• Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    29 minutes ago

    They all have problems. If i have to pick any one of them its going to be 2, but i won’t be happy about it.

  • GodyGade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 minutes ago
    1. It’s balanced, not too sharp or long.

    Nr. 2 is a no go, the thick butt is annoying af to put in a dishwasher cutlery basket. You need to think about these things.

    The rest is fine and whatever.

  • auginator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 minutes ago

    Number 5, as a backup 2. Edit: I feel like 2 is too fat and 5 is too narrow. Somewhere in the middle.

  • exasperation@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    When I got married, sitting down with the caterer and choosing between dozens of flatware types, I realized that I personally like three dimensional smoothness, with round, cylindrical handles that have some heft but not too much width. I also like cylindrical tines that don’t look like it was made from a flat sheet of metal cut and bent into shape (I prefer tines that are cylindrical, not rectangular prisms).

    I also like curves along where the head meets the handle, and along the head itself. No sharp corners or edges.

    I dislike ornamentation on the handle itself. I like plain, smooth handles.

    I chose the forks for my wedding, and then later on in life, based on what I learned about my own preferences, I bought some flatware that fits those general principles (looks like the Sambonet Hannahs, but cheaper than that very expensive line), and replaced the ones in my house. Now I basically don’t have any forks that I don’t like.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      2 has the best tines but that huge duckbill handle is a non-starter. 5 has the best handle

    • hansolo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      All of this is exactly right. #2 is the least cringe-inducing because of the lumpy bottom.

      Is this fork thing an official diagnosis metric? Or just not yet?

    • adm@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      No way, it’s 1 or 5. It’s not a sword, it’s a fork. You want something light and manigible so it’s not too heavy in the hand but can still scoop. Plus a smaller fork will fit better into your lunch box, purse, or even just silverware drawers.

      • Burninator05@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        34 minutes ago

        Five is out because its outer tines are curved. There is no reason for that and that is why I hate it.

        One, however, is the best. I find it eat slower (and often less) if my silverware isn’t the size of a pitchfork.

  • egircys@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    All are bad. If I’d have to choose, it’ll be in the order 1, 2, 4, 5, 3.

  • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I hate all of them but many people seem to like number two, but that is decisively the worst. I literally just bought twelve forks from a discontinued line because I had a few of them and they are the best forks ever. There are few things better than a great fork.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      I wish I did that. My flatware is outstanding but of course they discontinued it right after I got it. I’m down to 5 spoons 🙁 and the Replacements.com price is higher than they were new