7" Blade...Pointless?

Understood 6850. I can't hold one minor incident against somebody, especially when they apologize.
I have to admit though, I was a little stumped as to why you were mentioning the .308, and then In remembered what my user name was. I actually pulled that number out of thin air because Wyoming was already taken. I don't even own a 7.62x54/.308 Win. I am, however, I big fan of the 7.62x63, i.e. the .30-06. So I guess everything is alright.
 
Developing your preferences with knives is just that. If you prefer the larger 10" blade, that's fine. I seldom carry two fixed blade knives in the woods. Usually have a folder and a fixed blade. Using "use" as a reference point, the small folder can handle all the small tasks and the beast can handle everything else. But, you have to be willing to actually carry that 10" fixed blade and then use it; not just use the folder for almost everything. That has been my experience..... I use the folder for almost everything and really don't feel lacking when I don't have a larger knife. So, I generally leave the beastly fixed blades at home.

Started carrying a BK-15 as my general all around knife in the woods. I have others in the 4-6" size range. I can baton with it if I choose or at least as much as I would do. I carry a folding saw for the larger stuff. The saw just gets tucked away inside my pack until I might need it. It boils down to what you actually do in the woods and if you prefer the 10" fixed blade, more power to ya as you have found what you like.

Even when I carry a 4-6" fixed blade with a folder, the folder gets 90% of the use. Is it worth carrying then? That is the question I ask myself every time I head to the woods when I am not hunting. Hunting is different.

Be happy with your choices.

I might add that when I know I will need a larger blade, I usually chose a short machete. I have several Condors that I am most comfortable with chopping or wacking limbs and so forth. Yes, it does a much better job than the 4-6" blade. But I could probably get by with a BK-7 if I wanted to. But I don't. It just sits in its box at home. A 7" fixed blade is not pointless as it doesn't flop around as much on your belt for minimal use.
 
Last edited:
6850, thanks for being a good guy and and admitting your over the top comments, I appreciate someone being honest and having enough class to set it right. Now for the OP, I have always liked the 7 inch blades, jack of all trades, master of none, just feels good in the hand. I have used my BK 9 to chop off pesky limbs, very efficient, but too big for smaller tasks that the 7 incher could do better. Combo is better, big blade and a smaller one. For a long time, I was interested in 8 inch blades, just fiddling with the bigger than 7 inch blades idea. This thread has got me thinking about the old Nessmuk trio again.
 
I'm a pretty short guy so my reasoning is as much based on comfort with what I carry as a sheath fixed blade on my belt- 4-1/2" to 5-1/2".
More than that and I'm strapping the knife/chopper to a pack or carrying it with a shoulder sling. Always carrying a folder in the 3" to 4" range and when I carry a fixed blade I have found that there is not much of the routine things that I can't do with my 4-1/2" fixed blade and/or my folders. If I were heading out into the wilderness for a extended bit I would certainly be carrying (in some fashion)) something in the 9" to 11" range.
 
Wyoming, what blade do you carry in the woods or on the trail? Or are you trying to decide what you like?
 
My regular carry knife is a Buck Vanguard (looking to get something new, too) and I also carry a hatchet on the trail. I like 10" blades, but, and I think (but not sure) I said this on the original post, I prefer a small axe if I can have it along with a knife in the 4-5 inch range.
 
I think a skilled hunter/outdoorsman can accomplish a lot with a 7" blade. Like the saying goes- it's not the tool, it's the craftsman.

I've seen highly experienced outdoorsmen make good use of a variety of blade lengths, including 7". Many of the "old-school" outdoorsmen that I have met used whatever knife was available to them, or left to them from their father, they didn't have knife stores with glass cases full of knives to choose from, or the internet.

Many people get the job done with whatever is available to them. Having a lot of choices makes people a lot more particular and discriminating when it comes to their equipment, trying to find the "perfect" option.

On a related note- I once saw a video of a native living down in a south american rain forest who used a machete for everything. From clearing a path in the jungle, to building a temporary shelter, to skinning animals and cleaning fish, to fine wood-carving.

