Another Question From Dr.Bill

I used to carry the wrong knife for the job a fair bit. They were functional and high-quality blades, but they were chosen for reasons other than an awareness of the specific features I would most likely require in a given situation. In some cases, this meant carrying knives that were too large or not comfortable enough (grip-wise) for the tasks at hand.

As I came to be more familiar with knives as wilderness tools I started drifting towards 5-6" belt knives for my standard woods carry, and I haven't looked back. The blade shape changes often, but I think that this is the right length for me. Really, I need a knife that can handle food and fire prep, light de-branching for trail maintenance, and related tasks.

But a small knife can definitely go a long way. I cleaned a nice, big trout up in Algonquin last month with a tiny little Koyote PSK!

All the best,

- Mike
 
JCavSD said:
I suppose early on I was in the "bigger is better" camp. As time went on I started carrying based on environmental conditions. If I'm heading to the desert for a day a 3" or 4" blade will do just fine. If I'm motorcycle touring/camping all over the place for a week then I bring a larger knife to cover a wider variety of chores. I'd say my choice has become more refined over time.
Click to expand...

Yes Sir

I would agree they have at that!!!:thumbup:
 
Yes, Now that I think about it.I started with a much larger knife 7to 10"
and now it seams all I need is a 4".Or as long as it well reach across a tomato:D
Thanks for making me think Doc.:thumbup:
Hawkeye
 
I like using the same knife set often. I hope to wear them to stubs some day with the frequency of use. I'm not so concerned about size though. I just like to be handy with the tools I bring :D
 
I started out awesome, so my skills had nowhere to go. ;)

Actually, with all my big choppers, I must admit that I lean more and more towards my little Kellam SPT. Amazingly small list of things that it can't do.
 
I still like big knives, but as my skills have matured I am a lot more comfortable with smaller knives. I still usually carry a combination of blades, but the main knife has become smaller over time. I used to often have a 7-8" main knife with me, now more often than not its a 4-5" one.

At the same time I've become even more particular about certain features I want my main knife to have, both aesthetically and ergonomically, and the types of steel I'll use.
 
Hmmm....in looking at this as having this one knife as my only available cutting tool...as my skills have grown what I can work with has gotten a good bit smaller. I have learned techniques over the years that enable me to do many things with smaller knives that I didn't realize I could do at earlier stages of learning. I can get by pretty good with the right five inch knife and I can do more with a knife with a three inch blade than I once realized was possible. Under optimum conditions I am actually fine with either. However having seen just how quickly things can go south, having experienced true need for quick shelter and quick fire starting, and having suffered through hypothermia and severe frost bite I still prefer to have a heavy 6.5" to 7.5" knife to work with here in my neck of the woods, the South East U.S..
 
I always carry a Vick soldier. I really don't feel the need to had a huge fixed blade all of the time. In my day pack I have a cheapest of the cheap Mora. I do feel more confident and know I feel safe with just that. so I guess smaller.
 
Smaller, but tougher as well. I started out with a SAK as my main outdoor knife, then a 7" fixed blade, 9" fixed, back to a 7" heavy duty, a 6"HD, 4" HD folder, 4.5" thin fixed, 4.5" thin folder, and am now using a 4" HD fixed, and looking for a sub four inch HD folder. I still carry SAK's though.
 
What I prefer has definately gotten smaller. When I just went up to Canada I had no knife. I met up with some great forum members there and I had a truck load of knives to choose from. Anything from a 2.5" blade up to a 10" blade. I opted for the 2.5" Bruce Culberson knife that had a wicked thin edge.
 
tonym said:
What I prefer has definately gotten smaller. When I just went up to Canada I had no knife. I met up with some great forum members there and I had a truck load of knives to choose from. Anything from a 2.5" blade up to a 10" blade. I opted for the 2.5" Bruce Culberson knife that had a wicked thin edge.
Click to expand...

E-mail me some photos Bro:thumbup:
 
Good thread. I think there is some truth that the novice tends to gravitate towards the big blade but that doesn't necessarily lend itself to an interpretation that the skilled person always tends towards small.

