Becker Brute Concensus
- Thread starter Triquetra
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 494
cucharadedragon said:
I don't know what a "real expert" is... but here's my take anyways.
I have had two Brutes. The first one broke upon impact with a dry oak knot. It just broke in several pieces, right before the anvil. I sent it back, and after some waiting it was replaced for a new one. This new one seems to be tougher, but the kydex sheath rattles (I put it in a box and made a leather sheath) and I didn't like the handle at all (it's extremely slippery when wet), so I removed it (which is easy, it's regular hex screws). I wapped the handle with leather and paracord. With that new handle I could test the brute thouroughly.
Here are my conclusions...
1) It's a pretty heavy blade, with forward balance, but even reprofiled to a very thin convex edge it still doesn't chop that well. It's easily outchopped by any cheap hatchet, or even a blunt tramontina machete. It's -- by far -- outchopped by my swamp rat Camp Tramp, which is 2 inches shorter and about half the weight. I just can't imagine what a Battle Rat could do
2) For cutting and finer work, it's heavy and awkward. The portion near the handle cuts well, though, since the primary edge angle is much thinner for the first third of the blade. Using the anvil as a secondary handle, the brute excels as a draw knife.
3) The latest one I have is very tough. I use it almost daily to split fire wood and it resists metal/metal hammering when it's used as a wedge, even in hard twisted wood. I've had the blade bent up to 10 degrees because of twisted fibers, and it came back to true, which surprised me.
So, all in all, it's a decently tough knife if you're lucky enough not to get a faulty one. It requires serious reprofiling to cut well, and it will never be very good at chopping. For an "all around" blade it's not the solution. For a chopper, it's not the solution... and of course for a fine work blade it's not the solution either. The only strong point, here, is the toughness... but hey if you want a pry bar you can get real good ones for 20$
For the same price, or a tad higher, you can get a camp tramp which will chop better, let you go through finer tasks, and that will be lighter to carry.
Just my two cents...
David
Brian Jones
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 17, 1999
- Messages
- 7,560
Her's a link to an old review I did of the Brute. I ended up using it as my main blade on one of Ron & Karen Hood's videos, (Volume 11: Solo Survival) in the outback of Idaho. It performed beautifully.
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90741
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90741
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 494
Brian,
I read your review... and I disagree on pretty much everything you said there about the brute
One thing I agree with, though : the original handle is soft and it's a pleasure to work with it for a long time as it won't create hot spots...
I guess that blade just doesn't fit my whacking style
Cheers,
David
I read your review... and I disagree on pretty much everything you said there about the brute
One thing I agree with, though : the original handle is soft and it's a pleasure to work with it for a long time as it won't create hot spots...
I guess that blade just doesn't fit my whacking style
Cheers,
David
Brian Jones
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 17, 1999
- Messages
- 7,560
David,
Cheers back! LOL!
Just goes to show, there's no such thing as an objective fact on what makes a good knife.
It's all subjective opinion! And it's about technique -- not "good or bad" just preferred technique.
I like a nice heavy chopper for large work, and my Brute bit nicely but was easy to retract.
My taste has changed towards nice flat ground blades though, for sure. Next year, who knows? That's the problem with being a knife knut.
I wouldn't use the Brute for small tasks, but was able to if need be.
Interestingly, I found the handle got tackier when wet with water. Blood was different.
The only other problem with those handles is they fill up with water if they get dunked. A nice place for rust to form.
Ron Hood filled his Becker handles with silicone to prevent that.
Cheers back! LOL!
Just goes to show, there's no such thing as an objective fact on what makes a good knife.
It's all subjective opinion! And it's about technique -- not "good or bad" just preferred technique.
I like a nice heavy chopper for large work, and my Brute bit nicely but was easy to retract.
My taste has changed towards nice flat ground blades though, for sure. Next year, who knows? That's the problem with being a knife knut.
I wouldn't use the Brute for small tasks, but was able to if need be.
Interestingly, I found the handle got tackier when wet with water. Blood was different.
The only other problem with those handles is they fill up with water if they get dunked. A nice place for rust to form.
Ron Hood filled his Becker handles with silicone to prevent that.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2003
- Messages
- 541
I have a brute and a camp tramp,
two different knives. I cant imagine, no matter what the circumstances, that a camp tramp would out chop a brute, and I really like my camp tramp
sorry, I`m callin bullshit on the camp tramp outchopping the brute, been there done that, regardless of "style"
As for the handle, I removed some material and sanded the scales with 220 sand paper, made grip a lot better for "my hand"
Most recently, on a dead red oak, my RTAK smoked my battle mistress and it did not matter how hard I tried.
