I was waching this program about Aron Ralston and his ordeal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&v=SyPBTblkzBI

The thing that make me think the most was his choice of cheap multitool !!!!

I am myself a cheap-knife type of guy. Most of my pocket knives and multitools are in the $5-15 range. But I am a very urban guy and my "adventures" are limited to crowded beaches or campgrounds! They cannot be compared with Aron's lifestyle , who is cheating death again and again.

A guy like him , IMO, should not even depend on ONE top quality knife. In his case, one is none. A solo risk-taking adventurer like him should have no less than two top quality fixed blades, one or two top quality folders, AND a multitool.

I am still shaking my head in disbelif that he was carrying a very similar multitool to the one I have on my desk for opening envelopes !! If this was a "reality show" I might have blamed the producer, but it was an interview and showed the real thing !!

My question here is not about Aron's specifically but about such cases like this. Why do you think such experienced folks fail at times to be properly prepared ???

To a lot of non-knife guys as long as it cuts it's good enough. And a lot of times knife doesn't have to be razor sharp to work, which they probably have never experienced.

We all do it really, like my ski tuning gears are all cheap repurposed items that will make a pro cringe, who probably have a grand or more invested into tuning gear alone.

I only saw the movie, and I thought his mistakes included far better ones than carrying only a cheap multitool with him: not telling anyone where he went or when to expect his return, not going with the two hot hiker chicks...

The movie showed him looking for his better multitool as he was hurriedly packing for the trip. I don't know whether any of the movie is true.

I think the lesson of his ordeal is that you don't need to drag around a bunch of cutlery when in the outdoors. What would "two top quality fixed lades, one or two top quality folders, and a multitool" accomplish that his one multitool did not achieve? - what would all those knives weigh? What would they cost? That money and weight could clearly have been invested in items that would have been of more use to him. Actually, simply making sure that his route and plans were made clear to someone else, an action with essentially no cost, was clearly the best course. Being unburdened with unnecessary redundant gear is often a safety measure, and a wise decision, in its own way. Good judgement is more important that lots of gear, and your mind (making those good decisions, of course) is the most important gear of all.

"cheating death again and again" often results in failure to cheat death eventually, frequently in a way in which it doesn't matter how many knives you carry. If that lifestyle is your choice, that's OK - in a properly conducted society you should have that choice. Just be aware of the potential downside and accept the results of your decisions.

In his situation I would almost certainly have been carrying at least two pieces of serious steel, probably at least one Busse (normally my Bony Active Duty) along with a RAT-3, RAT-7 or a JK Handmade custom. But you know what? Ralston wielding a cheap multi-tool and a steel will is a lot better than me wussing out with my Busse! I have to seriously question whether or not I'd have the stones to cut my own arm off!

But if I ever had to try I'd at least have an extraordinarily sharp, high quality knife to do it with!

BTW, I understand that most of the details of the film are true to his actual experiences.

Just a reminder to all : The link up there to an interview, NOT the film. In this program, he re-visits the scene of his survival incidence. IMO, it is worth seeing more than the film.

Indeed he has a steel will.
Just a month or two before his ordeal he was buried in an avalnche and survived. He never thought to quit his adventures. Even leaving his job at Intel ( great sallary and all) to be closer to ghis favorite adventure land shows what he is made of IMO. And still after his ordeal and being one-handed, he still climes and goes solo.




I wish him the best of luck and many safe trips , but still wonder if it is wise for people to go into deep canyons ..etc. with almost no tools.

His story reminds me of an episde of ( I shouldn't be Alive) where a female marathon runner chooses a very deserted area for running ( very similar to Aron's canyon-land, and while she was running on the edge of a canyon, she slips and falls down several meters and breaks several bones ( hips ..etc.) and start to have internal hemorage (sp?) She was in a canyon in the middle of nowhere !! She didn't even have a dollar store knife on her !! Not that it would have made a difference , but come on !! Having tools may give you some options depending on the situation.

Here's a very short U-tube about it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SduaI06NoA

A PLB would be useful in thse situations . But I would still wonder ( espcially about the runner girl) why is it that she has to be training in such remote area ??!!! I would even feel guilty about the dog if I was crippled by severe injury in such badlands.

High risk taking like this is not admirable. It's selfish. Aaron has a family who loves him. Aaron shows through his actions that he cares about his adrenaline rushes more than he cares about those who love him and want him around.

The video says he was just wandering around looking for a little rest and relaxation, and wasn't looking for a wild adventure. I don't believe it. I believe Aaron was fully aware of the risk he was taking, and took the risk anyway for the thrill. I'm not judging Aaron. I understand him because I've taken some unnecessary risks before. Let's just call this what it is.

EDIT: Coincidentally, Aaron admits his selfishness at 7:25, which I heard after I wrote this post.

