I think dependency and price are not mutually inclusive of each other. It's certainly not a linear equation. Take guns for example. Glocks are certainly not in the expensive category, but are they less reliable than a Les Baer or Ed Brown 1911? The knife world isn't much different.
There's also no comparison between a 1911 and a Glock. Two different weapon systems, two different manual of arms. Very different construction. The grip angles are different. If you like a Glock, go get it. If you find it's the weapon for you, then carry it, shoot it, learn it. If you don't understand the value or point of a Baer or Brown, then there's no reason for you to carry one. In the meantime, Baer and Brown will continue to sell every weapon they build, because other buyers do understand and are willing to pay the price.
I learned about buying cheap tools a long time ago. Pay enough, buy once, and have a tool on which you can depend. Then again, I take my tools into places where I have to depend on them.
154CM isn't the toughest out there, liner locks aren't the toughest out there.
I don't need a knife that's made of diamonds. Just one that works.
You can certainly get decent quality and highly dependable knives at a medium price point.
Perhaps, perhaps not. If that's what floats your boat and if that's the measure of your life worth, then spend accordingly. Again, you're not taking away from Emersons business, and you're not hurting anyone or helping anyone; it's up to you. So far as I'm concerned, the highly dependable and decent quality knives at the medium price point are the Emersons.
Just because a $250 knife hasn't failed someone doesn't mean that there aren't knives out there just as dependable at a lower price point.
The cost is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it works. It's all that's relevant, in fact. Cost is always balanced against value. I value my life. The cost is minor when choosing something upon which my life may depend, whether it's pushing someone back at knifepoint, or cutting my way out of something. The price I'm willing to pay for that is commensurate with the trust I'm willing to place in the tool I buy. That aside, none of the Emersons I've bought are close to two hundred fifty dollars, which makes them an even greater value.
Let's not forget, it's not a nuclear weapon. It's a pocket knife.
I didn't buy any of my knives based on their "price point," and I didn't buy any of them based on what someone else said. I bought them to try them, and when they worked and performed as advertised and met my needs and expectations, and then exceeded them, I bought more. I do the same with firearms.
Now, with all that being said. If I was working in a war zone like Iraq or Afghanistan, I would definitely keep this thing tucked away in my pocket as a last ditch self defense weapon.
My view, having been in both places and still working regularly in one of them, is different. Certainly the Emerson is there as a last ditch weapon, but it's also an every day use tool, too. I like my Spyderco Militaries and Paramilitaries for daily abusers and cutters, and I use them. I like my Emersons more.
It is a good knife for what it is, but you definitely pay for the brand and specific design points like the wave or the karambit etc.
I don't pay for the brand. Just the tool.
