-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Another Question From Dr.Bill
- Thread starter WILLIAM.M
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2003
- Messages
- 8,583
Great question! I know my skills have improved for sure. And my understanding of what kind of blade I REALLY need for the job has definitely changed as well. I won't say that my taste in knives has shifted to the smaller (as I love small to large) but I will say I am learning that they don't have to be 1/2 an inch thick for my purposes. 
Thinner knives are capable of much more than I originally thought (toughness wise).
Thinner knives are capable of much more than I originally thought (toughness wise).
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 12,196
Great reply---and I never want anyone to FEEL they have to carry a knife just because certain people say so.
But that HAPPENS----all the time.
As soon as one EXPERT says he carrys "this knife" it becomes a lot easier to sell to people ..(Perhaps not on this forum---but remember we are a lot more Knife knowledgeable than most people )
We can(and should ) carry whatever we like and feel we could benefit from..
I was just interested in seeing how experience changed the choice of cutlery-or if it changed it at all.
And I thank you for your fine answer---VERY well thought out!!!
Dr.Bill
- Joined
- May 5, 2003
- Messages
- 2,493
I might be the odd duck and say that my knife choices may have leaned toward the larger side.
In my youthful years, I was always content to have a small stockman in my pocket. The only time I carried a fixed blade was while deer hunting, and that was because it was easier to clean than a slipjoint after a field dressing job. In my neck of the woods, only greenhorns and "flatlanders" (hunters from the city, downstate) carried big blades, so even my fixed blade whitetail knife was small (3.5").
But a growing interest in knives led me to larger blades, and a growing awareness of "survival" (Who worried about surviving when they were twenty-something? Back then, I never considered the fact that something could go wrong in the outdoors) had me thinking of how important a larger blade could be.
And then there's the fun factor... if you really like knives then you might carry a large blade just because you want to.
In the big scheme of things, I think I could get by with a small knife if I had to. I also think I could kill any North American game with a .22LR if I had to. But if I can make things easier/safer, why shouldn't I? If you became injured deep in the Adirondack woods in winter, would you rather have a SAK, a Mora, or a big Busse/Ontario/etc.? I'll take the big one with no apologies.
I'm not out to prove anything by how large --or small-- my knife is. I have a broad collection, decent skills, and I'm able to pick the tool I prefer for the situation without worry about what anyone else might think.
Do what you want!
Stay sharp,
desmobob
In my youthful years, I was always content to have a small stockman in my pocket. The only time I carried a fixed blade was while deer hunting, and that was because it was easier to clean than a slipjoint after a field dressing job. In my neck of the woods, only greenhorns and "flatlanders" (hunters from the city, downstate) carried big blades, so even my fixed blade whitetail knife was small (3.5").
But a growing interest in knives led me to larger blades, and a growing awareness of "survival" (Who worried about surviving when they were twenty-something? Back then, I never considered the fact that something could go wrong in the outdoors) had me thinking of how important a larger blade could be.
And then there's the fun factor... if you really like knives then you might carry a large blade just because you want to.
In the big scheme of things, I think I could get by with a small knife if I had to. I also think I could kill any North American game with a .22LR if I had to. But if I can make things easier/safer, why shouldn't I? If you became injured deep in the Adirondack woods in winter, would you rather have a SAK, a Mora, or a big Busse/Ontario/etc.? I'll take the big one with no apologies.
I'm not out to prove anything by how large --or small-- my knife is. I have a broad collection, decent skills, and I'm able to pick the tool I prefer for the situation without worry about what anyone else might think.
Do what you want!
Stay sharp,
desmobob
- Joined
- May 16, 2006
- Messages
- 2,724
For me blade length is much less important than blade geometry. For all types of work, I'd prefer my Ranger RD7 with its 20 degree inclusive bevel and rounded shoulders to a factory ground Izula. What I can accomplish with a knife has more to do with how well it cuts and a thinner edged blade just cuts better.
Mistwalker
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2007
- Messages
- 19,043
My thing with this one is that while I have become much more comfortable with smaller knives, I have also become more comfortable with larger knives at the same time. While I never really plan on working that hard on a day hike, I do like to be prepared on longer outings, especially in the cold months, just because you never know. I do feel more limited having only a smaller knife than I do when having only a larger knife.
1066vik
Gold Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2009
- Messages
- 21,351
well, when I first went out in the woods all I had was a buck folding hunter.
