Ray Mears vs Bear Grylls

Who is a better survivalist? plus knife input

  • Bear Grylls

    Votes: 1 100.0%

  • Ray Mears

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    1
That's a no brainer. Ray Mears, of course.
I sure don't want to eat what Bear Grylls "cooks" up, but I'm definitely drooling over Ray Mears cookery.
Plus Ray Mears knife definitely is the better one (that's an opinion made from experience).
/ Karl
 
I dont think people should compare Bear Grylls vs. Les Stroud or vs. Ray Mears just based upon what you see on Man vs. Wild . When I see Man vs. Wild I think of it as a show thats supposed to be more entertaining than say survivorman. I think that people that arent into the whole survivalist "hobby" wouldnt get a whole lot of watching Les Stroud or Ray Mears. But if you take those same people and show them Bear Grylls Man vs. Wild I think alot more of the regular joes will be entertained by it.

Thats just my theory, i dont think Man vs. Wild was marketed to the hardcore survivalist whereas Survivor man is. Yes it has some good survival information and im sure bear grylls has great survival skills, but I think what they really wanted to convey was the shock factor of him eating nasty things and doing gross stuff like laying in a camel carcass or drinking his own piss. Just my 0.02
 
Thomas Linton said:
Da' Bea displays unnecessarily risky behavior. Dumb and dumber.
Click to expand...
Thomas Linton, hola........................................................................................................................................................................................................................I'm really glad I skimmed through now I see you have posted because I'd like to direct my questions specifically at you. Don't take that as an attack on you, quite the opposite, I am interested in your reasoning because you seem to have some. That you disagree with me is not really interesting. What is interesting to me is how you got there.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................Particular hurdles I seem to have be up against with others, apart from the glib banality of some of the responses, are [1] the role of TV versus real life, [2] the deity like status bestowed upon celebrities, [3] the fantastic nature of perceived survival scenarios and the order of their likeliness, and [4] the nature of what it means to have a team mate..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................Here's some background to where I'm coming from: ..................................................................................................................................................................................In the early 1990's I was fortunate enough to see John Wiseman lecture. I thought he was great. That wasn't just because I was a bit more impressionable then but also because in conjunction with his knowledge I really enjoyed the fast tempo of his deliveries and his sarcasm. Here was a guy I respected and kinda liked. The funny thing is that a couple of years ago a thread such as this came up on a forum and I responded that now I sooner pick a whole bunch of different people than him, because now he is an old pensioner bloke living quietly with his wife. I came in for a bunch of snide criticism for saying that from some dullard forum members as if I was attacking him, their god. It got me to wondering just what it would take to dislodge a guy like him once he becomes deified, the loss of both hands, blindness, demyelinating disease. Could it be that there was no scenario that could dislodge him in the minds of some people‽ ...............................................................................................................................................That scenario aspect is also of special relevance to me here. I don't doubt that Mears is a far better bushcrafter than Grylls, but I wonder at how much weight I should give that in potential survival scenarios that might occur to me. Whilst it is true that I may have a plane crash over some poxhaven in Argentina whilst going on holiday, in which case Mears might be my guy, that's very not likely. It's far more likely that I break my leg up on Dartmoor and am freezing in some bog. In a situation like that I think I'd be better off sending up the Bat-signal to someone like our very own mtwarden to get to me quick sharp and do what is necessary than calling on Mears. Similarly, if my potholing nutjob of a cousin ever talks me into going down another cave and we get stuck I can think of loads of people that I'd want to call out before Mears, despite him being a better bushcrafter than all of them. The pattern I'm trying to get across here is relevance to me, and Mears and his bushcraft stuff is unlikely to be the most relevant to emergency situations I may encounter. I've considered the fact that it might be simply because the UK is small but I can't reconcile that with the fact that most of the folks that do stuff off the beaten track in bigger places are usually in teams of two or more. I know there are some notable exceptions but the vast majority of guys reporting being out on their own don't seem to be doing much more than a heroic “overnighter” not far from a well beaten track. For that I don't see how any kind of bushcraft skill would even take priority of a well stocked and fit EMT. On that, my case is that using bushcraft knowledge as a cudgel to beat down alternative contestants is heavily reliant on the least probable survival scenarios. It strikes me that relative bushcraft skill is used to obfuscate that truth of that, and prop up a personal hero...........................................................................................................................................................The last aspect is the nature of a team, and what it is about the way people here seem to be conceiving of a team as that seems so peculiar to me. It's a bit like a cat fart; you can smell it , you can taste it, you can darn near see it, yet you can't quite rub your finger on it, although you're positive it exists because of the clues pointing to it. When I conceive of a team in a survival situation solutions are brainstormed between my mate and I as to how to go about addressing a problem. A lot of what I'm reading in this thread gives of more of a flavour of a sheep wanting to follow along behind an all powerful rescuer. I'm just not understanding the mentality behind that. I'm certain it exists because of the repeated extrapolations from one of Grylls TV shows - “he's a stuntman”, “he's dangerous”, “he's an adrenaline junkie”, all that kind of thing, as if that blindly presented a hazard to you and you had no say 'cos you were just a follower. I just don't get the dynamics of that. I don't get that any more than if I were out with Mears and for whatever reason his faculties caused him to make a bad judgement about a fungus. If I believed that fungus contained a dangerous alkaloid I'd say so, perhaps doing both he and I a favour. After all I am just as much his team mate as he is mine, so I'm not getting the make yourself a liability and just follow along thing............................................................................................................................................................................................................................I'm really interested in your thoughts.
 
