 behind the edge will out cut a knife that has .12” thick stock and is .26” bte when cutting most common materials.
 
Last summer I have pushed a PM2 to destruction to see how much abuse it can take... my conclusion is; unless you do stupid things, the PM2 can resist to any folding knife « normal use ».

The shaman can be biefier - I have never handled a shaman - but for my use it will not be better than a PM2

If the shaman look, ergonomics and materials fit you go for it without any hesitation... and same thing if you prefer the PM2 :)
 
Banter 247 said:
I didn’t start the thread.

I expressed interest in the thread because of how often people spread misunderstanding through ripple effect after hearing this like “X is better for hard use” or “Y cuts better because it has thinner stock”.

These are often easy to correct by simply showing somebody that a knife with .16” stock that is .018 behind the edge will out cut a knife that has .12” thick stock and is .26” bte when cutting most common materials.
Click to expand...

I know. I apologize if I came across as implying that you did. Since me and another apparently missed the point of the thread, I replied to the one that you gave (since you responded to the other gentleman with your take) but the words were regarding the OP and the thread itself. Sorry for using you as the conduit.

Again, I agree with everything you say. If this thread brought up the past with his own evidence as to why the other folks' assertions were wrong, it would be a good read and conversation starter.

Yet dredging up the past by calling others out for their allegedly false opinions from a year or two ago and asking them to prove it without adding any contrary evidence of your own position is a very poor attempt at correcting misinformation and comes across as salty. This is not a fact, just my opinion.
 
benchwarmer380 said:
I know. I apologize if I came across as implying that you did. Since me and another apparently missed the point of the thread, I replied to the one that you gave (since you responded to the other gentleman with your take) but the words were regarding the OP and the thread itself. Sorry for using you as the conduit.

Again, I agree with everything you say. If this thread brought up the past with his own evidence as to why the other folks' assertions were wrong, it would be a good read and conversation starter.

Yet dredging up the past by calling others out for their allegedly false opinions from a year or two ago and asking them to prove it without adding any contrary evidence of your own position is a very poor attempt at correcting misinformation and comes across as salty. This is not a fact, just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Saying something has a thicker (beefier) tip is not a specific use case. And my asking for a specific example is legitimate. It's tiresome for me to keep responding when you don't get it and probably never will, so you keep spouting your drivel, but don't take my henceforth not replying as my saying you are right. Take it instead as my saying you aren't worh the time. Bye, Felicia.

P.S. I acknowledged the "3.6" case, though it's rather contrived.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top