Becker Brute feedback?

S

storyville

Joined
Aug 11, 1999
Messages
1,111
I haven’t yet seen much on this model. It appears to offer a versatile design for a bigger knife. Has anyone yet undertaken the inevitable "comparison test" to the Busse Basic #9 or Battle Mistress? Or vis-à-vis comparable khukuris (e.g., 15" HI Ang Khola or 16.5" WW II)?

What are the Brute’s strengths? What might be its compromises?

Thanks,
Glen
 
strengths: strong enough so that you can chop away at anything and not worry about damage.
Weaknesses: super thick and heavy, chops worse than a hatchet of comparable weight, can't slice through green foliage as well as thinner and quicker knives of equal length. Swinging the knife is also tiring because of the blade heavy weight. I find the knife twists when trying to chop wood. Also I get bad shock at the base of the handle.

In general, it can do the job of an ax and the job of a bush-wacking (machete type) knife, but it does them both poorly compared to the tools made for the job. This knife is sort of a do-it-all tool capable of prying and hammering as well, though a real hammer would also pound nails better. I guess if you want only one knife that can make your fire wood, stake your tent, and chop you through thick brush, then this knife would be a good choice. Otherwise the Brute will only make you work harder than you have to.
 
I was originally seeking feedback in relation to other big knives, but your comparisons are very illuminating – thank you.

I personally have not yet found the big (8"+) blades very suitable to my uses/habits. (I am certainly still open to being "convinced.") The Brute’s design appears significantly different from the Bowie-style blade that is typical among bigger knives, but your response suggests that it offers no real advantage. Hmm…

Any other comments, pro or con? If not, that must mean that Becker/Camillus produces a worthless POS.

(J.K.
smile.gif
LLLet’s get ready to rrrrummmble!)

Glen
 
Judging from my Companion, and Magnum Camp, it must be tough as hell and a real BRUTE of a blade. Haven't tested it againt a Battle Mistress but I am inclined to beleive it would be lacking by comparison. IMHO!

------------------
Ron,
Now Thets-A-Noif Shop
Bremerton, Washington
 
Originally posted by storyville:
Any other comments, pro or con? If not, that must mean that Becker/Camillus produces a worthless POS.
Click to expand...

Surely you jest. Oops, wait, just looked at your post again and saw the "J.K." at the end. DUH! Gotta read better the first time.

...strong enough so that you can chop away at anything and not worry about damage...
Click to expand...
but
...chops worse than a hatchet of comparable weight, can't slice through green foliage as well as thinner and quicker knives of equal length
Click to expand...
It does sound like it will chop, but its chopping is really just beating the chopped material into submission.
biggrin.gif


------------------
iktomi
 
The Brute looks to be inbetween the Camp and Machax in terms of function. The Camp at 3/16" would have low weight for chopping and would bind readily. The Machax looks like it would be difficult in general to use for slicing and such. The Brute looks like it could do each of these better than the other but probably worse than the swapped aspects.

I would be interested to hear an overview on all three blades from someone who has used them as say compared to a standard 1/4" 10" bowie. Generallobster, have you used a Machax? I have used a similar blade from Ontario and it was the worst cutting tool I have ever seen. Beating wood into submission was a very good description of its chopping abilities. The Machax has a slightly higher grind but not by much.

-Cliff
 
Can anyone else w/a Brute provide some feedback?

I'm not surprised that it doesn't favorably compare to a hatchet or machete in their respective tasks; the value of a bigger knife is supposed to be its versatility, a jack-of-all-trades, so to speak. It is certainly thick and heavy, and undoubtedly blade heavy; but no more so than other knives in its class.

How does its bolo-derived design compare to the more typical big bowie (or other big blades)?
Is it thicker/thinner *at the edge* than comparable blades?
Is its recurve a plus or minus?
General Lobster mentioned that it produces a "bad shock at the base of the handle" – is this true for others, as well?
Is its handle more/less comfortable/secure than other comparable knives?