I wish..............................this conversion....................................could be more.............................................trite.................................................and unreadable.............................................or something. Sorry to get all Kirkish. Speaking of Kirk, he was much more like Bear than like that other guy. Then again, both are TV personalities so go figure. Help me.......................Spock.
 
20120109021410.jpg
 
This message is hidden because baldtaco-II is on your ignore list.

Bear isn't doing too well in the polls. I am somehow not too surprised. He is a good entertainer as long as I remember that is what he is first and foremost. I envy his being able to make a good living doing what he likes to do. I certainly would not enjoy doing many of the things he does. I suspect that he doesn't either. I would imagine that there are many times he would like to kill his writers and director. There is no telling what off-the-wall stunts he has actually refused to do. So if he wants to name his second son Huckleberry Jocelyne, more power to him. As for myself, I would much rather depend on Mears in a survival situation. Wheee! Now we can be Bear-free untill 2013!
 
Yeah Codger well said, not sure if I would want to make lots of money and be a star if it meant drinking my own urine and poo water or sticking stagnant water and bird poop up my butt. I think I will just stay poor, thank you very much. Chris
 
What is survival? Depends where you is:

You would want Mears along for an unexpected wilderness plane crash.

You would want Bear Grylls along if you were in Vegas, surviving hookers and blow.


"Here I is," one of the Little Rascals
 
Entertainment aside (and "Dumb and Dumber" is intended to be entertainment), if you are in a survival situation, I expect you don't want to take unnecessary risks to make the odds of surviving even worse: say jumping out of a tree when you have miles of cordage to let yourself down; running out of control down a steep, rocky hill for no reason; intentionally going over a waterfall as a means of travel; eating raw carrion when not hungry to any meaningful degree; drinking "water" out of a depression in a pile of shit. That sort of stuff.

It's all par for the course for our former U.K. reservist. So Da Bear models daft behavior as he cons his way through his program fighting guys in bear costumes, "capturing" live snakes that were actually road kill gathered by a staffer, "breaking" "wild" horses from a dude ranch, and "surviving" the rigors of the "desert island" of Hawaii 200 feet from a major highway and in sight of armies of tourists.

Just really impressive.

"Survivor" anyone?
 
Erasmus said:
What is survival? Depends where you is:You would want Mears along for an unexpected wilderness plane crash.You would want Bear Grylls along if you were in Vegas, surviving hookers and blow."Here I is," one of the Little Rascals
Click to expand...
Excellent point. Exaggerated for effect but superb non the less. Mears for a genuine wilderness plane crash situation. I'd pick him for that too. Surely though for what most of us here are more likely to get our selves into a much fitter and faster person to orchestrate first aid and further support would be a better option? Any fitter and faster person that could do that, including Grylls?
 
