Big Mitt -- First Impressions

[joarthur]

INTRODUCTION

Around the end of August Andy offered to design a new model with a handle sized for my large hands. He said he'’d send me one to try and that if I posted a review I could buy it at a used price if I wanted to keep it, or return it if I didn'’t. I gladly accepted his generous offer.

A couple weeks later he posted a sketch of the “Big Mitt.” He proposed two versions, one with a 4-inch blade and one with a 3-inch blade. I opted for the 3-inch version because I wanted a utility knife for around the house and yard with thin stock and a handle long enough so that I could use a full, 4-finger grip. Jules (Bear71) sharked the first 4-inch version at the Friday, 9/23/16 sale.

Last Friday the first 3-inch Big Mitt arrived in my mailbox. (Pencil shows balance point.)

SPECIFICATIONS of 3-INCH BIG MITT

OAL: 9.127”
Blade Length: 3.336”; Cutting Edge: 3.139”
Handle Length: 5.791”
Steel and Thickness: 3/32”, A2
Tang Type: SFT
Grind: Convex
Handle Material: Natural canvas micarta with tan liners and white pinstripes
Weight: 6.95 ounces
Blade Height at Plunge Line: 1.320”
Handle Measurements:
-- at front -- Height: 1.415”; Width: .865”
-- at indentation for index finger -- Height: 1.090”; Width: .796”
-- at Palmswell -- Height: 1.214”; Width: .980”; Circumference: 3.75”
-- at narrowest point aft of Palmswell -- Height: 1.121”; Width: .832”
-- at Back -- Height: 1.195”; Width: .943; Circumference: 3.75”
Distance from front edge of handle to center of Palmswell: 1.690”
Distance from front edge of handle to balance point: 2.350


IN USE
It'’s been rainy here in the Pacific Northwest, but I'’ve been able to use the Big Mitt enough to know it'’s going to do just what I'’d hoped it could. One use will be as the blade to carry when I'’m working in the woods out back, clearing out ivy, holly and other invasive species. I'’ll also use it as an EDC around the house. It excels as a cutter, easily slicing straight through a three-fourths-inch stack of cardboard.


IN-HAND PHOTOS

First, some photos of the Big Mitt in my left hand. I'’m right handed but my right hand has some grip issues because of an old accident, so you might find these left-hand photos more useful to you. Think of it as getting two reviewers in one review.

Much of my right hand is numb, and some muscles have atrophied. The fingers are skinnier and a little shorter than those of the left hand. Only the pinky has 100 percent strength and sense of touch. I grip knife handles at the front and the back, the middle section essentially being a place to park the zero-strength outer halves of my index and middle fingers. I pinch the front indentation of the handle between the main knuckle of my index finger and my thumbpad, and hold the back end in a fairly normal way with the pinky and a fairly strong ring finger.

Here are some pics of the Big Mitt in my right hand:

COMPARING BIG MITT’'S HANDLE TO A WOODSMAN’S

Woodsman’s Relevant Handle Specs
Handle Length: 5.318”
Handle Material: Evergreen Shadetree burlap
Handle Measurements:
-- At Front -- Height: 1.287”; Width: .859”
-- At First Indentation -- Height: 1.113”; Width: .728”
-- At Palmswell: Height: 1.268”; Width: .840”; Circumference: 3.5”
-- At Aft Indentation: Height -- 1.026”; Width: .712”
-- At Back: Height -- 1.164”; Width: .800”
Distance from front edge of handle to center of palmswell: 2.375”
Distance from front edge of handle to balance point:

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

The 3-inch Big Mitt is the best cutter of the 30 or so Fiddlebacks I'’ve tried. One reason for that is the 3/32” stock. The other is the big, thick handle, with plenty of surface area to bear down on.

I also like the shape of the underside indentation for the index finger. Even without a good sense of touch I can easily position my hand using that notch. That'’s a feature I also liked about the Bear Cub.

When I saw pics of the first 4-inch version, I was concerned that the palm swell shape would be too short lengthwise on the underside, and that it would be located too close to the front. I had, after all, become very pleased with the Woodsman'’s handle, whose palm swell is considerably longer lengthwise and located closer to the middle of the handle. But both are excellent handles for me.

