7" Blade...Pointless?

Well, these are just barely over 7 inches and I wouldn't say they're pointless. For fighters, I find 7-8 in. is the sweet spot.

20151212_160053_zpsfxoywdy6.jpg


20151212_160107_zps9zn7bdfl.jpg


Other than that, I agree that I don't like that blade length in camping/outdoors knives.

20151212_155904_zpsn5ter3dr.jpg


I find they have to be 9+ (choppers, splitters, heavy axe or machete substitutes) or 3-4 in. (smaller tasks, carving, whittling) to be useful in my typical camping and hiking routes, trips and methods.

Of course, YMMV.
 
The man is from Wyoming. There's no way he's propagating control over civilian knives. I'm from the same state ;) 6850, well done for handling the situation like a man and apologizing. We've all been there!

To add to the discussion, I own a CRK Nyala, which would be perfect for detail work and skinning, a small hatchet and a Busse BGTG. To me, the BGTG would be used (it hasn't yet, it's brand new) to mainly chop/clear material or for defense purposes. I agree that a 10" blade would prove more useful in the outdoors, but I'm a sucker for the looks and weight of the Busse.
 
The 5.5-9 inch knives tend to be in that "too much compromise" size of knives. They're too big to do fine work well and too small to do heavy work well. My last knife in that range was the ESEE 6 and was exceptionally dissatisfied with its performance along with ESEE's traditional "you suck and I hate you" ergonomics.

My Sweet spots are usually in the 3-4.5 inch range for utility and 10 inch for choppers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top