What does style and bullshit have in common? Nowadays Most folks have plenty of both.
two different knives. I cant imagine, no matter what the circumstances, that a camp tramp would out chop a brute, and I really like my camp tramp
sorry, I`m callin bullshit on the camp tramp outchopping the brute, been there done that, regardless of "style"
As for the handle, I removed some material and sanded the scales with 220 sand paper, made grip a lot better for "my hand"
Most recently, on a dead red oak, my RTAK smoked my battle mistress and it did not matter how hard I tried.
What does style and bullshit have in common? Nowadays Most folks have plenty of both.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,063
Brian Jones,
An excellent review!!! I really enjoyed reading it. It has been quite a while since I have seen WM#11, but I thought you and Radio Ray used American Ranger Tomahawks? How does the chopping performance of the brute compare to the Ranger hawk? Do you use a different technique when using different tools? If so, can you explain them?
One question, in the review you wrote:
In the several years that have passed since you wrote that has your perspective changed? I am not sure what you mean by this, since it does not accord with what I have seen.
Generally, the durability of an edge is determined by a few factors:
Material (Some steels are far more durable than others for heavy outdoors work, i.e. 5160 v. 420V), heat treat, geometery, etc.
What I have seen is that high durability of a blade (aside from other factors listed above which are very important) is generally most a result of a thicker cross section, i.e. a thick edge is more durable than a thin one.
From what I have seen (and my experience level is much lower than yours), a shaving edge can be very thick (see the Cold Steel SRK for example), but can easily shave because it is highly polished, and there are no burrs, wire edges, etc. In fact, when working with axes, I have seen that a very high polished edge is less likely to chip than one that has a filed finished edge, and the edge lasts much longer. I have seen the same thing with machete blades. Perhaps it is comparing apples and oranges a bit, but the principle should be the same.
I am very dissapointed that you would write that. It amounts to a personal attack. This type of reaction makes the exchange of information much less likely.
If you disagree with his opinion, or have observed different results from the same knives yourself, why not discuss them in an adult manner instead of "calling bullshit."
Perhaps you could have asked what size wood was bing used, what technique, what conditions, and see if you could reconcile you divergent opinions.
If he says he has used the same knives as you and seen different results than you have, that is not "bullshit", it is his observations and they are just as valid as yours.
Much of how a knife performs is not related to the blade, it relates to things like balance and the handle.
I have seen 5" blades (Becker Campanion) that can outchop a 7" blade (Kbar, SOG, etc), so I do not think blade length is the only factor.
In any event, any chance for an interesting disscusion we can learn from has been compromised by your hostile actions. I assume we are all adults, please act like it.
Moine,
I am very interested in hearing a more in depth disscussion of your views on the knife, please do not let his personal attack ruin it for everyone.
Can you explain what situations you use the two knives mentioned, and how the performance is different? Also, compared to other knives, do you think it was blade geometery, balance, handle design, or some combination or other factors that lead to the less than optimal results with the Brute? What would you change to make it a more effective design?
Thanks,
KT
An excellent review!!! I really enjoyed reading it. It has been quite a while since I have seen WM#11, but I thought you and Radio Ray used American Ranger Tomahawks? How does the chopping performance of the brute compare to the Ranger hawk? Do you use a different technique when using different tools? If so, can you explain them?
One question, in the review you wrote:
In the several years that have passed since you wrote that has your perspective changed? I am not sure what you mean by this, since it does not accord with what I have seen.
Generally, the durability of an edge is determined by a few factors:
Material (Some steels are far more durable than others for heavy outdoors work, i.e. 5160 v. 420V), heat treat, geometery, etc.
What I have seen is that high durability of a blade (aside from other factors listed above which are very important) is generally most a result of a thicker cross section, i.e. a thick edge is more durable than a thin one.
From what I have seen (and my experience level is much lower than yours), a shaving edge can be very thick (see the Cold Steel SRK for example), but can easily shave because it is highly polished, and there are no burrs, wire edges, etc. In fact, when working with axes, I have seen that a very high polished edge is less likely to chip than one that has a filed finished edge, and the edge lasts much longer. I have seen the same thing with machete blades. Perhaps it is comparing apples and oranges a bit, but the principle should be the same.
scfishr,
I am very dissapointed that you would write that. It amounts to a personal attack. This type of reaction makes the exchange of information much less likely.
