Becker BK-7: Perfect Compromise, or...

Joined
Feb 23, 2003
Messages
512
Lately I've been wondering: For general 'survival' use, I've been of the opinion that the 7" Becker BK-7 was the ideal compromise:

-Long and Heavy enough to do some light chopping

-Short and Handy enough to do more delicate work

But recently I've begun to wonder if maybe it's:

-Too Short and Light to do any real chopping

-Too Long and clumsy to do any real 'fine' work

I suppose that's just the nature of the beast with any compromise, and for me it's not really much of an issue because I'm never without 3 or more different-sized knives, but what do you all think?

Of course this question could be applied to 7" knives in general as a 'compromise' knife as compared to other options.

Thanks,

-John

PS-I hope this isn't too much of a re-hash of the old "just one knife" discussion...
 
In my opinion a 7 in blade IS the perfect compromise of all knife sizes.A 7 inch blade can do almost anything.
 
In my case a 7" blade is a compromise length. Most of my field chores can be done with a Swiss Army Trailmaster or Lile Backpacker. Both have 3" blades. For heavy hacking I have a Martindale Jungle Knife.
Though I'm not a fan of big knives, the BK-7 is such a great knife I had to have one.
Don't think there is one knife that can do it all but, I'm still looking.
 
7" blades are my favorite length as well. I think it's a good size for your light chopping and hacking without being too heavy for finer carving work. Look at the Dave Beck Wilderness Survival Knife. It has a 6 1/2" blade whose hatchet face chops like a small axe and the draw knife portion of the blade is ideal for carving.

It's my opinion that if you're going to use a knife with a blade over 7", you then need to start carrying a smaller knife for whittling and skinning chores.



My Handmade Knives

My Knife Photos, including the Dave Beck Knife
 
The Camp Tramp has for me a more optimal design. Similar size, but with a more forward blade balance and overall heft making it a much more powerful chopping blade. The disadvantage this induces for fine work is compensated for by the index finger cutout which allows a more neutral balanced grip.

Seven inch blades have recived bad reputations for chopping ability, but this is due to choices of geometry rather than inherent restrictions in the design. A seven inch blade with a optimal wood cutting edge geometry and decent blade balance will have 50-75% of the chopping ability of a quality hatchet. This is easily enough to handle a lot of wood work well.

-Cliff
 
To some degree, seven inch knives are a compromise, but they are a reasonable compromise which works for me.

They're a little bit long and clumsy for fine work, but far from "too long and clumsy for fine work". You sacrifice some efficiency, but keep most of the ability.

As for not being large enough for real chopping: they've got about twice the blade length of a full sized axe.

As for not being heavy enough for real chopping: people who claim that seven inch blades are not sufficient for real chopping forget the fact that a sufficiently tough blade can easily be affixed to a club/baton/branch and used as a pole-axe with far more chopping power than a full sized axe.

--Mike
 
Originally posted by Evolute
As for not being heavy enough for real chopping: people who claim that seven inch blades are not sufficient for real chopping forget the fact that a sufficiently tough blade can easily be affixed to a club/baton/branch and used as a pole-axe with far more chopping power than a full sized axe.
How would this work, exactly? The attachment would need to be extremely stable to effectively support serious chopping. I don't see how this can be done with a 5"-6" handle. Unless you have another way in mind, it would appear to make for a short spear -- okay for stabbing but not an effective chopping design -- rather than a pole-axe. For the latter, besides the stability issue, it would somehow need to move the chopping blade "forward" of the handle, like an axe head or the forward sweep of a khukuri.

Also, I don't think the additional length of the cutting edge improves chopping in any way. Rather, it has to do with the tool's ability to concentrate power into an optimized ~3" area around the belly.

That said, I do agree that a blade-heavy 7" knife can make for an "excellent compromise," i.e., good at all or most tasks if not ideal for any one. But I haven't gone for the BK-7 because its reported neutral balance would seem to diminish, rather than enhance, the potential of a 7"+ blade.

