BRKT Rogue Review. Looong, looots of pics

[HoB]

This week I got my new BRKT Rogue and after taking it out into the yard yesterday, I thought I write a “short” review.

Intro:
The Rogue is a 7.25” long (blade), 11 oz. (335 g) heavy classical Bowie knife. As such it is obviously a fighter blade, but I was more interested in a woodcraft knife. I have an RD9, which chops very well, but I find it too heavy and long to take on extended trips, while I fear that a typical 4-5” in woodcraft blade has essentially no chopping ability left. So I focused on something in the 7” range that would be a little lighter and more nimble than your average combat blade. The Ratweiler was in contention but its weight (it is about as heavy as the RD9) and the reduced availability took it out of the running. The Rogue is being advertised as suitable for “light chopping and can be batoned through everything that can not be chopped”. It has a leaf shaped blade with a point not too far from the centerline not unlike many traditional woodcraft blades.

Figure 1: Comparison, Buck 119, Rogue, RD9

Initial Observations
Sal Glesser once said that Mike Stuart paid his dues on the grinder…..and it shows. If there is one thing that in my opinion stands out about Barkies, it is the way they are ground. Most of them feature fully three-dimensional blades (meaning they taper and swell in all directions) and there is not a flat spot on the entire knife except for the two facets on the coffin handle. Say what ever you will about the full convex grind, it is the most beautiful and elegant grind there is and the Rogue is a prime example of it. The fit and finish is exceptional. There are only two minor flaws that distinguish this from custom grade: The chamfer on the spine extents slightly further towards the handle on the left (front) side than on the right (back) side, something that is only seen when looking down on the spine of the blade, and the last quarter of an inch of the edge towards the hilt is not fully finished (see Figure 3).
The blade is very well shaped as you can see from the profiles (RD9 in comparison) but it had a small burr on the edge and did not shave. Five strokes (literally) on the Sharpmaker whites and the edge was more than just shaving. However, I noticed a section at the belly that I thought was weak material and a bit of cutting showed this to be correct. The edge in that section turned quickly and became a bit ragged. Therefore I took the blade immediately to a #700 grit stone for maybe 5-7 swipes with very light pressure, removing the edge in that section and then rehoned the entire edge lovingly with a #3000 and #10000. Now, that is pure pleasure! For whatever reasons, the BRKT A2 just takes a beautiful edge, I would still get it goose bump sharp, even if I was blindfolded with one hand tied behind my back (and that is almost no exaggeration!). Part of it is, of course, that there is no reprofiling to be done, all you have to do is to hone the edge.

Figure 2: Profiles of the Rogue and the RD9. The edge angle was estimated with a paper cut, which is not very precise since there is no flat spot on the blade to measure against, but it should be accurate within +/- 1 deg. The RD9 is reprofiled to 15 deg. This figure illustrates what nonsense it is to claim that the convex grind cuts somehow better than a flat grind. But it also shows what a shallow relief a Barkie has, which accounts for its excellent cutting ability. It also shows that at 7 mm (roughly 1/4&#8221 into the cut, the flat grind of the RD9 experiences smaller wedging forces since it actually has a smaller cross section.

Like on my Mini Canadian, the tip came slightly rounded and I used the opportunity to even out the last quarter of the edge close to the handle and to bring the tip to a needle point, both of which are truly minor fixes. So after a bit of TLC I had a 7.25” long straight razor with a needle-point and good, strong material along the entire edge.
To put this into perspective (eventually I will write a review for it as well), my RD9 came with an outright blunt edge that was ground wavy to something well above 20 deg. per side and had one substantial misgrind in the edge. It took about an hour on a #220 stone to straighten out the edge and grind it to 15 deg. per side, and even now I still have a slight recurve in it that requires fixing.
Now, I have read Mike Steward say that the weight of the Rogue is “in the hand” and others saying that it chops better than a 7” blade ought to do. This seemed to be a contradiction to me, especially since the knife is not a very heavy one. Both statements are somewhat exaggerated, but have some truth to them: the key is the weight distribution not the balance of the knife. The knife is balanced right on the hilt, but the weight distribution is very bi-modal: One center of the weight distribution is at the belly, the other is far back at the butt. That makes the balance point very narrow (I would say, less than ½ mm wide). So narrow in fact that it is impossible to balance the knife on your finger, since you finger is too thick to fit right at the edge of the hilt. It is, however, possible to balance it on a thin ruler. The consequence is, that the knife feels quite nimble and not overly blade heavy, while retaining decent shopping ability when choked back a bit.

