"Blood groove" on 119/120

David Martin said:
rob, my field skinner is the best I've seen. There's not a good skinner found in a kitchen set. Then I've seen guys use a French Sabatier as a 'Quartering knife'. It is not! My point being, Kitchen sets sold today do not have a proper boning, breaking & skinning knife. So, guys use what they think will work. Many don't know the shape of the knives I just mentioned. Now, I know industrial supply salesmen who call on Meat Markets have these models in stock and I see them in meat cutters hands when I visit. But not in many kitchen sets. DM
Click to expand...

Gotcha'.
I guess I was saying in an offhanded way that it would make sense to own those proper knives for their proper use in their proper place.
(Like owning an axe, saw, hatchet, etc. for cutting up trees and making fires in your back 40, instead of relying on a single - albeit very well made - custom fixed blade).
 
I cooked a "spiral sliced" ham for Christmas Eve dinner tonight. At the end of the process you must use a longish knife to slide in alongside the bone and then cut all around the bone, releasing the slices. My two chef's knives had blades that were too wide, the rest of my kitchen knives were too short. The Buck 119 was used and it easily slipped in and then circled the bone. I cannot compare it to either a Marbles knife or a non-grooved knife, but it functioned beautifully.
 
TAH, will just have to see this as a contribution to his topic.
These are examples of processing style knives. The top is a 9" carver from the Empress Trio set but is similar to a breaking blade. These two are close. Not seen much in kitchen sets today. The middle 2 are boning blades. I see both styles in meat markets. Empress Trio 6" and a L.C. Germain. The bottom is a 103 skinner. A 4" blade with belly. I added more point and a lanyard hole. DM
 
The top and bottom knives are really all you need to process a large fed out steer. Plus, a saw. Then bring the quarters to a walk-in cooler for hanging. Then later dissect the cuts from the quarters using the top 2 knives. DM
 
I'm guessing that the groove/ fuller is likely decorative... however... I thought that the origins of the "blood groove" was not about the so-called suction (as the article stated) when stabbing/ thrusting the blade as a weapon, but rather when a stab or thrust is made the groove is there so that the blade does not stop up the wound--rather the groove permits more blood to flow, even as the weapon remains in the enemy combatant. This facilitates blood loss, disorientation, death, etc... which is the primary way a blade works as a weapon--effecting massive blood loss.

That said, I'm not saying that is why we find a groove on a Buck or any other knife these days--that's just what I thought the origin of the "blood groove" to be--whether or not it ever functioned that way or whether it was decoration, or even myth... of that I cannot be sure.
 
David Martin said:
TAH, will just have to see this as a contribution to his topic.
These are examples of processing style knives. The top is a 9" carver from the Empress Trio set but is similar to a breaking blade. These two are close. Not seen much in kitchen sets today. The middle 2 are boning blades. I see both styles in meat markets. Empress Trio 6" and a L.C. Germain. The bottom is a 103 skinner. A 4" blade with belly. I added more point and a lanyard hole. DM
Click to expand...

David, that 103 has the same blade mod I did on mine so long ago. Works great for an all around knife, doesn't it?
 
Yes, a good one to modify. More point, more belly, a higher grind, no hump, longer, beefier handle with a stainless pommel and lanyard hole. All with a 440C blade. From a custom maker we would not have wanted to shell out the big dollars for these features in a custom skinner. Yes, our effort paid off. Whether processing game or camp chores you can do a lot with just a 4" blade. DM
 
Aias said:
I'm guessing that the groove/ fuller is likely decorative... however... I thought that the origins of the "blood groove" was not about the so-called suction (as the article stated) when stabbing/ thrusting the blade as a weapon, but rather when a stab or thrust is made the groove is there so that the blade does not stop up the wound--rather the groove permits more blood to flow, even as the weapon remains in the enemy combatant. This facilitates blood loss, disorientation, death, etc... which is the primary way a blade works as a weapon--effecting massive blood loss.

That said, I'm not saying that is why we find a groove on a Buck or any other knife these days--that's just what I thought the origin of the "blood groove" to be--whether or not it ever functioned that way or whether it was decoration, or even myth... of that I cannot be sure.
Click to expand...
If the groove was orignally designed for something blood related, this makes the most sense to me. However, as stated, it seems out of place on the 119/120 as they are not fighting knives.
 