If you disagree with his opinion, or have observed different results from the same knives yourself, why not discuss them in an adult manner instead of "calling bullshit."
Perhaps you could have asked what size wood was bing used, what technique, what conditions, and see if you could reconcile you divergent opinions.
If he says he has used the same knives as you and seen different results than you have, that is not "bullshit", it is his observations and they are just as valid as yours.
Much of how a knife performs is not related to the blade, it relates to things like balance and the handle.
I have seen 5" blades (Becker Campanion) that can outchop a 7" blade (Kbar, SOG, etc), so I do not think blade length is the only factor.
In any event, any chance for an interesting disscusion we can learn from has been compromised by your hostile actions. I assume we are all adults, please act like it.
Moine,
I am very interested in hearing a more in depth disscussion of your views on the knife, please do not let his personal attack ruin it for everyone.
Can you explain what situations you use the two knives mentioned, and how the performance is different? Also, compared to other knives, do you think it was blade geometery, balance, handle design, or some combination or other factors that lead to the less than optimal results with the Brute? What would you change to make it a more effective design?
Thanks,
KT
Fish,
Nice reply .
Fact is diff blades do diff things. My long Ontario machette chops well on some things but is left in the dust on others with much shorter blades.
As was said steel aside, blade shape, edge profile, balance, grip etc... all play a role in a blades abilities.
To disagree strongly is one thing but to trash an opinion as bullshit is the heights of immaturity.
Gow up.
Skam
Nice reply
.Fact is diff blades do diff things. My long Ontario machette chops well on some things but is left in the dust on others with much shorter blades.
As was said steel aside, blade shape, edge profile, balance, grip etc... all play a role in a blades abilities.
To disagree strongly is one thing but to trash an opinion as bullshit is the heights of immaturity.
Gow up.
Skam
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2003
- Messages
- 541
"Personal" no way, shape, or form,
Immaturity, hmmmmmm
Roll eyes, hmmmmmm
This is the #1 sight bar none for people of all walks,
rich, poor--experienced, inexperienced
collectors and newbies
When we put product loyalty above facts, is it immaturity or bullshit?
I now have 5 busse`s(recently traded one for a Dozier) and 2 swamp rats,
they are great blades.
But Jerry Busse himself addressed the issue of(elequently I might add) big dog, little dog in a thread where competitors blades were being trashed.Look it up.
Opinions are fine, but false statements are not. This is a survival forum.
Survival;
15k per year income
25k
40k
60k
100k
My first high end purchase was a 125.00(purchased as new, second owner) microtech amphibian, to listen to others, I would have thought I had an inferior blade, I now know, from experience, that I had a blade that was comparable at any level.
So, A guy logs in, new to blades and the forum, reads this thread, he`s on a budget, but because some opinionated !@#$%%^ says the one he can afford is a piece of ****, he does not buy one at all.
THATS BULLSHIT!
If you like swamp rat or busse thats great, but to say that a blade will out perform another, unfounded, is not right.
My remarks were from actual experience, not from defending myself against concrete blocks.
Roll your eyes, jump on a bandwagon, but misleading people out of blind loyalty is still BULLSHIT.
Now, anyone who wants to show up at blade, with camp tramp in hand, and out chop my becker brute, please show up.
My camp tramp is one of my favorite blades, but it will not out chop my brute. Thats pine, oak, dead oak, 2x4`s or kindli`n. Grind or sharpen how ever you want,
Folks come here for facts and advice. Opinions are fine when prefaced with alternatives, which do exist.
If you are on a budget, and can not afford a battle rat or mistress, i`m telling you now that the becker brute, ontario Rtak among others are very good alternatives and will not let you down in a survival situation.
To Jerry Busse, my most recent aquisitions have been 2 different Satin Jacks, I love your blades and there designs, I love that they are 'nuclear"
and i love that in a thread that you recently responded to, that there are other good blades out there. You acknowledged that there are good choices in other manufactures. Thanks for your commitment to quality and integrity.
As for bullshit, its just that, bullshit. Keep it to yourself,
oops,
Immaturity, hmmmmmm
Roll eyes, hmmmmmm
This is the #1 sight bar none for people of all walks,
rich, poor--experienced, inexperienced
collectors and newbies
When we put product loyalty above facts, is it immaturity or bullshit?
I now have 5 busse`s(recently traded one for a Dozier) and 2 swamp rats,
they are great blades.
But Jerry Busse himself addressed the issue of(elequently I might add) big dog, little dog in a thread where competitors blades were being trashed.Look it up.
