Best Combat Knives?

[Snickersnee]

Corduroy, inferring from what you wrote here and in the "gator skinning" thread, you're thinking about making a knife and sending it to me to evaluate?

I would be honored.

Or if I completely missed the mark, drop me a line anyway and let me know what's up. I am definately intrested in whatever you have in mind, and will help out in any way I can, you know, as long as it doesn't violate any basic precepts of goodness and normality...

Auction, I figured you were new around here at the begining of this thing. I haven't intentionaly directed anything at you or tried to put you down or anything like that on purpose. My sole annoyance was with the knives. I am also bugged by people promoting(as in the guys who sell/market these, not somebody who just posted a link for evaluation) these things as some people honestly don't know much about knives and are pretty trusting. I don't take you for a fool, the impression I got was that you saw something and you didn't know exactly what was meant by what so were asking some questions, which is a logical and wise course of action.

Unfortunately, I am full of piss and hot air, so I tend to get carried away with my posts. If I in any way did anything disrespectful to you, I apologize. My beef is with the knives and claims made by their purveyors, not with you.

As a new member to these forums, if this was face-to-face rather than words on a computer screen, I'd give you a hug and peck on the cheek to welcome you to our family, actualy, that'd be really uncool...

Instead I'd give you a hand shake and a hearty slap on the back, then we'd bust out a couple bottles of Wild Turkey, get real drunk and try to shoot the bottles off the fence from the porch of the Bladeforums trailer. Then we'd get in the beat up and filthy Bladeforums pickup(complete with gun rack and light bar) and go down the dirt road to the local roughneck bar and start some fights. You know, something macho like that. Yeah, that's A LOT better...

 

[RUDY]

Well, Snick I am going to have to disagree with you again unfortuantely.

You asked if it is okay for knives to be one trick ponies and I think it is. Many knives are desgned purely for fighting and nothing else so why can't a combat knife be designed for only the harder more stressing tasks of such a situation.

Anyways getting back to the blades in question. I am not arguing with you that the steep grinds prevent good slicing and cutting but as I stated they are hardcore choppers, pryers, and diggers which as Mr. Pobertson stated are all tasks a knife may be called on to do in combat.

Now you wonder why should a knife be capable of doing only these things easily and why shouldn't it be capable of slicing, etc. easily. Well, all I can say is if you have a probelm with baldes designed like this you should be be over at the HI forum putting up a stink as far as I see it. The utility kukris are designed for heavier tasks just like these blades such as chopping, digging, and prying. They are really not very good at slicing and more detailed tasks. They are used for the same purposes as these blades.

Now, the kukris come with a karda or small utility blade for the more detailed tasks you seem to be upset that these blades can't perform well. As I have stated before these blades are made to be used in conjunction with smaller blades. Mr. Robertson carried a number of smaller baldes with is Brend too I believe because it was better at teh heavier tasks.

Let me ask you why would I want to use my heavier duty blade for such slicing and cutting tasks if I can better and more easily do it with my small thin bladed utility blade. As far as I see it these blades are more specialized than your P1 which I find okay because they do the tasks they were designed for great and you can't say they don't shop great Snick because you haven't handled one. I would say one would even out do your P1in these areas.

The important thing to is that if you lost your small blade these can be made to do its tasks which is important if you are forced to carry on with only one blade. I might add here my 11 inch blade was used to skin to wild jungle pigs with fair ease by Mark Sexton. You say why would I want to have to make a blade work for me. well you don't have to unless it is your only blade and if you choose to carry it as your only blade willfully I don't think you should be able to b**ch. If you have to make do with only that blade my guess is you are now in a survival situation in which the blade will function fine and offer the needed strenght of a survival blades. In a survival sutiuation you are going to have to compromise and make do a lot no matter what plainly put if you have only 1 blade of any design I feel.

Overall, they are specialized blades made to be used in conjuction with others ideally and if you are in less than ideal condtions the single blade will still function fine. Even with the P1 I would still want a smaller blade because I feel any 7 inch blade made for heavy use is going to function better at such task as chopping, digging, and prying.

Now at this point I would like to apologize for my rambling and if they are incoherent. I sometimes get going and then ende up finding out what I wrote makes no sense to any one but myself. If this has happened I will try and clarify whatever needs it for you. I would also like to say these blades are not ideal but they work and work well I think. I would rather have my P1 one even though these blades woul work fine.

thanks and take care
collin

 

[Joe Talmadge]

Okay, nice to see we've all bonded and smoked a virtual doobie together. All friends now, let's continue with this thread!

