In all seriousness, buddy, it would be pointless of me to elaborate on why I agree with his position, because I feel he elucidated that position perfectly. I wouldn’t have much to offer beyond it. I’m reluctant to mention him here, as it’s sort of painting a target on him, especially with what can be a pretty passionate topic, but he’s a good friend, and as a good friend
I feel obligated to throw him under this bus. Just know that I concur with him - right up until saying he won’t make them. I certainly will, because sometimes there’s more to a knife than being a functional tool. I keep threatening to write an article on what I describe as the ‘Talisman Effect’, but so far it’s eluded me.
Without further ado, here’s that observation from
Nathan the Machinist
“A Bowie is an anachronism. An ill defined concept of a knife without real engineering or optimization. First of all, what is a bowie? The ABS style bowie looks and feels impressive at a knife show and feels "light and lively" due to a low moment of inertia from distal taper and a stick tang and feels like a "fighter" when you pick it up and wave it around. I'm probably going to ruffle some feathers here, but in my opinion some of these don't really work that great as knives, and I'll tell you why. It isn't relevant in a modern context (it's not very good as a modern fighter) and it isn't useful or historically accurate in a classical context (that ain't a bowie). It isn't a good stabber, and it isn't a good chopper (the point and the balance are wrong) and as a fighter many of them would perform poorly in real combat.
A classic fighter would be more of a stabbing weapon. These don't feel "light and lively". They have a higher moment of inertia from a reinforced point, a pommel and even weighted quillons and were more about straight line stabbing, resisting deflection and defeating various forms of armor or heavy clothing. They weren't light and they weren't lively and didn't strike you as weightless when you picked them up, they had stout points, weighted pommels and were made to kill, not wave around. Often they were a defensive left hand weapon of opportunity while the right hand held something with reach.
A modern fighter also has a reinforced point and is also a secondary weapon. The demands of modern combat dictate something that can pry in addition to stab, and the primary weapon is a firearm. Again they're stout and one of these modern bowies would loose their dainty little point pretty quick. Modern knife fighting principals where no one has a sword (this is the 21st century, no one has a sword) more resembles a fist fight with grappling than fencing. While a modern fighter still needs to work in a fencing grip with the blade held in the hand at an angle to project reach in line with the arm (not 90 degrees to the arm like most of these bowies are designed to be held, what are they stabbing their own face?) modern fighters also need to work in a reverse grip with the edge out and shielding the arm. When an opponent catches or dodges a punch they get the blade. Stabbing with a blade held in this grip (a motion like an ice pick) requires a handle shape and length where the thumb can go over the end of the grip to prevent the hand from sliding over the blade. The placement of any guards, ramps and grip swells need to align with a hand in this position. A modern "bowie" fails miserably here.
Then there is the historical aspect. Even though a bowie knife is not optimized as a fighter compared to an engineered weapon, there is the nostalgic value. Except there isn't, that's false nostalgia, the real actual bowie knife was more of a big kitchen knife.
So, lets see: yes it is a knife and can be used as one, but compared to modern engineered alternatives it's not good at stabbing, chopping, cutting and fighting and the clip point is a hindrance skinning large game and it isn't historically meaningful, but it's pretty good at a snap cut, it looks cool and it feels "light and lively" in the hand at knife shows. I'm sorry, I don't mean to disparage those who make or collect these kinds of knives, but they're not very good in my opinion and there is no way I'm ever going to produce them.”
Matthew Gregory
, can you elaborate on why you agree with Nathan Carothers re the limitations of the stereotypical Bowie design? I seem to recall him concluding that it just not particularly good at anything, but I hesitate to paraphrase any further.
