Spyderco Forums

Not sure if we have the same knives in mind, but I don't think you'd get any of that if you were to use a caly 3 or military, neither are "tough folders" by any means.

I used a regular old Endura to shove back the bolt on an AR with a triple feed when the bolt couldn't be manually moved by hand or with a spent case etc. Worked fine for a purpose it certainly was not designed for and was a lot faster to deploy than a Extrema Ratio 185 RAO.

Personally if I was thrust into some fantasy scenario where I was whacking my way through cars, interior walls or legions of evil doers I'd rather have a hatchet than any Strider or Crusader Forge, or at least a Greyman or Busse. Most of the guys in the military who I have asked about knives said they mostly have Enduras or the Benchmade/CRKT equivalent and that guys with monsters knives tended to be retarded as "that guy."

jzmtl wrote:Not sure if we have the same knives in mind, but I don't think you'd get any of that if you were to use a caly 3.

It depends on the knives in question for sure. :)

I have used some lighter knives and all of what I posted happened to them.

And that was from cutting cardboard.

Dang 4 pages in less than a day

SUDS wrote:Dang 4 pages in less than a day

Must be a lot of emotion here to generate all that sound and fury. :p

Aimless wrote: Personally if I was thrust into some fantasy scenario where I was whacking my way through cars, interior walls or legions of evil doers I'd rather have a hatchet than any Strider or Crusader Forge, or at least a Greyman or Busse. Most of the guys in the military who I have asked about knives said they mostly have Enduras or the Benchmade/CRKT equivalent and that guys with monsters knives tended to be retarded as "that guy."

We're not in the military are we? We're knife nuts.

And if you can't envision a fantasy scenario where you'd need tough then you probably won't have the foresight to bring a hatchet for a scenario you did not anticipate. :p

chuck_roxas45 wrote:We're not in the military are we? We're knife nuts.

And if you can't envision a fantasy scenario where you'd need tough then you probably won't have the foresight to bring a hatchet for a scenario you did not anticipate. :p

You are still beating around the drum and accusing other people, with no direct argument in support of "tough" folders.

jzmtl wrote:You are still beating around the drum and accusing other people, with no direct argument in support of "tough" folders.

There actually can be no direct argument for this thread but only indirect ones like the question in the title of this thread. And no matter how they cut you still say "not good enough".

I have already said that if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....

And where did I accuse somebody? Seems to me you're the one accusing me of at least two things here.

And oh, and this is the thread where I don't have to make arguments in favor of the tough folders, it's you who has to make the counter arguments here.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:There actually can be no direct argument but only indirect ones like the title of this thread. And no matter how they cut you still say "not good enough".

Yes there is, I argued I prefer regular folders because they cut better in 99% or all of the tasks a folder is reasonably expected to do. You could start by telling us in which tasks (again, reasonable) a a tough folder would perform better.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:And where did I accuse somebody? Seems to me you're the one accusing me of at least two things here.

And oh, and this is the thread where I don't have to make arguments in favor of the tough folders, it's you who has to make the counter arguments here.

You have accused other people saying tough folder can't cut, which is taken out of context. You have also accused people of lacking foresight because they can't envision any scenario to need one, without any argument to back it up.

I HAVE made the counter argument, now it's your turn to back up yours.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:Must be a lot of emotion here to generate all that sound and fury. :p

Yep, and we know where a good portiono of that emotion is. :p :D

jzmtl wrote:Yes there is, I argued I prefer regular folders because they cut better in 99% or all of the tasks a folder is reasonably expected to do. You could start by telling us in which tasks (again, reasonable) a a tough folder would perform better.

Haven't you read previous threads? The tasks that tough folders excel in are tasks that you consider unreasonable. Ok, what 99 percent are you talking about? I bet you'll merely say cutting.

jzmtl wrote:You have accused other people saying tough folder can't cut, which is taken out of context. You have also accused people of lacking foresight because they can't envision any scenario to need one, without any argument to back it up.

It's not an accusation, it has been said and you're even saying it now. It's not taken out of context because what you are saying is that it can't cut as well as a thin folder 99 percent of the time. So you mean that it cuts only well enough 1 percent of the time. That's practically saying it doesn't cut.

And saying people will lack the foresight is again not an accusation it is a conclusion I make from the poster's statement about being unable to imagine scenarios.

jzmtl wrote:I HAVE made the counter argument, now it's your turn to back up yours.

All those word are not a counter argument. They are merely your opinion. And you're opinion is not more correct than the opinion of all others.