I guess I'm the opposite of ol' Aaron! Adventure is great but I don't seek the kind that's likely to kill me. If you ever read about me in the papers it won't be bungie jumping or getting stranded doing a solo summit of K2! I try to maintain a margin of safety as best I can. If I get in trouble it will be because I tarried to long sight-seeing, or because I got wrapped up in the moment and missed a trail or misremembered a fork.

Once you have a family, you think about the risk element quite differently.

You don't think that's a little overboard ? There's a huge difference between being properly prepared and ridiculous overkill. A good blade and a multi-tool sure, but no less than 4-5 blades is what you consider minimum ? wow Chisel, I would hate to have to hump your day bag around.

Assuming you don't carry 3-4 of those as well

If you read his book you'll understand that he was a very high-risk-seeking kind of guy.

The risk seeker doesn't look at things the way most of us here do (backups, alternate plans, turning back under duress, etc) hence having really good tools probably wasn't on his radar.

When I teach my course module on survival I use his example to emphasize the importance of a trip plan - or having a really sharp knife- student can choose.......

I respectfully dissagree Izzy,

"you live or die by training, knowledge, experience and a healthy dose of dumb luck"-me

Tranlation: people have survived a lot more with a lot less. What matters is what you carry between your ears and not how many tiers in your pack. You can't buy experience or common sense in a gear shop.

That being said, don't get me wrong. I do not think for one second I am at such a high level of experience to come across as preaching.(not my intent) I do believe knowlede and experience is a greater contributing factor to my overall survival than what I outfit myself with though. What I carry certainly helps, buts it not the most important consideration by any stretch.

I agree with you in that you should take the gear you need and the best you can afford. I do think some people get too carried away on the whole "two is one, 1 is none" concept however. For SOME people, I believe they rely on lots of back-up gear as a way to compensate for lack of confidence and skill. (not refering to anyone in particular or anyone here, just an opinion)

Think of the gear your grandfather used to take into the woods, Then your father perhaps. Now think about what you carry. The wilderness hasen't changed, so why all of a sudden do we feel it's taboo to go on a wilderness outing without a PLB, GPS, 2 or 3 stoves, 5 knives and about 10 ways to start a fire? Did the wilderness change or are we relying more on gear than we need to. Now I am not suggesting going out into the wild without a solid plan or some essential gear, But where do we draw the line on what is really enough stuff? I guess that is for everyone to answer themselves....

Anyway. I guess this is straying away from the intended topic. My bad. To answer this question however


Because some people try too dammed hard to be prepared for every situation when they should realize that no matter how hard they try, s*** happens to the best of us anyway. Regardless of the type or amount of knives this dude took, I bet he didn't think about being crushed by a huge SOB rock when he stepped off that morning. There are a lot of things that would have helped him out, but I don't think the number of knives in his pack was his greatest concern.

Apologies for the bad spelling and gramar, but I got this wonderful bottle of Glenfiddich 30 yr at the duty free shop recently and now we are getting to know each other.....

I should know better than to drink and type. BTW, happy St Paddys day all .......

A lot of people who have studied survival seem to agree that the will to survive is more important than gear and gadgets. Ralston's case is a good example. How many of us would have the will (or even the notion, for that matter) to self amputate our hand, sharp knife or not? I am not sure that I could do something like that, and I hope I don't have to find out....

Mention has been made of the "poor quality" of his knife. But compared to the perfectly adequate Green River knives that were top gear on the nineteenth century frontier, demonstrably capable survival tools, I'll bet it measures up pretty favorably. And any of these were a vast improvement over the flint cutting instruments that served mankind quite well for many thousands of years before steel came along.

I have an idea that a good many of today's expensive, top of the line knives are more bling than anything else. Ridiculously cheap Moras seem to get the work done just fine, for a fraction of the cost. The same picture appears with a lot of the other gear we fret about. How did we ever make it before titanium appeared on the scene. Times were hard then...

Taurus,There's No Bull in your Bad,Very Well said that's for sure!I'm having a Pt.of Guiness & watching an Alien invasion outside my window at present-Rain!Happy St.Paddy's!

Kinda sorta. The thing with todays top-of-the-line-take-out-a-second-mortgage-on-your-home knives is they are made up of these super hard metal, process sensative, single manufacturer, super alloys. Yes, the brand name (Strider, Emerson, etc.) can kick the price up too, and you are paying a fair amount for bling with these. The knives of yesteryear and their current derivatives all seem to be made of alloys better suited to large scale production (10XX, 51XX, 420 440 and AUS families). They don't have the same performance as the super alloys, but they'll readily handle the job. On the other hand, too cheap can means **** quality control. Won't take an edge, won't hold an edge, and usually so poorly constructed that they're more likely then not to cut the user.

