-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Battlesaw convexed
- Thread starter Gaston444
- Start date
MacLaren1
Gold Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2014
- Messages
- 4,657
Who did this? Contact info please.
Josh at Razor's Edge.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 5,288
Heck of a job, look's way sexy. My favorite Busse so far,,,
I just got it in the mail: It is every bit as spectacular as the pictures implies...
The convex edge is basically mirror, but with enough "grain" in it to not scratch so easily: The whole blade is not marred in any visible way by the Kydex sheath, which is great for me.
The edge is thin but does not seem excessively fragile at all: It is simply more or less "level" with the corrugation now (it used to "thicken" considerably "on top" of them)...: I will test this on wood probably next Spring, when I get to compare it in chopping to my incoming Randall Smithsonian Bowie (same blade length), the GSO- 10, and at least one comparable hollow handle. I have no doubt the Battlesaw is now, on a per ounce basis, the most efficient chopper I own (It is even quite "stabby" now!). I do know INFI is not at its best in thin profiles, but I am not worried.
The corrugations really did a great job of thinning the whole blade, which is why the grinding did not have to go full height: The corrugations really are that thin, and in fact are still slightly thinner than Josh's 15 dps apex convex grinding...
Be advised Josh is loaded with work now, and that the turnaround is apparently around 2.5 months for re-grind/sharpening work... Coatings alone can be faster if you are at the right point in his coating cycle. For grinding work it is a long wait but he is on time to his estimates. Because the work on the Colin Cox was quite complex (the precision of the result is just beyond words: Beyond Seki City stuff) and the Battlesaw had to have all its teeth squared-up from rounded corners (again, absolutely amazing dead even and square results), it all added up to quite an expensive bill: In the several hundreds of dollars... Edge bevel sharpenings are much cheaper than full height re-grinds, so that should be kept in mind.
Except for narrow daggers, I can handle sharpening myself, so most of what Josh does for me is full re-grinds: There are charts to help with per inch estimates on his site at RazorEdgeKnives. If you are like me into big knives, it does add up, but you will not regret it... He is well aware of grinding heat issues (he uses water cooled belts): So far, almost all of what I got from him (in the dozen) seemed completely unaffected, and for the rest it is impossible to say if the "change" in edge holding is due to the drastic thinning in geometry: It is no longer a comparable object, and some steels simply do not perform at thinner angles: I say do not worry about this, and add a micro-bevel if you see it the edge went too thin to hold up: "More open" Micro-bevels do wonders to help edge-holding on thin edges, and hardly affect the performance of the underlying geometry.
Good luck with yours!
Gaston
The convex edge is basically mirror, but with enough "grain" in it to not scratch so easily: The whole blade is not marred in any visible way by the Kydex sheath, which is great for me.
The edge is thin but does not seem excessively fragile at all: It is simply more or less "level" with the corrugation now (it used to "thicken" considerably "on top" of them)...: I will test this on wood probably next Spring, when I get to compare it in chopping to my incoming Randall Smithsonian Bowie (same blade length), the GSO- 10, and at least one comparable hollow handle. I have no doubt the Battlesaw is now, on a per ounce basis, the most efficient chopper I own (It is even quite "stabby" now!). I do know INFI is not at its best in thin profiles, but I am not worried.
The corrugations really did a great job of thinning the whole blade, which is why the grinding did not have to go full height: The corrugations really are that thin, and in fact are still slightly thinner than Josh's 15 dps apex convex grinding...
Be advised Josh is loaded with work now, and that the turnaround is apparently around 2.5 months for re-grind/sharpening work... Coatings alone can be faster if you are at the right point in his coating cycle. For grinding work it is a long wait but he is on time to his estimates. Because the work on the Colin Cox was quite complex (the precision of the result is just beyond words: Beyond Seki City stuff) and the Battlesaw had to have all its teeth squared-up from rounded corners (again, absolutely amazing dead even and square results), it all added up to quite an expensive bill: In the several hundreds of dollars... Edge bevel sharpenings are much cheaper than full height re-grinds, so that should be kept in mind.
Except for narrow daggers, I can handle sharpening myself, so most of what Josh does for me is full re-grinds: There are charts to help with per inch estimates on his site at RazorEdgeKnives. If you are like me into big knives, it does add up, but you will not regret it... He is well aware of grinding heat issues (he uses water cooled belts): So far, almost all of what I got from him (in the dozen) seemed completely unaffected, and for the rest it is impossible to say if the "change" in edge holding is due to the drastic thinning in geometry: It is no longer a comparable object, and some steels simply do not perform at thinner angles: I say do not worry about this, and add a micro-bevel if you see it the edge went too thin to hold up: "More open" Micro-bevels do wonders to help edge-holding on thin edges, and hardly affect the performance of the underlying geometry.
Good luck with yours!
Gaston
The 1980s Aitor Jungle King 1 had a superb "reversed" double row saw. The RJ Martins HHs had a reversed "Parrish style" triple row saw (while the actual Parrish has a "pull" triple row saw)...
Yes a sawback will be more efficient on the pull than the push: Hard to say what the loss is, as I only tested the Battlesaw in its "rounded teeth" state vs the Lile Mission, but I would say around a 20-30% loss from what I can see, with another 20% loss possible from guard/handle causes.
I would guess that, as squared up now by Josh, it does about 30-40% of the Voorhis sawback depth, and 70% of the Lile's sawback depth. Voorhis is about 1.5" (to 2") deep on 3" round, Lile 0.75" (to 1") on 3" round, I expect the Battlesaw to be 0.5" (to 0.7") on 3" round, which is plenty good enough for notches. Those figures are with a single straight cut at a single angle (the high figures more like moving the cut angle a bit before the blade really binds).
In the Battlesaw's case, the efficiency of the "pushing" saw problem is somewhat worsened by the lack of a true guard piece: You end up pushing against the holed "talon" that serves as a guard, and this is a narrow surface to work against. The swelled palm does help, but a true and wide separate guard piece would make more sense for the "reversed saw": In fact the traditional hollow handle style, usually with a broad guard, takes very well to a "reversed saw", and I remember the 1986 version of the Aitor JK1 provided better comfort and had an excellent double row reversed saw that performed superbly, but it clogged and needed cleaning on green wood.
That being said, the convexing made my Battlesaw almost a dedicated fighter-like knife(!), and I like a reversed saw for the self-defense "compatibility". The Kydex sheath makes it a quite flat package, the handle bulk is modest, so I find the reversed saw suits this knife's "simplicity"...
Gaston
