If you're looking for a knife that incorporates some of the features of the CQC and the Gemini, I may have some ideas.
Look at "Zero Tolerance". They are Kershaw's high-end/hard-use division. Their designs tend toward the "tactical knife" end of things, closer to Emerson than Jasmine, but that may be something you're looking for.
Two other companies also deserve mention: Fox Knives, which actually incorporates about half a dozen different brands under it's umbrella. They're made in Italy, and they have a reputation for good quality.
The second company is "Lionsteel", which also manufactures their knives in Italy. Of particular interest is the SR-1 line.
With Titanium scales in various colors, it pretty well splits the difference between Emerson's chunky utility folder and the sleek art of the Kizer.
Just be aware that these knives aren't cheap. All of them are above the $100 mark, which took me a long time to work up to, too. At that price point, you get good warranties, quality materials, consistent fit and finish, and blades that are heat-treated properly. I understand if you're not quite ready to spend that much on a knife, but when you are, you will find it's worth it.
Interesting choices, because the two could hardly be more different. Both have 3" blades, but that's about it.
The black one is indeed, an Emerson. A Mini-CQC-7, with a tanto point, partial serrations, and the trademarked "Wave opening" feature, all things I don't need on a knife.
I bought it because I felt compelled to. That sounds odd, until it happens.
The gray one is a Kizer Gemini, a faithful reproduction of Ray Laconico's "Jasmine", one of the few knives that has ever made me say "oh my God!" the first time I saw it. I knew I would never be able to afford a full custom Jasmine, so when I saw the Gemini, $170 (as opposed to $500 and up) left my bank account as fast as I could type in the credit card number.
The CQC-7 is a chisel-ground blade, making it easier to sharpen. The primary and secondary bevels are flat, and the blade is 1/8" thick at the spine.
The Gemini blade also has flat ground bevels, but they extend right to the spine, which starts out 3/32" thick, and tapers towards the point.
It is a flipper, but there is no spring to assist the blade, because it doesn't need one: it rides on bearings, instead of washers, so there is very little friction to impede the momentum of the blade. There is also a ball detent to hold it closed.
While the Emerson has a ball bearing pressed into the liner to help hold the blade closed, it doesn't really need to. The blade rides on washers, and it opens and closes smoothly, but you have to move the blade the whole way with your thumb. Luckily, everything is well located, so that's an easy job, even for my small hands.
The Gemini is a titanium frame lock, with a steel insert to contact the blade tang. The CQC is a titanium liner-lock, with no insert. The steel/titanium contact is slightly "sticky", thanks to the mechanical properties of Ti.
The G10 handle slabs on the CQC are nicely textured, without being rough. The slabs of the Gemini may look smooth (the fit and finish are very good), but there is a subtle friction to them. I imagine if you were sweating hard, or your hands were wet for grimmer reasons, the Jasmine's production cousin would feel quite slick, but this is not a knife for Serious Business.
Emerson's pocket clip is a wonderful thing. It's easy to draw, easy to stow, doesn't snag on other clothing or nearby objects, and keeps the knife bolted to the side of my pocket. Other manufacturers should simply source their clips from Emerson, drill holes to match, and waste their time "improving" other things.
The Gemini's clip screams "Made in China!" It was, but that's not the point. They were so faithful to the execution of the Jasmine, but then they tried to save fifteen cents by putting on that boring pocket clip. No matter, the clip for the Ursa Minor fits the Gemini too.
The essential job of a knife is to cut things, and by that measure, they are both equal. It's the details of how they go about it that make them different.
The Gemini is kind of like what you would get if Ferrari designed and engineered a car to be mass-produced by Fiat-Chrysler America: it's damn good, and one of the best-looking things out there. It doesn't matter to me that it doesn't feel quite as special as a full custom, but I would still treat it carefully, and never use it even close to it's full capability.
The Mini-CQC-7 is a bit like the Ford Ranger, excepting of course for the fact that Emerson still builds them in America. Never mind that. The point is, it's a group of features that don't seem all that interesting, if you consider them by themselves. But, like the truck, it's more than the sum of it's parts, and everything works together to make a knife that isn't pretty, but feels far more capable than it's size or spec sheet.
Appealing to my ego by asking me to post collection photos. This pleases me.
These are the ones that I carry most, and not all of them have all of the attributes I've described because it turns out that there is no production knife that exactly meets all of my criteria. I'm still fighting the idea of a bespoke custom. That and I think it's highly improbable that Rick Hinderer and Andrew Demko would collaborate.
I'm not going to run on about each of them. If you like the looks of one, tell me which and I'll say more.