Opinions are fine, but false statements are not. This is a survival forum.
Survival;
15k per year income
25k
40k
60k
100k
My first high end purchase was a 125.00(purchased as new, second owner) microtech amphibian, to listen to others, I would have thought I had an inferior blade, I now know, from experience, that I had a blade that was comparable at any level.
So, A guy logs in, new to blades and the forum, reads this thread, he`s on a budget, but because some opinionated !@#$%%^ says the one he can afford is a piece of ****, he does not buy one at all.
THATS BULLSHIT!
If you like swamp rat or busse thats great, but to say that a blade will out perform another, unfounded, is not right.
My remarks were from actual experience, not from defending myself against concrete blocks.
Roll your eyes, jump on a bandwagon, but misleading people out of blind loyalty is still BULLSHIT.
Now, anyone who wants to show up at blade, with camp tramp in hand, and out chop my becker brute, please show up.
My camp tramp is one of my favorite blades, but it will not out chop my brute. Thats pine, oak, dead oak, 2x4`s or kindli`n. Grind or sharpen how ever you want,
Folks come here for facts and advice. Opinions are fine when prefaced with alternatives, which do exist.
If you are on a budget, and can not afford a battle rat or mistress, i`m telling you now that the becker brute, ontario Rtak among others are very good alternatives and will not let you down in a survival situation.
To Jerry Busse, my most recent aquisitions have been 2 different Satin Jacks, I love your blades and there designs, I love that they are 'nuclear"
and i love that in a thread that you recently responded to, that there are other good blades out there. You acknowledged that there are good choices in other manufactures. Thanks for your commitment to quality and integrity.
As for bullshit, its just that, bullshit. Keep it to yourself,
oops,
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,169
Given what the Brute was designed for, I personally think it does a good job. First, the handle is a little large, and for some, may need to be sanded down. Second, I had to re-profile my edge...it was just too thick and at first and didn't do as well at chopping as some other comparable blades I had.
(ignore the dirty laundry )
I do like the "anvil" or full spine thickness near the end of the blade...it really assists in battoning and hammering. The slight recurve has a ton of potential as a good chopper which has become more evident since I've re-profiled the edge. It is a heavy, compact chopper...much like a Khukuri in some regards, but not as pronounced as their recurve.
For the price, it's a good blade...and would serve well in a variety of tasks. With the small semblance of a choil, I've be able to choke up and do some small tasks pretty well...but the heavy blade does get tiresome after a while.
I didn't have any 9" blades (Busse, Swamp Rat, TOPS, etc.) to compare to but it excelled at battoning, mediocre at chopping (again, this was before I re-profiled the edge), poor at clearing brush, pretty good at small work, and excellent as a draw knife (right up with the Ang Khola)...
If I had a good small fixed blade and SAK, I wouldn't hesitate to bring along my Brute...with the price, I have no fear in abusing/using it, and so far it's proven itself enough for me to rely on...and that's no Bull$hit , it is however, only my humble opinion
ROCK6
(ignore the dirty laundry
)
I do like the "anvil" or full spine thickness near the end of the blade...it really assists in battoning and hammering. The slight recurve has a ton of potential as a good chopper which has become more evident since I've re-profiled the edge. It is a heavy, compact chopper...much like a Khukuri in some regards, but not as pronounced as their recurve.
For the price, it's a good blade...and would serve well in a variety of tasks. With the small semblance of a choil, I've be able to choke up and do some small tasks pretty well...but the heavy blade does get tiresome after a while.
I didn't have any 9" blades (Busse, Swamp Rat, TOPS, etc.) to compare to but it excelled at battoning, mediocre at chopping (again, this was before I re-profiled the edge), poor at clearing brush, pretty good at small work, and excellent as a draw knife (right up with the Ang Khola)...
If I had a good small fixed blade and SAK, I wouldn't hesitate to bring along my Brute...with the price, I have no fear in abusing/using it, and so far it's proven itself enough for me to rely on...and that's no Bull$hit
, it is however, only my humble opinion ROCK6
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 494
Brian,
First of all, I want to highlight your polite and even cheerful reaction to my disagreement with your views re. the Brute. I think such a cool attitude gets rare enough those days to be appreciated
I think the wet handle being slippery for me comes from two things. First of all, I've got very callous hands. My skin texture makes it hard to get a "tacky" grip on any hard, non-textured surface, like the wood handle from a hatchet, a glass of water or anything alike. I don't mind rough textures and even paracord wrappings for use. Rather than creating hot spots, it simply allows me to get a grip. But that's just me.
