Which CPK are you carrying today?

Morning Roosters.

i-w6pMq46-X3.jpg


You guys all stand inline for a Magnacut DEK3 .... in the meantime, I'm very happy I got another FK1 :)
 
Blues said:
I carried the Reaper and the DEK 2 today...but not at the same time. I've got to take some testosterone supplements before I can pull that one off.
Click to expand...
What were your impressions? I'm curious how they felt, comparatively, since they weigh the same amount. Have you had an opportunity to use either for anything interesting or telling of their characteristics?

I have to admit that I'm having a case of FOMO since deciding to pick up the DEK3 in Friday's sale. 😆
I'm sure you can't go wrong with any of these knives though.
 
carnifex knifeworks said:
What were your impressions? I'm curious how they felt, comparatively, since they weigh the same amount. Have you had an opportunity to use either for anything interesting or telling of their characteristics?

I have to admit that I'm having a case of FOMO since deciding to pick up the DEK3 in Friday's sale. 😆
I'm sure you can't go wrong with any of these knives though.
Click to expand...

They are very different in almost all regards other than the weight on the scale....both being 7 7/8 ounces.

The DEK 2 is a longer, wider blade. The Reaper is shorter and more compact with a blade of about 3 5/8".

Where the DEK 2 is very well balanced...it balances pretty much on my index finger...the Reaper is grip heavy, with an unskeletonized tang.

Both have great handles / grips...but the Reaper locks into the hand in a more pronounced way...as if it was molded for your fingers to wrap around.

When you hold the Reaper, you can't help thinking what a hammer fist strike with the end of the grip would deliver to an opponent. It feels like you're holding a couple rolls of quarters in your hand to add weight to a punch.

I had an opportunity to spend about a half hour on the phone with Mark to discuss his vision for the knife and its attributes...and I found that what my thoughts were upon receiving the knife were pretty much in tune with Mark's vision and intention. (He's a real gentleman and a pleasure to speak with, by the way.) The Reaper was not designed as a general utility knife, if you take my meaning. But neither, in truth, is the DEK 2.

Both knives are certainly suitable for mundane or utilitarian tasks, and both, in my opinion, would serve their owner's well if and when rough usage was called for, in pretty much any regard.

Of course, the difference in the grinds is readily apparent, and I think the (lesser) thickness behind the edge of my example of the DEK 2 made it a tad slicier.

I have not put any real work in with either. But they make a handsome pair.

Hope that helps with some bare bones.
 
Blues said:
They are very different in almost all regards other than the weight on the scale....both being 7 7/8 ounces.

The DEK 2 is a longer, wider blade. The Reaper is shorter and more compact with a blade of about 3 5/8".

Where the DEK 2 is very well balanced...it balances pretty much on my index finger...the Reaper is grip heavy, with an unskeletonized tang.

Both have great handles / grips...but the Reaper locks into the hand in a more pronounced way...as if it was molded for your fingers to wrap around.

When you hold the Reaper, you can't help thinking what a hammer fist strike with the end of the grip would deliver to an opponent. It feels like you're holding a couple rolls of quarters in your hand to add weight to a punch.

I had an opportunity to spend about a half hour on the phone with Mark to discuss his vision for the knife and its attributes...and I found that what my thoughts were upon receiving the knife were pretty much in tune with Mark's vision and intention. (He's a real gentleman and a pleasure to speak with, by the way.) The Reaper was not designed as a general utility knife, if you take my meaning. But neither, in truth, is the DEK 2.

Both knives are certainly suitable for mundane or utilitarian tasks, and both, in my opinion, would serve their owner's well if and when rough usage was called for, in pretty much any regard.

Of course, the difference in the grinds is readily apparent, and I think the (lesser) thickness behind the edge of my example of the DEK 2 made it a tad slicier.

I have not put any real work in with either. But they make a handsome pair.

Hope that helps with some bare bones.
Click to expand...
Excellent thank you for this!
 
Blues said:
They are very different in almost all regards other than the weight on the scale....both being 7 7/8 ounces.