I already talked a little bit about why ATS-34 isn't the best steel in the world for production knives. I'd like now to take up the issue of chisel grinds, and then put the two together to discuss the chisel-ground ATS-34 combat fixed blade.

Anthony Lombardo makes perfect sense as usual in his discussion of the chisel grind. It should NOT be dismissed out of hand. The cutting performance you can get from a good chisel grind is positively scary. Of course, a large part of that performance comes from the very small included angle at the edge, and the asymmetric grind. But this also brings about the chisel grind's disadvantages. 1. It doesn't cut straight. 2. Like all single-bevel grinds (e.g., puukko), the edge is relatively fragile due to its thinness. I mean the *very* edge here -- the edge thickens quickly so it gets relatively strong quickly.

Anthony's example of a 5" chisel-ground fighter is especially good. For a knife in this class, you want ferocious cutting power, and don't especially need to make dead accurate straight-line cuts or need chopping-style edge robustness.

Is this the best design criterion for a combat knife, though? As everyone seems to agree, fighting is one of the least important things a combat knife must do. A combat knife must be very robust, for chopping, prying, digging, and other random use/abuse. And when it's used as a utility cutter, you'll want it to cut straight. The chisel grind *does* tend to make a knife very robust for blade prying, but it makes the edge delicate, so chopping and edge-torquing will take its toll *real* fast. And cutting straight? Fa'get about it!

And now let's bring in ATS-34. This is a steel that in production knives tends to be a bit brittle. Some commercial heat treaters (like Ernie Mayer) and custom makers (like Walter Brend) have gained a reputation for heat treating ATS-34 especially tough, but production companies don't seem quite there yet, nor is there any reason to think they ever will be. So in a chisel-ground ATS-34 combat knife, you have a knife that's going to go through all kinds of abuse, but on the basis of its grind alone is a little suspect at the very edge. And now you're going to couple that with a steel that isn't known for its edge toughness properties.

All in all, a mismatch. The chisel-ground ATS-34 combat fixed blade may work for some, but in my opinion is not the best overall solution.

If auction is still reading and gives me some indication that he's interested in continuing the conversation, I'll take up the matter of the other fixed blades on that site next.

Joe
jat@cup.hp.com

 

[RUDY]

After rereading my post I realized I wasn't specific on what knives I was referring to. I am referring to the TOPs blades. Specifically the Steel Eagle and Anaconda.
The other chisel ground blades I would agree are awful for combat.

As for calling these the ultimate I don't think they are but I think are are very fuctional.

thanks and take care
collin

[This message has been edited by RUDY (edited 04 July 1999).]

 

[Snickersnee]

I have no problem with hard use knives at all. A knife designed for hard use need not be as niche as these are. I have no beef with kukri's `cause they're great knives fully capable of and proficient in a wide range of tasks. I don't like the little knife though, a karda was it? Just not my style.

Chisel ground blades offer no advantage in terms of slashing ability, I can make a "standard ground" edge that'll cut as well or better, nor does it have a distinctive advantage in terms of chopping ability, but it does reduce functionality in return for highly dubious gains in strength and nefarious gains in marketing.

Chisel grinds have their place, mostly on chisels, but also "patch knives", if you do any blackpowder shooting, and bench mounted shears, scissors too.

I've gotta wonder why all these soldiers want to dig with their knives. They DO get issued entrenching tools you know. You just ain't gonna be able to dig any knida hole with a knife, even those Civil War trowel bayonets. That pretty much makes a knife a probe, any knife can do that. You can also use any knife as a digging stick. This "prying" issue is getting way outa hand. You CAN pry with most any good, center-pointed knife with an adequate spine. The thing is, why? At any given time you will have a myriad of better prybars all around you.

It's not a case of calling these knives overly specialized, it's a case of them being poorly designed, especialy for their intended task. They are limited WAY beyond what they should be. They can be "made" to work, but that is all. They will excell at nothing but decorating your wall and pleasing dealers. A high price should not be paid for such a knife.

In fact, the e-tool issued to U.S. troops for free are far better at digging and prying than these will ever be. Being that the e-tool's also have an edge, I'd have to do side-by-side chopping comparisons to see if these knives can even chop better. Probably, but I'd bet it'd be real close.