Follow up, anyone may respond, the more the better. I just would like to know what your idea of a perfect tactical knife is. As a newbie to knives, I'm still trying to figure out what features are important to me. I appreciate very much the Emerson design that have the wave feature (I don't know if that's important to you or if you think it's just a gimmick, let me know please) , but I also think it's awesome that the crkt knife that I posted can be taken apart without any tools (or maybe I'm just easily amused). What do YOU look for in a tactical pocket knife?
Well, it has a front and rear sight and goes bang. Knives are terrible self defense tools. Look into pepper spray, ccws, folding batons, or a very bright flashlight.
Roy said it, but I feel the need to expand on this, because self-defense, and armed combat in general, is serious business. Any time you begin to talk about a piece of metal entering another person's soft tissues, not only are there moral and ethical questions (which I will not address, ever), but in today's world, there are legal concerns which should be left to lawyers.
I'm going to link to a couple of other articles down below. They contain descriptions which may be unsettling for some readers. I'm trying to use reasonably well-regarded sources, but we're discussing the subject of bodily harm, so there's some possibility of "squick".
I am not a lawyer, or anything close to it. I know enough about the legal situations that can result from the use of knives (or guns) for self-defense, to know that I will never carry or use either one as an SD tool.
The problem comes from something called "disparity of force". If you want to read an explanation of it, this article:
Is a place to start. I've included the link so that you can run it through your browser's filtering programs to check it's legitimacy and SSID certificates, if you choose. The information I took away from the article is that you can go from victim to aggressor in the time it takes for you to take one step forward, and I don't trust myself to think that clearly in "fight or flight" mode. I grant you, a mugger is unlikely to have smart legal representation, but I'm trying to address worst-case scenarios.
The next problem comes from something called the Tueller Drill, or the "21 foot rule".
This is the time it takes to draw, target, and fire, your gun, at an attacker. Now, this is in a clear space, and everybody knows what's going on. If you're enjoying a day at the river, or a night in a crowded venue, your attacker can walk right up alongside you, and put a bullet through your ear, or a knife through your kidney, before you ever know something is about to happen. Again, worst-case scenarios.
So, it takes just as much time to get out a knife as it does to get out a gun. The problem is, your knife is only effective at kicking distance, which means that if you can hurt him with it, he can hurt you too.
A bullet works very differently from a knife when it enters the human body. I can't find a link to information about this, but I will try to summarize based on what I remember.
A knife is a long, thin piece of metal, and the wound track it causes is long and thin, as well. Yes, I know, there are places where you can open carry a fixed blade, but I'm not going to give you any advantages to work with, here: all I'm assuming is that you have a legal-length folding knife which will leave a wound track which is around half an inch wide, and three or four inches long.
Bullets are designed to hit with enough force to enter the body. Then, they slow down, the head expands, and they tumble, making odd-shaped wound tracks that damage a larger volume of soft tissue.
If you want more, "wound ballstics" will send your browser in the right direction.
The point of all this gory detail is that a bullet causes more damage, and does it faster, than a knife ever will. Unless you chop off a person's head.
We can argue back and forth about "what ifs" for days, and there are threads about it everywhere. Bladeforums has a sub-forum called "Practical Tactical", where you can watch "Mercop" and many others argue about lighting, distance, tactics and techniques, all day long. If you want to read some well-written articles on the legal aspects of guns and knives for self-defense, look up "Massad Ayoob". He's the guy being interviewed in the "disparity of force" article. His work is on firearms, but it's the same thing: gun or knife, somebody is bleeding out, and you need to do everything you can to stay out of prison.
So, what I look for in a tactical pocket knife has nothing to do with hurting other people. The design of a "fighting knife", another term that I don't like, is generally thin and sharp on both sides, with just enough metal behind the point to keep it from breaking on bone.
All right, I've said enough. The knives I like are pretty much everything that a tactical knife is not: flat-ground wharncliffe or spear-point blades without pronounced jimping or large guards. I'm going to climb down off my soapbox now, thanks for listening, everybody!
Last Edit: Nov 29, 2017 6:21:25 GMT -8 by Shorttime
Pssshh. I don't get to do this much, so I feel like a kid who's just learned a magic trick. On the other hand, the way the Internet works is that you say something which isn't quite accurate, and people with the correct information show up to set you straight, so "thank you" to Roy, for teaching me something, too.
Depends on the knife. They have some generally good knives, and some..... really odd, knives, at a whole bunch of different prices. It would be difficult to summarize their entire inventory, because it is so diverse.
