Tactical VS. Traditional

I should add that while the ear to the ground is out for the Beer Scout I also have/had 3 modern knives on the list.

Spyderco PPT Spring; found on Ebay
Spyderco HAP40 Delica; Bought in an online store when released
Spdycro PM2 BHQ edition; have all the email alerts loaded and am ready to pull the trigger.
 
I have mostly moderns, several SAK's and I just recently got a couple of traditionals. I really like their aesthetic and size. GEC makes a fine knife. I don't have any tactical knives, to ME, tactical is not a series of features but an intended purpose. Karambits, push-knives that go in a fist, the sort of thing primarily intended to be used as a weapon. Any knife CAN be a weapon but I'm talking about design philosophy. That said, they are fine but I'd rather collect knives with a wider range of usefulness and practicality.
 
afishhunter said:
"Tactical" knives are generally equipped with one hand opening, pocket clips, and serrated blades seem to be popular.
To a non-knife person,(and LEO's) a "tactical" knife is more likely to be considered a "weapon" (thanks to Cold Steel, who seems to market all their goods as a "weapon", and have those videos out where they slice clothes filled with meat and stabbing car hoods and/or doors, etc.)
A "traditional" knife is more likely to be seen by the non-knife person (and LEO's) as something they remember their parents and grandparents using as a tool, and are therefore not "threatening" like the all black "tactical" knife. Just like a blued metal and wood stocked Winchester 94 or Marlin 1895 is not "threatening" like an all black M-16.
Personally, in the 60 odd years I've been on this rock, I've never had cause or the desire to stab a car (or person). I loathe serrated blades (excluding the fine serrations on a bread knife), and have no need of one hand opening.
I also prefer multiple blades on my knives, since one blade profile is not ideal for every use. Traditional knives handle all my cutting needs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this sums it for me as well.

Plus, I have the added baggage of having grown up in an era that pre-dates the so called tactical movement by decades. Growing up, I knew men who were hunters, trappers, warehouse workers, working watermen, and tradesmen of all kinds. Some of them served as mentors to me, and I learned much of who I became from them. This was before office cubicles and the dawn of the great migration from rural to urban life in general. All of these men has a knife on them if they had pants on. Almost exclusively it was some smallish two blade serpentine jack or penknife, about 3 inc he's closed. With this knife they did whatever had to be done in the way of cutting. If the small pocket knife was not enough, then they had a "huntin' knife that got hung on the belt. Large knives were thought to be for green horns and knives as weapons were very looked down on. The only knives around for the most part were the James Dean switch blades or Eye-talion stiletto type of knives. My mentors had very open scorn for those.

I've actually tried to like single blade knives. I went through a sodbuster craze and didn't take to it. I like having two or even three different blades on hand in one pocket size package. Versatility. If the knife has a few tools on it, like a basic two layer SAK or scout knife, then it's gravy on the 'taters. On a two blade jack, I'll keep the main blade razor sharp, and the secondary pen blade a bit more blunt for the dirty work that I know will screw up the main blade.

I've never looked at my knife as a weapon. Just not going there. All I need is a cutting tool. And for that, the traditional pocket knife is as good now as it was for many generations of men who actually did real work out in the real world, up to and including getting through a great depression, and fighting a world wide war of horrific proportions. If a scout knife or simple jackknife was good enough for them, that's good enough for me. The beauty of nicely jigged bone, mellow stag, or smooth almost translucent horn, is just more gravy on the 'taters!

Take it from a senior citizen, life is to short for ugly knives.
 
jackknife said:
I like having two or even three different blades on hand in one pocket size package. Versatility. The beauty of nicely jigged bone, mellow stag, or smooth almost translucent horn, is just more gravy on the 'taters! Take it from a senior citizen, life is to short for ugly knives.
Click to expand...

Carl nailed it for me; it's why I EDC traditionals 99+% of the time. I do have modern OHO knives for special uses, but almost never just carry one out and about. Carry-ability, versatility and good looks all favor the traditional multi-blade slipjoint.
 
I like both and most days I carry both. Each has its strenghts and weaknesses.

Regards, Daniel
 
afishhunter said:
"Tactical" knives are generally equipped with one hand opening, pocket clips, and serrated blades seem to be popular.
To a non-knife person,(and LEO's) a "tactical" knife is more likely to be considered a "weapon" (thanks to Cold Steel, who seems to market all their goods as a "weapon", and have those videos out where they slice clothes filled with meat and stabbing car hoods and/or doors, etc.)
A "traditional" knife is more likely to be seen by the non-knife person (and LEO's) as something they remember their parents and grandparents using as a tool, and are therefore not "threatening" like the all black "tactical" knife. Just like a blued metal and wood stocked Winchester 94 or Marlin 1895 is not "threatening" like an all black M-16.
Personally, in the 60 odd years I've been on this rock, I've never had cause or the desire to stab a car (or person). I loathe serrated blades (excluding the fine serrations on a bread knife), and have no need of one hand opening.
I also prefer multiple blades on my knives, since one blade profile is not ideal for every use. Traditional knives handle all my cutting needs.
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
Not to split hairs, but the word tactical to me is an application, not a design. It all depends what the knife or tool is being used for..... I still have my grandfathers Camillus pocket knife that he carried in the Pacific theater during WWII and I personally consider it more tactical than the most tricked out Emerson, Busse, Benchmade out there. Why? Bcuz it was used in a military setting during combat, even if the most action it saw was to open C-rats and cut string.....
That being said, I have about a 50/50 mix, modern and traditional. It's funny, I always wonder if my grandkids are going to look at my Spydercos and Esee's 40 years from now and call them "traditional" LOL!
 
