How much does the look of a knife influence you?

Well, I guess that answers the question of how important the appearance of a knife is to most people - a lot - but I think I already knew that. So just to get back to the specific knives I mentioned, the Benchmade 940 and the Spyderco Paramilitary 2 - which are two of the quintessential EDC knives - I wonder what most of you think about the way these knives look. To me - and I don't own either knife - the 940 looks slim and elegant, like a sports car. The PM 2 looks like someone measured exactly what the angle of the spine would need to be in order to fit the hole in, with the least amount of steel at the top of the hole, and then cut a straight line at that angle. In other words, it looks like the solution to a geometry problem - function over form.
Don't get me wrong - I own several Spydercos and like them a lot - and my aversion to the PM2 is obviously just a personal preference. I was just curious what other people think about these two knives, both of which clearly have devoted fan bases - and clearly there is no right or wrong opinion about them.
 
Wil lRogers said:
Well, I guess that answers the question of how important the appearance of a knife is to most people - a lot - but I think I already knew that. So just to get back to the specific knives I mentioned, the Benchmade 940 and the Spyderco Paramilitary 2 - which are two of the quintessential EDC knives - I wonder what most of you think about the way these knives look. To me - and I don't own either knife - the 940 looks slim and elegant, like a sports car. The PM 2 looks like someone measured exactly what the angle of the spine would need to be in order to fit the hole in, with the least amount of steel at the top of the hole, and then cut a straight line at that angle. In other words, it looks like the solution to a geometry problem - function over form.
Don't get me wrong - I own several Spydercos and like them a lot - and my aversion to the PM2 is obviously just a personal preference. I was just curious what other people think about these two knives, both of which clearly have devoted fan bases - and clearly there is no right or wrong opinion about them.
Click to expand...

Looked up the Benchmade 940...instead of sports car, it reminds me of a poorly modded pickup truck with wheels too small for the body. The handle is nice, but the grind and cutting edge shape make the blade look like an overly long duckbill

The PM2 though....I usually don't like spydercos, but that one looks slick, nice upswept blade and precise looking.


I am sure both are excellent use knives though, and that's what matters for most people.
 
Wil lRogers said:
Well, I guess that answers the question of how important the appearance of a knife is to most people - a lot - but I think I already knew that. So just to get back to the specific knives I mentioned, the Benchmade 940 and the Spyderco Paramilitary 2 - which are two of the quintessential EDC knives - I wonder what most of you think about the way these knives look. To me - and I don't own either knife - the 940 looks slim and elegant, like a sports car. The PM 2 looks like someone measured exactly what the angle of the spine would need to be in order to fit the hole in, with the least amount of steel at the top of the hole, and then cut a straight line at that angle. In other words, it looks like the solution to a geometry problem - function over form.
Don't get me wrong - I own several Spydercos and like them a lot - and my aversion to the PM2 is obviously just a personal preference. I was just curious what other people think about these two knives, both of which clearly have devoted fan bases - and clearly there is no right or wrong opinion about them.
Click to expand...
o_O I can't really judge from appearance alone . I've got to get hands on and live with , carry and use a knife before I can really know if it's a keeper (as with the ladies :oops:) . Even my perception of beauty is altered by experience of function . My first real fighting folder was a Spyderco Police . I thought at first that it looked kinda cool and wicked ---but sorta ugly . After a few years of carry , love made it beautiful to me .
 
Don't like either knives. I don't care for thumbstuds, and both don't offer enough handle for my Wookiee paws to hold.

If I had to choose, it would be the PM2 all day. 940 has too much going against it.

Thumbstuds
Metal scales
Ugly IMO
Questionable quality control

I'm not a big fan of the compression lock, but I think the PM2 is gorgeous.

I don't like S30V at all, so I don't like either knife in it's base form.
 
Wil lRogers said:
....The PM 2 looks like someone measured exactly what the angle of the spine would need to be in order to fit the hole in, with the least amount of steel at the top of the hole, and then cut a straight line at that angle. In other words, it looks like the solution to a geometry problem - function over form.
Don't get me wrong - I own several Spydercos and like them a lot - and my aversion to the PM2 is obviously just a personal preference...
Click to expand...