I've had a few Bokers, and I've read other people's thoughts on them. Their quality control is about the same as everybody else's, which means you can be sure you're going to get what you pay for.
Last Edit: Nov 26, 2017 15:08:51 GMT -8 by Shorttime
Great! How do you feel about liner lock versus frame lock? A certain YouTuber says that his friend was cut because the liner lock failed, implying that a frame lock may be safer? And he also showed that a liner lock is thinner than a frame lock.
Right. This is the "Facebook sound bite version". Further down is the stuff you don't have to read.
Lock strength doesn't matter in the real world. If you're going to be splitting wood, or self-extricating from a building or vehicle, there are specialized tools for that.
Lock type doesn't matter in the real world.
Blade bevel shape and blade thickness are what do the cutting.
Heat treat is what makes a blade hold an edge longer. Steel chemistry plays a smaller role.
cookie break
This is the "blah blah blah, you talk too much, Shorty", version:
The liner lock versus frame lock debate is like the 9mm versus .45 debate among pistol enthusiasts. You could also argue similar points about pull-on versus lace-up boots, and blondes versus brunettes.
As far as I know, nobody has been able to find a way to test lock strength in a way that allows one knife to be compared to another, but also reflects real-world use. Cold Steel does destructive testing, and there is a video where Benchmade tests an Adamas to failure (spoiler: the Axis lock fails, but it jams with the blade still open. If you were using it, there would not be any danger to your fingers). But these tests aren't quite "real world", because they are pushing against the lock in one direction, and knife locks are at their strongest when they're resisting force that's straight-on to the cutting edge, or straight-on to the spine.
The problem is, nobody cuts things in a laboratory-perfect way: people tend to "hook" the cut slightly right or left, and once you introduce lateral torque, you screw up your testing results.
A properly-designed liner or frame lock will "fail safe". It bends in toward the other handle slab, jamming the blade open, and now you have a fixed blade. I have yet to hear of one that fails in the other direction, letting the blade swing closed. If you can find evidence of a knife that has a "fold in" failure, I would be interested to see it.
The reason frame/line locks fold in is usually more subtle. Let's say you're fixin' to cut something heavy, like the kind of half-inch thick industrial rubber that's used for skirting on conveyor belts, so stone stays on the belt instead of bouncing all over. So you get a good, tight grip on your frame lock knife, and start to shove it through with everything you've got.
The edge is actually pretty dull by this point, but rather than doing the sensible thing, you decide to power through the cut, and as you twist your wrist a little, the death-grip you have on your knife pushes the lock tab out away from the face, and you feel the blade start to unlock. You stop dead for a moment, and decide that a trip to the sharpening stone really is a good idea.
This little story may or may not have been based on personal experience. The point is, since these locks rely on lateral torque from your thumb to unlock them, unintended lateral torque ("twisting" the knife) can put enough sideways pressure on the lock tab to move it.
Some people (including me) would start to wonder if a lock-back or similar thing is the better answer.
Maybe....?
The lock-back/back-lock/Triad lock is stronger than a frame/liner, in those laboratory rooms: the blade breaks before the lock fails. If absolute lock strength is all you're looking for, then we've arrived at an answer.
But.
Every knife is the sum of it's parts, and it's a compromise between strength and cutting ability. Where your needs fall along the spectrum from slicer to splitting maul depends on what you're using the knife for, and how often you figure on being willing to sharpen.
Last Edit: Nov 26, 2017 7:13:18 GMT -8 by Shorttime: Edited because this is the Internet
Seventy two dollars is quite the jump from your original stated price point. This is how it begins, and I am thrilled to be an enabler.
You will also see a difference in quality.
Now. In this case, Youtube is going to be a better resource than anybody here, because the Homefront really is something new in the world of production knives.
But not necessarily better.
I can't make that decision for you. I don't need to field-strip my folder and clean out the gunk. If you need that feature, then it may be the right thing. Or, if it really just speaks to you: I've had knives come home with me for no other reason than because I felt I should.
As for Emerson's "CQC-" designations, I have no idea what the convention is. But that's never stopped me from speculating.
I guess the CQC-7 is the one that's been around the longest, followed by the -8, then the -6 and the -5.
Apparently, there is also a -10, and a -15. There are various letter suffixes after the number, for if the blade is coated, satin finish, or stone wash. The ones with serrations have a letter, and there are some custom versions with different handle slab materials. Those are the expensive ones.
Forget it. Think I'll try your suggestion of either gerber paraframe or kershaw-emerson. If you had to choose between the two, what would it be?