I am more of a tactical knife woman myself, but I DO love a nice custom slip joint. I am also a huge fan of Victorinox's.
 
My sense is that "tactical" and "traditional" have a significant overlap.

My personal (certainly not legal) definition of a tactical knife has the following design characteristics:
- Folding so it can be easily hidden
- Locking blade to allow for stabbing
- Blade length in the 3.5" range - enough to be likely to cause significant internal organ damage

IMO, a knife becomes very tactical when you add the features:
- Finger guard to protect the hand when stabbing
- Double edge
- Fast or near instant deployment

The Spanish Navaja certainly fits my (personal) definition of a tatical traditional knife. It was widely outlawed for this reason.
Navaja2.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navaja

The Buck 110 was widely used by soldiers in the Vietnam war era and by biker gangs in that time (and to this day).
Buck 110 and 112 by Pinnah, on Flickr

My understanding is that the Buck 112 Ranger has it's name in "honor" of the aircraft carrier USS Ranger. My understanding (could be urban/internet myth) was that the Ranger was in port in San Diego and a fight broke out in which a sailor was stabbed with a Buck 110. The ship's commander issued an order limiting blade length of utility knives to 3" and Buck responded with the Ranger.

All this said.... I think modern tactical folders are playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship, particular with "flippers". IMO (emphasize, my opinion, it may not be yours) is that there is no functional need for automatic, assisted, gravity or detent driven flippers. IMO, these are just different technical designs to solve the same basic design goal of near instant deployment. These designs are not about one hand opening. You can one hand open Opinels and Buck 110s, no problem. This is about fast one hand deployment and really, the only purpose I can think of that that serves is a tactical need.

My concern with flippers and the like is that they'll cause enough of a social backlash that all locking folders get restricted where I live. Switchblades, gravity knives and automatic out the front knives already are and I would have to think that it's a possibility that flippers and the like could end up in the same bucket. That wouldn't bother me but the possibility of all locking folders getting swept up in that would.
 
I started off with traditionals and I still prefer the traditional "look" - there's something special about a stag or wood handle that you just rarely see in a modern knife. My collection is about half and half right now, with the edge towards the traditionals. That said, I rarely carry them anymore. My trad of choice used to be a linerlock, either Case or Boker Tree - both made great ones. But I started getting into GECs and they're such buggers to open and you have to be so careful when closing them. I understand they're made stiff so they don't close on you, but that why moderns have liner locks and frame locks. The ease of opening and closing, plus the pocket clip and generally larger available blade sizes have pushed me into tacticals. I still love and treasure my traditionals, it's what I want to hand down to my kid. But for functionality and protection, I'll take a spring-assisted or flipper any day.
 
I'm still trying to get a maker to make a combat Sodbuster.
But, lots of different knives are in my rotation.
rolf
 
I work for a company that supports military applications. A colleague once told me, "If you think about, the whole reason our company exists is to help our military kill our enemies more efficiently."

My sense as an engineer is that engineering and design decisions matter. Some designs are more "efficient" for their stated purpose than others. Horse for courses, as the old saying goes.

This said, it's an interesting question and interesting that the OP posted in both the general and traditional forums. People should check out hte responses in the traditional forum for some nice cross-polinization of ideas.

My post in the traditional forum follows...

My sense is that "tactical" and "traditional" have a significant overlap.

My personal (certainly not legal) definition of a tactical knife has the following design characteristics:
- Folding so it can be easily hidden
- Locking blade to allow for stabbing
- Blade length in the 3.5" range - enough to be likely to cause significant internal organ damage

IMO, a knife becomes very tactical when you add the features:
- Finger guard to protect the hand when stabbing
- Double edge
- Fast or near instant deployment

The Spanish Navaja certainly fits my (personal) definition of a tatical traditional knife. It was widely outlawed for this reason.
Navaja2.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navaja

The Buck 110 was widely used by soldiers in the Vietnam war era and by biker gangs in that time (and to this day).
Buck 110 and 112 by Pinnah, on Flickr

My understanding is that the Buck 112 Ranger has it's name in "honor" of the aircraft carrier USS Ranger. My understanding (could be urban/internet myth) was that the Ranger was in port in San Diego and a fight broke out in which a sailor was stabbed with a Buck 110. The ship's commander issued an order limiting blade length of utility knives to 3" and Buck responded with the Ranger.

