• The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
    Price is $300 $250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
    Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.

  • Today marks the 24th anniversary of 9/11. I pray that this nation does not forget the loss of lives from this horrible event. Yesterday conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was murdered, and I worry about what is to come. Please love one another and your family in these trying times - Spark

Top 5 MBC for SD

ignoramus said:
I respect your opinion, but it sounds like your just saying it's better without any rationale behind it. Would you mind elaborating on why you believe what I said is wrong and the smaller blade is better?

A smaller blade is

A. easier to conceal

B. less likely to have legal repercussions

C. usually is part of a knife that offers a smaller package, one that you are more apt to have on your person EVERY DAY, instead of the big 4.5 inch blade fighting folder, that is heavy, uncomfortable to carry, difficult to conceal, does not fit with every outfit you wear, and is apt to be left home, and remain there when you need it most.

D. NKP friendly. a smaller blade is less likely to scare non knife people, and I am a proponent of USING a SD knife for the daily mundane tasks, so drawing and opening the knife become routine and ingrained.

E. In a self defense situation, you won't be duelling an opponent. Your knife should not be for show. Most likely it will be an ambush, in a confined area. A smaller knife is less likely to injure you, the user, in a close quarters situation, than a larger one, as well as being easier to access.

D. and in a self defense situation, you are looking to use a knife to facilitate an escape, not finish off your assailant. A small blade cuts a hand, wrist, or forearm just as easily as a longer one, and if that arm is around your throat, a native is going to be safer for you the user than a military.

and if you are worried about your SD blade being dulled by day to day chores, most of the higher end steels will get you through every day mundane cutting needs without losing too much cutting abilities, and nightly touchups on the sharpmaker are a simple and efficient way to keep the edge up to par.

Peter
 
as a side note.

2 things.


meshmdz-try a search and look at the practical tactical section of bladeforums. this topic has been covered ad infinitum. you need to go with what suits you.

and as mentioned ad nauseum, many many people use knives to take lives every day, and the knives are crap, and the users have no training whatsoever. A knife is a deadly weapon with serious consequences. while I recommend having some self defense training, do not let that dissuade you from using your knife without training. it is one more addition to the arsenal of self defense. Use it in concert with your mind, awareness, and common sense, and remember, your only priority should be to get yourself or your loved ones to safety.

and keep in mind, using a knife in self defense will most likely be met with legal action on the part of the police and victim (assailant). A knife that is jury-friendly can't hurt your case. As stupid as it sounds, image is everything. Check out the Alexander Pring-Wilson case in Boston.

Pete
 
Pete1977 said:
A smaller blade is

A. easier to conceal

B. less likely to have legal repercussions

C. usually is part of a knife that offers a smaller package, one that you are more apt to have on your person EVERY DAY, instead of the big 4.5 inch blade fighting folder, that is heavy, uncomfortable to carry, difficult to conceal, does not fit with every outfit you wear, and is apt to be left home, and remain there when you need it most.

D. NKP friendly. a smaller blade is less likely to scare non knife people, and I am a proponent of USING a SD knife for the daily mundane tasks, so drawing and opening the knife become routine and ingrained.

E. In a self defense situation, you won't be duelling an opponent. Your knife should not be for show. Most likely it will be an ambush, in a confined area. A smaller knife is less likely to injure you, the user, in a close quarters situation, than a larger one, as well as being easier to access.

D. and in a self defense situation, you are looking to use a knife to facilitate an escape, not finish off your assailant. A small blade cuts a hand, wrist, or forearm just as easily as a longer one, and if that arm is around your throat, a native is going to be safer for you the user than a military.

and if you are worried about your SD blade being dulled by day to day chores, most of the higher end steels will get you through every day mundane cutting needs without losing too much cutting abilities, and nightly touchups on the sharpmaker are a simple and efficient way to keep the edge up to par.