Secondly, when I chop I hold the handle loosely in my hand until right before impact. I find that this adds considerable acceleration to the blade at the last moment. It creates a very efficient "snapping" effect, but to be able to do this (keeing in mind my general hand texture problem) I need a grippy texture. The res C handle on my camp tramp allows me to do that, while the Beckers handles in general don't.
Fish,
I understand your point, and I appreciate the fact that you don't want me to disqualify the Brute in a gratuitous way, just because it's less expensive or for whatever stupid reason like loyalty to SRKW. I owe nothing to SRKW, and I see absolutely no reason to be "loyal" to them. My opinion about the CT is solely based on my own experience with it. You have the right to suspect me of being irrational and so long. I think that such criticism is sane, if not vital in an informative forum. For this reason I consider your opinion to be valuable, but you didn't need to call bullshit to make your point, as it stands on it's own and doesn't need any vulgarity as a backing.
That being said, in my hands and with my chopping style, my Camp Tramp outchops my Brute, period. Call that bullshit if you like, it's true nevertheless. Now you can believe me or not, and your own experience may differ. That's life. But I swear I'm not lying here.
Do I disqualify the Brute as a good survival tool ?
No.
It's tough, it won't let you down, and it will get the job done. That alone qualifies it as a survival blade. But on a daily basis, when I leave home and head for the bush, I grab my CT, and the Brute stays home.
Tester,
Thanks for asking the only good question one can ask, here, and to try to find out the mechanical truth that lurks behind this whole opinionated debate
To get more specific, I've tested both blades quite extensively. As the blade profile of the CT is thinner, it allows better penetration into the wood, even if the blade is lighter and shorter than the Brute. That was confirmed on many type of woods : hard, soft, medium, big chunks, small saplings, and with many levels of dryness. My CT consistantly outchops My Brute.
The CT, being shorter, needs to be "snapped" faster into the wood rather than just being pounded down while relying on mass to do the job. It's very simple physics. To make an impact harder, you can either increase speed or increase mass... but speed is the most efficient part in the equation. That's how I outchop heavy axes with my thin 1 pound hawk on a long handle. More speed + thinner profile = great wood penetration.
The only limit to thinness is the steel's toughness... and that's where high end steel comes in handy on a chopper : it allows thinner blade geometries to survive equivalent impacts. The Brute's profile is thicker than the CT's at the chopping impact point (below the anvil, give or take an inch), mostly because BK&T wanted this blade to be bullet proof whilst keeping the Camillus steel (which is very good for it's price, but not as tough as SR-101). One could reprofile the Brute to the point of making is as thin as the CT, though, which would probably allow superior chopping performance. The blade, after all, is still 2 inches longer. But in such a case, I think that the Brute's toughness would seriously plummet.
Just my opinion...
David
First of all, I want to highlight your polite and even cheerful reaction to my disagreement with your views re. the Brute. I think such a cool attitude gets rare enough those days to be appreciated
I think the wet handle being slippery for me comes from two things. First of all, I've got very callous hands. My skin texture makes it hard to get a "tacky" grip on any hard, non-textured surface, like the wood handle from a hatchet, a glass of water or anything alike. I don't mind rough textures and even paracord wrappings for use. Rather than creating hot spots, it simply allows me to get a grip. But that's just me.
Secondly, when I chop I hold the handle loosely in my hand until right before impact. I find that this adds considerable acceleration to the blade at the last moment. It creates a very efficient "snapping" effect, but to be able to do this (keeing in mind my general hand texture problem) I need a grippy texture. The res C handle on my camp tramp allows me to do that, while the Beckers handles in general don't.
Fish,
I understand your point, and I appreciate the fact that you don't want me to disqualify the Brute in a gratuitous way, just because it's less expensive or for whatever stupid reason like loyalty to SRKW. I owe nothing to SRKW, and I see absolutely no reason to be "loyal" to them. My opinion about the CT is solely based on my own experience with it. You have the right to suspect me of being irrational and so long. I think that such criticism is sane, if not vital in an informative forum. For this reason I consider your opinion to be valuable, but you didn't need to call bullshit to make your point, as it stands on it's own and doesn't need any vulgarity as a backing.
That being said, in my hands and with my chopping style, my Camp Tramp outchops my Brute, period. Call that bullshit if you like, it's true nevertheless. Now you can believe me or not, and your own experience may differ. That's life. But I swear I'm not lying here.