Then I upgraded to a bayonet.
As I've gotten older, more experience, and better employed my choices in knives have increased in quality, but size depends on what I'm planning on doing that day or trip.
Regardless, I always have a SAK, a locking folder, and a multi-tool.
Then I upgraded to a bayonet.
As I've gotten older, more experience, and better employed my choices in knives have increased in quality, but size depends on what I'm planning on doing that day or trip.
Regardless, I always have a SAK, a locking folder, and a multi-tool.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2006
- Messages
- 1,079
I have really enjoyed the replies in this thread
When I asked myself this question I realized that from my youth to now I have learned to do the bigger jobs associated with large knives, using my smaller ones.
The opposite is also true, in that I have learned to do the more delicate tasks that small knives are usually used for, yet with my larger knives.
Sooo...I guess I have gotten better at doing all the tasks at hand with the knife I happen to have with me at the time.
Yet. I sure do enjoy collecting fatwood with a hatchet or a 17" khuk more than a small nessie
And cutting the holiday turkey with a seax is fun as well.
Cheers,
Mark
When I asked myself this question I realized that from my youth to now I have learned to do the bigger jobs associated with large knives, using my smaller ones.
The opposite is also true, in that I have learned to do the more delicate tasks that small knives are usually used for, yet with my larger knives.
Sooo...I guess I have gotten better at doing all the tasks at hand with the knife I happen to have with me at the time.
Yet. I sure do enjoy collecting fatwood with a hatchet or a 17" khuk more than a small nessie
And cutting the holiday turkey with a seax is fun as well.
Cheers,
Mark
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,397
Dr. Bill, Back in the day on the ranch. If I had work to do , fixing / clearing fense, Logging, cutting trails I would have a load of tools for these jobs or hunting. most of the time had an old timer liner lock or an uncle henry stockman. If out in the middle of now where and trying to get by I would be happy with what I carry the most a SAK trekker, a SAK Mechcanic(?) or craftsman(?) one or the other and a Kershaw blur. I know I carry to much but I like them.
i see everyone about there big knives picture of chopped green fire wood, if you have to get buy the stuff won't burn for crap, and i would use less energy just picking up small dead fall branches for a nice little fire.
If I had to dig something up, It would be better to sharpen up a digging stick and save your edge from the dirt and rocks.
Making shelter, don't need to chop the forest down, throw up a debris hut made mostly out of stuff found loose on the ground.
i love some of the big knives i see but to get by, I would say a 3 or 4 inch blade would do just fine. If you are out in a bad place conserve your energy and respect your tools
Pat
i see everyone about there big knives picture of chopped green fire wood, if you have to get buy the stuff won't burn for crap, and i would use less energy just picking up small dead fall branches for a nice little fire.
If I had to dig something up, It would be better to sharpen up a digging stick and save your edge from the dirt and rocks.
Making shelter, don't need to chop the forest down, throw up a debris hut made mostly out of stuff found loose on the ground.
i love some of the big knives i see but to get by, I would say a 3 or 4 inch blade would do just fine. If you are out in a bad place conserve your energy and respect your tools
Pat
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 7,035
I'd say mine stayed the same, but that doesn't tell the whole story.
More properly, mine have broadened. As I progressed in skill, I find that I can pretty much make anything sharp work.
It may seem like I'm calling people out, but I'm not. . .
But what does blade size have to do with confidence? IMO, it's trading one emotionally made decision "I can't go wrong carrying my sword into the woods" to another "I'm so skilled, I'll never get myself into a situation where I need a bigger knife.
The Unskilled = big knife, and skilled = small knife cracks me up, too. Let's face it, that's often what is said. If talking about big knives is likened to a contest to see who's penis is bigger, are the other guys bragging about whose penis is smaller?
No, I pick based on utility. Utility-wise, big sharp things are simply more capable and versatile than small sharp things. You can make an emergency debris shelter with your SAK? Great. So can I. But I can make it FASTER with my kukri. Depending on my situation, that may be the difference between living to see another penis contest, or having a nice gravestone with "He had skillz" written on it.
History is on my side on this one. In all cultures, the big tool (axe, machete, BFK, kukri) was the workhorse, everything else was the gravy. Even into modern times.