Peter

Are you aware that my original post was suggesting that you carry a blade with length of at least 3"? Hair was suggesting that less than 3" is better somehow. Go back and read my original post and see if you disagree with it.
 
whoa... knife? jury friendly? GET OUT OF HERE. lol... i thought that was an oxymoron... oh well..

no hurt feelings. i just dont want to be called mall ninja and that kinda stuff because i am training in SD and was wanting to learn what a good SD knife would be for me... i like the karambit and thought it would be a great choice.. my trainer has one and uses it in our sessions, it isnt a spyderco.... however, he does carry a spyderco karambit and says it is all you need if you are trained well with it... he has stated numerous times that with the spyderco karambit, one can easily end the threat by "slashing" anywhere in the neck or throat region... i find this hard to disprove so i am going with it.. the other knives you fellas mentioned are great blades and i want one of all of them, however, i cant afford them all right now. monday i am going to be ordering something and i wanna have my mind made up 100% when i foot the bill... something about the spyderco karambit just really is calling my name, maybe since thats what i have been training with for the past 2 weeks... i dont know. thanks for the help thus far men. God bless.
 
ignoramus said:
Are you aware that my original post was suggesting that you carry a blade with length of at least 3"? Hair was suggesting that less than 3" is better somehow. Go back and read my original post and see if you disagree with it.

I am quite aware with what your post said, and whether i agree or disagree isn't the issue. i am offering advice and reasoning behind carrying a small blade.



peter
 
nolan raborn said:
I certainly can't see how Hair thinks a two inch blade is faster and more accurate than a three inch blade. We are talking about one inch and maybe fractions of an ounce of weight. An ounce or two at most. Looks like he is comparing a hammer and a maul! The only possible difference is concealability and that should not be that much of a problem.
I never said that. Please do not put words into my mouth. I said a small blade like 2 or 3 inch blade is faster and more accurate than a large blade. This is true. I was refuting the incorrect belief that a blade larger than 3 inches should be recommend when in reality blades shorter than 3 inches are more effective. I am against using arbitrary cut-offs like 3 inches, or 2.9 inches. My point is that less blade does not mean less damage- it tends to actually mean more damage. Yes, there are extremes. A .0001 inch blade will not do much. A sword is a very dangerous weapon. But we are not talking about swords or skeeter-skinners.

ignoramus said:
I was wondering if anyone else was going to catch that. I also wonder why Hair repeatedly says he doesn't train and has no experience and yet comes to these conclusions so confidently (nothing personal Hair, I'm sure you're a great person, but It just doesn't seem very logical to me).
I am repeating the opinions and beliefs of people that are educated and trained on using knives as self defense. Scientists say that radiation can kill you. I am not an expert, nor a scientist of any sort, but if someone says that radiation can not harm you, I will tell them otherwise. Not because I am an expert, but because I am able to retell the thoughts of the experts. This is actually VERY logical. I'm surprised you did not understand that.

ignoramus said:
The romans didn't slash and claw their way to the top.
We are talking about knives, not swords. The Romans didn't use a Manix to get to the top either. Likewise, a Karambit is not a thumb tack. You cannot use irrelevant extremes to prove your arguement.

ignoramus said:
Lastly, I was never talking about using a knife for some sort of "one stab kill", I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that just because I have a 3" blade or larger, I should only stab once.
I never said that was your arguement. You said a larger blade will do more damage. I said the opposite is true because the amount that the blade could potentially penetrate isn't as important as how far it actually penetrates, how often it inflicts a wound, how quickly it can be used, and how accurate it is.
 
This definitely belongs in practical tactical

Hair said:
A .0001 inch blade will not do much. A sword is a very dangerous weapon. But we are not talking about swords or skeeter-skinners.

At what point do you believe that they'll be ineffective?

I am repeating the opinions and beliefs of people that are educated and trained on using knives as self defense. Scientists say that radiation can kill you. I am not an expert, nor a scientist of any sort, but if someone says that radiation can not harm you, I will tell them otherwise. Not because I am an expert, but because I am able to retell the thoughts of the experts. This is actually VERY logical. I'm surprised you did not understand that.

Are you aware that there is a multitude of "experts" and "educated" people out there who haven't come to the same conclusions? If you're inexperienced in this field, how do you determine who the authority is when a large amount of people with experience can't agree on this?

We are talking about knives, not swords. The Romans didn't use a Manix to get to the top either. Likewise, a Karambit is not a thumb tack. You cannot use irrelevant extremes to prove your arguement.