Something about bone notches was mentioned, and how they facilitate cracking open bones for marrow. Marrow is highly nutritious. It's also easy to get at without notches on your knife. Simply what the bone with the spine of your knife. I have done this on leg bones from 200+ pound boar. It actualy isn't that hard at all. Just 2 or 3 solid whacks. Most any full-tang knife with a .25" thick spine will do. To our most ancient ancestor's marrow was an important food source. They used small rocks to break the large marrow bones left over from other animal's kills before they became the deadly effective predators humans are now. An experimental anthropologist survived for some weeks trying this out in Africa as I understand it.

Again, these knives aren't overly-specialized, they're overly-limited. I can design you a knife that will kick their butts and it'll be a lot more "traditional" in design and construction. Because that old stuff works pretty good. And the new stuff ain't all it's cracked up to be. I'm talking design affectations here, the new materials are great, even if they are played up a bit more than is warranted.

If you like these, if you like using them, fine. More power to you. But they are optimized for nothing. Oh, Project's slice great too, they don't have much belly, but they do have a good, sharp edge. I skin large animals with mine. I wouldn't have any qualms at all using it as my only knife in most any situation, except surgery maybe.

At best the design features of the knives in question can be made to work as well.

A good moto for further discusion of combat and survival knives would be;

"Any knife is the poorest and most expensive prybar you will ever encounter, and the most miserable and over-priced shovel available. And this is when the knife in question is optimized for these purposes. Optimization for these tasks renders them also the worst knife available. With this in mind, we should endeavor to carry a tool suitable to our needs and not attempt to modify a wholey unsuited tool to undertake their labor, which can only result in the least efficient tool imaginable, capable of performing no task adequately. We should also gaurd against being suckered in by dishonest advertising and non-sensical fads "

 

[edenver]

I 've got a college buddy in the Army Rangers who received a Randall #1 upon his commission, as his father did before him, and carries it whenever in the field. You could not convince him to break with the tradition...

I have a college buddy on one of the SEAL teams who also owns a Randall- though his is displayed on the wall. He once showed me a trunk full of stuff at his parent's house- filled to the brim with stuff given to him in hopes that he would endorse it... I think he said he takes some plain jane issue knife into the field, and that he could care less as long as it does the job.

Erik

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Snickersnee :

Any knife is the poorest and most expensive prybar you will ever encounter, and the most miserable and over-priced shovel available.

Knives will in general be better suited to utility prying that an actual prybar becuase the geometry is better suited. There are a wider range of uses covered with a blade because of the thinner edge and tip allowing work that a prybar would have problems with. As for digging, you don't use a knife as you would a shovel. Its used like a pick. It loosens the dirt so that you can scoop it out with your hands. You simply work the point in with the edge trailing breaking the soil up. Unless of course you have sod to remove in which case you do it first. The easiest way is to just use the point to break out a pattern. You can slice it up but that is just unnecessary wear - useful for evaluation purposes but probably not the best field method.

As for the stresses that these place on a blade, neither is beyond the scope of a well made knife. If you do break a knife by doing these, odds are that it was a fault in the materials of construction rather than you over stressed it. It is steel we are talking about, it should not easily break, or warp. The reason that prying and digging are pushed so hard as being "abusive" is the same reason that people will say not to store knives in leather - it allows them to sell an inferior product by pushing the flaws as not flaws at all but as the expected performance.

All knives pry, or are are exposed to stressed which are basically prying, on a daily basis, assuming they are actually used. Even if you are just cutting cardboard the stress is there and a part of it will be perpendicular to the blade. Now how much stress should a blade be able to take? A hell of a lot. Most of the quaility smiths with guarantee their knives, even with the thinner stock (3/16") and weaker grinds (full flat), as being unbreakable by hand. The fact is that even much smaller knives like the 1/8" Kellam can easily take the strain of prying, twisting, and splitting wood. It is not too much too expect.

All of these things, digging, prying, chopping pounding, I do on a regular basis even with knives that are not designed for it. Being as they are made of steel they can generally handle a great deal of stress. For example I recently had to do some cleanup on a plot in the cemetary. Basically I had to remove some weeds and cut out some encroaching sods. This was a fair amount of "digging". Then I had to remove a broken fence rung, so I just worked it loose using the point of the blade until I could pull it off. The knife was undamaged after this except for the dulling. It was a Calypso Jr. by the way.