Do I disqualify the Brute as a good survival tool ?
No.
It's tough, it won't let you down, and it will get the job done. That alone qualifies it as a survival blade. But on a daily basis, when I leave home and head for the bush, I grab my CT, and the Brute stays home.
Tester,
Thanks for asking the only good question one can ask, here, and to try to find out the mechanical truth that lurks behind this whole opinionated debate
To get more specific, I've tested both blades quite extensively. As the blade profile of the CT is thinner, it allows better penetration into the wood, even if the blade is lighter and shorter than the Brute. That was confirmed on many type of woods : hard, soft, medium, big chunks, small saplings, and with many levels of dryness. My CT consistantly outchops My Brute.
The CT, being shorter, needs to be "snapped" faster into the wood rather than just being pounded down while relying on mass to do the job. It's very simple physics. To make an impact harder, you can either increase speed or increase mass... but speed is the most efficient part in the equation. That's how I outchop heavy axes with my thin 1 pound hawk on a long handle. More speed + thinner profile = great wood penetration.
The only limit to thinness is the steel's toughness... and that's where high end steel comes in handy on a chopper : it allows thinner blade geometries to survive equivalent impacts. The Brute's profile is thicker than the CT's at the chopping impact point (below the anvil, give or take an inch), mostly because BK&T wanted this blade to be bullet proof whilst keeping the Camillus steel (which is very good for it's price, but not as tough as SR-101). One could reprofile the Brute to the point of making is as thin as the CT, though, which would probably allow superior chopping performance. The blade, after all, is still 2 inches longer. But in such a case, I think that the Brute's toughness would seriously plummet.
Just my opinion...
David
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,063
David,
Thank you for your well thought out and detailed response.
I am suprised that the CT has thinner edge than the Brute. I have never used a brute, but I have used the Becker Campanion, BK7 and BK9, the only one of which I still own is the BK9 and it is used for comparison purposes to other large knives. The edges are quite thin, I don't have the figures in front of me, but the BK9 is under .030" behind the edge.
Did your CT come with such an acute edge, or did you reprofile?
Personally, I find that handle shape, security, and comfort are a huge factor for me. THe Becker line is very slippery in my hand, and the shape does not suit me, where the bolt hoels are creates hot spots, and the slickness allows my hand to slide down on the handle under hard impacts and smash my pinky into the pommel. The result is that I cannot use the knife nearly as hard as I could if it had a grip that suited my hand. Because I have to use it much lighter, obviously its choppoing performance goes way down.
For example, I have been using the BK9 as a reference when evaluating a Ranger RD9 (flat grind, 5160) which has micarta handle and a better handle design for me. The Becker is much thinner behind the edge with a more acute edge grind. It has a slightly more balde heavy balance. On soft clear woods like alder and willow saplings, the Becker's thinner edge should lead to much greater penetration on soft wood, and thus higher cutting performance. That was the theory, in reality however, just the opposite was true.
The Ranger, despite being thicker edged, was more capable. Although it does have a Bird's beak that can lead to similiar problems as the Becker, the handle is micarta and rough enough to really grip well. So by using a normal grip, my hand does not slip down onto the pommel during impact, and I am not worried about it flying out of my hands.
Absolutely!!! I am glad you understand this, as I have seen many knifemakers who do not. When you see a production knife that is offered in different steels, but all have the same profile, you know the maker did not take advantage of the material properties of each steel to increase cutting performance. Instead, they are likely using the different steel types as a marketing tool.
Take for example the Benchmade Nimravus Cub. It is offered in both ATS34 and M2, yet they have identical grinds. The M2 steel is *MUCH* tougher than the ATS34, so it could be run on a much thinner edge than the ATS34, which is brittle in comparison.
Fish,
Again, your insulting personal attacks are completely unwarranted.
If you want to dispute his conclusions, reasoning or method, please do it through fact and logic, not attacks.
Personal attacks have a chilling effect on the exchange of information. As well, any validity your assertions on blade performance may have had have been drastically undercut by your personal attacks. Part of interpreting peoples reviews on knives has to do with credibility, and people who have to resort to personal attacks have little credibility in my book.
Are we even reading the same thread? The only illogical statements, attacks and assertions without backing it up with facts have been from you.
At one time, I would have ignored you. Now, I am less inclined to do that. "Be the change you seek in the world" has become important to me.
Thank you for your well thought out and detailed response.