TAH said:
I know blood grooves (fullers) have been discussed, but I could find anything specific to Buck. I believe the real purpose of the groove is to lighten and stiffen the blade, but I have a few questions...

1) Why does the 119 and 120 have a blood groove, but the 124 does not?
2) Does the shallow groove really lighten the blade enough to make a difference?
3) Are the grooves forged/stamped somehow or just ground/milled into place?
4) If just ground/milled, how would this stiffen the blade?
Click to expand...
Fullers were never meant to lighten the blade, unless you mean, to lighten the back of the blade, to bring it more in balance with the edge side of the blade, thus balancing the blade. This was used in swords, but with knives it doesn't really matter. It has NOTHING to do with Blood, and I cannot believe the comments I've seen on here (not yours). I would guess (as an amateur) that the 124 doesn't have the fuller, because the blade is wide enough, and thick through the blade, right up to the edge, Buck found it wasn't necessary. Actually, it's not "necessary" on any one handed knife blade, unless it's a sword, (in my humble opinion).
 
David Martin said:
I found the topic that discussed Buck's model 120 that has no blood grooves. DM
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...coal-handled-custom?highlight=no+blood+groove
Click to expand...

Did you also see a topic that it's not a "blood groove"? In fact, has NOTHING to do with blood, there's no "sucking" sound, but makes the blade look "cool". It's a "Fuller", and was use in swords, to balance the heavy back of the blade, with the lighter cutting edge part of the blade. In double edged swords, the "fuller" was in the middle.
 
Mark MacIver said:
Fullers were never meant to lighten the blade, unless you mean, to lighten the back of the blade, to bring it more in balance with the edge side of the blade, thus balancing the blade. This was used in swords, but with knives it doesn't really matter. It has NOTHING to do with Blood, and I cannot believe the comments I've seen on here (not yours). I would guess (as an amateur) that the 124 doesn't have the fuller, because the blade is wide enough, and thick through the blade, right up to the edge, Buck found it wasn't necessary. Actually, it's not "necessary" on any one handed knife blade, unless it's a sword, (in my humble opinion).
Click to expand...

Mark MacIver said:
Did you also see a topic that it's not a "blood groove"? In fact, has NOTHING to do with blood, there's no "sucking" sound, but makes the blade look "cool". It's a "Fuller", and was use in swords, to balance the heavy back of the blade, with the lighter cutting edge part of the blade. In double edged swords, the "fuller" was in the middle.
Click to expand...

this is a 5 year old thread...not sure ya realized that.
 
I know it’s an old thread, but I’m bored, so I’ll share my thoughts.

My opinion.

The 120, 119, and 117 were made to satisfy the American love of the Bowie knife. The clip point and the blood fuller are for looks. Because that’s what the market wanted. Form over function.

The 121,118,105,103 and 116 are all original Buck designs. Designed to be real functional. Function over form.

The 124 is in a class by itself. Bucks flagship model. It was designed as a dive knife. Plus it’s not a true clip point so no need for the blood fuller. Again it’s an original Buck design, they knew it didn’t need the fuller.

When they turned the Nemo into the frontier they could have added a clip point and a fuller to make it into a Bowie. But they didn’t. Again a Buck design function over form.

The 102 I can’t figure out. It’s almost too small to use. Perfect little bird and trout knife. So the best answer I have is a bird and trout doesn’t need the fuller. The real mystery is the angle of the blade. I’ll never figure that one out.
 
Last edited:
eveled said:
The real mystery is the angle of the blade. I’ll never figure that one out.
Click to expand...

My guess is that, because it is a small knife and the handle is relatively short, the angle gives a little more finger clearance for some uses. Picture using it on a cutting board—that little angle would let you have the blade slightly closer to horizontal. As I said, that is just a guess.

Bert
 
the good news is everyone quoted is still here so they can communicate with Mark, if they want to. also welcome to the forum Mark.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAH
eveled said:
The 102 I can’t figure out. It’s almost too small to use. Perfect little bird and trout knife. So the best answer I have is a bird and trout doesn’t need the fuller. The real mystery is the angle of the blade. I’ll never figure that one out.
Click to expand...

I know I'm taking an old thread further off topic, but... I could swear that I read somewhere (maybe BF, but I don't know, and I can't find it now) that because the knife is so slim, the angle on the 102 blade is designed to make the knife more stable and keep it from tending to rotate in the hand. I can kind of visualize how that might work. My old Western L66 has a similar upsweep to the blade, for whatever that's worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top