As for khukuris, while some of them are very big and very heavy, they are not all the same. Some of them are very thin and light are are designed for slashing/cutting rather than chopping. An 18'th century and an Ang Khola are very different knives but both are khukuris.

-Cliff



[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 05 July 1999).]

 

[submachine.com]

Interesting...Just a comment that I have updated the aforementioned site so you could have a better picture of the knives you despise

Actually, I have taken some points into consideration, excuse the pun. I'd be interested in hearing your opinions on titanium blades and ceramic blades.

Joe www.submachine.com/knives

 

[Snickersnee]

Cliff, I got a chuckle when I read that "knives pry better than prybars because they have better geometery for it"(paraphrase), but then I realised what you really meant, at least I hope you meant; That knives are slimmer so can slip into spots a fat prybar couldn't, not that a pointy, razor-sharp bar of steel with anywhere from a quater to a half of the stock removed is more efficient for prying. I would reccomend a thinner prybar. You know, they do come in many sizes and shapes, some have comfortable handles too. Check out some in your local Home Depot or somesuch.

I agree that a well-made knife should be strong enough for digging and prying. I have never even broken a knife that was tempered around the classic 55-57R by throwing(folders excluded). The entire thing is they're not well suited to it, that there are much better tools designed to do this, and when you try to turn a knife into a prybar or trowel you end up with tool that is inadequate in it's performance of any of the above duties.

I fail to see why I should prefer dragging my knife through the dirt and then removing said dirt by hand over using my entrenching tool. Even from the prone position, an entrenching tool is wholey superior to a knife for these purposes. It's a piece of standard issue equipment, well designed for it's intended purpose, and most importantly free.

A good knife should be able to withstand the stresses of throwing, digging, prying and the like. A bad knife is one that has been designed to serve as a prybar or entrenching tool, especialy when it sacrifices it's functionality as a knife.

Truth be told, I don't typicaly see prying as abuse, I see it for what it is, mis-use.

Titanium knives won't replace steel. Ceramic probably won't either. Ceramet(ceramic in a metalic matrix) might, someday.

 

[not2sharp]

It looks like our positions are clear with respect to the chisel profiled knives and single sided grinds.

Should we move on and discuss our recommended blade profile (Bowie, Bolo, Kukri, Dagger/fighter), stock (1/8, 3/16, 1/4), and Blade length.

I usually go with a bolo shaped blade of 3/16 stock with a blade length of 5-8". The bolo blade is a very effective on light vegetation, and provides plenty of belly for good cutting action. This comes at the expense of point penetration but my carry folder handles the delicate work.

What about your favorite field knife?

 

WHile checking out some combat knives, I found out about the Microtech OTFs. I think I may have found what I am looking for, except that they seem overpriced...$500-$800 ?? just how much force do those springs have anyway? Maybe this should go in a new thread. Thanks for all info/help.
K-

 

[Cougar Allen]

A Microtech OTF is about the last knife I would consider for a combat knife, but that's just me ... I wouldn't say the best off-road pickup truck is a Porsche, either....

Seriously, I don't think we're on the same page here. Maybe instead of saying you're looking for a "combat knife" you could go into detail about what you want the knife to be good for.

I guess you must be looking for a self-defense knife (please correct me if I'm wrong). If you choose an OTF auto for that purpose carry it in a sheath and make durn sure it never gets any lint or anything into that slot. Check out the Automatics Forum on this website for more discussion of OTFs and autos in general for defense purposes ... despite what you see in the movies, most of the auto buffs consider them inferior to manual folders for defense purposes, mainly because they're slower to open than manuals.

-Cougar Allen :{)

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Snicksnee :

"knives pry better than prybars because they have better geometery for it"(paraphrase)

Which is quite moronic and not an accurate paraphrase for what I said. I pry on a daily basis with just about every knife I own, the stresses differ from knife to knife, but it is prying none the less. What I said has to be taken in context to the discussion at hand.

I would reccomend a thinner prybar. You know, they do come in many sizes and shapes, some have comfortable handles too

If a prybar had the geometry that I wanted, it would end up being a knife. As for the comfortable handles, I severly doubt that the ergomomics are going to equal a well made knife. To be specific, while I did use a prybar on a regular basis when working in construction, I have not have much for one since I stopped. However, prying, like cutting, covers a lot of ground. Just like sissors cut a lot of things easier than knives, knives prying a lot of things easier than prybars.

