• 𞋴𝛂𝛋𝛆@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    5 is definitely the best. It offers a thicker handle edge for cutting and did not require a stamping bend on thinner material to add rigidity. The rounded head and outer tines serve two purposes. One it offers a smaller controlled side contact like the profile of a chef’s knife that will focus more force at the contact point allowing for better contact with the plate and shearing more efficiently. Second, the rounded outer edge will fit the contour of a bowl allowing a fork to efficiently manage rice or other small items down to the last bite with nothing remaining. The larger outer tines and shorter overall length is also more durable and resistant to bending. It cost far more to make number 5 and the design functionality came ahead of the operations cost, and materials stock selection. All of the others were made according to the minimum number of forming operations and thin stock.

    • UnityDevice@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Exactly! Everyone is saying 2, but 2 is way too long for comfortable cutting, and that’s a very important feature of a fork - unless all you’re eating with it is very very soft.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If eating with stamped metal utensils things must be cut by a knife. 5 will be warped just as fast, plus the curved edge means it will do a horrible job of cutting while it bends.