Josey said:
Geez, I hate to disagree with Joe -- kind of like arguing with Einstein about general relativity. But I will. I'm also going to argue with you, fnmag. I guess I'm just cranky this morning. I personally think the wave feature is close to worthless. If you practice with it constantly, you can open it faster than other knives, but you increase the chance of dropping it during a high-stress situation. (The approach to the draw and mount is critical and requires a calm concentration, something you are not likely to possess when under attack.) Plus, to open the knife with the wave, you have to pull the knife backwards, away from the attack. An axis lock is faster to open AND deploy than a wave. But a good thumb hole or stud is nearly as good.
Thanks for the props (to you and everyone else who commented!
). Do disagree, that what makes this interesting! On the wave, the first question I always ask: if you think the wave is no easier to open than a stud or hole, have you pressure-tested it? With the "bad guy" really rushing at you? Most people haven't, which is why I ask -- without the pressure, I was lukewarm on the wave myself. Regarding having to pull the knife backwards with the wave, two points. 1. I've found that to be only a disadvantage in theory. In practice, the critical problem is getting the knife out and open, whether the knife is in front of you or at your side rarely makes a difference in the outcome of the drill (just a drill, but still). 2. You have to draw the knife back only to draw into forward grip. If you favor reverse grip or pakal (I favor the latter), the wave will allow you to draw forward! I assume this is not the case for the original poster, but something to keep in mind.
Without pressure, I would have agreed with you that a stud or hole is nearly as good. But the more pressure we applied in the drills, the more the wave pulled ahead (and for me, the hole came next; as I said, the stud became useless and I resorted to wrist-flicking my 710)
But, the Military is better, with it's long, pointy, flat-ground blade. I cuts better. It penetrates better. It's stronger. I know, fnmag, you don't like liners from reading on the internet, but the Military has an excellent liner that is easy to use and very strong. If you're worried about breaking this liner, you probably should have a fixed blade. The Manix would be a great choice if you don't mind the size and need an extremely strong folder: It's pretty big in the pocket. The Benchmade Rukus is a wonderful knife that is very fast to open (axis lock and heavy blade), but it has a thumb stud. I don't know why you don't like thumb studs, but this knife is so smooth and easy to open that I don't think you should ignore it.
Both great knives. But I can't get past the liner lock, and of course there's no wave. The Rukus is awesome also, but no thumb hole, and absolutely HUGE in the pocket, worse to carry than a Manix which is itself a handful.
Knives are a gestalt kind of thing -- more than the sum of their parts. If you go about making a laundry list of preferred features, and only considering knives with all those features, you are going to miss out the the best knives that manage to blend whatever set of features they have into a knife that is fun and easy and effective to deploy and use. And you can find a knife that has all the features you want and is a stinker to use. A knife is a package of design features that are, in the best cases, designed to work together.
That, I completely agree with. There's a real danger when people zero in too closely on particular features. As someone who doesn't feel liner locks are reliable for anything but light use, I'm fine with leaving those out
But you really want to handle some knives yourself. Lots of people EDC the Manix; for me, it's too heavy for EDC. Most people like holes better, but there's a sizeable majority who like thumbstuds. And most important of all, a knife really is more than the sum of its features.