JNewell wrote:Yep, and we know where a good portiono of that emotion is. :p :D

Yes, I do admit I'm passionate about this, but this thread could not have gotten this far if I was the only one. :D :p

The emotion seems to come from both sides of the equation. I'm just wondering why.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:Yes, I do admit I'm passionate about this, but this thread could not have gotten this far if I was the only one. :D :p

The emotion seems to come from both sides of the equation. I'm just wondering why.

Problem is, if misinformation like you're constantly posting is allowed to go unanswered, some folks will take that to mean it's been accepted as fact. You keep dodging the issue that, aside from a few tasks that few people perform, and even fewer perform on a regular basis, a blade over 3mm thick is neither necessary or desirable and, while it may "get the job done" requires more effort and does an inferior job. It's never been a question of "can't cut", it's always been a question of "doesn't cut what most people need to cut as well".

The Deacon wrote:Problem is, if misinformation like you're constantly posting is allowed to go unanswered, some folks will take that to mean it's been accepted as fact.

So now it's misinformation? What misinformation is that? That a thick blade can cut almost as well as a thin blade? The izula slices quite well with a .156 thickness. Does that qualify? probably not since it's not a "tough folder".

The Deacon wrote:You keep dodging the issue that, aside from a few tasks that few people perform, and even fewer perform on a regular basis, a blade over 3mm thick is neither necessary or desirable and, while it may "get the job done" requires more effort and does an inferior job. It's never been a question of "can't cut", it's always been a question of "doesn't cut what most people need to cut as well".

Maybe they do cut well enough for some people and you just don't like to admit that fact. I wonder why CRK's, striders, and ZTs have a large market and command a fairly high market price?

How well and how big is the difference, might be the crucial issue here. Better? sure, that's been granted, but how much better? The answer can only be subjective.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:We're not in the military are we? We're knife nuts.

And if you can't envision a fantasy scenario where you'd need tough then you probably won't have the foresight to bring a hatchet for a scenario you did not anticipate. :p

Goodness Chuck.

Do you see the vibe this throws? You may not but it's pretty brazen wording.

The problem is this invites what you call "emotion" or "attacks" which quickly has you cycling back on the victim persona.

I don't have a problem with you. I have my beliefs and logic (similar to Paul posted) which like some has been side-stepped. If you want to debate you have to address the counter-point. Otherwise your wasting energy and just making noise.

Like I said many times before, I could care less about te topic because most of us have "hard use folders" too. Keep poking dogs though and someone is going to lash out at ya. Then the victim card won't work in the poker hand :p .

PS: Science lesson - a thin blade is still very tough vertically. Same physics to why a nail can be driven into wood. You just can't pry and torque it laterally like a fool. The locks are not quite as strong but cutting with the edge (not the spine) guarantees safe fingers.

What victim persona are you talking about? Do you think I'm playing the victim here? It's just giving as good as I get.

So I'll ask this again, should we wind this one down now? Or do we go on?

This is kinda tiresome. I'm out.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:What victim persona are you talking about? Do you think I'm playing the victim here? It's just giving as good as I get.

So I'll ask this again, should we wind this one down now? Or do we go on?

Really? Last I checked you get a steaming debate going on topics more heated than politics then quickly call people who "attacking" you. Just because you get a steaming pile of logic dropped on you and you can't counter it doesn't mean people are getting "emotional".

Maybe I'm constructing this cycle out of thin air. If someone wants to negate it I'll quickly edit my accusation.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:This is kinda tiresome. I'm out.

You're telling US? Four pages circular logic would wear out my cat.

Nevermind, not directly related to thread question

Wow Blerv you are drawing me back in with that.

SUDS wrote:Dang 4 pages in less than a day

This was posted.

Resulting in this exchange.

chuck_roxas45 wrote:Must be a lot of emotion here to generate all that sound and fury. :p

So I replied with the above.

Then this came back.

JNewell wrote:Yep, and we know where a good portiono of that emotion is. :p :D

chuck_roxas45 wrote:Yes, I do admit I'm passionate about this, but this thread could not have gotten this far if I was the only one. :D :p

The emotion seems to come from both sides of the equation. I'm just wondering why.

So now we come to your post.

Blerv wrote:Really? Last I checked you get a steaming debate going on topics more heated than politics then quickly call people who "attacking" you. Just because you get a steaming pile of logic dropped on you and you can't counter it doesn't mean people are getting "emotional".

Maybe I'm constructing this cycle out of thin air. If someone wants to negate it I'll quickly edit my accusation.



You're telling US? Four pages circular logic would wear out my cat.

Where's the steaming pile of logic in those?

You could always have stopped long before, but there seems to be a lastworditis going around. :p