I hesitate to get too "knife geeky" but I'm one of those you-get-what-you-pay-for type guys for the most part. The Mora knives truly are a great deal- good steel, well heat treated and sharp OOtB. I can think of a handful of pretty good knives that are under $40 or so: CS Pendleton Mini Hunter, Becker BK11/13, most Moras and the SOG Field Pup. But even those superb value knives fall far short of the performance of, say, a Busse BAD or Game Warden or a Falknivven F1. While merely spending a lot doesn't guarentee you'll get a good one, moving up to superior steel in a knife made by folks that know how to use it (eg D2 from Knives of Alaska or Bob Dozier, INFI from Jerry Busse) then your odds get very good of getting a superior blade.

Of course, superior isn't always important. It may just mean longer edge retention or a bit of extra sharpness. This may be trivial or it may mean life and death, depending on the user and application. Certainly a stronger blade could make a big difference- a knife that shatters at the tang isn't going to be of much help when you need it.

I try to match the knife to the task. While I love Moras their rat-tail tang isn't all that robust. I've seen people baton with it but I consider that a bit beyond the limit of prudence and safety. Now I wouldn't hesitate to do this with my Fallkniven F1, Bark River Aurora or JK Handmades. I'll break before my Ontario SP8 does, I'll wager!

Still, the best survival knife is the knife you have on you when you're survivin'!

I am with you on "you get what you pay for" - up to a point. Above a certain price point, you are buying bling and status, not significant utility, at least for most stuff.

In most products, you begin with super cheap and in this price range, you typically acquire junk. You are truly throwing your money away. As price increases, you find products that are quite useful and offer good value. Increase the price still more, and the small increase in utility does not match the ever higher price, except possibly for a very small number of purchasers. Eventually, any increase in utility is hard to see as prices soar into the stratosphere..

This kind of relationship can be seen in knives, firearms, watches, wine, (but not women, of course) - you name it.

Ageed. I carry several knives when out in the wilderness. I believe in the condom principlee when it comes to gear: I'd rather have it amd not need it, then need it and not have. Quality counts as well, though you couldn't tell it by going through my day pack lol. I'm also a loner so I rarely go out with others. A stupid decision on my part I know. Fortunatly I've aged and had a lifetime of risks and adventures so I'm more careful and less foolhardy now.

Shhh! I need the sales after the middle east conflicts are over!

You know SD, condoms have been known to fail ...

At any rate, to each his own. My way is not everyone else's way. If it were there would be no need of this forum as there would be nothing to debate.
When I first joined this forum I had backups for my backups as well. My past few deployments have left me with a whole new outlook on life and I kinda got a max relax attitude in areas that 5 or 6 years ago would have bothered me to all to hell. I had a few lessons in "survival" that taught me I need to start enjoying my life more and stop "what if-ing" every possible scenario to death every time I step into the woods. I no longer worry about giant bears jumping me from behind, or losing my only knife, or the end of the world happening when I am out camping. In short, I now go on wildernes trips to live rather than survive and I enjoy myself a lot more. If I break or lose my knife I have a multi-tool which is a good enough back up blade for my needs. If I lose or break the multitool then I will Improvise,adapt and overcome as trained and make do without. It's as simple as that.

I have since removed the unnecessary crap from my pack and replaced it with a bottle of fine scotch. It may sound like wasted space to some, but when the sun goes down over the water and I am totally alone in the wilderness with nothing but a glass of spirits and the sound of wolves howling in the distance for company I am really glad I don't sweat the small stuff anymore. I feel there is a fine line between being prepared and overprepared. There may come a time when this mind set bites me square in the a**, but for now I feel as equipped to survive as the next guy and I have plenty of free space in my bag.

If I suddenly find myself naked up a tree and swinging a bottle of scotch at a man eating bear after losing and breaking all my gear I will feel rather silly however.

Maybe those guys saying that Aron should have had three or four knives on him could tell me this: which knife is best for cutting one's arm off?

I don't think field self amputation is something that people gear up for when they go out. (If you do and if you have personal experiences of using the gear, there is probably a whole publishing and movie industry that'd like to talk to you.) At the end of the day, he survived. He survived because he had the wit and the mental and physical fortitude to do what needed to be done. Sure, his equipment sucked, and it would have been better if he had been better equipped. But even with the best equipment (let's say those $500 knives), I'm not sure I can hack my arm off in the same situation.

The main lesson I've learned here is that I need to pack a bottle of Scotch.

Not to derail this thread, but I have read a lot on Theodore Roosevelt. His book "Through the Brazilian wilderness" is a fascinating read on the expedition down the "River of Doubt" (better known as the Amazon River.) The expedition members faced incredible hardships that makes modern day adventures, a walk in the park....

Also, Candice Millard's biographical book The River of Doubt is also a good read and also available as a Kindle download.