anybody for a thinner Survive

P

pkd3

Joined
Aug 8, 2000
Messages
163
Like if you had a 6 about the thickness of an esee 6. That thickness really appeals to me for its versatility while still being robust enough for heavier duties outside of the kitchen. I mentioned this in the gso 6 thread and Guy commented that he had thought of a "kitchen line" of knives perhaps but I was thinking more along the lines of knives just like the current GSO line but in an esee 6 like thickness. Maybe an option to have a GSO 6 lite, or something like that. Am I alone on this?
 
Check the specs, my friend. ESEE site has their 6 listed as a 0.188 thickness and the GSO 6 is listed as 0.185 thick.

What do you think?



Edit to correct GSO specs.
 
Last edited:
wow, i wasn't aware of that. seems noticeably thinner thanks for the heads up
 
Maybe that ESEE coating is like a black dress on a woman... slimming effect ;)

I can take a pic of my GSO 5 and ESEE 6 later tonight.
 
I like that slimming effect woman in black dress that would definitely explain my perception of the esee:D
 
My ESEE 6 and 7 are about 0.195" at the ricasso. Probably 0.188" stock with the added thickness of the coating.

My GSO 6 and 7 are both about 0.190" thick at the ricasso.

My GSO 4 is about 0.155" at the ricasso.

My GSO 5 is hiding from me at the moment. Mike
 
Great info, Mike. Thanks!

Here's a shot of my ESEE 6 with black coating.

Whoa! Totally the wrong pic. I'm so embarrassed!

I'll get a real comparison pic up, if not tonight then tomorrow for sure!
 
Both the Esee 6 and the GSO 6 are close to 3/16. The GSO 6 is a hair thinner at .003
 
Ok ok, so clearly I'm not the photographer that LarsL is. Getting a good angle without the world's worst lighting was harder than I thought.


 
I like my ESEE 6, but I like yours with the black dress, er, ahem, coating much better Silver Needle. Mike
 
calc said:
Definitely. I was lucky enough to try a Fiddleback Bushfinger a while back, and I thought it was a great example of keeping the spine thick enough for harder use while still getting thin enough behind the edge to be an efficient cutter.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/1283158-Production-Bushfinger-Pass-Around-4
Click to expand...

Fiddleback Production Bushfinger (nice review, btw) is the same thickness as the GSO-4.1 which happens to be the same size - 5/32" stock.
Edge-thickness of the Bushfinger? The edge on my GSO-4.1 is <0.020" and it cuts very well indeed. It isn't as efficient as the ScrapMax I used to have (0.093 spine, 0.010 edge) or the customs I have from Tim Johnson (timos- on BF) which are both 1/8" spines and <0.010 edges, but that 0.020" lends a great deal more confidence in what the blade is capable of :cool:

The GSO-3.5 pre-order is spec'd at 0.14" stock, not quite 1/8" but almost there... If the edge gets down to 0.015", it's on par or thinner than many a folder out there, though the saber grind thickens it up a bit. For a kitchen line, <1/8" and FFG is right on the mark :thumbup: I'll be interested to see what comes...
 
chiral.grolim said:
Fiddleback Production Bushfinger (nice review, btw) is the same thickness as the GSO-4.1 which happens to be the same size
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Regarding thickness behind the edge, my 3.5 comes in at ~.025. Not sure what production run, but (speculation here) a newer (at the time) knife company probably has some variation. So I can't speak for all 3.5s.

The Bushfinger had come in under that, even after being sharpened a few times before I got my hands on it.

I mean, it's not a competition, different knives do different things. But I would have liked the 3.5 to have been a little thinner given its length.

It's not absurdly thick for its length or anything, as knives like the Izula are. It's actually much better than almost everything else I've measured. But if S! were to push the edge thinner, I wouldn't complain.
 
You could always try a regrind. Josh at Razor Edge did a great job on my Survive knife! Good customer service too. I couldn't be happier.
 
Hey pkd3,
I'm curious if you're talking about the grind of the knife? The Esee 6 is definitely skinnier throughout most of the blade because it's a full flat grind instead of a saber grind.
I owned a black Esee 6 and a OD green Esee 5 at the same time and I swear that the 5 looked like it was twice as thick! I think it's an optical illusion.
 
Sorry for a silly question. I figure that a thinner blade will make it easier to slice than a thicker blade, but isn't Survive! Knives made mainly for survival in outdoors applications? Now my question is what benefits would one get with a thinner blade than a thicker one? I thought the thicker one helps to split wood better when doing batoning and stuff like that?
 
I'm under the same assumption that these are survival knives. The only really benefit to me for thinner blades is slicy-ness and they're more detail oriented. That typically comes with a higher grind angle that weakens the edge holding capability.
I personally like the saber grind on these because they act like a wedge while chopping and the tips are really nice and stout. I don't cut vegetables or field dress game so a thinner blade really doesn't fit any role for me. I'm thinking that the new 4.5 Bushcrafter will be an awesome do-all knife for a lot of folks that want great detail knife that can still handle some lighter punishment.
 
Most of my kitchen knives are hand forged, and thin (about 3mm). My field knives are as thick as they need be for hard use, and no thicker. I think that 0.25" is way too thick if you have a good steel, resulting in excess weight. Slicyness vs. utility in other tasks such as shelter building and fire making. One tool cannot do everything well. As Standard78 mentions, the desired application should dictate the tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top