reviewers

gangsta965084

gangsta965084

Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
696
I hate it when people are reviewing a knife then they say i just got it in the mail, does anyone else hate this. I mean use the knife for a week or two before you do a review. Thats why i have been using my RAT-3 for a month now review coming later
 
I think a lot of guys are just sharing thier excitement and reviewing how the knife feels and looks when they first get it in thier hands. I don't have a problem with it.
 
just consider those type of reviews, initial reviews. I would rather read a review from someone whose actually used their knives, but I can understand the excitement of getting a new blade and wanting to talk about it.
 
Most people say it is their first impressions. But I do agree, a lot of people on these forums don't really use their knives much. Most people have lives that just don't require hard use out of knives--one of the main reasons most people don't carry knives everywhere. Sadly we live in a world where a knife isnt needed, but I still think it is a very useful tool:)

First impressions are helpful if they give lots of pics, i use these types of reviews a lot when deciding on knives. It helped me decide on a rat:)
 
When they do a review when they first get it, it is just the initial impressions of the blade. Not exactly a review.
 
I'm with the OP. I get tired of hearing, "this is a great knife" "this knife is really nice" "This knife will be a great XXXXXXXX".

Are you the amazing Kreskin? How is it exactly that you know that a knife that has cut nothing but air is going to be a great bushcrafter/slicer/whittler/carver/zombie slayer?

Get out there and get the damn thing dirty before you tell me how much I'm going to like it.
 
no like they get the knife and they saw it is a good chopper and then you go out and try this and it sucks at choping


but, i can see it as an overview type thing
 
SOUTHSTAR said:
I think a lot of guys are just sharing thier excitement and reviewing how the knife feels and looks when they first get it in thier hands. I don't have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

I agree too, to a certain extent, but I hate when they say stuff like, "it is one tough knife, I think." Go test it out, then come back and tell us.

_____Rat Pack #106_____
 
Last edited:
shotgunner11 said:
I'm with the OP. I get tired of hearing, "this is a great knife" "this knife is really nice" "This knife will be a great XXXXXXXX".

Are you the amazing Kreskin? How is it exactly that you know that a knife that has cut nothing but air is going to be a great bushcrafter/slicer/whittler/carver/zombie slayer?

Get out there and get the damn thing dirty before you tell me how much I'm going to like it.
Click to expand...

I understand those initial impression reviews but I agree with the above, it was watching and reading reviews about the knife's performance that helped me decide on a RAT...which should be coming within a week or so...:D
 
SOUTHSTAR said:
I think a lot of guys are just sharing thier excitement and reviewing how the knife feels and looks when they first get it in thier hands. I don't have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

I agree; as i have done just this in a previous post.

I feel as though there are a few things that faith offers habor within regards to steels and their durability during use. In my opinion it is a safe assumption when first handling my new RC-6 to state "this is a tough son of a b!tch." Why? During my use of Tuarns RC-3 I have batoned through 4.5 inch popples, I have gutted fish, speared at crawdads in a rock filled creek bed. Watched my brother throw the blade 25ft into a steel drum..(yes, I was asking wtf? ' it was a miss and accident') its cut paracord, tin cans, electrical wiring, climbing rope and fencing. Through all of this i was able to still pull enough of an edge off with a flat creek stone that the blade preform all tasks i needed it for.
So if a length of 1095 steel at .125 thickness preforms at such a high standard in regards to its steadfast nature, is it improper to assume that a blade of .188 thickness would not exceed in regards to durability? Thus making it in comparison to all smaller blades of RC make "one tough son of a b!tch."
If im incorrect in my assumptions about 1095 and the RC heat treat, then will someone please explain in a concise manner why 1095 does not excel in its ruggedness when increased in thickness?? I am not a metallurgist so please give me sources that will help me understand your explanation and further my understanding of steel and its variability.

(please don't mistake this as a rebuttal or me attempting to incite a debate. The actuality is that If i was ignorant with my "rc-baby" post i want to know, and thus how i can improve my posts for you." The way i type is the way i speak, i just strive to be quite direct.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top