I am suprised that the CT has thinner edge than the Brute. I have never used a brute, but I have used the Becker Campanion, BK7 and BK9, the only one of which I still own is the BK9 and it is used for comparison purposes to other large knives. The edges are quite thin, I don't have the figures in front of me, but the BK9 is under .030" behind the edge.
Did your CT come with such an acute edge, or did you reprofile?
Personally, I find that handle shape, security, and comfort are a huge factor for me. THe Becker line is very slippery in my hand, and the shape does not suit me, where the bolt hoels are creates hot spots, and the slickness allows my hand to slide down on the handle under hard impacts and smash my pinky into the pommel. The result is that I cannot use the knife nearly as hard as I could if it had a grip that suited my hand. Because I have to use it much lighter, obviously its choppoing performance goes way down.
For example, I have been using the BK9 as a reference when evaluating a Ranger RD9 (flat grind, 5160) which has micarta handle and a better handle design for me. The Becker is much thinner behind the edge with a more acute edge grind. It has a slightly more balde heavy balance. On soft clear woods like alder and willow saplings, the Becker's thinner edge should lead to much greater penetration on soft wood, and thus higher cutting performance. That was the theory, in reality however, just the opposite was true.
The Ranger, despite being thicker edged, was more capable. Although it does have a Bird's beak that can lead to similiar problems as the Becker, the handle is micarta and rough enough to really grip well. So by using a normal grip, my hand does not slip down onto the pommel during impact, and I am not worried about it flying out of my hands.
Absolutely!!! I am glad you understand this, as I have seen many knifemakers who do not. When you see a production knife that is offered in different steels, but all have the same profile, you know the maker did not take advantage of the material properties of each steel to increase cutting performance. Instead, they are likely using the different steel types as a marketing tool.
Take for example the Benchmade Nimravus Cub. It is offered in both ATS34 and M2, yet they have identical grinds. The M2 steel is *MUCH* tougher than the ATS34, so it could be run on a much thinner edge than the ATS34, which is brittle in comparison.
Fish,
Again, your insulting personal attacks are completely unwarranted.
If you want to dispute his conclusions, reasoning or method, please do it through fact and logic, not attacks.
Personal attacks have a chilling effect on the exchange of information. As well, any validity your assertions on blade performance may have had have been drastically undercut by your personal attacks. Part of interpreting peoples reviews on knives has to do with credibility, and people who have to resort to personal attacks have little credibility in my book.
Are we even reading the same thread? The only illogical statements, attacks and assertions without backing it up with facts have been from you.
At one time, I would have ignored you. Now, I am less inclined to do that. "Be the change you seek in the world" has become important to me.
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,169
frank k said:Nice collection Rock!
How dose the British Army golok with the black rubber handle compare to the Martindale golok and the Ontario machete?
- Frank
It's much thicker and heavier...I like it, but to be honest the $20.00 Martindale golok is a much better deal. It's kind of an in-between blade...a little too heavy for easy brush work and not quite as heavy as a khukuri for the best chopping. The handle is nice, but once I get my Martindale sanded down, it'll be the next hiking companion. I will say the bluing is great and the edge very effective coming out of the box...still testing, so the jury is still out.
ROCK6
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,063
Rock,
That is a very nice collection of cutting tools. The Martindale is cool, I have a few, they needed a bnit of sanding and grind tuning, but they are now solid performers.
Frank,
I have not used an Ontario RTAK, I bought one, did not like it and sold it. The handle did not fit my hand well, the sheath was not well made, and the design was not suited for the type of work I would use a brush blade for. It is more like a short, heavy machete. This makes it a rather odd design, machetes should be light, thin and sharp for soft vegetation and light brush. Having a heavy short machete, you have no reach and a heavy knife that will wear you out fast. Ontario's USGI machete is more suited for that type of work, if you find a good one and tune it. As well, Martindale makes several models that look good.
For a small brush blade (~12") that is capable of heavy work, look at the Livesay RCM. It has a much better handle design, better balance (but still a little too handle heavy for me), and the steel heat treat is in a different leauge. You can use the Livesay RCM for chopping hardwoods without a problem especially with the stock edge, just avoid the worst knots.
Really, it all depends on what you like, what you use a knife for, and how you use it.
That is a very nice collection of cutting tools. The Martindale is cool, I have a few, they needed a bnit of sanding and grind tuning, but they are now solid performers.
