.25 inch too thick for deer

Uath

Uath

Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
703
I love my TOPS Moccasin ranger. I almost turned it into a fetish knife, the perfect blade...but wait. Remember the old Viking saying; never praise a sword until it's tried, or a day until it's over? Well, it's true.
I haven't deer hunted for years, but wanting venison, I went out this last weekend and killed one. I had my TOPS with me. There were definite problems:

It's so stupid thick.

First, I couldnt cut a piece of rope with it. I had to lay the rope down on my truck bed to cut it.
Second, Cleaning the deer was hell with it...it sucked.
Third, I beginning to doubt self defence. I don't know if it would even cut a malcontent throat. How could you depend on it in a knife fight?It would be a great stabber, but for slicing...it sucks.

I just ordered a Becker CU 7 for my hunting knife. I know it's 3\16 inch. I just couldn't go any thinner. Do Yall have any of the same problems with a .25 inch knife?
 
Uath said:
First, I couldnt cut a piece of rope with it. I had to lay the rope down on my truck bed to cut it.
Click to expand...

This sounds like a sharpness problem. 1095 with a keen edge ought to go through rope all day long.

Uath said:
I just ordered a Becker CU 7 for my hunting knife. I know it's 3\16 inch. I just couldn't go any thinner. Do Yall have any of the same problems with a .25 inch knife?
Click to expand...

BK-7 just seems too big for an effective field dressing knife. Not to say that it won't work, but it's a big blade, and field dressing requires close-in work from time to time. Personally, I prefer a much smaller blade.
 
Most modern knives are just too thick. I think the macho soldier of fortune thing gets in the way. If you look at what the mountain men, and the frontiersmen of the even earlier Kentucky period carried, it was in essence a large butcher knife. About 1/8 inch if they were lucky.

About a million soldiers and Marines went through hell with a K-bar or the Camillus version, called the fighting-utility MK2, with no problems at all. They were 5/32, or .156 in thinkness. Thats about as thick as you want a blade.
 
Here's what I consider an optimal hunting knife. 3.5 inch blade. Anything too much bigger is overkill. 3.5 to 4 inches is just about right.

37.jpg
 
I've two "hunting knives" that are at or near 1/4 inch thick and they perform well (Gil Hibben Alaskan Pro Hunter in 420 and Knives of Alaska Alaskan Hunter in D2). However, they are both deeply hollow ground so the edge is pretty thin. The blade length on both is at about 4 inches, and both are purpose built hunting/skinning knives. I like these knives very much, but this past hunting trip I found myself dressing, skinning, and butchering my deer with the same knife- a knives of alaska caping knife (cub bear). It is made from much thinner stock. I used it not because of its thinner steel, but because it has a narrower, and more acute blade and tip which is much more handy for getting into tight spots when quartering.

Long answer to a short question, I know. No, I don't have a problem with thick blades in my dressing/skinning duties, but thinner blades may work better. Short blades will generally be more handy than long blades. In my experience knives with narrow blades and acute points are more handy than dull points and lots of belly. Skinning does not require lots of belly, and a sharp edge will fly through a pelt just as fast as an acute tip (this is expereince talking- the friend I was with said my knives were too sharp to skin with). As a matter of fact, skinnning shouldn't require very much in the way of knife work at all.

If you are going to stick with knives built as combat/utility or camping knives, you may be stuck with thick blades. These knives are just not built for what you are using them. I would recommend looking for a purpose built hunting knife like a Dozier on one of the many fine knives offered for sale on the hand made knives forum. A 4 inch blade is probably as much or more than you need and 1/8 to 3/16 stock is thick enough.

Guyon hit it right on the head, with a picture for effect.
 
Here's another picture for effect. These knives have dressed more deer than I'll ever count.

BuckBG42.jpg


The specs on this Buck 110?

Handle Material: Sambar stag
Blade Steel: BG-42
Blade Length: 3 3/4" (9.5 cm.)
Blade Shape: Clip

The $30 Buck 110 in 420HC will do you just fine, however. Same blade length and shape.
 
Try reducing the angle of the cutting edge. On thick knives this can be a bit of work as alot of metal has to be removed. It is a common mistake many users make when they sharpen using too steep an angle. A steep angle may feel sharp but it will not cut well
 
jackknife said:
Most modern knives are just too thick. I think the macho soldier of fortune thing gets in the way. If you look at what the mountain men, and the frontiersmen of the even earlier Kentucky period carried, it was in essence a large butcher knife. About 1/8 inch if they were lucky.
Click to expand...

I disagree. There have always been thick knives. What is the macho soldier of fortune thing? Look at knives from traditional cultures (like Khukuri) they are often 3/8" thick or more at the spine.

Uath said:
I love my TOPS Moccasin ranger. I almost turned it into a fetish knife, the perfect blade...but wait. Remember the old Viking saying; never praise a sword until it's tried, or a day until it's over? Well, it's true.
I haven't deer hunted for years, but wanting venison, I went out this last weekend and killed one. I had my TOPS with me. There were definite problems:

It's so stupid thick.