The Kershaw/Emerson. They pay attention to their heat-treating protocols, and they are getting some of the best performance of anybody out of the 8Cr14MoV and similar "alphabet soup" steels that you find at these prices.
I spent an awful lot of money on $20 knives, because I didn't know any better, and because if I saw something I liked, I could buy it: who cares? It's twenty bucks.
I learned what I liked, and I slowly moved on to more expensive knives. I'm fighting hard to stay below $200 now, but I will still purchase some in the 40-60 range, because there are good knives to be found there, too.
There are merits to the "buy once, cry once" philosophy, but from what I've seen, people don't think that way: they have to learn by experience, and that often means learning where their personal cost-to-value zone is, by starting with the cheap stuff, and working their way up. The same could be said of boots, booze, knives, watches, flashlights....
Booze! I said booze!
I'm not accusing you of being a snob, Coupe. Believe me, I would be there with you if I didn't have offspring-related priorities. But I'm not going to sit here and preach the same old sermon to somebody about "well, if you're willing to spend a little more....", because that way lies madness. If a beginner wants to spend $20 on a knife, then I'll do my best to find something decent at that price point. I know it won't take long before they talk themselves up by five dollars. Then another five dollars. It's only a little more expensive, why not?
Well, Coupe goes for the custom knives, so his idea of "quality" is different from mine.
When we talk about "quality" without putting any other words alongside it, things can get awfully confused. Knives continue to get better as they get more expensive, but there is a point of diminishing returns, around the $120 mark. After that, you don't see the big improvements in fit and finish that you see as you go from $20, to $40, to $60, and so on.
I'm going to go backwards through your list, because this is the Internet, and I can.
7) Serrations are a personal choice. I don't like 'em, because they snag in the cut. People who advocate for serrations say that they will keep cutting even when the rest of the blade has gotten too dull, but it will be an ugly cut. With a ceiling of $20, you may want to have them, because you will need to touch the sharpening stone more often.
6) I don't know what kind of training you have with a knife. If you don't, get some. There is enough text to fill a library on the subject of self-defense with edged tools, and in general, my advice for a $20 SD knife is: don't.
Just don't. You get what you pay for, and trusting your life to a $20 knife is... undervaluing your mortality, to put it nicely.
5) 3" blade seems to be about the sweet spot for everyday, and has the advantage of being legal in most places.
4) The knob is a "thumb stud", although I personally like the disk that you see on Emerson knives. Being able to open the knife by snapping your wrist is really a matter of making sure the pivot screw isn't too tight.
I don't recommend it. There is a controversy right now about "gravity knives", which allows police officers to call it a "gravity knife", if they can get it to open by flicking their wrist. Then, they charge you with a weapons felony. The state of New York is infamous for this, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it go on in other places.
3) "Holds a decent edge" is a matter of heat treat, edge geometry, what you're cutting, and personal preference.
2) Hair shaving sharp out of the box, at the $20 level, is purely a matter of chance. That being said, if you want a knife that sharp, you can learn how to get a knife that sharp. Start with "Murray Carter" in the Youtube search bar, and plan to be there for a while.
1) Ah yes, the central challenge. Here we go:
The Kershaw Emerson 60740. I don't know why the hell they give them numbers, instead of names, but it's worth a look.
Some of Kershaw's other offerings may appeal to you, although they climb out of the $20 range pretty quickly.
I'm going to bring up Gerber knives. That's right, they don't just make baby food.
Joking. The two companies aren't related.
Gerber knives makes some stuff that falls into your price range. Just be aware that the edge-holding qualities are not much to speak of. Some people swear by the Gerber Paraframe, and it may be just the thing you're looking for. Among the knife snobs over at a certain Forum (for) Blades, the Paraframe is considered the "best worst knife" out there right now.
There is a company called "Bad Blood", and their knives aren't too bad, for what they are.
Sanrenmu and Enlan Knives, our friends form overseas. Some people like them, some people aren't impressed by them, and some despise them for making copies of the Chris Reeve Sebenza. I would say they're a little overpriced for what you get, and if you shop at the "value" end of companies that have a tax ID number in the States, you'll get more knife per dollar.
Finally, we come to the Maxpedition "Ferox", the last picture in your original post. I have no personal experience with this knife, but it's probably good stuff. The rest of their gear seems to be a good value for the money, but I think you'll find the Kershaw Emerson that I mentioned earlier is comparable to the Ferox in the way of numbers, for a lower price.
If you're willing to buy used, you can lurk the Ebay, and find something that's been "pre-loved". This possibly allows you to get a knife that MSRP'ed for more than you want to pay.
Welcome, by the way. This is a deep, deep, hole you're climbing into.