We're actually talking about how much and what kind of damage needs to be inflicted on an individual for effective self defense. This makes the point relevent.

I never said that was your arguement. You said a larger blade will do more damage. I said the opposite is true because the amount that the blade could potentially penetrate isn't as important as how far it actually penetrates, how often it inflicts a wound, how quickly it can be used, and how accurate it is.

Now you're generalizing when I specifically stated at least 3 inches. How far it penetrates is definitely what's important here, but it must have enough blade to penetrate to the extent that it's effective.
 
Pete1977 said:
I am quite aware with what your post said, and whether i agree or disagree isn't the issue. i am offering advice and reasoning behind carrying a small blade.



peter

You're right, your opinion isn't the issue. I'm wondering why you took my question out of context to prove your point. I specifcally said 3" and you suggested a native over a military. You post seems like it's proving a point against mine when it's actually agreeing with my original post.
 
ignoramus said:
At what point do you believe that they'll be ineffective?
This is impossible to determine since there are degrees of effectiveness and it varries from person to person based on strength and accuracy. I do not see why this is an issue since neither of our arguements requires we know how small is too small. My arguement is that sub-3inch combat knives such as most Karambits, or the TDI are not too small to be ineffective. This is pretty much proven by reality and their track record.

ignoramus said:
Are you aware that there is a multitude of "experts" and "educated" people out there who haven't come to the same conclusions?
Yes I am. That is why I stated it. But most "experts" disagree with you. Strongly. And by "most" I mean virtually all of them.

ignoramus said:
If you're inexperienced in this field, how do you determine who the authority is when a large amount of people with experience can't agree on this?
There isn't a large amount of people disagreeing. They mostly agree. The results achieved by small combat knives are so known and consistant that it is hard to be an expert and not know that they are effective. Experts tend to know about reality and agree that reality exists.

ignoramus said:
We're actually talking about how much and what kind of damage needs to be inflicted on an individual for effective self defense. This makes the point relevent.
No we are not. We are talking about whether sub-3-inch combat knives are effective or not. They are. They can inflict enough damage to be effective. Most experts feel they are even more dangerous (to an attacker) than a larger knife. How small is too small is not being discussed. I am saying there are sub-3-inch knives that are effective SD knives. I am not saying all sub-3-inch knives are effective SD knives. I base a knife's effectiveness in SD on it's effectiveness in SD, not its blade length. And thus, finding a magic number under which no blade can be used for SD is pointless.

ignoramus said:
Now you're generalizing when I specifically stated at least 3 inches. How far it penetrates is definitely what's important here, but it must have enough blade to penetrate to the extent that it's effective.
Yes it does, and 3 inches (and less) is more than enough. Or rather, more than 3 inches is not required. That is why you were wrong, and that is why I corrected you.
 
In a lot of sd situations you're only gonna get one shot, and its gonna be up close. If you have the training a karambit is the best choice. Without training, the easiest option would be to stab. From this perspective the Yojimbo is the best choice. From a law enforcement perspective, I would go for a Manix or Delica. Those were designed with uses other than SD in mind, but can be effectively used for that purpose.
 
quick question - is the Yojimbo discontinued? somewhere i read it was or was on the verge of... i wouldnt pass up getting the yojimbo, but then again, i am training daily with my trainer and we are using the Karambit. anymore info on the yojimbo and why i should consider it?
 
outofgum said:
In a lot of sd situations you're only gonna get one shot, and its gonna be up close. If you have the training a karambit is the best choice. Without training, the easiest option would be to stab. From this perspective the Yojimbo is the best choice. From a law enforcement perspective, I would go for a Manix or Delica. Those were designed with uses other than SD in mind, but can be effectively used for that purpose.

I agree with Oouofgum and Pete1977.

Karambit might look special, but it could cause you trouble before you have a chance to pull it out. Any knife can hurt and kill if you use it right at the right time. All the special training can be out of the window in the heat of a fight. IMO, better to carry something that's ordinary-looking than some funny-looking bad-ass knife.
 
david, the karambit will not be carried because of its looks. the design of this knife is to slash and claw. i think it would be a very good SD knife, so i am highly considering getting one. people always say, in the right hands, etc... i wanna know this... how much training do you need to slash someone across the neck in a life/death struggle? dont get me wrong, in my training sessions, i have seen and used the karambit with my trainer, however, i was meaning to ask him this and didnt get around to it... it seems to me, once you master getting the karambit opened and held in hand the way you want it or train with it, it is very user friendly... how much training does one need to slash in certain areas though, ya know...
 
