Whats with people calling medium sized knives "large"?

If you're a Chihuahua or lover of one, everything else is a BIG DOG.

If you own a great Pyrenees, my 60 lb spaniel mix is a "little dog". It's all perspective.
 
eugenechia1989 said:
Well, I'm small-sized and a PM2 wouldn't disappear in my pocket quite like it does yours.

I currently carry a Cold Steel Code 4 and it's certainly large enough that I constantly feel it in my pocket. Pros and cons, I know it's there and that gives me peace of mind. But then I can't have a tablet-sized phone, which is fine by me, my S7 is as large a phone as I ever want to carry.

That said, in terms of blade length, I do classify the full-sized Griptilian and the PM2 as mid-sized, or perhaps more accurately medium-large, because their blade lengths are around 3.45", under 3.5" which I consider to be where large begins.

I grew up with a 91mm SAK. I lived most of my life thinking a typical pocket-knife is about that size. The Code 4 is a monster in comparison.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on your height and the type of pants since some have smaller pockets then others but in most of my jeans I can fit a cased iphone x in the right pocket next to a full sized praetorian without any issue, my PM2 fits with plenty of room to spare. However if I put on slacks then even a zt 0450 seems to take up too much room. Im a large glove size but still I think it would be foolish to call a knife thats just big enough to get a full grip/purchase on large
 
I don't know if height has as much to do with it as preference. I'm on the shorter side of average at 5'9" and 175 lbs., and I have medium-sized hands, but find the Spyderco Military very easy to carry and use, for instance. For *my own personal uses*, anything bigger than that in a folder is unnecessary, and crosses into 'overcompensation' territory. I also enjoy medium and small knives. I've know very tall/large men who will only carry small pocketknives like 2-blade penknives or Victorinox Classic SAKs and are happy enough with them.

There are some people out there who consider the Spyderco Military to be only medium or 'small'.

Jim
 
ribeyemediumrare said:
They should just call the sebenza 21 "large" simply sebenza 21 and the small a small 21, just like how benchmade makes the griptillian and the small version is a mini grip. Non knife people might not know what a knife is called but how we treat certain knife sizes can condition the general public to be scared of something that is relatively normal sized. Consider places with knife laws of under 3 inches, the boundaries were set because they deemed that to be an appropriate size limit for a pocket knife and anything over that is a weapon in their eyes instead of a tool. Some people might be hesitant to carry a normal sized knife because they've been conditioned to believe its too big and scary to have on you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that extra half inch can kill you.
 
Whether or not a knife is large or small is completely relative. Some folks may not consider a knife small unless it’s the size of the Spyderco Ladybug. In that case the small Sebenza would seem large. As far as manufacturers, my large Case XX trapper is outsized by my Ontario Rat1. It’s simply how the manufacturer names the product, one large model in a certain family of products could be smaller than the large model in the next lineup.
I wouldn’t lose too much sleep over it.
 
1" to 4 small, 5 to 8" medium and 9" or larger are considered choppers. I see 6,7" knives being called choppers all the time. I don't see a knife being a chopper until it's over 9 or 10.
 
whp said:
And 4 inches are choppers.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I guess; that is if you chop with a folder.

The old legal limit for blade length was 3.5" in TN. Many states have or had a 3" blade limit which for many would be the break point between medium and large folders. I recall reading that GA colleges have a 2.5" blade limit for carry knives. It is not the size of the knife; it's how you use it.

Size matters when it comes to choppers. 7" is the break point on fixed blades between medium and large. Chopping has nothing to do with it. But I agree that 9" is the minimum blade length for an effective fixed blade chopper. But I guess if a person wants to, they can chop with a 4" fixed blade. I know that I have chopped with a smaller knife; not effectively, but that was all I had with me.
 
Last edited:
91bravo said:
If all you carry is a Ladybug, then EVERYTHING is large. Perspective.
Click to expand...

This! When a PM2 isn't "large": Is a Military large? But if a Military is large what do you call an Opinel No. 13 or a Extrema Ratio RAO?

I don't know. I'd say ~3" knives are "EDC sized". Everything smaller than ~2-2.5" is small and everything over 3,5-4" is a full size folder for me. The RAO has to be supersize this way but IMO it really is.
 
I think its got a little to do with yt reviewers calling anything over 3” and 3 ounces big. 5 ounces isnt anything and nether is 3.5” made up issue like a lot of things people bring up.
 
A rose is a rose, what's in a name, you say tomato and I say red fruit that people think is a vegetable. Just go by the numbers. 3" is 3" and 4" is 4". Why stress over what it's called? S/M/L/XL/OMG!
 
GronK That red fruit your referring to is a Tomahto ;). When looking at knives to buy I just check the stats, Handle length/Blade length. I also check how it fits in the hand of Nick Shabazz and if he can get a full 4 finger grip on it than it probably is a Large. < Just kidding Nick:D
 
Knives the size of large Sebenza are as large as I carry, so to me it is a large. I am fully aware that other larger knives exist.
As for the manufacturer. CRK offer basically 2 size Sebenza -a large and a small, why would they call the larger a medium when they offer none larger. It is the large of their series, not necessarily a claim at being a large knife.
 
Oo is a medium fry at mcd really a medium. I mean the large is not that big. But the medium is kind of tiny
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top