First, I couldnt cut a piece of rope with it. I had to lay the rope down on my truck bed to cut it.
Second, Cleaning the deer was hell with it...it sucked.
Third, I beginning to doubt self defence. I don't know if it would even cut a malcontent throat. How could you depend on it in a knife fight?It would be a great stabber, but for slicing...it sucks.

I just ordered a Becker CU 7 for my hunting knife. I know it's 3\16 inch. I just couldn't go any thinner. Do Yall have any of the same problems with a .25 inch knife?
Click to expand...

TP-88.jpg


One glance at the knife and it is obvious.

The grinds and blade geometry suck. They wanted to make it tough so they used crappy primary grinds less than half the width of the blade. Probably very thick behind the edge as well.

A 1/4" thick knife (or thicker) with a wide blade and full flat grind is far superior. I have never been tempted to buy any TOPS knives, mostly because of their grinds. Here is a graphic that shows what I mean. The TOPS cross-section is in black, with the grind I would want in gray.

geometry.jpg
 
Thanks Bufford, good advice. I've always thought of myself as a good sharpener, but I did just what you said. The TOPS was just so thick I increased the angle to sharpen it. I just looked at the knife again, the edge itself (the part not covered by the black polymer) STARTS at 1\8 inch. I don't mind a 7 inch blade for hunting, actually a 2 inch blade would be fine, but remember, it's looks here that are important (we are knife nuts, OK).

PS, I just read the the Becker CU 7 has cut-outs on the tang. I didn't think Becker did that. I have a brute and a companion and neither of them do. I don't know if I can handle that. What do Yall think of the Ontario RAT 7?
 
I used to own a hunting knife made by a guy named Bill Moran. The blade was at least 3/8" thick at the base. However, because of the tapers and full grinds the edge was still very thin; at 1/4" up from the edge it was probably still no thicker than an Old Hickory butcher knife. It was almost a shame the thing was in perfect mint condition 40 years after it was made. I would have loved to use it, but couldn't bear to be the first one to scratch it. I am certain it would have sliced flesh as well as any thinner knife out there.

596.jpg
 
Uath said:
Thanks Bufford, good advice. I've always thought of myself as a good sharpener, but I did just what you said. The TOPS was just so thick I increased the angle to sharpen it. I just looked at the knife again, the edge itself (the part not covered by the black polymer) STARTS at 1\8 inch.
Click to expand...

That is way thicker than I thought it would be.
 
what you need is a sog field pup. They are about $50 and fit all the requirements everyone has listed. They get scapel sharp and were designed for this very task. I cary huge knives bk9, sog tigershark, ect but when it comes time to cleaning deer i reach for the field pup.
 
here is my revised graphic showing the TOPS on the left, with a decent profile on the right. It is pretty much to scale if the knives have ~a 1.3" wide blade

geometry3.jpg
 
Rat-
What kind of software are you using to generate those cross section illustrations? Is it something that's already standard in Windows, or something you bought later?
 
I used to own a hunting knife made by a guy named Bill Moran.
Click to expand...

See the broad, deep fuller on that Moran? Look at the Marbles Ideal, the prototype for the Ka-Bar combat/utility knife:
7" and 6"
8" and 4"

Now look at a simple, very thin blade instead:
A. G. Russell™ Deer Hunter and Bird & Trout

Each of these links includes explanations of the strengths of each style.

But you can have a thick blade and still cut and skin easily with it. I have a Fallkniven H1 which is a derivation of the puukko, with a convex edge on a 5 mm thick blade. Bark River also has some pretty thick blades, all with convex edges, and they slide through everything in food prep.

Go ahead and sharpen your TOPS to a 30 degree edge and see how much better it works. If you can put a convex edge on it, so much the better. Convex Grind FAQ
 
I think that the Spyderco Stretch is one of the best field dressers.
With his 3.5 inch, flat grind VG10 blade it cuts like a razor.
It is my favourite folding hunter.
 
the possum said:
I used to own a hunting knife made by a guy named Bill Moran.
Click to expand...

That handle looks interesting, any comments?

Uath said:
First, I couldnt cut a piece of rope with it. I had to lay the rope down on my truck bed to cut it.
Click to expand...

That is more of an issue of sharpness. Leave the edge with a fairly coarse finish and it will slice the rope well, even with a fairly thick/obtuse edge.

Do Yall have any of the same problems with a .25 inch knife?
Click to expand...


For such work as you noted the spine thickness isn't critical. You want the edge extremely sharp and secondly it should be fairly thin and acute. David Boye used to make drop point hunters which were ~1/4" thick and very narrow but still cut ver well as the edge was about 0.005" thick.


Take the TOP's blade. Regrind the edge to 10 degrees per side, then apply a microbevel at 15 leaving a section of it through the choil at the finish of a fine DMT (or similar) and raise the rest of it to x-fine DMT (or similar) and try similar work again.


-Cliff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top