Any more feedback would be much appreciated –

Glen
 
Have you checked on the Camillus forum? You may gather more responses there. I have one and like it alot, but haven't used it enough to give a valid opinion.

------------------
Dennis Bible
 
I know Cliff reviewed an Ontario kukri a while ago and that it is what he must be comparing to the machax. Although I have never held the machax, I have one of the newer ontario kukris with a full flat ground blade. I have found that it signifigantly out slices the brute because of its thin edge, lighter swing weight, and more pronounced curve. It behaves much more like a machete than a wood chopping tool because it has an edge that is thinner than my master hunter. In fact I don't have a knife with a thinner edge. It is too thin, almost like a spiderco moran shaped into a kukri. I fear I might snap whole pieces out of the edge while cutting through any wood with a diameter larger than one inch. That is why I appreciate the toughness of the Brute. I have found that the Brute is good for the task of clearing large branches that are too thick or hard for a machete, and too entangled for a hatchet. I would not choose the brute to down a tree if the machax or a hatchet were at hand, and I would not choose the brute for clearing a path through dense weeds and green foliage. The recurve on mine has not made too much of a difference in performance. I think the curve is too shallow for material to be drawn into the belly of the knife during a swing. It does position the tip of the knife lower than say a trailmaster, but that lowered tip could be responsible for the twisting of the grip during heavy chopping because of torque. I don't want to discourage people from getting the brute, just because I usually tend to point out more of the bad things that the good. The brute is priced very reasonably when comparing it to other blades in its catagory. It can do just about everything including slicing--it just takes more energy to swing the tip heavy blade repeatedly back and forth, and it tired me out after a while. Fit and finish is quite good, though the knife is still sort of ugly and brutal by virtue of its designers intentions that it be a work knife and not some jewled treasure. Botach is selling them for around 78 dollars and I think this knife is worth it.
 
I love my Brute.
I usually carry a kukri type blade (any of the many versions I own) and a smaller knife (either SRK, Master Hunter or Recon Tanto).
The Brute has replaced both these for me on many occasions. As is well known, there are specific tools that perform specific jobs better than any other tool but for a "one knife does it all" tool, the Brute outperforms any other multipurpose large knife. I've used mine to chop, dig, pry, hammer, stab, split and slice.
I love the handle and have had no problems with twisting (I have rather large hands). The BK&T handles are my favorite knife handles on the market.
The Brute does not chop as well as a kukri type blade, though. I have an Ontario kukri and love it, also. I thought Cliff may have been referring to the Ontario bolo (it plain sux as a chopper). The Machax is a very mean chopper and will outperform the Brute in that category hands down. It and the Brute are the only 2 BK&T knives I currently own but will have all of them soon. I really like the sheaths, also.
As you can tell, I like choppers.
I talked to Will Fennel on the phone today and he mentioned the Becker model #6. He wouldn't give me a whole lot of info but he did say something about a 14" blade!!!!!
I can't wait!!!!!!

Orion
 
I love my Brute too. I have chopped through a couple of firewood sized logs with it and would say offhand it's ability is similar to a sharp CS Trailmaster. I find the grip on the Brute to be day and night more comfortable than the Trailmaster however, with no blistering or grip problems at all. Both hold an edge very well, to the point I am wondering if the steels might be very similar if not the same. I am almost inclined to think the Brute has a small edgeholding advantage over carbon v, but need more time to be sure. My only complaint about the Brute is that I would prefer it without the thick hammering spot on the spine. I am taking the Brute camping this weekend and am really going to let it have it - I'll write more after.
David
 
From my experiences, the Brute holds an edge considerably better than Carbon V. I do not own a Trailmaster but I do own a LOT of CS products (quite a few of their kukri type blades, all Carbon V) and the BK&T steel retains its edge better. Keep in mind this is coming from a die-hard CS fan. I agree about the handles but I also LOVE the thick hammering spot on the spine of the Brute!!!!
I haven't had to sharpen the Brute yet (due to its edge retention!!) but when I do, I'll post on ease (or lack thereof) of resharpening.