For example, I recently had to remove the cover of a dessicator in the lab that had been left on for about 5 years. As a result the grease had formed a tight vac seal and I could not budge it. I tried heating up the grease but that made little difference. So then I took the knife I was carrying, placed the edge facing the crack under the lid and gave the spine a wack. I then twisted the knife and worked it in a little. I repeated this a couple of more times until the seal was broken.

This is a prying stress. It's not prying as you might normall think of, but the net effect that the blade sees is the same thing. Another regular use is twist chopping wood. Done at significant speed on hard wood, the strain the blade will feel with be very great and will match or exceed the level of taxing that a full body pry will exert on a blade, mainly becuase the latter will be supported by the spine while the former will not.

These are the kinds of things that fall under the class of "utility prying", there are many others. Its basically anything that you do that while not prying as such in the usual sense, does simulate the same stresses. A knife will do much if not all of this better than a pry bar because of the slimmer point and edge allowing a wider range of penetration and concentration of force.

The entire thing is they're not well suited to it, that there are much better tools designed to do this, and when you try to turn a knife into a prybar or trowel you end up with tool that is inadequate in it's
performance of any of the above duties.

Snickersnee, different people want different things from their knives. Not everyone needs a knife to do what you do.

A bad knife is one that has been designed to serve as a prybar or entrenching tool, especialy when it sacrifices it's functionality as a knife.

You are using a very narrow defination of a knife, mainly one that is based on your needs. As a rather extreme example, as Rudy mentioned above, there are khukuris that are designed with the intended goal being to preform well in high stress areas. Prying, hammering digging etc., are actually optomized over chopping and slicing is pretty much ignored. These are not knives "designed by the navy SEALS" but rather have been refined by thousands of years of actual use. Commonly used in nepal are very thick khukuri's 1/2" or more at the spine. Do to the thickness of the blade and extreme forward balance, they are difficult to use for more "normal" knife uses - yet they are the tool of choice. Why? Simply because what they want a knife to do is different and better suited by that particular geometry. Labeling them as "bad knives" because they don't do what you want seems kind of narrow minded.

My father grew up fishing. The only knife he ever used on a regular basis had the following geometry : about 9" long, under 1/8" thick, flexible, full flat grind, narrow (1.5 cm), no belly, with a very sharp point.

My uncle on the other hand mainly hunts more so than fishes and his blade of choice would be : about 4" long, over 1/8" thick, stiff not flexible, full flat grind, broad (> 2 cm), belly, with a upswept tip.

Now both of those knives are very well suited to what they are being used for, yet if they were swapped then they would be quickly be thrown away in disgust as they don't cross over very much into each others performance range. Different people want different things and different things want different geometries.

Truth be told, I don't typicaly see prying as abuse, I see it for what it is, mis-use.

I see it as a use. If I need to do even dedicated prying and my knife can handle it why am I going to look for something else. If I need to butter some toast and I was carrying a Busse Battle Mistress I would not hesitate to use it. It would not be my choice if I could magically warp in a buttering tool on command, but it would do it if it needs to be done. Much the same as prying, digging, chopping, slicing or anything else. Misuse would be overstressing something, none of the above should do that.

I fail to see why I should prefer dragging my knife through the dirt and then removing said dirt by hand over using my entrenching tool.

If you are supplied with a tool that has suitable strength for prying with a decent digging/probing geometry then obviously you are not going to want these aspects in a knife. However by a similar arguement, if you have a small knife on you, a pocker knife of sorts, which most do, why do you want another knife? That two tool combo (pocket knife plus e-tool) will easily handle any task. Thus it looks like the best combat knife could be a Benchmade Axis or a regular Buck hunter.

A lot of the above are general comments. Getting back to the specifics of combat blades, to get an idea as to what a good combat knife should look like then it would be first needed to define what the needs are, what tools are available and then figure out what knife best fills the remaining gaps.

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 06 July 1999).]

 

[Joe Talmadge]

Ah, auction is still around, good! auction, I agree with Cougar's statements. The Microtech OTF isn't really a combat knife. Are you really looking for a fighting knife, not a combat knife? If so, we've definitely been looking at the wrong things in this thread. Come to think of it, why were we looking at overbuilt large fixed blades, when a small thin easier-to-break auto would do? I second Cougar's idea -- why not describe what you're looking for, since the terminology is only confusing things at this point?