Glen
 
Whilst I'd always prefer to have one small and one large knife, if I were only to have one then I would want a 7-8" knife. I've seen plenty of video with natives in jungle terrain getting by just fine with 10"+ blades so I figure I could what I need to do with a 7-8" although obviously not quite as easily as with two different sized knives.

Matt
 
I have to agree with Cliff on this one.

I think the Swamp Rat line offers higher performance for the reasons listed. The main reason is the more forward balance. Also, the handle material on the Swamp Rat, and it Basic ancestors, is much more secure and comfortable, but at the price of being less durable then the Becker line.

The finger groove does offer improved fine cutting ability, but chould be chamfered (rounded out) for increased comfort in use.

The SR line also is differentially tempered, which has potential advatanges in shock absorbtion and flexibility, but offers lower strength (ability to resist deformation at the spine).

In general, the edge geometery is similiar for both lines of knives, fine for a tactical knife used by an unskilled user, but far overbuilt for woodcraft, and general camp chores with an experienced user looking for maximum performance. From the samples I have seen, I would rate the Becker line as coming with better edges, i.e. thinner and more uniform in finish.

I think the Swamprat coating is more durable, but that is of little to no importance to me.

My personal view is that the 7" range is a poor choice, it offers low chopping ability and poor fine task ability. IMHO you get the worst of both worlds.

You are much better off using more specialized tools, in this context a Golok from Valiant for chopping and a Swiss Army Knife, Opinel, Mora, or other small blade of your choice for fine work.

The cost of these two knives may still be less than a decent 7" knife, and you will have a far greater range of use.

I see no real advantage of a 7" knife over a 9" except that it is easier to carry.

I disagree with Cliff in regards to his comparison between a solid 7" knife (like the Basic #7) and a good hatchet. Even an Estwing or Collins hatchet that has been properly sharpened will outchop a good 7" knife by 200-300%.

A very good hatchet, like the Gransfors Bruk, will easily do this from the factory, and will be able to out perform the 7" at light tasks as well. The blade and edge geometery is far superior, as is the level of edge finish, which is at a very high polish, perfect for chopping and other pushcuts.

As well, Swedish axe steel is very tough (similiar in toughness to 5160 in my experience) and is also easily sharpened. It is a little softer than a high quality 7" knife like those mentioned, so it may impact a little easier, but will be far less prone to chipping. Chipping in an axe edge would ruin the axe fast, as the amount of steel removal required to repair would quickly ruin the geometery of the axe (like a century of normal sharpening wear in a single afternoon.)
 
Mike :

I disagree with Cliff in regards to his comparison between a solid 7" knife (like the Basic #7) and a good hatchet. Even an Estwing or Collins hatchet that has been properly sharpened will outchop a good 7" knife by 200-300%.

A very good hatchet, like the Gransfors Bruk, will easily do this from the factory

An optimal wood chopping ten inch bowie can get around two inches of penetration on a pine 2x4 (live cutting competitions by the abs guys). Lumber is signifiantly harder than live wood as it is dried and compressed, so lets assume 2 to 2.5 inches on live wood on a 2 inch face. I can get slightly better than 2 inches on the softest fresh clear pine and fir.

The best axe men in the world (Stihl series), on clear while pine get three inches of penetration across a six inch face. Thus they are getting around 3.5 to 4 times the penetration of the bowie. This is with full size axes, with seven+ lbs heads. Only a handful of the top guys in the world can do this as well, I can only think of two who do it consistently (Wynard and Bolstad).

There is no reason why a properly optomized 7" blade can't have 75% of the chopping ability of a 10" blade, the only difference is going to be the weight. I assumed similar geometries and mass when I made the above, the seven inch blades could be better of course if you just made the blade three inches wide and thus gave it equal mass and thus ability to generate power.

