I got an email from dlttrading today about the Bark River Grizzly. (dlttrading is on bladeforums and I believe I've seen them posting, so hopefully I'm allowed to mention them.) It's got about a 9 inch blade and almost .28 of an inch thick of CPM3V steel. Has a big fuller.
Now, don't get me wrong. I think it's a nice knife and I like it overall, otherwise I wouldn't be posting about it. But one design aspect I don't get is the combination of thickness of the knife plus the huge fuller. Presumably, the fuller is there to reduce weight. If the fuller wasn't there, couldn't they have done a 1/4 or 3/16 inch thickness instead? That would have reduced weight. Why make a thicker blade, only to add a fuller? What do you think?
I would have preferred a little more substantial half guard also, to keep fingers off blade on a strong thrust into the ground or ice in an emergency. Meh, I think I'll pass on it.
Now, don't get me wrong. I think it's a nice knife and I like it overall, otherwise I wouldn't be posting about it. But one design aspect I don't get is the combination of thickness of the knife plus the huge fuller. Presumably, the fuller is there to reduce weight. If the fuller wasn't there, couldn't they have done a 1/4 or 3/16 inch thickness instead? That would have reduced weight. Why make a thicker blade, only to add a fuller? What do you think?
I would have preferred a little more substantial half guard also, to keep fingers off blade on a strong thrust into the ground or ice in an emergency. Meh, I think I'll pass on it.