Random Thought Thread

SharpBits said:
How tough have throats, hearts, and kidneys gotten over the years? I mean, sure better is better, but good enough is good enough.
Click to expand...
Ribs, mags, LBVs…

That was also one of the things about another well known and popular dagger - the Gerber Mk II.

Seen so many of them with broken tips, simply because someone dropped it on the ground while playing around with it. I will say the handle actually felt pretty decent. Way better than a F-S. The Applegate-Fairbairn was probably a better dagger overall.

Of the old school daggers, I actually kind of like the Ek Commando. Stabby enough, but the tip is fairly robust.

I thought I read somewhere that the wood handles were deliberately oversized so people could do some final shaping to their preference. No idea of the veracity of that claim, but the Pakkawood handle felt like a 2x4 😂. I have the paracord handled version.
 
bluemax_1 said:
Ribs, mags, LBVs…

That was also one of the things about another well known and popular dagger - the Gerber Mk II.

Seen so many of them with broken tips, simply because someone dropped it on the ground while playing around with it. I will say the handle actually felt pretty decent. Way better than a F-S. The Applegate-Fairbairn was probably a better dagger overall.

Of the old school daggers, I actually kind of like the Ek Commando. Stabby enough, but the tip is fairly robust.

I thought I read somewhere that the wood handles were deliberately oversized so people could do some final shaping to their preference. No idea of the veracity of that claim, but the Pakkawood handle felt like a 2x4 😂. I have the paracord handled version.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the FS was a product of its time. It was well respected in its day by those who used it as intended. Well, I read there were later copies made with bad heat treatment that were too brittle. But those were copies and not the real deal.
It’s like saying the Sopwith Camel was junk because it couldn’t knock an F-86 Saber out of the sky.
 
oldmanwilly said:
What's wrong with it, besides the following?

- Thin, weak tip prone to snapping;
- Narrow, flimsy tang; and
- Narrow, round handle.
Click to expand...

The physical samples that I have handled that were original genuine issue did not have a thin tip. They were reinforced. Could have been better, but I have seen way worse.

But the 1/8" tang and round narrow handle are no bueno. The handle should never be round.

The center of gravity specified in the design print, and confirmed in my model, is incorrect. Too far back. Also, all the weight in the middle of the blade and none on the ends is not good for a stabbing weapon. Many of these had a round cast brass handle. Brass is 10 times heavier than wood. It's putting a lot of weight in exactly the wrong place.

Here is a knife whose edge cannot be indexed by the handle, you have no idea where the edge is at by feel, and it's heavy but also unstable. Given the physical design envelope of a dagger, there's only so much that a designer can do, but they didn't even attempt to do any of the things.

Also, it's heavy, yet weak.

It's a cool dagger. Perhaps in part due to the history and the time and place where it was being used. But it is suboptimal.
 
Nathan the Machinist said:
The physical samples that I have handled that were original genuine issue did not have a thin tip. They were reinforced. Could have been better, but I have seen way worse.

But the 1/8" tang and round narrow handle are no bueno. The handle should never be round.

The center of gravity specified in the design print, and confirmed in my model, is incorrect. Too far back. Also, all the weight in the middle of the blade and none on the ends is not good for a stabbing weapon. Many of these had a round cast brass handle. Brass is 10 times heavier than wood. It's putting a lot of weight in exactly the wrong place.

Here is a knife whose edge cannot be indexed by the handle, you have no idea where the edge is at by feel, and it's heavy but also unstable. Given the physical design envelope of a dagger, there's only so much that a designer can do, but they didn't even attempt to do any of the things.

Also, it's heavy, yet weak.

It's a cool dagger. Perhaps in part due to the history and the time and place where it was being used. But it is suboptimal.
Click to expand...
All good points. I'm surprised that the tips on the examples you've handled were all reinforced. The only WW2 era model I've handled was a half inch short due to the tip snapping.

Also interesting to note the lopsided weight distribution. It may be worth pointing out that the early dagger models made by/for Fairbairn in Shanghai had lighter and more substantial wooden handles. I think the brass and steel handles came about once Sykes joined in before the war.

Edit: I forgot that both Fairbairn and Sykes were in Shanghai and developed the dagger together. I'm sure there's not much that anyone can tell you about the FS Commando Dagger that you haven't already discovered.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top