If a GB hatchet had 300% of the ability of that knife you would be lopping 6x6 in half with a few hits. A purely optomized wood cutting bowie, based on what I have seen, should be able to out chop (penetration wise) a GB Wildlife hatchet, by maybe 25%, as I have equaled it with sub-optimal bowies (too thick edges, you want 0.020").

The reason that the axe is slightly behind is that the edge is *far* thicker to minimize wedging on soft woods and to provide a decent splitting ability, the GB products are not pure falling tools, more utility base. Axes made purely for penetration where binding isn't of any consequence (traditional falling axes) will have better penetration but will wedge badly if used without relief cuts from saws.

The true ability of the axe in general comes from always getting the same penetration regardless of the size of the wood. A bowie only gets half the penetration on six inch wood that is does on three and thus quickly becomes unable to clear the wood and thus multiple notches have to be made and the efficiency starts to suffer. This is also why falling axes had narrow heads.

... and will be able to out perform the 7" at light tasks as well. The blade and edge geometery is far superior, as is the level of edge finish, which is at a very high polish, perfect for chopping and other pushcuts.

I have used both and the wood working blade (from Ray Kirk for example) will easily vastly out cut the hatchet because the edge will be more acute and *vastly* thinner on the knife. The latter will become very apparent on deep cuts. The blade will also have a very high polish.

Axes do however have lots of other advantages, the swing is a lot different for one, and they can be a lot more fluid in very binding woods.

-Cliff
 
Evolute,

I stand corrected!!!

Interesting experimentation and results. As you note in the Busse thread, however, actually there aren't a lot of blades that can fit the bill. The Swamp Rats, for example, may be able to take the punishment but their handles would be difficult to strap to a pole. I suppose this makes a case for lashing holes and flat slabs (or removable scales)...

Glen
 
Looks like this has drifted into a knife vs. axe thread. An area where I have a few opinions myself.


Mike said:
I disagree with Cliff in regards to his comparison between a solid 7" knife (like the Basic #7) and a good hatchet. Even an Estwing or Collins hatchet that has been properly sharpened will outchop a good 7" knife by 200-300%.

Notice The entire thread is about 7" knives.

Cliff responded:
An optimal wood chopping ten inch bowie can get around two inches of penetration ..... AND

There is no reason why a properly optomized 7" blade can't have 75% of the chopping ability of a 10" blade, the only difference is going to be the weight. I assumed similar geometries and mass when I made the above, the seven inch blades could be better of course if you just made the blade three inches wide and thus gave it equal mass and thus ability to generate power.

If adding three inches in length and another in girth to something was as easy as that, well, lets just say people would not have to buy big bowies to compensate. . . . :) :) :) :) (And I have my share of bowie knives too guys.)

Comparing 7" to 10" knives is like comparing apples to watermelons. Nice way to skew the thread towards your point of view.

But I'll run with it. I have some experince with big knives myself.

Now since you are talking about a big knife, lets throw in a big hatchet. The biggest hatchet that does not cross the line into axe is the Gransfors Small Forest Axe. A 1 1/2 pound head and 19" handle if memory serves me right.

I have used the SFA side by side with a very high performance Bowie, my Blademan Custom Trailmaster.
Picture%20061.jpg


The SFA easily outchops the Trailmaster, on at least a 2-1 margin and that rapidly increases the thicker the wood gets.

AS compared to other knives, the Trailmaster offers higher chopping performance than a stock Busse Battlemistress or a CRK Shadow I (both of which are though of as good choppers) See here for my Busse/CRK big chopper comparison review

As compared to the Trailmaster, the Busse had an edge far more obtuse (50 degrees included for the Busse vs. about 20 degrees for the trailmaster), this difference in edge geometry was the primary reason for the performance difference. The Trailmaster simply sank deeper with each chop using about the same amount of force, this increased penetration is what I mean by higher performance.

This is true even though the Busse has a more blade heavy design. Edge geometery is paramount in performance.


fd6bb41d.jpg

fd6bb40e.jpg

fd5c1323.jpg

fd5c1565.jpg


Now, the Trailmaster outchops the Busse (at least in stock form), and the Gransfors SFA absolutely smokes both of them.

