Almost any knife, within reason, can be used as a bushcraft/survival knife—do you agree?

[chevyrulez1]

Thanks for sharing, Brian. Would you say that a scandi grind is “essential” for a woods knife? Or do you think convex/full flat/hollow grind knives will get the job just fine?

I’m quite happy with my Moras for EDC. I’ve never done woodsy chores with them though lol.

Scandi grind is not essential for anything. In fact, I had never heard of it until a few years ago. People were hunting and camping and making fires and surviving in the wilderness and cutting stuff for many years before mora knives became popular.
They work well for wood carving and such, but definitely not essential.

 

[navman]

Best knife in a survival situation is the one you have on you. If all you have is a SAK, guess what, that is now your survival knife.

 

[Dagoth_Blur]

Thanks for sharing, Brian. Would you say that a scandi grind is “essential” for a woods knife? Or do you think convex/full flat/hollow grind knives will get the job just fine?

I’m quite happy with my Moras for EDC. I’ve never done woodsy chores with them though lol.

Scandi excels in wood. So if you plan on doing a lot of wood carving it may work best for you. Otherwise probably not.

Scandi also has the benefit of a stronger tip. Whether that is important to you is well...up to you. I'd be less worried about type of grind and just that the geometry of the specific knife is good (aka thin enough).

 

[J. Doyle]

Scandi excels in wood.

How so?

Scandi also has the benefit of a stronger tip.

Again, how so? Stronger than what?

 

[Dagoth_Blur]

How so?



Again, how so? Stronger than what?

A zero grind is most similar to a wood chisel. A tool which excels in shaping wood. A secondary bevel is generally used to create additional strength, that of which is often not needed in carving wood.

Not sure of your second question here, as it's self explanatory. The generally lower start to the primary bevel on a scandi ground knife leads to more meat at the tip of the blade. If zero ground perhaps not at the actual Apex however I would consider the tip being from where the primary bevel starts all the way to the edge. Also obviously the higher the scandi grind the less this benefit will be seen. Additionally the ratio of attainable sharpness of the blades tip via zero grind to overall durability is high. I can take a picture or draw a simple diagram to demonstrate this if you desire but that really shouldn't be necessary as it is basic geometry.

 

[aconitearms]

Dangerzone98,
I have used many grinds for all the tasks, it is personal thing. Scandis are easy for me to sharpen quick in the field. They cut wood well, and are also great utility knives. I still carry a saber grind with a redone convex edge but all my knives get there, even scandis eventually become convex scandis. As i use a belt sharpener and its how i do sharpen. Most knives its about the final sharpening, most all knives i get are reworked and sharpened. Its also your style of cuts and grip.
Thanks
Brian

 

[J. Doyle]

A zero grind is most similar to a wood chisel. A tool which excels in shaping wood. A secondary bevel is generally used to create additional strength, that of which is often not needed in carving wood.

A chisel excels at a very specific type of cut where a very specific outcome is desired. Chisels suck at general cutting. I've never seen any woodlore/bushcraft/woodcraft (or whatever silly marketing term one wishes to use) task that requires that specific chisel type cut. I've never even seen anyone demonstrate a single cut where a scandi grind "excels" over any other grind. All I ever see is the same parroted canned response of, "they excel at woodwork".

Not sure of your second question here, as it's self explanatory. The generally lower start to the primary bevel on a scandi ground knife leads to more meat at the tip of the blade. If zero ground perhaps not at the actual Apex however I would consider the tip being from where the primary bevel starts all the way to the edge. Also obviously the higher the scandi grind the less this benefit will be seen. Additionally the ratio of attainable sharpness of the blades tip via zero grind to overall durability is high. I can take a picture or draw a simple diagram to demonstrate this if you desire but that really shouldn't be necessary as it is basic geometry.

I'm glad you understand geometry. A taller grind will cut better than a scandi grind in every case.

I can take a picture or draw a simple diagram to demonstrate this if you desire but that really shouldn't be necessary as it is basic geometry.

 

[Danke42]

Best knife in a survival situation is the one you have on you. If all you have is a SAK, guess what, that is now your survival knife.

I tried to survive with a SAK but I was killed.

 

[SharpBits]

I tried to survive with a SAK but I was killed.

RIP

 

[Danke42]

RIP

I got better

 

[Dagoth_Blur]

I am not sure why you immediately move to disrespectful condescending comments. It reflects more on you than anything else. Treat others how you would like to be treated.

A chisel excels at a very specific type of cut where a very specific outcome is desired. Chisels suck at general cutting. I've never seen any woodlore/bushcraft/woodcraft (or whatever silly marketing term one wishes to use) task that requires that specific chisel type cut. I've never even seen anyone demonstrate a single cut where a scandi grind "excels" over any other grind. All I ever see is the same parroted canned response of, "they excel at woodwork".

This is primarily just strawmanning everything I said. You said cutting not me, I said carving (and to clarify even further I specifically value push cutting where your off hand thumb is pushing on the spine of the blade which is much of notching and small field carving tasks). Also you haven't seen a specific one of those tasks that use a chisel type cut? Are you being sarcastic here? I'm genuinely confused how you could make this comment. Perhaps you are using the term "require" literally, which if thats the case sure you are correct. A sharp rock could also work. What makes a scandi excel in wood is the zero grind. Again this is why chisels generally have no secondary. You give up apex strength for a thinner finer apex that can be placed directly on the cutting surface (not always in an absolute sense but in a tip strength to sharpness ratio). Edit: To add a scandi allows for a sharp zero apex while keeping the blade thin (top to bottom height) which is an obvious benefit in carving.

I'm glad you understand geometry. A taller grind will cut better than a scandi grind in every case.

This comment is nonsensical. A taller grind and a scandi grind are not mutually exclusive.

I can take a picture or draw a simple diagram to demonstrate this if you desire but that really shouldn't be necessary as it is basic geometry.

No worries mate I got one. Here is a Garberg at 3.2mm, a Joker Campero at 3.7mm, and a BK16 at 4.2mm Which tip looks more durable to you due to the reasons stated above? While the two on the right are full flats to demonstrate the point, the same is true with most saber ground knives as well. More meat at the tip as stated (not the apex however, unless a secondary/mb is applied). Pound for pound a scandi has better tip strength.

 

[Blues]

If public skirmishes continue to break out, infractions will be handed out.

Be civil, and if you can't, there are better places for you to post.

(Almost any conversation, within reason, can remain civil.)