![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ellerCan you take a late stone age knife that was shitty by late stone age knife design standards - and make it worse?
Absolutely, and I'm very impressed by this.
Let's take a look at this lovely little knife produced by the company 'Condor' from El Salvador, inspired by the knife that ice mummy Ötzi had on him when he died (which was at some point during the copper age - poor guy got himself murdered, and it wasn't an armed robbery, which we know because he still had all his tools and weapons - fascinating criminal case that, I'm afraid, will go unsolved).
It's a tiny knife, and they decided to market it as a neck knife. If you ask me, neck knives (knives worn in a sheath around the neck) are stupid because you don't want anything around your neck when in the field - it's just an extra strangulation risk - but nevertheless, they're kind of popular in the 'bushcraft' scene. (That is, middle-aged men trying out camping for the first time.) I own several knives that were sold as neck knives because they have one thing going for them: they're small. I wouldn't ever use those sheaths, though! (I can improvise with birch bark and tape. LOL) Anyway. This particular knife is small enough for my hand, which also means that the usual 'bushcraft' guy won't be able to use it at all. (Of course, these guys only have knives to 'look cool' anyway, and don't know how to use them, so I suppose it's all good.)
I'm not going to comment much on the overall quality of craft; I think the photo speaks for itself. (In case it's not clear: that's supposed to be the edge of the blade, not the back. Yeah. Really.) Instead, let's focus on the design, which is horrible enough even if it were executed in a competent manner. Just so much: it failed to cut the cardboard box it came in, and sharpening didn't help. (Edge retention, what edge retention?) Yeah. I'm relatively sure those 'smith marks' on the blade are not smithed (which is something you do to harden the edge and control the directional properties of your steel) but simply pressed sheet steel. The wood is so directional it will crack in a few years, and I can't even regret it because nothing of value will be lost.
The first mistake these people made was to take Ötzi's flintstone knife as an inspiration. That was... not a very good knife in the first place, and Ötzi had (likely due to a lack of availability of fresh flintstone) re-sharpened it again and again by removing small splinters of flintstone until the blade was much too small for its handle, which was a stick that was also not really suited as a knife handle. Suuuper shitty knife all around!
The second mistake? Trying to reproduce a flintstone blade in steel. Look... Generally speaking, steel blades are vastly superior to stone blades, which is also why most cultures switched to metal as soon as they encountered it. However, there are some very specific strengths of flintstone blades and other flintstone tools:
A) Corrosion resistance (relevant if you want to slice lemons or go fishing in saltwater: all these modern 'special ceramics' are merely trying to replicate the wonderful properties of flintstone while being easier to shape...)
B) Heat resistance (not only relevant if you regularly cut stuff that's on fire - hello, dragonhunters - but also simply when cutting food fresh out of the oven, which ruins the tempering of good steel)
C) Superior piercing/stabbing properties.
D) Avoid metal detectors.
The relevant one here would be C): the symmetrical 'spear point' design of the blade is for stabbing. This is one of the very few areas where the advantages of steel (like, say, more elasticity, which would become important in asymmetric blade designs where flintstone would simply break) become irrelevant, and the change in material really just removed the one strength of the original knife. That blade design is one you really want in the flintstone version!
The third mistake? Only sharpening one edge of the blade. I mean, come on. The geometry is not a reasonable drop-point blade. If you're going to imitate a spear-point blade, simply changing the blade type by leaving one side unsharpened without any adjustments to the overall geometry is completely unreasonable. The result isn't a drop-point blade (though I'm sure whoever designed this thing thought so), it's just a horrible, nonfunctional, spear-point blade. Ötzi at least was smart enough to sharpen both edges: the result was still shitty but at least (barely) functional...
The fourth mistake? Weird handle design. I'm not just talking about the wire wrapped around the handle that makes sure you have to use this thing with gloves or rip your fingers bloody. That's fine. (Relatively speaking.) I'm also talking about the way the handle becomes thinner towards the end without broadening first - that's the exact opposite of how you want the lines of your knife. (And, surprisingly, this is not a design mistake Ötzi's knife had, either! This one is newly introduced! WHY???) Obviously, this means any kind of reverse grip (you know, those grips developed for stabbing, which is what this blade shape is designed for?) will result in a dislocated or even broken thumb. Hooray. I mean, it's a good way to ensure this thing can't be used as a weapon - however, this results in exactly zero possible uses of this knife. Also, the cross section is a very thick rectangle, which is... sadism, pure and simple. How the fuck is anyone supposed to grip this thing?
I could go on, but I suppose this is already nerdy enough. Maybe, at some point, I should show examples of how a good knife is designed, with some examples that look like they should be shitty but actually are not?!? The really shitty ones are funnier, though, and I'm not running out of shitty knives anytime soon. I simply love them! :D
Absolutely, and I'm very impressed by this.