Joe

 

I always thought 'fighting' and 'combat' meant generally the same thing, as opposed to utility/survival. I need a knife that I can use for self defense, as the "idiots that be" have made just about everything else illegal here. Actually, any blade over 4 inches is illegal to carry, but who cares.
I WAS looking at the larger 6 inch blade 'combat' knives that are on that site (I haven't heard this mentioned, but I dont think I'd do a very job of sharpening a tanto/modified tanto) but then I found out about the OTFs, and think that maybe they are the better choice, defensively if not legally.
REgarding the combat type blades, I am looking at options like titanium and ceramic.
Basically, I want it and its edge to last, I want it to look wicked/black, and I want it to be an effective all around cutting/puncturing tool. (I think the Chris Reeves have metal handles, so im not even going to consider them)


[This message has been edited by auction (edited 06 July 1999).]

 

[Snickersnee]

Cliff, I think you're right, I am a moron. I'm having a real hard time folowing what you mean by "prying". Do you mean lateral stresses and such? As both of us agreed above, a good knife should be able to take them. I would say that a knife still wouldn't be my first choice for prying in the "true" sense, as they are sharp and that would suck if/when your knife slips.

You're wrong about kukri's though. The blade pattern has been used by the Greeks and Iberians since the Bronze Age under the name Espada Falcata, Marchione, and Kopis(though that might actualy have refered to a different Egyptian weapon). It was designed as a chopper. The thick spine was orignaly meant to make it tougher and give it a meaner "whomp!". It's a very old, and very good, multi-faceted design. As far as big blades go, it's a great pattern capable of doing many different things. It can thrust and chop with authority. You can even use it as a effective draw knife. Slicing too!

I'd have had to have seen what this lid was like, but sounds like a job for a screw driver to me. I'm envisioning something akin to a paint can. Sure, butter your bread with a Battle Mistress, again my concern is what happens if the knife slips whilst you're prying? It's happened to me, I can tell you. A nasty cut.

As for your Dad's fillet knife, you're not reccomending it as a combat knife, are you? That is what we're talking about right?

Now if you mean that knives designed for different things are gonna be a little different, well yeah, that's a no-brainer. My contention is that trying to make shovel knives and prybar knives is silly. I'm all for making a tool that will serve well as a prybar and shovel, but to do so would make it less a knife, to the point I feel it should either be labeled a non-knife or even a good multi-tool. Maybe there's even a market for better prybars. Not that it matters, as best as my pea-brain can ascertain, you're using real knives to do this stuff, making this discussion moot.

Auction, why don't you like a metal handle?

As a long term user of a Project 1 for tasks that would curl most people's hair, I can tell you with authority that it causes me no discomfort in use, is quite secure, and the knife's over-all weight is roughly equal to that of a Mad Dog Attak, which has a G-10 handle last I heard.

The Project's are robust knives that have proven themsevles in a wide range of tasks over a goodly amount of time. If you don't like'em, you don't like'em, but if you're just looking around right now, don't be discouraged from trying one out. They're good knives that can do most anything you'd want'em to, unless you want to cut live wires or something.

I personaly wouldn't reccomend that anyway. Unlike McKlung aparently, I have access to trained electricians who can use better suited tools, have much more experience in such matters, and take all of the risk out of it for me. Plus, I know what electrical wires look like, so I don't accidentaly cut them. McKlung has some weird ideas sometimes.

As to what blade style is suitable for a combat knife, well, there's a lot of suitable ones. It depends a lot on personal asthetic tastes and particularly what you want to do with them. Recently I've become enamored of drop-points. All I'm saying is that a combat knife, if used at all, which it doesn't seem like it will be from the reports from the front lines, should be capable of handling a myriad of tasks. Many blade patterns can do this. Many of what's being sold by, well you know who all is making them, sacrifice multi-functionality for the pure sake of asthetics, making knives that look cool, but aren't really any better, and often times worse, than pre-existing patterns. I'm all for inovation, but a lot of what's out there isn't inovation, at least not in the usability arena. Remember, knives have been used by humans for about two million years, there's not a whole lot that works that hasn't been tried. Certain patterns work good for a lot of stuff, which is why they have withstood the test of time. Sometimes bad patterns are preserved out of a sense of tradition. In modern times, inefficient designs are being pushed for marketing reasons, designed for asthetic appeal, to be bought by those who while wrapped up in the "tactical" movement have been blinded by the light.