Go to Asia, what's the dominant tool for the "primitive/poor" people there? Parangs, kukri, goloks, etc. For northmen, it's the axe. Desert people often have a long (if not particularly thick) blades due to everything having spikes.
Modern woodsmen/survival types?
Ray Mears -- parang
Jeff Randall -- machete (IIRC an 18" is his sweet spot)
Mors Kochanski, Nessmukl, Dan Schectman -- axe (with Schectman and Kochanski going for a 3/4 axe rather than a hatchet)
Ron Hood -- BFK
They all say/said the same thing: if they can only have one tool, make it the big one. All guys with skillz, too.
However, I choose based on utility, right? Utility demands that you don't take only one tool. All of those cultures, and indeed all of the above people, also carry a small tool whenever they can. They just make small work easier. If the big tool is your workhorse, the small tool can be anything: 4-5" "bushcraft" blade, SAK, kitchen knife, whatever. Because you're not beating the snot out of it.
For this blade, I gravitate to 4-5" of blade. Why? Because we have come to value aesthetics over utility. Most will complain if a knife's handle is as long as the blade, for most people handle length = blade length is the upper limit on handle size. They also want the girth of the handle to be proportionate to the blade. Since I have big hands, this mostly limits me to 4-5" blades to get a comfortable one. However, if you look at working knives of past cultures, they would often have small blades with full size grips on them. Contrary to the charge of "It's unbalanced!" leveled at such a thing, they are actually much nicer because you have absolute control of that blade. A girthy grip also lends itself to less fatigue on the hand when using it for hours. So, yes, it may look stupid, but it works great. Unfortunately, to get such a beast, you pretty much need to have it custom made. Prepare to have the maker argue with you as well.
So, back to the original point: The size of my tools stayed the same, even across tools -- 19" axe, 20" kukri, 18" (22"OAL) machete, or a 14-16" BFK for the big tool and 4-5" for the "small" tool.
Specialized tools, obviously are not included (such as spoon knives, etc).
More properly, mine have broadened. As I progressed in skill, I find that I can pretty much make anything sharp work.
It may seem like I'm calling people out, but I'm not. . .
But what does blade size have to do with confidence? IMO, it's trading one emotionally made decision "I can't go wrong carrying my sword into the woods" to another "I'm so skilled, I'll never get myself into a situation where I need a bigger knife.
The Unskilled = big knife, and skilled = small knife cracks me up, too. Let's face it, that's often what is said. If talking about big knives is likened to a contest to see who's penis is bigger, are the other guys bragging about whose penis is smaller?
No, I pick based on utility. Utility-wise, big sharp things are simply more capable and versatile than small sharp things. You can make an emergency debris shelter with your SAK? Great. So can I. But I can make it FASTER with my kukri. Depending on my situation, that may be the difference between living to see another penis contest, or having a nice gravestone with "He had skillz" written on it.
History is on my side on this one. In all cultures, the big tool (axe, machete, BFK, kukri) was the workhorse, everything else was the gravy. Even into modern times.
Go to Asia, what's the dominant tool for the "primitive/poor" people there? Parangs, kukri, goloks, etc. For northmen, it's the axe. Desert people often have a long (if not particularly thick) blades due to everything having spikes.
Modern woodsmen/survival types?
Ray Mears -- parang
Jeff Randall -- machete (IIRC an 18" is his sweet spot)
Mors Kochanski, Nessmukl, Dan Schectman -- axe (with Schectman and Kochanski going for a 3/4 axe rather than a hatchet)
Ron Hood -- BFK
They all say/said the same thing: if they can only have one tool, make it the big one. All guys with skillz, too.
However, I choose based on utility, right? Utility demands that you don't take only one tool. All of those cultures, and indeed all of the above people, also carry a small tool whenever they can. They just make small work easier. If the big tool is your workhorse, the small tool can be anything: 4-5" "bushcraft" blade, SAK, kitchen knife, whatever. Because you're not beating the snot out of it.
For this blade, I gravitate to 4-5" of blade. Why? Because we have come to value aesthetics over utility. Most will complain if a knife's handle is as long as the blade, for most people handle length = blade length is the upper limit on handle size. They also want the girth of the handle to be proportionate to the blade. Since I have big hands, this mostly limits me to 4-5" blades to get a comfortable one. However, if you look at working knives of past cultures, they would often have small blades with full size grips on them. Contrary to the charge of "It's unbalanced!" leveled at such a thing, they are actually much nicer because you have absolute control of that blade. A girthy grip also lends itself to less fatigue on the hand when using it for hours. So, yes, it may look stupid, but it works great. Unfortunately, to get such a beast, you pretty much need to have it custom made. Prepare to have the maker argue with you as well.