The straight, flat spine is part of the reason I don't really care for the PM2. It looks like the blade was not designed for that handle. And, the pocket clip just looks like an afterthought. Give me a PM2 with a wire clip and a little more graceful blade; not one that looks like someone cut corners because they were in a hurry to go home but could not leave work until the knife was finished.

It is a shame, really. The PM2 has one of the best styled handles that Sal has ever produced. Beautifully designed.
 
looks don't matter to me as much as ergos and cutting performance...... it's one of the reasons I like spyderco :)
 
Popsickle said:
looks don't matter to me as much as ergos and cutting performance...... it's one of the reasons I like spyderco :)
Click to expand...


:D but you also meant to say that some Spydies are really nice looking :thumbsup:. Some are acquired tastes, that's for sure.o_O

Ray
 
I've only bought one knife that I didn't find to have appealing looks to me. I should have liked the function, but the looks made it hard for me to want to carry over other knives. I ended up giving it to my grandpa as a gift. He was excited, so it was worth it.
 
Looks matter to me. I will buy knives I don't particularly care for the looks of because they are "classics"(SAKs, Moras, Opinels) and I want to own them regardless, but generally, when I'm buying something the looks have to appeal to me.

Spyderco Paramilitary does not particularly appeal to me, for that matter, Spyderco in general does not greatly appeal to me aethetically(I also hate opening holes, give me thumbstuds over those any day), but they have other designs I find more appealing(like the Native and Manix lines) so I am more likely to get one of those. Benchmade 940 looks okay, but the cost is moronic and thus I won't buy it(or any other Benchmade).
 
For me its about what I want the knife for some I have a task in mind or role I want it to fit or do and then some I have a look in mind that I want or I see something that grabs me by its looks and I go man I gotta have that. I do prefer more functional some would say tactical features over synthetic stuff like wood or leather id rather kydex and g10. Looks and function complement each other. Just like women
 
Hard question to answer. I like to be believe I'm a function over form guy. Many Spydercos are great on paper and I know people love them. I've yet to find one I really want to carry. Drifter is a highly functional knife and I carried one for a while despite having better knives and better looking knives. I'm now carrying a TSF Beast which is neither slicey nor a freely swinging blade, both of which I prefer. The feel in my hand and the waterjetted pattern in the Ti is great and I like looking at it. So I guess it really depends on the knife. The TSF being locally made, mid-tech, Ti, and incredibly smooth are all factors as well.

So the equation for me is complex. I'll carry a knife that doesn't have all the features I want if it meets some other criteria.
 
Last edited:
As others have said, looks are important to me, but not just because the knife is pretty.

If it looks useful, looks comfortable, looks well made, and it looks like I can afford it (;)), I will be interested.

Pretty helps, though.
 
I won't 'look' at a knife unless I like the looks. After that it's all about the specs though. I won't even look at the specs unless the looks are to my taste. However much I may love the looks, if the specs don't match my requirements, it's just another sigh and move on. For example, there are some beautiful GEC knives that I'd love to own. 66, 48 & 18 Beagle for example. But I've made a firm decision to steer clear of 1095 in any future purposes. Just doesn't work for me. Or on the other end of the spectrum, the Spyderco Techno, the only spyderco whose looks I've liked, but a thick blade of that size is of zero use to me. Again, no use. There have been plenty knives I've really liked the looks of but then I realise they are hollow grind and I don't do hollow grind. Example recently was the Kizer Feist. Would be a perfect urban carry for me but no go due to the grind. My ultimate example of all of this would be the CRK Mnandi. I'd sell my entire collection for one - if it was FFG. Looks that good but I won't compromise on my personal specs requirements.
 
Looks are not very important to me but I think most knives look good.
I like both modern and traditional and even the melding of the two.

Sure there are some knives that are a bit homely but I definitely could carry a "ugly" knife if it ticked the right boxes for me.
 
I like looks, but that only goes so far. Regardless of how a knife looks, if it isn't functional, I don't keep it long.
 
If it looks really functional then I'm interested. But I consider myself a "user" and not a "collector."

I can completely understand someone who prioritizes other aspects of a knife's appearance, but for me... It's all about utility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top