 

[Corduroy]

Auction,

I think you'll find most folks here think of "combat knife" and "fighting knife" as very different things. In my mind, fighting knives are knives used to fight (duel) with an armed, aware individual. Combat knives are in my book synonymous with "field" knives, but specifically for soldiers. They do every sort of field task a soldier might need - but fighting and killing is done with the rifles, grenade launchers, and tanks that these individuals are provided with for that purpose.

You sound like you're looking for a knife for self-defense. I have to assume that means that you either already have or cannot get a firearm or chemical spray, and are seeking a knife as a backup or substitute.

Many folks here will tell you that a fixed-blade is best for this job, and I think they are right. It's stronger than a folder and faster to get in your hand in a workable position. But for my $0.02, fixed-blades are socially unacceptable (if not illegal) most places, and also require some sort of rig to carry concealed and give fast access. If I'm going to carry something that's a no-no and also requires me to have a rig, I'd want it to be a handgun. That's why I'm a believer in defensive folders as an easy-to-carry, far more socially acceptable alternative.

Forget autos. They are illegal in many places, for starters. They are also slower than many of the modern breed of one-handers, and, being more complex machines, are less relaible and easier to break. Autos are toys, plain and simple. OTF autos are the most expensive and most complex, and thus have the highest "toy value." I like toys, but I wouldn't stake my life on one.

Spyderco developed a unique and well considered answer to the "defensive folder" question years ago with the Civilian. In my opinion, no other knife has had as much practical thought put into it for defense (not fighting). But many folks don't care to give up thrusting ability because it is generally the most effective way to permanently dispatch an opponent with a knife. I don't think that's a prime defensive concern, but for those folks knives like the Carnivour, Axis, and AFCK might be good choices. I suggest you start a new thread and ask about defensive knives. You will hear a lot of good info, as this unpleasant but important topic is much-discussed here.

------------------

-Corduroy
(Why else would a bear want a pocket?)

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Snickersnee :

Cliff, I think you're right, I am a moron.

Nah, I meant that comment was moronic.

I'm having a real hard time folowing what you mean by "prying". Do you mean lateral stresses and such?

Yes, anything that produces a force perpendicular to the blade face.

You're wrong about kukri's though. The blade pattern has been used by the Greeks and Iberians since the Bronze Age under the name Espada Falcata, Marchione, and Kopis(though that might actualy have refered to a different Egyptian weapon). It was designed as a chopper. The thick spine was orignaly meant to make it tougher and give it a meaner "whomp!". It's a very old, and very good, multi-faceted design. As far as big blades go, it's a great pattern capable of doing many different things. It can thrust and chop with authority. You can even use it as a effective draw knife. Slicing too!

Snickersnee, I was refering to particular khukuris ("there are khukuris") not all khukuris. To be specific, the Ang Khola or Tin Chirra are specialized designs. They are not designed for chopping. Yes they can chop well but that is not the intended goal. A thin bladed knife like an Ontario machete will penetrate just as well or better, even though it does not have the mass. The much thinner cross-section makes up for the reduced weight. What these types of khukuris are designed for is to take heavy lateral stress and have enough weight to be used for hammering. They are commonly used for digging and splitting and they are the tool of choice for such. You can't slice very well with these as you have to force the 1/2" thick spine through the material and of course there is 4 lbs dragging on your wrist.

I'd have had to have seen what this lid was like, but sounds like a job for a screw driver to me.

Way too thick.

my concern is what happens if the knife slips whilst you're prying?

Same thing that happens if the knife slips while you are doing anything else.

As for your Dad's fillet knife, you're not reccomending it as a combat knife, are you? That is what we're talking about right?

It would be great if you were in combat against cod but not much else. The point of that was to simply illustrate that geometries can work very well for some and yet be useless to others.

My contention is that trying to make shovel knives and prybar knives is silly. I'm all for making a tool that will serve well as a prybar and shovel, but to do so would make it less a knife

Again, that depends on what you want to do with your knife. You are making a cutoff judgement in a general statement of value which is a very dangerous thing to do assuming you are discussing tools to be used by people other than you.