How much training do you need to execute a simple slash across a general region of the body? not much...

How much training do you need to aviod/deflect your attacker's moves, move into practical range for your slash without getting stuck, position attacker optimally for your slash, remove obstacles in the way of your slash, and, finally, execute your slash with optimum speed, power, and effect then either immobilize your attacker or retreat from them until said slash has terminal effect...all in fractions of a second? A whole lot of training IMHO
 
ok ok ok ok ok ok, bigb, i am stupid... hehe. great post man. hadnt thought of ALL of those things. some of them i was totally aware of but i hadnt thought about all of them. thanks again. i am making a copy of all of this thread and taking it to my training sessions. thanks again for the great help..

still can someone answer me on the yojimbo? are they about to be discontinued or does anyone know? also does anyone have one of these as they main carry piece?
 
ignoramus said:
You're right, your opinion isn't the issue. I'm wondering why you took my question out of context to prove your point. I specifcally said 3" and you suggested a native over a military. You post seems like it's proving a point against mine when it's actually agreeing with my original post.

ignoramus. my post is not directed at you. my post is answering a question you posed. that question is :

ignoramus said:
I respect your opinion, but it sounds like your just saying it's better without any rationale behind it. Would you mind elaborating on why you believe what I said is wrong and the smaller blade is better?

My answer to that question are the reasons mentioned above. It is a general answer to the qestion Would you mind elaborating on why you believe what I said is wrong and the smaller blade is better?

I apologise for what you gathered was my tone of the post. There is in fact no tone to it, it is simply an answer to a question.

Peter
 
bigbcustom said:
How much training do you need to execute a simple slash across a general region of the body? not much...

How much training do you need to aviod/deflect your attacker's moves, move into practical range for your slash without getting stuck, position attacker optimally for your slash, remove obstacles in the way of your slash, and, finally, execute your slash with optimum speed, power, and effect then either immobilize your attacker or retreat from them until said slash has terminal effect...all in fractions of a second? A whole lot of training IMHO

are we talking knife duelling?

the knife assaults i've seen were blitz-style attacks, with ample verbal warning and escalation before hand, offering the victim plenty of time to escape until the immediate assault, and the assault itself came from behind-

or, a fistfight that escalated into one person arming themselves with a small automatic, which NO ONE saw, until I found it on the floor afterwards. all parties vacated, and there was no knife injuries to our knowlege, and no mention of the attack in the paper.

Before you take knife-fighting or other martial art training, condition yourself to be aware of your surroundings, where you are, who is around you, etc. look and listen. clothing styles, tattoos, a knife clipped to a pocket, etc. listen to conversations. in the first assault I mentioned, which came after the second actually, the assailant actually said "go get the shank"

self-awareness is the first self defense skill you should master.

In either of the above anecdotes, martial arts training would have been no help. esp. in the second one mentioned.

Peter
 
i am sorry for provoking all this arguing shit over 2-3 inch blades.. who cares. both can kill someone and are dangerous. carry what you want, train and you will be safer than you would without a blade of any kind and without any training. ok i win!


seriously, my apologies for any drama caused on BF. now does anyone know anything or have any experience with the Yojimbo. i have yet to find out if my suspicions of this blade being discontinued.... i had also heard it was one of the spyderco blades that wasnt as durable as some of the others... is any of this factual?
 
Another vote for the Chinook II. It's a good edc knife, I can tell you that from first hand experience. I am no SD expert but have read only good things. I do know, however, it feels very good in the hand and gives a wide range of attacks/defenses (i guess that your opinion) without formal training.
 
i like the chinook. however, my 2 choices have been narrowed down to the Spyderco Karambit and the Yojimbo. i like the yojimbo for, like someone else stated, when all else fails and you just stab, this is a GREAT blade for just that. the karambit is a great blade for SD too IMO. however, all you can do with it is slash...i dont know...
 
Back
Top