BF "Trapper" vs. Northfield

eisman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
7,002
I was very pleased with this years BF Traditional Forum Knife. That's not to say I didn't make a few minor changes to the one I've been carrying, but overall it have been one of my favorite purchases for this past year. I knew it was a good pattern, but what really suprised me was how quickly GEC took the basic pattern public.

My biggest issue with the knife was cosmetic; I wasn't sold on the scales. So when I saw the Northfield had Autumn jigged bone as an option I went looking for one.

You may be interested in seeing how the two compare:

First, the fit and finish on both knives are very good. But the BF knife has the edge. The lines are sharper (in some respects perhaps too sharp) and the grinds are cleaner. The Northfield is really attractive; the darker bone sets the pattern very well. The serial number on the bolster does throw off the cleanliness of the pattern though. To my mind it would be better on the secondary blade. Looking at the two I wonder how much better it would have been to use a simpler pattern shield on the BF knife; it may have worked better with the jig pattern of the bone.

BFCOMP1.jpg


When open there are several more obvious differences between the two. The blade grinds are completely different, the BF knife having a flat grind with a subdued finish and the Northfield having a sabre grind with a mirror finish. The Un X Ld etch detracts from the polish (my opinion). My photos don't show it well, but it's very obvious in your hand. Note the swage on the blades is different too. The Northfield has drawn swages on both blades. This may be smoother in the pocket, but (to me) is not as eye catching. The BF blades look like more care has been taken in the production.

BFCOMP2.jpg


Last, the wharncliff blade on the Northfield is not as clean looking; mainly due the grind profile. The sabre grind is not as tapered, and detracts from the overall shape of the blade. I doubt it will be as good a slicer with the greater angle.

BFCOMP3.jpg


All in all they are both very nice knives. But the toss has to go to the BF one, and the extra work put into each of them shows best against the later copy. Those who obtained one got a heck of a deal and my thanks go out to the folks at GEC who cared enough to make an exceptional run of special knives for all of us.
 
Excellent comparison. Thanks!
 
Eisman,
thank you for the comparison thread.
I had been wondering what differences there were between the BF knife and the regular production model...now I know :)

Fausto
:cool:
 
Well done, Eisman. Thanks for the excellent comparison.
 
Thanks, eisman. I appreciate your taking the time to clearly demonstrate the similarities and differences.

~ P.
 
I haven't seen any for sale yet. I am interested in your handle or the burnt stag. They should be popping up for sale soon.
 
Eisman, thank you for the excellent comparison.

Can anyone who has or is familiar with the Tidioute version of the #74 explain the different features of it compared to the above two?

Thanks,

Andrew
 
Good looking pair, both.

I do like the look of the cut swedge on the bf knife, but I have to say, I appreciate the drawn swedge in hand more when using the other blade (I have a #23 Pioneer that has a drawn swedge, and it is more comfortable in hand than another with a cut swedge.
 
I held off on the BF knife, and now am holding off on the #74, hoping GEC makes them the size of the #42 Trapper. I love the blade combination, so not buying one is killing me... been carrying my #53 'cause I love those wharnies.
 
I like the look of the #74, particularly the handle shape. I'm holding out for a version with a pen blade....

Sam
 
Back
Top