Frank,
I have not used an Ontario RTAK, I bought one, did not like it and sold it. The handle did not fit my hand well, the sheath was not well made, and the design was not suited for the type of work I would use a brush blade for. It is more like a short, heavy machete. This makes it a rather odd design, machetes should be light, thin and sharp for soft vegetation and light brush. Having a heavy short machete, you have no reach and a heavy knife that will wear you out fast. Ontario's USGI machete is more suited for that type of work, if you find a good one and tune it. As well, Martindale makes several models that look good.
For a small brush blade (~12") that is capable of heavy work, look at the Livesay RCM. It has a much better handle design, better balance (but still a little too handle heavy for me), and the steel heat treat is in a different leauge. You can use the Livesay RCM for chopping hardwoods without a problem especially with the stock edge, just avoid the worst knots.
Really, it all depends on what you like, what you use a knife for, and how you use it.
Rock,
I have the Martindale Golok also, but I dont much are for it. The blade is too short heavy and forward balanced for most machete work and while it is a decent (but not spectacular) chopper, it gives a lot of feedback through the handles. I also have a thinner bladed Martindale machete that I like much better.
KT,
I am glad to hear that the RCM holds up well given its high hardness. So far, I have not found any short/thick knife blade that will beat the 12 Ontario for all around use; the Ontario chops as least as well on most wood and is far better for machete work.
- Frank
I have the Martindale Golok also, but I dont much are for it. The blade is too short heavy and forward balanced for most machete work and while it is a decent (but not spectacular) chopper, it gives a lot of feedback through the handles. I also have a thinner bladed Martindale machete that I like much better.
KT,
I am glad to hear that the RCM holds up well given its high hardness. So far, I have not found any short/thick knife blade that will beat the 12 Ontario for all around use; the Ontario chops as least as well on most wood and is far better for machete work.
- Frank
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 494
Knifetester,
Thanks for your kind words. It's a pleasure to have a rational discussion over such a cool topic Thank you for that as well.
I've never used the BK7 or BK9, but they seem to have a geometry close to the CT. The Brute is about as thin near the handle (for light cutting work), and that part of the blade cuts well. The angle gets more open as you move forward near the chopping dedicated portion of the blade, obviously to meet toughness concerns. My best bet is that the BK9, whilst being lighter, is probably a better chopper than the Brute, mainly because of it's slimmer profile, but I haven't tested that.
I did not reprofile my Camp Tramp past the secondary bevel, which I made a thin convex angle (about 22-24° compound) using a camping mat and sandpaper. I do this on all of my big blades and choppers -- as it' a tough yet very aggressive edge -- and the Brute is sharpened that way as well.
Cheers,
David
knifetester said:
Thanks for your kind words. It's a pleasure to have a rational discussion over such a cool topic
Thank you for that as well.I've never used the BK7 or BK9, but they seem to have a geometry close to the CT. The Brute is about as thin near the handle (for light cutting work), and that part of the blade cuts well. The angle gets more open as you move forward near the chopping dedicated portion of the blade, obviously to meet toughness concerns. My best bet is that the BK9, whilst being lighter, is probably a better chopper than the Brute, mainly because of it's slimmer profile, but I haven't tested that.
I did not reprofile my Camp Tramp past the secondary bevel, which I made a thin convex angle (about 22-24° compound) using a camping mat and sandpaper. I do this on all of my big blades and choppers -- as it' a tough yet very aggressive edge -- and the Brute is sharpened that way as well.
Cheers,
David
Brian Jones
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 17, 1999
- Messages
- 7,560
Guys,
I'll reply more when I get time.
Scfishr,
I see from your sig line you have some sort of obsession with lies. Try focusing on the truth, look for that, instead of looking for lies. You might be a happier person. Maybe you are having a bad day.
And you might remain a participant on this forum.
However, right now, if you act like this again -- if you behave in any way but politely and respectfully to our fellow forumites -- you're outta here.
This is NOT a discussion, and it will be the last time I say anything. I will not repeat it. The next step will be banning. Period.
Keep it cool. And an apology to Moine would certainly go a long way to making your presence here more welcome.
Thank you,
~Brian.
I'll reply more when I get time.
Scfishr,
I see from your sig line you have some sort of obsession with lies. Try focusing on the truth, look for that, instead of looking for lies. You might be a happier person. Maybe you are having a bad day.
And you might remain a participant on this forum.
However, right now, if you act like this again -- if you behave in any way but politely and respectfully to our fellow forumites -- you're outta here.
This is NOT a discussion, and it will be the last time I say anything. I will not repeat it. The next step will be banning. Period.
Keep it cool. And an apology to Moine would certainly go a long way to making your presence here more welcome.
Thank you,
~Brian.
- Status