So the Big Mitt is definitely a keeper for me. Thank you, Andy, for your generous offer. You know, I hadn't bought a nice knife in decades until happening upon Fiddlebacks. Their great ergonomics make me a very satisfied customer. I would encourage any of you with large hands to give one of the Big Mitt versions a try.

 

[schmittie]

Bravo!

 

[VANCE]

very well done

it's a 2-hander w/ my hands

 

[BushBarb]

Nice write up, lots of good points and details. I almost went for the 4 inch model that Bear grabbed. Thanks for the review I'll definitely be on the look out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bmurray]

Nice review

 

[safetyman]

Thanks for the review :thumbup:.

 

[Warrior108]

Great review! Within the past few days, I did get to handle one of the 4" Big Mitts but the review from your perspective is much more insightful. I wear a 2XL or 3XL size gloves, thought the handle was comfortable but my hand coverage of the handle is nothing compared yours in your pics. Holy cow.

The creation of this model speaks volumes about Andy's Customer focus. Very cool to see! I am glad that he didn't have to follow through with attaching a blade to a broom handle for you. ;-)


Way to go Andy & congrats to those with extremely big mitts!

 

[Marl71]

Great job on the review, Jim. I'm also impressed by Andy's great job on the knife design. I think a number of people around here have a use for this model, and this review will serve as a useful reference.

 

[Fiddleback]

I'm very glad to see it fits your big mitts Jim. Its one of those designs as a knifemaker that you have to push through the first ones to see what the end result will be. Actually, even when I was done the knife looked a bit wonky to me. But seeing it in your hands, the thing works. Whodathunkit.

I think it would be funny to do a review of a blade on a broom handle. Never calling it or using it like a spear. I mean pics in a belt sheath, and carving fuzz sticks with it, and batonning with it. Constantly knocking the end of the handle into the camera man. LOL. A real caricature.

 

[cbach8tw]

Really glad Andy was able to help meet your need on the handle, a great example of helping a customer with obtaining a useful tool, and good looking knife to boot.

 

[hasco]

That's a very nice looking knife! There are a lot of knives that have a shorter handle to go with a shorter blade. That makes sense to me if you are trying to fit it in your pocket. If you are not trying to do that then, putting a short handle on a knife with with a shorter blade just makes it awkward to use. I like using a 3" blade and the handle on this one looks like it would be comfortable to use for extended periods.

Great pics by the way!!! Thanks for doing the review!

 

[joarthur]

I'm very glad to see it fits your big mitts Jim. Its one of those designs as a knifemaker that you have to push through the first ones to see what the end result will be. Actually, even when I was done the knife looked a bit wonky to me. But seeing it in your hands, the thing works. Whodathunkit.

I think it would be funny to do a review of a blade on a broom handle. Never calling it or using it like a spear. I mean pics in a belt sheath, and carving fuzz sticks with it, and batonning with it. Constantly knocking the end of the handle into the camera man. LOL. A real caricature.

First of all, I’m glad that a number of you found the review helpful. Thank you for your comments.


Andy, truth be told, the Big Mitt’s lines do look a little different from your other designs. The ones whose blend of appearance and function I most admire are the Bushfinger, Bear Paw, and those you and Allen make based on the Runt shape. I think my first thought upon opening the box was that the Big Mitt looked a little chunky or boxy. But for me the Big Mitt’s form does really follow function.

Last Sunday a friend was over so I asked him what he thought. His hands match up exactly with mine in “wingspan,” but we figured his palms were a little wider and about 3/8 inch longer. The palm swell shape and location didn’t work for him, mainly because of how it felt against his middle finger. He had me hold the handle in my left hand so I could feel what he was talking about, but I concluded it wasn’t my right hand's numbness that made the Big Mitt fine for me. It felt comfortable in both hands.

So I asked him to hold it where it was most comfortable. He avoided the palm swell altogether and held it at the end, which of course made it too short for his palm. (See pic.)



It seems his preference would be for handles with the EDCII, 3-finger Karda, or Longfellow shape -- no palm swell and actually an inward curve on the underside of the handle. (The Longfellow comparison is fitting, he’s “north of six-nine,” as he puts it, weighs 250, and wears size 17 shoes.)