For example, lets take a piece of 1/4" and put a flat grind on it. Now just look at position of the grind. As you move the grind up towards the spine the cross section becomes thinner and penetration will be enhanced greatly. It will also see a great performance increase in slicing. Now as you move the grind towards the edge (sabre), penetration and slicing ability start to be traded-off for greater strength and splitting ability. Where this grind should be set depends on the performance range you want in the knife. While I know what geometry I would like, I can't understand how any placement is "wrong" more so than any other in a general sense.

The fact is that even the Project makes tradeoffs that mean "knife" ability (going by your defination) is lost so that strength is gained. If the stock on the Project was lowered to say 3/16" and the grind started on the spine and went to the edge (no bevel put on) the penetration would be enhanced and of course it would be a much better slicer. You could go to an extreme and end up with a profile like the camping machete from Ontario that will out chop and outslice most (all?) large fixed blades just due to the thin cross-section.

My point is simply that all blades, to varying extents, compromise cutting ability for strength and durability. Labeling a particular extent of compromise as making something not a knife seems to be a pretty arbitrary judgement to me.

-Cliff

[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 07 July 1999).]

 

[RUDY]

Snick,
I am done arguing with you. No matter what I say you are not going to change your mind so why should I keep arguing and besides that I am running out of arguments. As Mr. Stamp said until you have need for such a blade ( which will probably be never) you will never see the reason why anyone would need or want such a blade. Oh well though, so we have different opinions thats what makes the world turn.

Mr. Stamp,
I am sorry that I wasn't clear about what khukuris I was referring to. I referred to utility khukuris which to me means AK's. Unforunately, I didn't realize utility khukuris doesn't mean that to everyone.

Also concerning sabre ground blades I had a couple of questions and ideas I would like to run by you.
1)When comparing the TUSK to the 15in AK I believe you stated eventhough the TUSK had greater penetration in heavier chopping do to its thinner blade the AK chopped through a piece of wood of similar size faster because it was less of a sruggle to pull it out of the wood. It didn't sink as deep so you didn't have to work as much to pull it back out of the wood is what I am saying. This is turn gave you the ability to chop faster with the AK. Now wouldn't the sabre grind of a blade make it behave similar to the AK and actually allow you to do heavier chopping with it quicker than with a flat ground blades of similar thickness. However, on lighter chopping (delimbing for instance) the flat ground blade would still have the upper hand but not by much I was thnking because the extra weight of the sabre grind would help to push the blade through the limbs despite the extra resistance of the thicker blade.
2)Snick and Nemo said the P1's chopping abilty came from the fact that the thin grind suddenly widening to the unground portion during chopping would casue the would to chip greatly and so more wood would be removed than on a similar chop with a completely flat ground blade. Wouldn't this also be the case with a sabre ground blade such as the one's on teh site of subject. I mean I have noticed a lot of chips when chopping with my SP8 sabre ground blade form Ontario.
3)Wouldn't a sabre grind lend itself to splitting wood better as the grind would thicken up sooner than on a flat ground blade thus casuing the wood to spread more than on with flatgrind, not to mention more quickly and with more force and shock to the wood. I mean the splitting mauls at the local Farm and Fleet are very wedgy. Wouldn't this action all help in lighter chopping like delimbing again as is would also help to just plain rip the limb off the tree.

Now I am not saying the sabre grinds on the site are the best ones but if a blade was wide enough you could probably put a saber grind on it to gt these effects and still have a thin enough grind for good penetration and slicing.

Anyways jsut a couple of thoughts I was wondering if you would comment on.

thanks and take care
collin

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Rudy, khukuris in Nepal are used for a lot of utility work and which model is the preferred one varies as location. It would probably be mainly due to the local vegetation I would assume. For example cutting cane would lend to a Sirupati while chopping firewood would make you reach for a Ang Khola. But yeah, if you asked Bill for a "utility khukuri" odds are that he would recommend a 15" AK.

As for your points 1, 2 & 3. Yes, that is pretty much exactly what would happen. Now there is some variation in regards to the first point depending on what type of wood you are cutting. For example, if I had done timed runs with the TUSK and an AK on pine and on Hickory. The TUSK would be much closer to the AK on Hickory than it would be on Pine. As the wood gets harder, penetration drops, so sticking becomes less of a problem. However in general the ideas you state are true and full vs sabre is not always a clear win for full depending on what you are doing with your knife.

-Cliff