Basic-10, Choil or No Choil?

Basic-10, Choil or No Choil?

  • Choil

    Votes: 75 55.6%
  • No Choil

    Votes: 60 44.4%

  • Total voters
    135
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
1,513
If you could ONLY buy one, would it have a choil or be choil-less? My vote goes to ‘No Choil”. I want a pure chopping machine; in addition, I have never had such a large blade without a choil.

On a different note, as a LE, will these be numbered (were past LE Basics numbered)?
 
Choil! Will imo look better after grindin on it a bit, that and I dont need the extra length ;)
 
They both look good to me. As many have said, the choil is found on a lot of larger blades and can be useful. I voted no choil (since the OP asked if you could only have one which you would choose?). To be honest the statements in above posts about it looking like a kitchen knife has me thinking how awesome that would be. Why not place this beauty in the kitchen? Puts most of my existing kitchen tools into "tucked tail" mode.
 
I voted choil as well. The idea of the choil causing problems on a chopper escapes me.

I don't suspect needing to choke up for work...but it's there if needed, ever.
 
No choil for me.
To me a choil doesn't improve the comfort of using such a big knife for precision work. After all - how often do you guys use such a large blade for works that really need precision? And even if will be used for such jobs - I prefer to have the part of the edge that's nearest to the handle useable, instead of a choil. Choil helps only whe you cut away from yourself - like in sharpening a stick. But try to peel a potato with a choiled knife. While peeling a potato (or any vegetable or friut) you cut towards yourself and a choil doesn't help at all. Actually it makes the work much harder because you cannot use the part of the blade that's nearest to the handle, and that part is the easiest to have control over. Doing such work (cutting towards you) you also cannot use the choil comfortably, because of the width of the blade.
 
Choil on a large blade. Saying that, I wish it was a bit smaller, like the one on a smooth B9.

Isn't a choil suppose to make a choping knife stronger?
 
Last edited:
Voted No Choil - this would be my first big blade with no choil- my BWM and M9 both have choils, as do others...
 
Isn't a choil suppose to make a choping knife stronger?

You'd have to give some kind of reasoning behind that before making a claim of it. I don't see any reason why it would, your making the height of the blade smaller in a section, reducing the amount of metal available for lateral flexing. And most breaks happen at the center of percussion or at the tip, neither of which are affected by the ricasso or choil area of the knife.
 
You'd have to give some kind of reasoning behind that before making a claim of it. I don't see any reason why it would, your making the height of the blade smaller in a section, reducing the amount of metal available for lateral flexing. And most breaks happen at the center of percussion or at the tip, neither of which are affected by the ricasso or choil area of the knife.

Because, as I understand it, the compression force in front of the handle generated by chopping, will be evenly distributed along the arch of a choil, rather than concentrate in a point of a square angle in a choiless blade.
 
Last edited:
Because, as I understand it, the compression force in front of the handle generated by chopping, will be evenly distributed along the arch of a choil, rather than concentrate in a point of a square angle in a choiless blade.

But there are no square angles in the ricasso or the handle, the ricasso transition into the main grind is a smooth arch, and the ricaso to tang junction is a wide arch as well.

For the tang transision:
This image comes from DWRW
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...e-CGFBM-Vs-Trail-Master?p=7968462#post7968462
Busse-Basic9RadiusedTangVsColdSteel.jpg


For the ricasso to edge transition on the grind itself:
This is an example of a more extreme rendition of the curved transition, the basic 6 and 10 won't be as extreme if they follow the pics jerry posted, but it gives an idea of how jerry finishes off his grinds termination points. Either he uses a ball end mill or he finishes them in a way that creates a radius rather than a corner at all transition points
https://knifemods.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/busse-basic-11-knife/
bussebasic11-7.jpg


If you look at jerry's images of the basic series, all of the ricasso to main grinds are the same, both on the choiled and non choiled versions. Sharper and at a much smaller radius than the basic 11, but still radiused
BusseBasic6.jpg

Basic10Choil2.jpg

Basic10Choiless.jpg


I pulled up some 12 broken knife images, but rather than post a series of non busse knives showing where knives normally break and potentially implying that other manufacturers are sub par (most are not, the individual breaks are just a matter of steel choil, heat treat on that model, and stress risers on that model), I'll just say that of all the knife breakages I've seen, none of them were at the ricasso to edge junction on a non-choiled knife. I've seen breakages occurring at the choil, but it's always because of stress risers and cracks being present there (sharp filing marks and ridges, or heat treat problems). Nearly all of the breakages I've seen on 'combat' knives and general purpose (non-kitchen) have been half an inch away from the ricasso to edge junction, at the tip, or at the center of percussion. That makes sense because the majority of the stress is being centered on the center of percussion or the center of curvature when prying, not on the ricasso or handle. The Knives I've seen break at the handle/tang have been because of square junctions, which busse doesn't use.