Then I handed him the Woodsman, with its handle almost a half inch shorter than the Big Mitt’s. He liked it, said it was comfortable. It might even change his opinion about the desirability of palm swells. (See pic.)



To me this means that a basic question is how many guys might like a Fiddleback with a handle in the Big Mitt size range? What’s the market for XL size handles? If the market’s such that it’s worth your making some knives with handles in the 5.5 - 5.8 inch range, then here might be some other options.

Before offering my ideas about other options, I think everyone should know that my only design request for the 3-inch Big Mitt was that it have thin stock. I didn’t want to say anything else because I didn’t want to interfere with your experience and artist’s eye. So in offering these suggestions -- in case there is a market for XL-handle Fiddlebacks -- I want to restate my great respect for you as a knifemaker:

-- a Bushfinger with all dimensions increased accordingly -- keep the same perfect shape in other words. Just size it up.

-- a Bear Paw with a longer section at the end of the handle. Keep the front and palm swell sections the same. Get the benefit of the relatively aft location of the palm swell but add one-half to three-quarters inch to the back end. And keep the same pommel shape.

-- an XL Runt/Palmer/Big Palmer-shaped handle. Given the top curve of those handles, a total handle length a little shorter than the Big Mitt’s might do the job, say 5.4 - 5.6 inches. Those handles also have a dip at the top front of the handles that adds to their comfort when your thumb is on top of the handle. In fact I compared the sizes of the top front of the Big Mitt handle and the Big Palmer's "dip" and found that the Big Palmer had a larger flat area -- .485" vs. .353".

As for your broomstick idea, it might make a good video for April 1.

 

[joarthur]

That's a very nice looking knife! There are a lot of knives that have a shorter handle to go with a shorter blade. That makes sense to me if you are trying to fit it in your pocket. If you are not trying to do that then, putting a short handle on a knife with with a shorter blade just makes it awkward to use. I like using a 3" blade and the handle on this one looks like it would be comfortable to use for extended periods.

Great pics by the way!!! Thanks for doing the review!

Your reasoning is the same as mine.

 

[Scotcha]

Very nice review and you have BIG hands

I agree with you on the Bushfinger. It is definitely one of the best designs as far as form & function are concerned.

I would go the other way in requesting a scaled down version of the BF.

 

[joarthur]

Very nice review and you have BIG hands

I agree with you on the Bushfinger. It is definitely one of the best designs as far as form & function are concerned.

I would go the other way in requesting a scaled down version of the BF.

I could be interested in a scaled down Bushfinger, too.

 

[trestle]

Great review Jim and glad you found such a suitable knife for daily use. I appreciate your honest comments about the handle shapes and the location and size of the various swells.

 

[Warrior108]

I could be interested in a scaled down Bushfinger, too.

Isn't that the Bushnub?? I never handled one but did post a pic yesterday of the Bushnub II I recently picked up.

 

[swonut]

I'm very glad to see it fits your big mitts Jim. Its one of those designs as a knifemaker that you have to push through the first ones to see what the end result will be. Actually, even when I was done the knife looked a bit wonky to me. But seeing it in your hands, the thing works. Whodathunkit.

I think it would be funny to do a review of a blade on a broom handle. Never calling it or using it like a spear. I mean pics in a belt sheath, and carving fuzz sticks with it, and batonning with it. Constantly knocking the end of the handle into the camera man. LOL. A real caricature.

Yeah, you could present it as one of the challenges and get it filmed at your shop. Call it "Forged with Flair." I can only imagine the Forged in Fire guys presenting you all with four broom handles, a box of buttons, pins and other "flair".

 

[joarthur]

Great review Jim and glad you found such a suitable knife for daily use. I appreciate your honest comments about the handle shapes and the location and size of the various swells.

Thanks, John. The Big Mitt handle seems a lot like the Camp Nessmuk's. I like the open feel. Also like how pinky, ring, and middle fingers can all be located aft of the palm swell. Seems a good arrangement for this kind of utility knife.

 

[bear71]

Great review and pics Jim. It's very cool to have followed the development and delivery of this special knife. I will hopefully have time to post a few a pics of the 4" version and some comparison pics with other models over the next few days. I haven't had chance to really use it in anger yet but constantly handle it in different grips and I'm excited about it's potential.