So, back to the original point: The size of my tools stayed the same, even across tools -- 19" axe, 20" kukri, 18" (22"OAL) machete, or a 14-16" BFK for the big tool and 4-5" for the "small" tool.
Specialized tools, obviously are not included (such as spoon knives, etc).
- Joined
- May 19, 2007
- Messages
- 7,745
I'd say that for me as my skill has improved I've moved to simpler knives, and felt more comfortable with less. For example my first few knives besides a mora all had saw backs, something that i would avoid now. I've also moved away from combi-edged blades, and guards. I would say that size has changed some, I used to think that bigger was always better, however I've learned that for 90% of what I do an RC/esse3 is as big as I can effectively use, for fine work anything larger is awkward for me.
That said, I've learned the purpose of and use of larger blades for chopping. Like my ka-bar khuk.
I've also in the last year learned just how useful a SAK can be, and how to use it effectively, I think this comes from being a long time user of multi-tools and learning how to get the most out of them by using each tool to its potential. Given the choice of a SAK or a larger locking folder, a year ago I'd have gone for the locker, now however, I'd be going to the SAK unless there were very good reasons for the locking knife.
Has my skill changed how large my knives are, yes, but more importantly it has changed how I view them. while the trend is towards smaller, I wants me a Junglas something bad!
That said, I've learned the purpose of and use of larger blades for chopping. Like my ka-bar khuk.
I've also in the last year learned just how useful a SAK can be, and how to use it effectively, I think this comes from being a long time user of multi-tools and learning how to get the most out of them by using each tool to its potential. Given the choice of a SAK or a larger locking folder, a year ago I'd have gone for the locker, now however, I'd be going to the SAK unless there were very good reasons for the locking knife.
Has my skill changed how large my knives are, yes, but more importantly it has changed how I view them. while the trend is towards smaller, I wants me a Junglas something bad!
Smaller. However, this is combined with a better understanding of steels. grinds, edges. point geometry, and handles. Also, a greater diversification in accomanying tools. The use of machetes, axe/hatchet, and more importantly, small bow and folding saws. Removal of all tools, except the knife, and I will move right back to a larger knife. I EDC a fixed knife on my belt daily. Due to current laws, I keep it under three inches so that I am not hassled. My current setup (in my EDC bag) includes a four inch NWA Scout, but with a folding saw and hatchet.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 7,035
Dunno man, chainsaws are very inefficient choppers -- they're more of a ripper. . .
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 2,389
Dunno man, chainsaws are very inefficient choppers -- they're more of a ripper. . .
HA! Thanks for correcting me!
Wow! Doc, you sure got a lot of folks thinking... but your posts do tend to do that.. thanks !
I started carrying a knife in my pocket when I was five or six (1945) because my father was never without his KeenKutter 4-blade. Mine was probabably a hand-me-down so I could learn to sharpen it without destroying something new and expensive... I started getting at home outdoors, often solo, when I was about seven, and always had the pocket knife, which was later joined by a 6 in. Solgien "hunting knife" (complete with blood groove) when I was ten or so. Entrance nto the BSA made some modifications, primarily to acquire "official" tools (generally Western); back then, it was pretty much expected that a Scout carried the multi-purpose pocket knife, and would always have a 4-5 in sheath knife (official) on his belt, plus the much-maligned scout ax (hatchet - usually a Plumb) in the pack.
For me, this combo evolved with my skills to a small SAK (with scissors), and the smallest of Case's XXX sheath knives (about three and a half inches, I think) lashed to the frame of my Kelty pack. If any real woodcutting was anticipated, there was a Snow & Neeley Hudson Bay axe that also traveled on the outside of the pack. I had a short romance with an army surplus machete, but the Hudson Bay was invariably considered my "serious" tool. This was the era of obsessive "Leave NO Trace" camping and backpacking, so most often the two smaller blades served all purposes, with the little Case taking care of "dirty" work - fish cleaning, tomato cutting, other food prep.
