Which knives have really been endorsed by the army - at some time?

It was. He built that one himself. But back when there was a Sith order, they were issued lightsabers. Another difference is that Sith lightsabers use manufactured focusing jewels, while the Jedi use naturally occurring ones. Neither Jedi nor Sith really count as the army, however.
 
High-speed and lightsabers aside, I think we would be hard-pressed to find anything literally "endorsed" by our military. "Selected"; "approved": "purchased"; "issued"; "appreciated" -- not "endorsed."

As for ""Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder," that's fashionable cynicism. I get it. Very traditional. I am sure Roman Legionaries agreed about their swords: "Could have used Primus but went for old Tercius 'cause he saved them a Mark a sword." However, it would be more meaningful if it was, "The specifications were either set to save money over function or were ignored." No. Guess not. Doesn't have the same ring to it. "Made by the lowest bidder" it is.
 
Thomas Linton said:
High-speed and lightsabers aside, I think we would be hard-pressed to find anything literally "endorsed" by our military. "Selected"; "approved": "purchased"; "issued"; "appreciated" -- not "endorsed."

As for ""Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder," that's fashionable cynicism. I get it. Very traditional. I am sure Roman Legionaries agreed about their swords: "Could have used Primus but went for old Tercius 'cause he saved them a Mark a sword." However, it would be more meaningful if it was, "The specifications were either set to save money over function or were ignored." No. Guess not. Doesn't have the same ring to it. "Made by the lowest bidder" it is.
Click to expand...

Thank you for intelligently addressing that misleading statement.

My M4 was built by the lowest bidder... That could meet the quality standards and production requirements. So Colt it is. And contrary to popular belief, it is the best weapon for the job right now.

You've never met a more gullible customer than a fresh out of basic training private who has a bank account full of money and the freedom to do whatever he wants for the first time in his life.
 
It's sad, actually. A common site on bases: sports cars and sports bikes. An uncommon site: someone with money in his TSP and who takes full advantage of the G.I. Bill when he gets out. Just sad.
 
stephenthesuave said:
My M4 was built by the lowest bidder... That could meet the quality standards and production requirements. So Colt it is. And contrary to popular belief, it is the best weapon for the job right now.
Click to expand...
Too bad about those quality standards and ballistics

The US military is still testing other calibers and platforms. Why they would want to move forward from the best, that creates a quandary.
 
gentlemen, we've fallen into the same trap as usual... BEST??? how do you define best and why would we assume the m4 is the best weapon... end of story? that's the same thing as saying CPM S30V is the best steel for a knife. some may think it is, but would you make a hard use knife out of it, like a chopper or machete? Nope! and the same can be said for our hero, the M4. it's a satisfactory weapon for short ranges (out to 300 give or take with the new ammo) but the older AR15 had a better reach... wouldn't that make it "better"? ...not for close quarters, or what about urban environments with soft walls like ours at home? wouldn't a combat shotgun or HK-MP5 in 9mm be better so as not to penetrate the walls and cause civilian casualty or collateral damage issue? not to mention the fact that it's been widely addressed that 5.56mm Nato rounds (.223) have been up for debate as not being sufficient for taking down humans over distance... it will, but sometimes it takes multiple shots as the rounds dont have the same impact as 7.62(good ole .308) and tumble differently when they hit flesh and bone. so would that make the 7.62 better? not neccesarily.... just saying, be careful with the "best" statement. it should be one of the blade forums four letter words (the "B" word)
 
I said it was the best "for the job right now". Which is to say, the best weapon for general issue to the military for the current conflict(s).

And I'm not "assuming" anything... I've been training with the m4 for 2.5 years and that is what my opinion is formed from. Ive fired about 3k rounds through the one I'm issued in the last 8 months and haven't had a non-magazine related failure. About 1800 of those rounds were fired on two separate occasions where we fired ~900 rounds without cleaning.

What's your opinion based on?
 