Like I said- it's not the tool, it's the craftsman. And I'm sure a skilled craftsman could be well- served out in the wilderness by a wide variety of blade sizes, including 7".

Back during my days of being an outdoorsman, I carried an old Marine KABAR (7" blade), and it served me just fine. Also carried a Buck 110.
 
Last edited:
Svord Hunter 7" as a compromise knife
SV280H.jpg

for those pighunters who don't want to carry both a sticker & a skinner.
gallery_image_0068.jpg
Svord%20Curved%20Skinner%20-%205.75%20Inches%20-%20Mahogany%20Handle%20Model%20%20677BB%20copy.jpg
 
The Vanguard is a nice knife. I have one and it makes a very good hunting knife. If you want to try out a big blade without much money spent take a look at the Condor Kumunga (10"). It is pretty beastly and kind of fun. The Condor Moonshiner at 9" is similar to the Kabar Becker BK-9.
 
6850 said:
Wyoming 762,
My apologies sir...
That came off much too strong.
i often carry big fixed blades, we can't carry handguns in Canada, or Alberta.
And lately after another stabbing the cry of banning knives is heard!
I think some of you in the U.S. Already have such laws re blade length etc.
You are right, many jobs don't require a large blade...
And most chores a
Can be handled by a reasonable length blade, be it 4" or 7".
I guess my paranoia led me to post before thinking thoroughly.
I did stick hogs for 5 years with an Old Hickory sticking knife, provided by the company.
That was in 1984, today that same knife costs $12 yup,,12 bucks.
No guard, no nothing, including no edge out of the box. And by the time they would give us a new knife, the blade looked like a 4" Arkansas toothpick.
But after all that, knowing I can kill 10 pigs a minute for 9 1/2 hours with a $5 knife...
I still chose to carry a big fixed blade.
Maybe I'm compensating? Who knows.
But I feel more comfortable with too much knife, than not enough.
Even making me look worse, I also carry two folders all the time... Why?
Probably because the fixed blade is too long for most chores...
Again, I'm sorry I got my back up over nothing...
Peace Wyoming 762, I hope.
E
Click to expand...

Well done 6850.
 
I'd like to offer up a hearty "good show" to 6850. Rare form on forums these days.

Waaaay back when, I carried a Marine Combat knife made by Camillus, and used it for damn near everything. I guess since I cut my teeth with a 7 inch blade, I have become very comfortable with it. Is it a better chopper than a 10 inch blade? Nope. Better skinner than a 3 1/2 inch Sharpfinger? No way. (Old Sharpfinger, that is.) But for some reason, a 7 inch blade is a kind of "sweet spot" for me.

I now carry a Camillus / Fisk OVB Bowie with the 7 inch blade. It carries like it's made of smoke... magical really. Using it is even more fun. The blade is long enough to perform light chopping, yet short enough to do fine whittling and carving. Where it really excels is food prep, where it functions like a well balanced chef's knife. In camp, this thing is as comfortable splitting kindling as it is spreading mayo on my salami samwich.

It's kind of a Jack of All Trades, Master of None maybe, but when you call on one knife to do all trades, it's a hard blade length to beat.
 
I would say the 7" is pointless except for dedicated fighters that are very slim and light, to be carried concealed in a lightweight shoulder harness for instance... Possibly daggers or slim single edges.

The huge loss of chopping performance is barely hinted at here...:

PA266683_zpsqsvlqvuz.jpg


Gaston
 
Wyoming762 said:
I'm having a hard time figuring what point 7" blades serve in wilderness, survival, or camping situations. A 4-5" inch blade is good because it can clean animals and do detailed work. And while I have always prefer a hatchet along with my smaller fixed blade, a 10" blade is good because it can do most of what a hatchet can, and can still do a lot of what smaller blades can do. In my mind at least, if you can't have a detailed work knife and a chopping tool but have to chose one blade, it would make sense to choose a 10" because it can do what a hatchet can do but still clean things and what not if you have to.
But then along comes the 7" blade as some sort of compromise. But it really can't do anything good. Of course it can cut smaller branches and be batoned better than the 4-5" blades, but you don't get much in the way of what a bigger knife can do. So you sacrifice the small knife's qualities without getting many of the bigger knife's qualities. I'll concede that if you are carrying a 7" knife it's okay, but if you, intelligently, decide to carry more than one cutting tool in the bush, it makes absolutely no sense to me to have a 7 incher paired with anything.
Maybe I'm ignorant to a lot of things regarding stuff I just said, so those who disagree with the above please correct me. I'm not interested in trying to prove a point, I'm trying to start a dialogue that I can learn from.
Click to expand...
My favorite field knife is the ESEE 6. But being as it is ESEE making the RAT 7, I consider it in the same class as a 7" blade. It is a very useful knife, and I pair it with a Junglas. So I do not agree with the theory posed in your post.
 
I agree, 6.01" - 7.99" blades are seemingly redundant IMO.

A good 4"-6" blade can baton fine enough, (as well as a 7" blade) and a good 8"+ blade can carve well enough, not great, but just as awkwardly as any 7" option.

I would opt for a 4-6" utility blade plus a 8"+ chopper, or one or the other, over a 7" blade (6-8) any day.
 
Last edited:
Gaston444 said:
I would say the 7" is pointless except for dedicated fighters that are very slim and light, to be carried concealed in a lightweight shoulder harness for instance... Possibly daggers or slim single edges.

The huge loss of chopping performance is barely hinted at here...:

PA266683_zpsqsvlqvuz.jpg
Click to expand...

That is a good show and tell picture and relevant to the discussion. My take is this...... big knife is about as good as a hatchet in terms of chopping; a bigger knife (>9") is better. Bigger knife is not as efficient as an axe. But bigger knife is probably easier to carry than an axe. So, you make your decisions.

I was a no hatchet person for many years. Now I am starting to lean back towards the hatchet simply because it can be more easily used for pounding. But, I flip all over the place on this issue. My Fiskars axe (aka big hatchet) hasn't seen much use. I have a CRKT Chogan and have yet to really use it except in the back yard. That may be all the use it sees.... I just like knives. Have a number of axes in my garage. They seldom get used anymore simply because most of my cutting is limited to small stuff. There are better ways to split up a bunch of wood for the fireplace or wood stove than a regular axe. I have a gas fireplace and no wood stove.
 
I find a 7" blade very useful. I'm not a knife malletier, nor do I use a knife for trail clearing or chopping. The largest knife I own is a 11.75" blade and it is used for halfing melons at home. Then I enjoy a 9" carver for slicing brisket. The largest knife I would take out camping is a 7.5" and it would be used to quarter and process large game. Plus, some cutting around camp. A 4" skinner I find most useful with general camp duty and wood craft. Then my Estwing hatchet is the real work horse. I wouldn't go camping or hunting without it. DM
 
When I first starting getting into knives, I noted the SAR members here used knives in that size range. I find them versatile and a great part of my collection.
 
I have seen Gaston's picture several times including where the knife weighed more than the hatchet and the hatchet wins by design (handle length/profile) and how it's weighted in terms of chopping performance.

All that being said, context of skill and environment should be a consideration, not to mention overall weight. What you use in the boreal forest, temperate forest, desert, sub-tropics, etc. may dictate what works best. I usually play in mixed-hardwoods and many times forego a chopper in lieu of a light folding saw because of the weight, size, and it is something you can use safely in the dark being just one example.

I know someone will add this quote from Kephart's 1917 book Camping and Woodcraft, so I might as well put it out there now...

“A woodsman should carry a hatchet, and he should be as critical in selecting it as in buying a gun. The notion that a heavy hunting knife can do the work of a hatchet is a delusion. When it comes to cleaving carcasses, chopping kindling, blazing thick-barked trees, driving tent pegs or trap stakes, and keeping up a bivouac fire, the knife never was made that will compare with a good tomahawk..."
 
I remember as a youngster, years ago, the old timers usually used a pocket knife or a very small sheath knife. There was always a hatchet or ax in the camp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top