Thomas Linton said:
Entertainment aside (and "Dumb and Dumber" is intended to be entertainment), if you are in a survival situation, I expect you don't want to take unnecessary risks to make the odds of surviving even worse: say jumping out of a tree when you have miles of cordage to let yourself down; running out of control down a steep, rocky hill for no reason; intentionally going over a waterfall as a means of travel; eating raw carrion when not hungry to any meaningful degree; drinking "water" out of a depression in a pile of shit. That sort of stuff. It's all par for the course for our former U.K. reservist. So Da Bear models daft behavior as he cons his way through his program fighting guys in bear costumes, "capturing" live snakes that were actually road kill gathered by a staffer, "breaking" "wild" horses from a dude ranch, and "surviving" the rigors of the "desert island" of Hawaii 200 feet from a major highway and in sight of armies of tourists.Just really impressive. "Survivor" anyone?
Click to expand...
That's not "entertainment aside" surely? Isn't that straight back in to judging on the basis of entertainments shows?
 
I think what he's basically saying is that if Bear was not on a television show and a celebrity, and he performed the actions mentioned above, he would not be considered overly wise. He holds entertainment value and there is real value in entertainment. But strip that all away, assume he would continue on with similar behavior (in reality he probably knows better and wouldn't), and he's the guy you don't want to go hiking with.
 
JCavSD said:
I think what he's basically saying is that if Bear was not on a television show and a celebrity, and he performed the actions mentioned above, he would not be considered overly wise. He holds entertainment value and there is real value in entertainment. But strip that all away, assume he would continue on with similar behavior (in reality he probably knows better and wouldn't), and he's the guy you don't want to go hiking with.
Click to expand...

I personally think he would be a hoot to go hiking with IRL, because I doubt that he would do all that risky stuff without it being written into a script and money at stake. He is bound to have a good sense of humor to do many of the things he does and handle the ridicule and criticism so well, much as Chuck Norris does. But I would still chose Mears or Cody over Bear in a real survival situation. Cody would just have to get over his aversion to meat and fish. And understand that when push comes to shove, human hair can make excellent cordage. :D
 
Codger_64 said:
This message is hidden because baldtaco-II is on your ignore list.

Bear isn't doing too well in the polls. I am somehow not too surprised. He is a good entertainer as long as I remember that is what he is first and foremost. I envy his being able to make a good living doing what he likes to do. I certainly would not enjoy doing many of the things he does. I suspect that he doesn't either. I would imagine that there are many times he would like to kill his writers and director. There is no telling what off-the-wall stunts he has actually refused to do. So if he wants to name his second son Huckleberry Jocelyne, more power to him. As for myself, I would much rather depend on Mears in a survival situation. Wheee! Now we can be Bear-free untill 2013!
Click to expand...

I tip my hat to him for the guts to eat..........guts. I doubt that I could keep some of that stuff down, that takes jam. I'll give him that. :thumbup:
 
The thing to keep in mind is that Bear is a soldier. He was taught to use survival skills to complete a mission. In that sense his mentality reflects this relationship between a specific skill set and goal that they help achieve. For Ray Mears, survival skills are the mission. Notice how Bear, although probably being a little dramatic, always seems to walk hunched over as if hunting, using cover instinctively and crouching down everytime he stops moving. Iys like the diffecene between a porfessional welding instructor and a custom motorcycle mechanic who is really good at welding.
 
climbingrocks said:
The thing to keep in mind is that Bear is a soldier. He was taught to use survival skills to complete a mission. In that sense his mentality reflects this relationship between a specific skill set and goal that they help achieve. For Ray Mears, survival skills are the mission. Notice how Bear, although probably being a little dramatic, always seems to walk hunched over as if hunting, using cover instinctively and crouching down everytime he stops moving. Iys like the diffecene between a porfessional welding instructor and a custom motorcycle mechanic who is really good at welding.
Click to expand...

Mr Grylls is an entertainer. He was a reservist in an elite reserve unit. Numerous soldiers, and former actual full-time members of the SAS, have written books on survival. Some have done TV programs. I can hardly imagine a greater contrast in "mentality." He is undoubtedly more entertaining. Excellent skill set, that.
 
I take months hiatus form bladeforums and when I come back there is still a 4 page thread about Bear Grylls is WSS. Astounding! LOL!
 
Since both are tv persevered and neithe is a survivalist per se, I say mears simply because I like his style. Grylls is too much macho thrill seeking, his show can be fun, but it packs about as much useful information as a subtle look from mears. As an archaeologist, I like the way ray often adds an historical or ethnographic element to his programs. Although I would vote lundin and Canterbury if given the choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top