Lots of reasons. While the Trailmaster and the SFA have similiar edge geometetry and finish level, the SFA has more mass, and it is concentrated in the head of the axe. Way more penetration. Yep, way more. No, I don't have any +++/---- numbers for you. Just way more.

Also, with the SFA, you can use use two hands for even more power if need be. With an axe, you are using more, and larger muscle groups. With the knife, you are mainly using your arm and wrist. With the axe you are using the arm, shoulder and hips. Much more power.

While I have lots to say on this subject I have little time. Some of what I haver to say is written here:

A big knife is a poor substitute for an axe

I have made other posts on the subject as well.
 
BlastJV,

To answer your original question, the Cammilus BK& and BK9 are great knives for the price. Sharp, strong and fairly light. The grip is handfilling, but a tad slick. It is very durable though, much more so than other knives in that price range with rubber handles.

It does not fit my hand well, but that is just me. Others find it great.

If I have not sold you on trying a quality axe yet, some very well versed people consider the GB mini to be the ultimate survival knife. It would easily outchop a knife of the same size:
Picture%20075.jpg


It will easily cut any size wood that might required for a survival shelter.

Picture%20072.jpg


It is nimble and keen enough to be used for very fine tasks as well.
Picture%20050.jpg


Another pic too big to post:


A pic too big too post
 
This is just too much. . . .

There is no reason why a properly optomized 7" blade can't have 75% of the chopping ability of a 10" blade, the only difference is going to be the weight. I assumed similar geometries and mass when I made the above, the seven inch blades could be better of course if you just made the blade three inches wide and thus gave it equal mass and thus ability to generate power.

The difference between theory and reality is that in theory there is not difference and in reality there is.

That's how the old saying goes, and your statement above is a perfect example.

That is not a personal attack, it is a comment as to your "scientific method" and "extrapolation".

It is more than just mass, there is leverage, tip speed, and most important balance issues. Cliff, sometimes you amaze me.
 
Unless I have missed someones point somewhere I am getting the jist that the idea being argued here is the point that a 9-10 in bowie with the right heft and geomwtry can out chop an Estwing axe.I fail to see this point as I have used both and the axe always wins against a bowie everytime.The bowie certainly has more blade length to contact with the wood,but the axe has more weight to target concentration along with leverage.The axe just makes deeper cuts per deliverance to target in my experience than a lighter knife of any kind.Correct me if I am wrong here??
 
Nope, you are correct sir. Cliff, however, seems to think otherwise.

Based on his above posts, Cliff is under the impression (mis-impression really) that a 7" knife has 3/4 the chopping ability of a quality hatchet.

Now, my figures are based on a large hatchet (the SFA), but even a smaller hatchet like the Wildlife Hatchet (1 pound head/ 14" handle) will easily outclass a 7" knife.

Now, if Cliff will give me a real world example of a "A seven inch blade with a optimal wood cutting edge geometry and decent blade balance " then I would have something to for a real comparison.

So Cliff, what out of the box factory knife has the chopping capacity of a fresh from the factory Gransfors hatchet?

Think your vaunted Busse knives do? I don't. Swamp Rat? Nope.

Name one and I'll be happy to buy it.

Name some real life chores (not theory, extrapolation, wild fantasy or some such) where a 7" knife is a better survival tool than a high quality Gransfors hatchet.

There are a few, but not many. Slicing, where blade length is a factor, maybe.

On balance, however, as Northwoodsmen have known for generation, the axe is king of the woods.

The big bowie is best reserved for arm chair commandos and drug store nickle novel cowboys.
 
Originally posted by Eric_Draven

Name some real life chores (not theory, extrapolation, wild fantasy or some such) where a 7" knife is a better survival tool than a high quality Gransfors hatchet.

Makeshift machete, for chopping through thorn thickets and tight undergowth - me thinks very difficult with hatchet. Digging down for water in dry creek beds (although you could make a decent digging stick with either).
 
