anybody for a thinner Survive

I think calc is right on that the edge could certainly be thinner on the shorter models. I hear you on the 3.5, I haven't owned one but the Necker & NeckerII were both ~0.025 and 20-dps, awfully stout.
While the Necker and NeckerII I had were both plenty capable of hard use, they didn't have enough blade for me to really take them to task, and the edges were too thick for them to excel at slicing and skinning. If Guy had spec'd those down to 0.010" or less... :cool:
 
pjandyho said:
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?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you use it for. Like you said, for survival use, you might want a thicker blade. I find myself prying once in a while when I get impatient, which you definitely should not do. But... Sometimes I get lazy. And I definitely wouldn't do it with a very thin knife.

The important thing is that the spine thickness drops down before the edge, which the GSO does admirably. That way you get the best of both worlds.

chiral.grolim said:
If Guy had spec'd those down to 0.010" or less... :cool:
Click to expand...

They'd be downright scalpels... I can understand why he didn't, but man, I'd have liked to see that.
 
calc said:
The important thing is that the spine thickness drops down before the edge, which the GSO does admirably. That way you get the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. This is what I love about Guy's designs and a nice tall, saber grind. You get the full strength of the spine with the top portion of the blade, but if the ground portion is tall enough then it has the same geometry of a less tall full flat ground blade.
 
Last edited:
Standard78 said:
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.
Click to expand...

McVeyMac said:
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.
Click to expand...

calc said:
Depends on what you use it for. Like you said, for survival use, you might want a thicker blade. I find myself prying once in a while when I get impatient, which you definitely should not do. But... Sometimes I get lazy. And I definitely wouldn't do it with a very thin knife.

The important thing is that the spine thickness drops down before the edge, which the GSO does admirably. That way you get the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...
I see. Thank you guys for being patient with a novice here. I can see why a thinner blade is needed. From all your posts here, may I also assume that a thinner blade would be best offered in a 3.5 or 4.1 configuration? I figure that anything longer than those configurations would best be reserved for survival applications like chopping, batoning and general camp craft where a thicker blade might be tougher in such an application?
 
pjandyho said:
I see. Thank you guys for being patient with a novice here. I can see why a thinner blade is needed. From all your posts here, may I also assume that a thinner blade would be best offered in a 3.5 or 4.1 configuration? I figure that anything longer than those configurations would best be reserved for survival applications like chopping, batoning and general camp craft where a thicker blade might be tougher in such an application?
Click to expand...

I definitely couldn't disagree with your assessment. I think Mr. Ethan Becker said it best when he said all knives are a compromise. Yes, there can be the ideal knife for the job, but the individual has to decide on what the job is and what knife is prefered. Some people do want an indestructible sharpened pry bar, but others may want a 6 inch scalpel. From my limited use and experience, I think Guy has found a really good balance. This doesn't mean we can't all hope for our individualized preferences, though :)
 
I'm really excited for the GSO 4.5 "bushcraft" knife coming up, with its blade thickness of 0.115 in 3v. I think that will be the happiest marriage of features I've enjoyed across the survive spectrum all in one.
 
Standard78 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yea I hear ya, Standard. No doubt the tall flat grind of the esee is part of the the perception and after reading all the post it is clear that Guy has really found a sweet spot for the survival type knife. I guess I generally prefer a slightly thinner profile due to the advantage in slicing which is what my use is for mostly but I sure love his knives. I mean they are some great knives. Of all that I have used, I keep being drawn to the 6. Only wish I had waited for the larger handle.
 
Last edited:
Fanglekai said:
.85 thick has to be a typo. That'd be ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Silver Needle doesn't make typos. In an effort to outdo Busse and Miller Bros, Guy made his GSO 5 almost an inch thick.

Ok ok... good catch. :)
I've corrected my wrong doing and misinformation.

pkd3 said:
the new line of gso knives have longer handles correct?
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, longer by 0.3 of an inch. Did I forget you have an old spec 6?
 
i don't think i ever mentioned that i had the original 6. Thinking i might try to get the new style for the longer handle
 
pkd3 said:
i don't think i ever mentioned that i had the original 6. Thinking i might try to get the new style for the longer handle
Click to expand...

I'm really looking forward to the longer handles in all models! I dont have big hands, but other brands got me accustomed to longer handles leaving more near the pommel.
 
chiral.grolim said:
I think calc is right on that the edge could certainly be thinner on the shorter models. I hear you on the 3.5, I haven't owned one but the Necker & NeckerII were both ~0.025 and 20-dps, awfully stout.
While the Necker and NeckerII I had were both plenty capable of hard use, they didn't have enough blade for me to really take them to task, and the edges were too thick for them to excel at slicing and skinning. If Guy had spec'd those down to 0.010" or less... :cool:
Click to expand...

We are working on it!
 
Standard78 said:
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.
Click to expand...

What he said
 
Riz2530 said:
What he said
Click to expand...

Riz, no doubt the flat grind and height of the blade contribute to the slicer feel of the esee, but my comments were really from my preference for knives just like the new gso knives but with thinner blades overall, probably 5/32 or less. Something much more robust than a flimsy kitchen thickness but less than the common 3/16 or even 1/4 inch knives that seem so plentiful. It seems from most of the post that I am in the minority and as I stated above I love Guy's knives. I have 4 of them but would probably settle on just one if I could get it a little thinner.
 
While I think that this is a cool conversation, I don't know if I am in favor of S!K making "thinner" knives. Maybe (probably?) the blade geometry on the S!Ks can be improved to increase slicing ability with no noticeable reduction in durability. However, to me, a HUGE part of the S!K value proposition is the fact that these knives are damn near indestructible. People can argue that "brand x" makes a tougher knife, but no one will deny that S!K is among the toughest knife brands out there. S!K is already freakishly sharp from the factory. I would hate to see the blades thinned out in an effort to increase slicing performance only to reduce their toughness...

I am jacked up on pain killers after a particularly nasty physical therapy session earlier today, so please forgive me if my post doesn't make sense. I just really like S!K and don't want to see them lose their focus on doing the things that they do so well, like making REALLY tough knives.
 
ncrockclimb said:
While I think that this is a cool conversation, I don't know if I am in favor of S!K making "thinner" knives. Maybe (probably?) the blade geometry on the S!Ks can be improved to increase slicing ability with no noticeable reduction in durability. However, to me, a HUGE part of the S!K value proposition is the fact that these knives are damn near indestructible. People can argue that "brand x" makes a tougher knife, but no one will deny that S!K is among the toughest knife brands out there. S!K is already freakishly sharp from the factory. I would hate to see the blades thinned out in an effort to increase slicing performance only to reduce their toughness...

I am jacked up on pain killers after a particularly nasty physical therapy session earlier today, so please forgive me if my post doesn't make sense. I just really like S!K and don't want to see them lose their focus on doing the things that they do so well, like making REALLY tough knives.
Click to expand...

I am squarely in this camp, without the PT and pain meds.
 
I don't have enough experience with different grinds and geometries and thicknesses, but I like how you're thinking, nc. I really like the toughness factor and in my personal use, I don't do enough food work or fine whittling to need a finer edge. Everyone in favor of increased thinness sure seems to know what they're taking about, though.

Hope you're feeling well soon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top