ASEK with pics

M

ml100

Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
766
Just bought an Ontario ASEK:

135.jpg


Here, the specs:

Hardness 50-54 HRC
Overall Length 10.25 in (26.0 cm)
Weight 1 lb 2.6 oz (0.527 kg)
Blade Length 4.95 in (12.6 cm)
Blade Material 1095 Carbon Steel
Blade Grind Flat
Blade Angle 60 Degrees
Blade Thickness 0.184 in (0.47 cm)
Blade Color Black
Blade Finish Zinc Phosphate


First impressions:
The knife came razor sharp. The grip on the rubber coated handle is simply fantastic. I just wonder why they don't do it more often.
The knife is handle heavy, due to the hammer/glassbreaker pommel (a feature I love). The knife sits very well in the sheath, which comes along with a additional tool serving as a belt cutter, flat head screwdriver and sharpening stone. All these functions seem to be thought through, and work very well.
I had some reservations regarding the low hardness. I guess the idea behind that is, that one should be able to sharpen the knife on a pebble if necessary and to prevent chipping or fracture when abusing the blade.

First tests:

Stabbing through metal sheet:
Though that sheet was rather thick, the knife did penetrate without major damage. However, the impact did blunt the tip minimally (the tip was really perfectly pointed before). Well, that was nothing that couldn't be handled with 600 sanding paper in less than a minute. I have seen worse results on highly respected blades like a Seki made Seal 2000 and a Kabar Bowie. Actually a had expected more damage due to the low hardness

136.jpg


Spine saw:

Unidirectional saw teeth are anything but perfect for wood. using the ASEK for sawing through green wood means lot of sweat, little effect.
However, sawing through fibre reinforced plastic worked very well.

137.jpg


The blade is partially serrated with very fine serrations. And though I'm not so much a friend of serrations, doing feathersticks for lightening a fire is really fun with that blade. As far as I can tell edge retention is not that bad.

It couldn't be more fuzzy.
138.jpg


First conclusions

pros:
- very good sheath plus extra tool
- fantastic and safe grip
- universal blade
- effective hammer and glass (or whatever) breaker
- saw works well on plastic

cons:
- not a chopper
- saw does not work on green wood

I still have to evaluate the edge retention in comparison to other knives, like i.e. an ESEE 4 or a Seal Pup.

So far, I really love the knife and it makes my favorite (urban) survival tool. For the woods I would still take my F1.
 
Last edited:
I just had the chance to test the pommel regarding its effectiveness as a glass breaker. I was kind of surprised how easy it is to scatter safty glass.
 
chiral.grolim said:
If this knife interests you, you may be interested to know that the Gerber LMF II is considered superior for the purposes that this knife was designed for (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASEK). Just a thought...
Click to expand...

Why would you say it is considered superior? Your wikipedia link says the Gerber outperformed the Ontario regarding the electrical insulation. But that adressed the old Ontario model. Further , since 2005 gerber changed the steel type, and what you read about the current quality of the Gerber does not seem the best.
However, I haven't handled the Gerber yet.
 
Last edited:
ml100 said:
Why would you say it is considered superior? Your wikipedia link says the Gerber outperformed the Ontario regarding the electrical insulation. But that adressed the old Ontario model. Further , since 2005 gerber changed the steel type, and what you read about the current quality of the Gerber does not seem the best.
However, I haven't handled the Gerber yet.
Click to expand...
These are just anecdotes I've gathered from servicemen, but you can probably find a lot of reviews online. The wikipedia-link was a simple point of reference, and it includes the famous SFC Johnson photo.
From those soldiers I have spoken with, the USA-made Gerber LMFII is well regarded, whereas the Ontario is not, for such reasons as: handle comfort, pommel-design, serration effectiveness, length of plain cutting edge, steel durability & ease of maintenance (hardness, edge retention, and corrosion resistance), initial sharpness, reduced guard, sharpener, versatile sheath design, etc. Basically, the entire package offered by Gerber is considered superior. There was also a destruction test of the LMFII in which it performed admirably, better than the ESEE-4 (though there was no Ontario to compare to). But again, I am not saying that the Gerber is objectively superior, only that it is regarded as such.

In my own mind these two ASEKs are very different knives. I thought it prudent to advise readers that the Ontario is not the only ASEK and is not even very well liked, not to tarnish Ontario's reputation.
As for Gerber's reputation, it is only poor on internet forums and only because of their budget-priced Chinese products, although recently even those products have begun receiving higher praise (e.g. the BG line). It is funny that you don't hear much about Buck's poor quality imports... But the LMFII is not an import, it is made in the USA. I have never read a negative review on this Gerber beyond a couple from a single guy with obvious bias who takes great pains to discount it despite its widespread use and favor. *shrug* I didn't want to turn this into a company comparison, just a model comparison of two ASEKs. In Switzerland, I'm not sure how likely you are to find someone who has the other model for you to compare it with, but I hope you do. Anyway, neither is a knife I'd take into the woods over the others you mentioned which are MUCH lighter and have better cutting geometry, so my ideas of what make a good woods-knife likely parallel your own. *shrug*

Thank you for the review and excellent pictures! :thumbup:
 
Thanks your input is appreciated. Guess I have to go to a store to handle the LMF.
 
Some pics and tests.

002-3_zps8fd71e15.jpg


I did some batoning, and I had to hit quite hard, because of the knot.

003-1_zps7200f5e8.jpg


Cutting through rope isn't a big deal, but I guess that was to be expected

004_zps6bdeff30.jpg


The microserrations on the cutting edge produce very fuzzy feathersitcks, perfect for firestarting.

005-1_zpsbb3f7b63.jpg


Hitting on the the pommel drives the knife easily into hard wood. I just don't know, what that would be good for:D

007-2_zps9602985b.jpg


The belt cutter with the integrated sharpening rod. Gimmickly? May look like, but I actually works.

008-3_zpsecedc6d3.jpg


Well, the longer I use it, the more I like it.

I will add some more pics and a comparrison to the knife issued to the swedish pilots, the Fällkniven F1.
 
The swedish army does obviously have a different concept when it comes to pilot knifes. They give a Fällkniven F1 to their pilots.
201_zps236897b0.jpg


More to come
 
Due to the blade shape and absence of an upper guard, the F1 make the much better bushcrafter.
Using the spine of the blade of the F1 for striking a firesteel is very effective. Due to the saw on the spine of the Ontario ASEK, getting sparks from the firesteel works very poorly. Controlled cutting and carving is difficult with the ASEK because resting the thumb on the blade's spine is very uncomfortable due to the saw teeth. Further the F1 hold a much better edge.

So in conclusion, the ASEK is well designed as an egress tool. The glass breaker works perfectly, a point where the F1 fails completely (I tried it with the exposed tang, but it is not what is was designed for, and it didn't work).

ASEK glass breaker result:
glas1_zps2e59041c.jpg


I suppose the ASEK make a much better fighting knife. But for the woods, the swedish are better equipped.

So the Ontario ASEK goes in the car, the F+ in the forest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top