All this said.... I think modern tactical folders are playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship, particular with "flippers". IMO (emphasize, my opinion, it may not be yours) is that there is no functional need for automatic, assisted, gravity or detent driven flippers. IMO, these are just different technical designs to solve the same basic design goal of near instant deployment. These designs are not about one hand opening. You can one hand open Opinels and Buck 110s, no problem. This is about fast one hand deployment and really, the only purpose I can think of that that serves is a tactical need.

My concern with flippers and the like is that they'll cause enough of a social backlash that all locking folders get restricted where I live. Switchblades, gravity knives and automatic out the front knives already are and I would have to think that it's a possibility that flippers and the like could end up in the same bucket. That wouldn't bother me but the possibility of all locking folders getting swept up in that would.
 
Traditional knives are a combination of form and function, and modern knives are just function. I used to shoot longbows, as opposed to compounds. At a traditional shoot in Eastern Washington, a friend wore a shirt I still laugh at... "Friends don't let friends shoot compounds." :thumbup:
 
I usually carry a flipper in the FR pocket and a small "traditional" in my left. And most of the time one knife will do whatever job is required at the time I just enjoy an old Barlow or my trusty Old Timer. How could you not? :)
 
My father and grandfather carried traditional slipjoint knives. I grew up in the "tactical" era, and went through a phase where I bought a few, but to me, it rings hollow. I can't help but feel that the tactical-style knife is a bit of an overreaction, a bit of bravado. In an era when the day-to-day cutting tasks of men are getting smaller, generally, the style of knife carried is almost universally getting larger and more aggressive. To me, for most jobs, a traditional knife is a better tool (let's be honest: in terms of blade geometry, the typical slipjoint will slice better and more cleanly than the typical thumbstud knife with a blade that can double as a pry bar.) The traditional knife is more elegant, too. It looks like something a mature man might carry as a practical, classy, considered choice of tool. The tactical folder, on the other hand, makes most guys look like try-hards, at best, or criminals, at worst, as they flick their knife out in a fraction of a second, to eviscerate that dangerous zip tie, or carve up that cucumber.

For real-world daily use, I find the multiple smaller blades of a slipjoint much better, to open an envelope, peel an apple, whittle a stick, etc.

On the other hand, if I really were a Navy SEAL, rescue diver, or otherwise working in an environment much more extreme than my office or my garden, then I could appreciate the practical advantages of a modern folder -the ability to open the thing almost instantaneously, one handed, with gloves, to be able to use it as a prybar or for batonning wood, the ultralight hi-tech ugly-as-sin grips that won't slip out of my hand even when I'm crawling through the mud of Mozambique, etc.

For me though, and I daresay about 99.9% of guys, that's overkill. I prefer the right tool for the job.
 
Even though I pretty much carry just a small pen or jack most of the time I appreciate both styles equally.

 
GaiusJulius said:
To me, for most jobs, a traditional knife is a better tool (let's be honest: in terms of blade geometry, the typical slipjoint will slice better and more cleanly than the typical thumbstud knife with a blade that can double as a pry bar.) The traditional knife is more elegant, too. It looks like something a mature man might carry as a practical, classy, considered choice of tool. The tactical folder, on the other hand, makes most guys look like try-hards, at best, or criminals, at worst, as they flick their knife out in a fraction of a second, to eviscerate that dangerous zip tie, or carve up that cucumber.
Click to expand...

Overall, I agree, but I will say that my PM2 with its FFG blade is much less prybar and much more slicer. I don't often carry a fruit knife, so if I want to slice an apple in half it's either my trusty Case 6375 or the PM2 (unless I'm carrying a 110 or something like that). The PM2 will also hold up to abuse better, which is perfectly fine for me: I want my traditionals to look as good as they cut. I don't have such constraints for a modern folder -- mine just need to cut like a demon, and the PM2 does just that.

That being said, I don't even have a modern folder with me today, and the 110 on my belt could probably fill in for any pry bar duty I might encounter. :D
 
Don't get me wrong, I have a Spyderco something-or-other that seems like a well made knife, and will handle food prep and most cutting tasks with aplomb. I keep it in my sock drawer in case the zombie hordes show up ;) But truthfully, the only thing it does better than most traditional knives is open fast, and unless I am planning to use it as a weapon (my PPK or 1911 serve much better in that role) the fast access does nothing for me, because I can't remember a time when it really mattered whether I opened that box right now, instead of half a second ago.
 
I carry both because if I end up non knife friendly place traditional a don't cause much "excitement" but prefer modern because lots of time I need to open it one handed
 
I like both.

My main one-hand opener that I EDC is my large CRK Insingo. I also always carry and use Victorinox SAKs or my Spirit multi-tool.

However, I do NOT consider my Insingo 'tactical' just because it has a pocket clip and opens one-handed. As others have mentioned, 'tactical' is an application as opposed to a type of knife. I've heard about military guys who, during combat, used their SAKs far more than the Ka-Bar combat knives on their belts. And while the SAKs weren't used as weapons, they allowed the user to accomplish things that helped keep them alive under dangerous conditions. Sounds pretty tactical to me, but nobody really considers an SAK as 'tactical'. Nowadays, I'm betting that more guys in the military would carry a multi-tool in place of an SAK.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top