The DEK 2 is a longer, wider blade. The Reaper is shorter and more compact with a blade of about 3 5/8".

Where the DEK 2 is very well balanced...it balances pretty much on my index finger...the Reaper is grip heavy, with an unskeletonized tang.

Both have great handles / grips...but the Reaper locks into the hand in a more pronounced way...as if it was molded for your fingers to wrap around.

When you hold the Reaper, you can't help thinking what a hammer fist strike with the end of the grip would deliver to an opponent. It feels like you're holding a couple rolls of quarters in your hand to add weight to a punch.

I had an opportunity to spend about a half hour on the phone with Mark to discuss his vision for the knife and its attributes...and I found that what my thoughts were upon receiving the knife were pretty much in tune with Mark's vision and intention. (He's a real gentleman and a pleasure to speak with, by the way.) The Reaper was not designed as a general utility knife, if you take my meaning. But neither, in truth, is the DEK 2.

Both knives are certainly suitable for mundane or utilitarian tasks, and both, in my opinion, would serve their owner's well if and when rough usage was called for, in pretty much any regard.

Of course, the difference in the grinds is readily apparent, and I think the (lesser) thickness behind the edge of my example of the DEK 2 made it a tad slicier.

I have not put any real work in with either. But they make a handsome pair.

Hope that helps with some bare bones.
Click to expand...
iu
 
Blues said:
They are very different in almost all regards other than the weight on the scale....both being 7 7/8 ounces.

The DEK 2 is a longer, wider blade. The Reaper is shorter and more compact with a blade of about 3 5/8".

Where the DEK 2 is very well balanced...it balances pretty much on my index finger...the Reaper is grip heavy, with an unskeletonized tang.

Both have great handles / grips...but the Reaper locks into the hand in a more pronounced way...as if it was molded for your fingers to wrap around.

When you hold the Reaper, you can't help thinking what a hammer fist strike with the end of the grip would deliver to an opponent. It feels like you're holding a couple rolls of quarters in your hand to add weight to a punch.

I had an opportunity to spend about a half hour on the phone with Mark to discuss his vision for the knife and its attributes...and I found that what my thoughts were upon receiving the knife were pretty much in tune with Mark's vision and intention. (He's a real gentleman and a pleasure to speak with, by the way.) The Reaper was not designed as a general utility knife, if you take my meaning. But neither, in truth, is the DEK 2.

Both knives are certainly suitable for mundane or utilitarian tasks, and both, in my opinion, would serve their owner's well if and when rough usage was called for, in pretty much any regard.

Of course, the difference in the grinds is readily apparent, and I think the (lesser) thickness behind the edge of my example of the DEK 2 made it a tad slicier.

I have not put any real work in with either. But they make a handsome pair.

Hope that helps with some bare bones.
Click to expand...
Thank you for writing that up! Just to confirm, you're saying the DEK2 is slicier than the Reaper? That's really surprising to hear, if I'm interpreting it correctly.
 
carnifex knifeworks said:
Thank you for writing that up! Just to confirm, you're saying the DEK2 is slicier than the Reaper? That's really surprising to hear, if I'm interpreting it correctly.
Click to expand...
We're talking degrees here. Even though the Reaper has the hollow grind, the thickness behind the edge may be just a tad more. It still slices phone book paper cleanly. It'll get the job done.
 
Blues said:
We're talking degrees here. Even though the Reaper has the hollow grind, the thickness behind the edge may be just a tad more. It still slices phone book paper cleanly. It'll get the job done.
Click to expand...
I'm actually surprised I thought the Reaper would be ultra thin, but thought application it makes sense it would be a little thicker

I wonder how thin the other grind Mark was doing on reapers is (I think it was a super heavy S)
 
Matt (Cap'n Smudge) had a very good pictorial and comparison post a short while ago when he showed the Reaper next to an EDC(2) a DEK(1) and an OG-FK. IIRC, I also got very fortunate in the last Reaper drawings as my post number came up but Jo has not come knocking on my door yet for the payment so I can't line 'em up yet against what else I may be rumored to own!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top