Let's take a look at this lovely little knife produced by the company 'Condor' from El Salvador, inspired by the knife that ice mummy Ötzi had on him when he died (which was at some point during the copper age - poor guy got himself murdered, and it wasn't an armed robbery, which we know because he still had all his tools and weapons - fascinating criminal case that, I'm afraid, will go unsolved).
It's a tiny knife, and they decided to market it as a neck knife. If you ask me, neck knives (knives worn in a sheath around the neck) are stupid because you don't want anything around your neck when in the field - it's just an extra strangulation risk - but nevertheless, they're kind of popular in the 'bushcraft' scene. (That is, middle-aged men trying out camping for the first time.) I own several knives that were sold as neck knives because they have one thing going for them: they're small. I wouldn't ever use those sheaths, though! (I can improvise with birch bark and tape. LOL) Anyway. This particular knife is small enough for my hand, which also means that the usual 'bushcraft' guy won't be able to use it at all. (Of course, these guys only have knives to 'look cool' anyway, and don't know how to use them, so I suppose it's all good.)
I'm not going to comment much on the overall quality of craft; I think the photo speaks for itself. (In case it's not clear: that's supposed to be the edge of the blade, not the back. Yeah. Really.) Instead, let's focus on the design, which is horrible enough even if it were executed in a competent manner. Just so much: it failed to cut the cardboard box it came in, and sharpening didn't help. (Edge retention, what edge retention?) Yeah. I'm relatively sure those 'smith marks' on the blade are not smithed (which is something you do to harden the edge and control the directional properties of your steel) but simply pressed sheet steel. The wood is so directional it will crack in a few years, and I can't even regret it because nothing of value will be lost.
The first mistake these people made was to take Ötzi's flintstone knife as an inspiration. That was... not a very good knife in the first place, and Ötzi had (likely due to a lack of availability of fresh flintstone) re-sharpened it again and again by removing small splinters of flintstone until the blade was much too small for its handle, which was a stick that was also not really suited as a knife handle. Suuuper shitty knife all around!
The second mistake? Trying to reproduce a flintstone blade in steel. Look... Generally speaking, steel blades are vastly superior to stone blades, which is also why most cultures switched to metal as soon as they encountered it. However, there are some very specific strengths of flintstone blades and other flintstone tools:
A) Corrosion resistance (relevant if you want to slice lemons or go fishing in saltwater: all these modern 'special ceramics' are merely trying to replicate the wonderful properties of flintstone while being easier to shape...)
B) Heat resistance (not only relevant if you regularly cut stuff that's on fire - hello, dragonhunters - but also simply when cutting food fresh out of the oven, which ruins the tempering of good steel)
C) Superior piercing/stabbing properties.
D) Avoid metal detectors.
The relevant one here would be C): the symmetrical 'spear point' design of the blade is for stabbing. This is one of the very few areas where the advantages of steel (like, say, more elasticity, which would become important in asymmetric blade designs where flintstone would simply break) become irrelevant, and the change in material really just removed the one strength of the original knife. That blade design is one you really want in the flintstone version!
The third mistake? Only sharpening one edge of the blade. I mean, come on. The geometry is not a reasonable drop-point blade. If you're going to imitate a spear-point blade, simply changing the blade type by leaving one side unsharpened without any adjustments to the overall geometry is completely unreasonable. The result isn't a drop-point blade (though I'm sure whoever designed this thing thought so), it's just a horrible, nonfunctional, spear-point blade. Ötzi at least was smart enough to sharpen both edges: the result was still shitty but at least (barely) functional...
The fourth mistake? Weird handle design. I'm not just talking about the wire wrapped around the handle that makes sure you have to use this thing with gloves or rip your fingers bloody. That's fine. (Relatively speaking.) I'm also talking about the way the handle becomes thinner towards the end without broadening first - that's the exact opposite of how you want the lines of your knife. (And, surprisingly, this is not a design mistake Ötzi's knife had, either! This one is newly introduced! WHY???) Obviously, this means any kind of reverse grip (you know, those grips developed for stabbing, which is what this blade shape is designed for?) will result in a dislocated or even broken thumb. Hooray. I mean, it's a good way to ensure this thing can't be used as a weapon - however, this results in exactly zero possible uses of this knife. Also, the cross section is a very thick rectangle, which is... sadism, pure and simple. How the fuck is anyone supposed to grip this thing?
I could go on, but I suppose this is already nerdy enough. Maybe, at some point, I should show examples of how a good knife is designed, with some examples that look like they should be shitty but actually are not?!? The really shitty ones are funnier, though, and I'm not running out of shitty knives anytime soon. I simply love them! :D
no subject
Date: 2024-02-14 03:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-02-14 09:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-02-16 12:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-02-16 12:36 am (UTC)