Once I became acquainted with this forum, I sorta lost control of my impulses on an all-too-regular basis, and began aquisition of a LOT of blades - from a genuine Tracker with companion blade, thru a couple of Randalls, three Busses, two Skookums, Benchmades, Moras, Spydercos (out the wazoo !), and a dozen or so examples of the work of some of the finest craftsmen represented on this forum... my EDC is most often a Spyderco native (!), rather than my small Sebenza, or the SAK farmer. I really like the work from Bark River, but going out for a day is likely to call for my F1 in a custom horizental sheath from ChuddyBear leather ....
Probably the only folding saw of note I have not tried is the Silky, but my LM Charge case with a half-inch ferro rod and a AA Fenix flashlight is going to be on my belt as well.
The alternative is a Dozier Louisiana (?) Traveler (4 in.) in a custom neck rig, but the LM will still be around.... or a Skookum. Often my "fun" knife is it the little pocket sheath knife frrom Off The Map in another ChuddyBear custom sheath. (DAMN! he turns out good leatherwork!)
I would like to think that my skills have improved from the times when I tried to open a can of beans with that !!*&#! Boy Scout knife... at least I cut myself a little less often...
While size has not varied a lot, I think the sophistication of tool selection has developed... often with a great deal of guidance from folks on this forum!
The Cpl. also nailed this one pretty good !
Thanks again for the post!
Docgra
I started carrying a knife in my pocket when I was five or six (1945) because my father was never without his KeenKutter 4-blade. Mine was probabably a hand-me-down so I could learn to sharpen it without destroying something new and expensive... I started getting at home outdoors, often solo, when I was about seven, and always had the pocket knife, which was later joined by a 6 in. Solgien "hunting knife" (complete with blood groove) when I was ten or so. Entrance nto the BSA made some modifications, primarily to acquire "official" tools (generally Western); back then, it was pretty much expected that a Scout carried the multi-purpose pocket knife, and would always have a 4-5 in sheath knife (official) on his belt, plus the much-maligned scout ax (hatchet - usually a Plumb) in the pack.
For me, this combo evolved with my skills to a small SAK (with scissors), and the smallest of Case's XXX sheath knives (about three and a half inches, I think) lashed to the frame of my Kelty pack. If any real woodcutting was anticipated, there was a Snow & Neeley Hudson Bay axe that also traveled on the outside of the pack. I had a short romance with an army surplus machete, but the Hudson Bay was invariably considered my "serious" tool. This was the era of obsessive "Leave NO Trace" camping and backpacking, so most often the two smaller blades served all purposes, with the little Case taking care of "dirty" work - fish cleaning, tomato cutting, other food prep.
Once I became acquainted with this forum, I sorta lost control of my impulses on an all-too-regular basis, and began aquisition of a LOT of blades - from a genuine Tracker with companion blade, thru a couple of Randalls, three Busses, two Skookums, Benchmades, Moras, Spydercos (out the wazoo !), and a dozen or so examples of the work of some of the finest craftsmen represented on this forum... my EDC is most often a Spyderco native (!), rather than my small Sebenza, or the SAK farmer. I really like the work from Bark River, but going out for a day is likely to call for my F1 in a custom horizental sheath from ChuddyBear leather ....
Probably the only folding saw of note I have not tried is the Silky, but my LM Charge case with a half-inch ferro rod and a AA Fenix flashlight is going to be on my belt as well.
The alternative is a Dozier Louisiana (?) Traveler (4 in.) in a custom neck rig, but the LM will still be around.... or a Skookum. Often my "fun" knife is it the little pocket sheath knife frrom Off The Map in another ChuddyBear custom sheath. (DAMN! he turns out good leatherwork!)
I would like to think that my skills have improved from the times when I tried to open a can of beans with that !!*&#! Boy Scout knife... at least I cut myself a little less often...
While size has not varied a lot, I think the sophistication of tool selection has developed... often with a great deal of guidance from folks on this forum!
The Cpl. also nailed this one pretty good !
Thanks again for the post!
Docgra
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 12,196
Thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed and WELL written answer!!!:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
I would say larger and better quality. I attribute part of this to men like William M. who like to post pics of great choppers. I love the feel of my Siegle chopper(thanks Doc) tied to my pack and the small confidence boost it gives me. I remember going into the woods with an Eastwing hatchet and a large trapper on many occasions. Would that duo still take care of my cutting needs? It probably would but I can carry what I choose. When I don’t carry a hatchet I do carry a large blade.