So in generally I'd say it would be an extremely rare occurrence and unlikely that any knife, especailly the basic 10, would break at the ricasso to edge junction, and that adding a choil does not add noticeable strength to the area, which receives a small percentage of the stress applied to the knife.

If you read this opinion on a forum, did they give examples of knives that had broken at the ricasso to edge junction, where they may not have with a choil? did they give a reason behind why stress would be centered on that junction enough to cause failure before it happened at the tang junction or at the center of percussion/curvature?
 
Last edited:
No choil for me. I like to be able to choke up on a large knife, but I don't need a large, edge-reducing choil in order to do so. The ESEE Junglas has no choil and I can choke up on that just fine. I may get the choil-less Basic 10 and then grind off the bump below the hole, so that there is still space for a choked up grip (sacrilege, I know).
 

I need to be careful, as I’m getting close to being over my head here.

I think my previous statement was not entirely accurate sine occurring stress points during chopping should be moving along the blade, depending on the points of impact, and/or change of the grip, making your statement, that absence or presence of a choil is irrelevant during chopping, correct.

However, where I think a choil would be beneficial is during a heavy (in case of Busse knives, unrealistically heavy) batoning, with application of the force (a baton) at the spine of the ricasso, above where a choil would be. I’m basing this statement on my understanding (and bridge engineers would correct me if I’m wrong) of a hypothesis that rounded obtuse arches support the most average weight. The rounded arches tended to support more weight than the flattened arches, and the obtuse arches tended to support more weight than the acute arches.

There was a thread, I can’t seem to find, with a video of a guy trying to pound through a chunk of frozen fire wood and snapping the blade right at the handle, just where he was pounding. People familiar with the model of the knife (a non Busse kin) pointed out that this was a choiless model and therefore was easier to brake vs. had it had a choil.
 
I’m basing this statement on my understanding (and bridge engineers would correct me if I’m wrong) of a hypothesis that rounded obtuse arches support the most average weight. The rounded arches tended to support more weight than the flattened arches, and the obtuse arches tended to support more weight than the acute arches.

There was a thread, I can’t seem to find, with a video of a guy trying to pound through a chunk of frozen fire wood and snapping the blade right at the handle, just where he was pounding. People familiar with the model of the knife (a non Busse kin) pointed out that this was a choiless model and therefore was easier to brake vs. had it had a choil.

(Let me preface this with the same thing you said, I am so over my head on this having not taken any engineering courses and having no education in the subject at all. I will concede all my points if I find a decent argument against them from anyone. I'm just giving reasons I can think of on the side of arguing for no choil.)

But your not applying loads to the choil as you would a bridge, your applying shock loads where the stabalizing element on one end can only apply a very small amount of counterforce. With a bridge, the ends are anchored to the ground so that when you have a large load on it (say 1,000 cars) the weight is pushing down on the bridge, with the counter force being applied at both ends by the ground. In this case it would be as though the bridge only had one post in the center, when you apply enough force on one end you end up tipping the bridge in that direction. The maximum amount of counter force that can be applied is how much your muscles can supply to keep the handle from tipping downward.

If you supported the handle on another log so that you had a striaght line, and you were striking the center of that line above the choil, I might agree that a choil may add stability, but I would still question whether it would be enough (if at all) to change the amount of force needed to break the knife at that spot. But with the knife strongly supported at center and weakly supported at the handle, it seems like the shock forces would not be enough to damage or break the knife since your hand would not be strong enough to support the forces needed to do so. When knives break due to batoning on the handle side, the ones I've seen have been because the knife is at too high an rc for the activity, there are residual stresses in the steel matrix (non-cryo treated), or because of stress risors like serrations or square tang junctions like the one shown in the picture of the cold steel trail master, never at the ricasso/edge junction. I just don't see the stresses being enough to break the knife there during that activity without some other defect being present.
 
I still stand by my comparison of batoning with a knife to a bridge. One side of the support is provided by the blade engaged with a piece of wood sitting on the ground and another being feet/ knees/ass of the user, whatever touches the ground, with the holding hand as only one of number of connection through which the counterforce would travel (the aching joints of the fingers perhaps being the weakest), but I don’t believe that end should be considered as being up in the air, no matter how soft or shaky it may be.

I’m not clear about the difference between a load and a shock load you are referring to. It appears to me, the only difference would be the time during which the down force is applied, and that seems irrelevant here. We are talking about the difference in forces that would break a choiles and choied knives by way of a transferring energy from the external object to the spine of the knife, and I believe that the time has no effect there (Newton’s second law?).

I don’t know where I’ve got it, but I always thought that the main reason for a choil is to reinforce the weakest point of a knife that is being the transition from ricasso to the edge due to the right angle, not to provide a convenience of choking the blade or sharpening it, those are byproducts.
Anyway, I don’t have much else to add, as I’m at the edge of my understanding of Newtonian physics in the world of which we seem to be living.

And LWC, thank you for a stimulating discussion, always a pleasure.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top