Last Edit: Nov 19, 2017 12:33:51 GMT -8 by Shorttime
This is the Kizer Assist, a collaboration with Justin Gingrich. It's a knife I've had my eye on for some time, but the cost was always a little high for me.
Last Sunday, my random Internet luck led me to a reputable supplier where they were on sale for less than half of MSRP.
Yessir.
I have always liked it, because the Assist looks like it would feel a lot like Hinderer's XM, without the Hinderer cost. Now that I've had a chance to get my grubby little paws on it, it does.
It's a marvel of packaging, squeezing a 3” cutting edge into a little bit more space than a mini-Grip. The Batum also has a 3” blade, which will give you some idea of how much variability is possible.
The blade is a little thicker than Benchmade's. High-strength metallurgy is fine, but more steel inspires more confidence.
The bevel grinds are nearly perfect, and out of the box, it almost shaves hair, which is better than I can usually manage on my own.
The logo is crisp, which is not a big deal, but it's a general indication of quality.
The thumb stud looks cheap. I like the knife enough that it doesn't bother me terribly, I would like to see something different, maybe with checkering across the top instead of the smaller knob, and the same color coating as the blade.
I want a different pivot pin. A chain ring bolt, ideally, but I want chain ring bolts for nearly every pivot pin. Still, the Lovejoy coupling looks out of place. I can get a flat blade driver in there if I need to tighten the pivot, so I can live with it.
There is a spring in there, and it rattles when the blade is deployed. Time will tell if I let it in, or not.
Usually, I pull the spring out first thing. This one pivots on washers, so there is some friction to keep the spring from firing the blade too hard. The odd part is that it makes it easier to fold the blade up too, so I'm conflicted about the assist in the Assist.
Lockup is early, but very solid. No blade movement, no lock stick, and the lock is easy to release.
Pocket clips make or break a knife for me. It seems all right for now, but it takes me some time to make up my mind. It's shaped roughly like a Benchmade or Cold Steel clip, so it should be tight enough to keep the knife in place. It's already getting some snail trails on it, and I loves me some wear marks.
Backspacer seams are another detail that I pay attention to. As you can see, they're not perfect, but the gap is even along it's length, and about the same on both sides. Now that I look, the one scale is slightly darker than the other.
I don't know about the glass breaker. It's out of the way, and it doesn't detract from the appearance or function of the knife, so I'll overlook it.
The Assist checks all the boxes for me: sturdy pocket clip, great ergonomics, good flipping action, etc, etc. I like modern folders with tactical design influences, and this one has them, without going too far into the world of Triple Black Oper8tor.
So why do I feel that it isn't quite right?
Part of it is the weight. It's very light, and I have trouble taking a knife seriously, if it doesn't have a certain amount of... inertia.
Part of it is the size. There is an expectation (for me, anyway), that a knife with those tactical cues ought to be able to take on tasks that aren't strictly cutting, and an assumption about the market segment such knives are aimed at, which is belied by the feeling that the Assist is... dainty.
I'm not an expert on hard use knives, I'm just some guy on the Internet, with strong opinions about things, and a willingness to put his foot in his mouth. The Assist is a quality product, and Kizer has paid attention to the details. It will be in my regular rotation because I like the ergonomics, I like how it carries, and I like the “tactical look”.
But it will always feel like it aspires to more than it can deliver.
Last Edit: Nov 11, 2017 13:47:45 GMT -8 by Shorttime
Reprising an earlier thread, in which I dick around with background colors and light in photos.
CRKT's Bronze Ripple continues to fascinate me, because of the way the scales pick up light. Unfortunately, capturing it properly in photos is really tough. Under the right light, it has a very warm, rich look that you don't get with stainless steel, or even brass.
So, I tried to figure it out.
White background, top down and angled shots.
Um, no. Very flat, and lots of shadow. Not at all what I was looking for.
Well, now it's starting to pick up the light, so it doesn't just look brown. Lots of glare though, so I tried anther angle.
Still messing with the angle of photography. Little steps.
I was going to try a black background, anyway. Still too much glare.
Again with the glare, but the color is richer.
These photos are unfiltered. I could probably get somewhere by mucking with contrast and whatnot, but I wanted to see what I could do without it.
Off to the side, a little. This is better.
Pretty close, now. The bronze is very warm, and there is very little glare. Let's swap backgrounds, once more.
Wow. On the one hand, it is very warm, and rich. On the other hand, it's too much. Some filters will give you a look like a watercolor painting, or a pastel. This looks as if it's been filtered, but in a way that's trying too hard to look un-retouched. I don't think I like it.