When it comes to picking a servicable combat knife, I would trust any of you guys over your average Combat Troops, Special Forces, or SEALs. You guys are the experts.:thumbup:
 
A deployed unit also is given a pot of money to buy whatever the unit deems necessary for the deployment. So the supply sergeant can buy whatever he wants for the unit. What he buy depends on his taste, the approval of the CO, request from the soldiers, and what is available in the market. Some units buy knives for their soldiers. If the supply sergeant knows anything about knives, then the unit get good knives. If the supply sergeant is clueless about knives, the unit get crappy knives.

Our unit bought some really low quality stuffs to include axes that were not heat treated at all, furniture that fall apart in a few months, and shovels that broke after few times of use.
 
100eyes said:
"Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder."
Click to expand...
Very deceptive statement. all military (U.S.) Equiptment is built with top quality materials to government spec's. The company that can meet govt. required quality with the materials specified by the Govt. lowest Bidder gets the contract.

lowest bidder doesn't mean lowest quality
 
stephenthesuave said:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=44869
Click to expand...

dear stephenthesuave, i'd like to not turn this into a pissing contest as i don't care much for guns and ballistics and you've obviously done your homework on the matter and have fired the M4 on more than one occasion in your 2.5 years, so I'll leave it at that... that being the case, you could use a less aggresive tone and you probably wouldn't get such a cold response in the future. I've read all of the blogs and forums, and on paper at least you are probably correct, from what I have read. The problem with testing is in the control measures. when you compare a high speed projectile such as the 5.56 at around 3000 feet per second it generates 1000ft/lbs power where as the 9mm at around 1400fps develops in the neighbourhood of 375ft/lbs, now apples to apples, that's a lot more bang for your buck... assuming your 5.56 doesn't fragment or tumble (which they are prone to do... hence the study of replacing it as a man dropper). That being the case, a lot depends on your ammunition selection and whatnot as well, with regards to jacketed/hollo point and the like. i'm was only speaking from my own personal experience on the matter and I have seen 5.56 penetrate cinderblock walls, and body armour, when 9mm wouldn't. again, it depends on a lot of factors, so let's just agree to disagree and get back to the knives.
 
Iyonk said:
Victorinox soldier alox and OH 111mm models are true army knives thats been used by swiss, german, dutch and many other countries...
Click to expand...

But... but... them don't say so in their website? :(
Nor they are black coated, titanium framelock, assisted opening, out the front, out the back, out the anti-terrorist. :(
 
rustyrazor said:
dear stephenthesuave, i'd like to not turn this into a pissing contest as i don't care much for guns and ballistics and you've obviously done your homework on the matter and have fired the M4 on more than one occasion in your 2.5 years, so I'll leave it at that... that being the case, you could use a less aggresive tone and you probably wouldn't get such a cold response in the future. I've read all of the blogs and forums, and on paper at least you are probably correct, from what I have read. The problem with testing is in the control measures. when you compare a high speed projectile such as the 5.56 at around 3000 feet per second it generates 1000ft/lbs power where as the 9mm at around 1400fps develops in the neighbourhood of 375ft/lbs, now apples to apples, that's a lot more bang for your buck... assuming your 5.56 doesn't fragment or tumble (which they are prone to do... hence the study of replacing it as a man dropper). That being the case, a lot depends on your ammunition selection and whatnot as well, with regards to jacketed/hollo point and the like. i'm was only speaking from my own personal experience on the matter and I have seen 5.56 penetrate cinderblock walls, and body armour, when 9mm wouldn't. again, it depends on a lot of factors, so let's just agree to disagree and get back to the knives.
Click to expand...

Apologies to the OP for my end of the thread drift... And I'm done with terminal ballistics discussions here.
 
I know we're not talking sexy here, but haven't the Victorinox soldier and trooper knives been issued to personnel in a number of nation's armies, like the Swiss, German, Dutch, and others? Sorry if it's been previously mentioned, but I missed it.
 
I served in the Marine Corps from 88-92 and Desert Storm. I was not issued anything other than a bayonet. We purchased our own fighting knives. Our CO basically let us take any knife we wanted to the field. I bought my own Ka-Bar, dyed the sheath and handle black. That knife is in my gun safe and will be passed down to my son.
LL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top