Orion
 
Brute is a great piece, I love it and have written a few fav rev's on it...Search and yee shall find!

Steve in NYC


------------------
What we do today in life...echoes in eternity...
 
Thanks for the replies – very interesting comments. The comparisons to the Ontario machete are a little confusing, however: Orion states that the Brute doesn’t chop as well as a khukuri (Ontario? really?) while Generallobster notes that the Ontario khukuri is much closer – in performance and thin edge design – to a machete than to a traditional khukuri.

Since the 0170-6C steel is a variation of 52100B, I would hope it performs a bit better than Carbon V – in edge retention as well as toughness.

Any comparisons to, say, a Busse #9?
 
PS Dangelo – I just read your two reviews – thanks for the heads-up; both have good info. You note in the first one that the BK&T pprwork indicates/suggests a 10-15 degree sharpening angle – that is *very* thick!
 
While browsing thru a new knife book at a store the other day I ran across a comment from someone who had some Carbon V analyzed. It looked pretty much like 0170-6C, within assumed mfg tolerances at least.
 
generallobster :

I know Cliff reviewed an Ontario kukri a while ago and that it is what he must be comparing to the machax.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was it.

I have one of the newer ontario kukris with a full flat ground blade. I have found that it signifigantly out slices the brute because of its thin edge, lighter swing weight, and more pronounced curve. It behaves much more like a machete than a wood chopping tool because it has an edge that is thinner than my master hunter.
Click to expand...

Glad to see they changed the design, the old one was one of the few knives that I would outright call useless. It was just barely a knife at all which only had one bevel along the edge and believe it or not as you went down from the spine the metal got thicker - figure that one out.

Interesting to see them go so far in the opposite way when they worked on the design. The new model sounds much like one of the light Cold Steel khukuri models. Have you used any of those?


I have found that the Brute is good for the task of clearing large branches that are too thick or hard for a machete, and too entangled for a hatchet.
Click to expand...

You mentioned that you would prefer the Machax for felling a tree, does the same go for the large branch clearing?

Orion :

I thought Cliff may have been referring to the Ontario bolo (it plain sux as a chopper).
Click to expand...

Yes, it is far too light. It might be useful on light vegetation but then again Jeff Randall mentioned once that on thick and heavy (non-woody) vegetation straight machetes work really well as they can be drawn free with no effort compared to the curved blades that can generate a lot of drag when doing such work. Seems sensible to me but I don't do that kind of wook. It all woody vegetation around here.

As for Carbon V vs the Becker steel, as has been mentioned on the forums several times, Camillus has made knives for Cold Steel, it is quite likely that the Beckers are Carbon V.

-Cliff



[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 08-29-2000).]
 
The Ontario Kukri that I have is one of the newer models. It is pretty decent, and as far as thickness, is kind of in between the light CS models and the thicker models. As far as comparing it the CS LTC, that is one of my favorites. I LOVE the LTC for chopping. I know a lot of people have dissed it but I have been using mine for almost 3 years and I guess I have just come to the perfect "feel, technique" kind of thing with that knife... kind of a "farfegnugen (sp?) thing! (Cliff, it's appearance looks as if you have"tested" it, but it has only been through standard work.) I chipped a large hunk out of the blade and had to reprofile it (hit a buried brick). It looked as if someone had taken a bite out of it. I dremmelled it down and resharpened it and now it looks like the side profile of a shark's head! Great chopper (for me) but the Brute is a better "all-round" knife.
The BK&T steel could very well be similar to Carbon V, but I believe it is modified. It does seem to hold an edge slightly better than the Carbon V blades. No comparison on resharpening yet, though....

Later-
Orion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top