I think you match your tools to your expectations and over time learn the skills to use each tool appropriately. At some point this leads you into a mindset that you really don't need a 7" blade for a dayhike and perhaps there are several circumstances (but not all) where gravitation to small is warranted.

Here is my current perspective on preferred carry which would bear little resemblance to my likes a year ago and may not resemble what I will like next year:

Day hiking and farting around carving: 2.5-3.5" knife + small SAK e.g. farmer, preferred

Overnighter with minimal need for wood prep (e.g. use of stoves): stout 4" knife (1/8" thick of 5/32") plus SAK (with saw) is preferred

Overnighter with moderate wood prep needs: 2.5-3" knife and 6" knife combo plus SAK.

Multi-day trip or winter trip with high wood prep needs: 4" knife, forest axe and take-down buck saw (oh yeah don't forget that SAK).

In the last category, my preferences haven't really changed at all. In the first two categories my preferences have dropped in size from the past.
 
kgd said:
Good thread. I think there is some truth that the novice tends to gravitate towards the big blade but that doesn't necessarily lend itself to an interpretation that the skilled person always tends towards small.

I think you match your tools to your expectations and over time learn the skills to use each tool appropriately. At some point this leads you into a mindset that you really don't need a 7" blade for a dayhike and perhaps there are several circumstances (but not all) where gravitation to small is warranted.

Here is my current perspective on preferred carry which would bear little resemblance to my likes a year ago and may not resemble what I will like next year:

Day hiking and farting around carving: 2.5-3.5" knife + small SAK e.g. farmer, preferred

Overnighter with minimal need for wood prep (e.g. use of stoves): stout 4" knife (1/8" thick of 5/32") plus SAK (with saw) is preferred

Overnighter with moderate wood prep needs: 2.5-3" knife and 6" knife combo plus SAK.

Multi-day trip or winter trip with high wood prep needs: 4" knife, forest axe and take-down buck saw (oh yeah don't forget that SAK).

In the last category, my preferences haven't really changed at all. In the first two categories my preferences have dropped in size from the past.
Click to expand...

Excellent reply and logic applied as well:thumbup:

Thanks for taking the time to post such a detailed answer!!
 
I got to say... Ken always gives very well thought out responses...I ALwayls look forward to his posts
 
I like the bigger blades, but the reality is that the majority of my knife usage in the woods is done with a 3 or 4 inch knife. I do tend to use a saw a lot more though, seems to be a more energy efficient way of going about things though. The only thing that I have a strong preference for a longer blade is for doing large amounts of food prep, like with a group camp. In that situation, I find it more useful to just bring along an 8 inch chef's knife rather than a thicker woods blade.
 
I have to say "D" all of the above.... lol... and I'll explain why.

As my skills increased, my reliance on gear decreased, my blades got smaller and my philosophies changed with regard to what you really need to survive. I was a big advocate for downsizing your blades. However, I still owned larger knives and had a blast using them in the woods. Though officially, I refered to them as toys and unnecessary.

"Anything past 3" is gravy!", was a line I often used.

Then I got to thinking.... Why wouldn't you want "gravy" when you need it the most? This became a huge dilema for me. I preached "go small" but knew darn well that in some instances a large knife could get the same job done, FASTER. Why was I refusing to accept that fact?

Then I thought "Why do I have to CHOOSE between them, at all?" Now, I let the occasion decide what edged tool I will carry. If I'm going on a day hike and do not expect to stay out longer, I take a small knife, feeling safe in the fact that I can make it work if things go bad. If I am heading out for a few days or more, I add a large blade to my kit because I know it will get used and make life easier. Then again, I throw reason to the wind and will take whatever blade tickles my fancy.... just because I can.

At this point in my life, a large blade is no more a crutch than an impact gun is to a mechanic.

Release yourself from the shackles of having to pick a side, GO FREEBLADE and never feel guilty again.

Rick
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top