Eric_Draven :

... what out of the box factory knife has the chopping capacity of a fresh from the factory Gransfors hatchet?

The Trailmaker from Marbles should get the same penetration on small wood (the axe face width) as it looks to be fully convex ground with no distinct thickening of the edge bevel from pictures I have seen. Valiant makes small Goloks in that size range as well which have fully convex ground blades with thin and acute angles.

The new Battle Mistress should be very close depending on the edge geometry, assuming it was the same as the SH one I have, it might even be slightly better as it might have more blade balance. The Battle Rat should be close as well assuming its geometry is similar to the Camp Tramp I have used.

By the way, I never even said that you could buy factory knives like this, just that an optomized wood working bowie could be made this way. In most cases the optomization is simply one of edge thickness which can be done by laying down a relief grind, under an hour with an aggressive hand stone, a few minutes with a belt grinder, about 10 minutes with pseudo-belt files if your endurance is high enough.


Name some real life chores (not theory, extrapolation, wild fantasy or some such) where a 7" knife is a better survival tool than a high quality Gransfors hatchet.

Clearing brush, gathering vegetation for construction, bedding and supplementary clothing, most food preperation outside of hammering, any deep cutting, digging in woods for tinder or food or construction materials, digging in soil to expose plant parts for food (or bugs), a lot of shaping and carving such as draw knife work, drilling holes with the tip, and most precise carving, ...

The axe of course does *much* better for cutting thick woods, splitting, and makes a much better makeshift hammer. It will also equal the bowie on shallow cuts as the edge geometries are similar in angle.

The bowie in general is also a lot more forgiving to abuse, which can be a consideration if it is not just you in the situation and your company may not have the same level of skill or knowledge. It is easy to break the handle on an axe if you are sloppy or just not familiar with the axe, but a bowie even one highly optomized can at most just see some edge impaction.

It is more than just mass, there is leverage, tip speed, and most important balance issues.

If you are hitting with the tip, the longer blade would have more of an advantage due to tip speed, however the length of the arc is the total distance from the center of the swing, which includes your arm, so the extra inches are actually a very small percentage of the radius of rotation. The balance and other issues do not have to be significantly different. Well leverage is, but if you have to do that much prying to free the wood, you are usually better off with multiple notches.

Comparing 7" to 10" knives is like comparing apples to watermelons. Nice way to skew the thread towards your point of view.

That comparion was made to show the difference in size that an axe needs to have to get such a quoted performance difference over a knife. As is often the case, the performance advantage of an axe is usually vastly over estimated as even the very best axe men in the world can not achieve such performed levels and the axes they use are more than slightly better than an Estwing.

The SFA easily outchops the Trailmaster, on at least a 2-1 margin

Yes, and that isn't even a hatchet. The above claim which I disagreed with would predict that you should in fact be about 6-8 to 1, assuming that you can get better pentration with the SFA than a hatchet.

marsupial :

... the idea being argued here is the point that a 9-10 in bowie with the right heft and geomwtry can out chop an Estwing axe.

If the bowie is optomized for wood cutting and the axe of similar size. Take a 2x4 sized piece of wood with your Estwing hatchet and see if you can cut it as fast as the ABS guys with their bowies. To make it a fair comparison use a decently hard wood to approximate the drying and pressure hardening that a 2x4 sees. I would be very suprised if you can equal it let alone out cut it by multiple times to one which would imply you were slicing the 2x4 with one hit.

-Cliff
 
Cliff,
Your argument is weak.

Take a 2x4 sized piece of wood with your Estwing hatchet and see if you can cut it as fast as the ABS guys with their bowies.

I could not take a Porsche around a race track as fast as a race driver could take a Honda.



so the extra inches are actually a very small percentage of the radius of rotation. The balance and other issues do not have to be significantly different

Anyone who has used a 7" knife and a 10" knife knows that is not true.
 
Back
Top