Figure 3: Balance of the Rogue and the “uneven spine”.

Now, BRKT isn’t exactly famous for their sheaths, but I must say I was impressed with this one. The leather is good quality and I love the look of the rounded hardware. I was very pleasantly surprised. I think this sheath is great. It has a good tight fit with out being too tight on the sides, so you can easily pull the knife out and put it back in without constantly cutting into the leather. In particular I like the feature that the belt loop is removable so that the Rogue can be carried tugged into the belt.

Figure 4: Rogue in sheath.

 

[HoB]

Woodwork
I finally took the Rogue out to our woodpile and selected a piece of seasoned cherry, about 6.5” in diameter. Cherry isn’t the hardest of hardwoods but it ain’t no Pine either. The wood was not exactly clear, but mostly straight grained with on large knot on one end. I started the batoning on the opposite end. You can also see that the bark had accumulated a lot of dirt.

Figure 5: Rogue on a 6.5” log.

I was a bit surprised to see how much wedging forces played a role here. To get the blade into the wood took some effort and some pretty hard whacks. I split a similar round from the same tree with the RD9 last week and thought it was a bit easier to get it started even though the Rogue bites must faster on the first ¼”. I assume that the very shallow relief causes quite a bit of binding. After the blade is full embedded to the spine (where the critical phase begins because you can only baton on the tip and hilt) the batoning becomes a ho-hum with the Rogue, now (again, to my perception) much easier than the RD9. I assume because the convex grind swells out more, the binding is much reduce. There was also a substantial crack leading the blade during the batoning, once the blade was full embedded, which is easily seen on the pictures. The 6.5” round represents in my opinon about the largest size you can baton the Rogue through. I tried a larger one but even when starting on the sides like I did with this log, there is not enough purchase at the tip to baton on, you could probably handle a 7.5” log but after that, you really need a longer blade.

Figure 6: Batoning and splitting


Figure 7: Batoning and splitting


Figure 8: Batoning and splitting


Figure 9: Finished work.

 

[HoB]

After the batoning, I tried some chopping on the split pieces. This is easy work. The Rogue chews itself through the relatively thin pieces (roughly 1.5” thick, 3” wide) in no time taking out good-sized chunks on each hit. The RD9 does not benefit from whole arm swings when chopping, and the Rogue even less. It works most efficient with small and fast strokes out of the wrist. After the cherry I gave it a whirl at some standing dead in our backyard. I don’t know what wood it is, looks a bit like cedar, but it is MUCH harder than the Cherry. This is a 2” piece and a pretty hard test for chopping ability. It took a lot of little swings and the weight is insufficient to bite deep into such a hard wood, but due to its sharpness and slim profile it chewed itself through just fine with a little bit of patients. On something like 2” Pine or 1.5” Cherry branches, there is not even a comparison between the RD9 and the Rogue as the RD9 will chop through both clearly with one swipe. On the 2” mystery wood the Rogue gains a lot of ground due to its thin profile since both blades need quite a few swings on this hard wood.

Figure 10: Chopping cherry


Figure 11: Chopping really hard wood.

During the chopping and batoning the blade did not suffer any damage. I was very concerned about the tip, as the tip is very thin and acute. And during the batoning it did lose a minute amount of the very tip and hence its needle like quality, but it was still sharp enough that it would be able to remove a splinter.
Because of the acuteness of the tip, which is illustrated in Figure 12, I decided to do some drilling. I took one of the split pieces of the cherry and drilled a hole.

Figure 12: Rogue and RD9 tip


Figure 13: Rogue and RD9 tip

Due to the acuteness of the trip, the drilling is less of a mindless turning of the tip with pressure, but more a carving with the tip which also puts a lot of lateral pressure on the edge and tip as I decided to keep the hole as small as possible to exaggerate the effect. A few time I heard cracks that made me sure that the Rogue had lost its tip, but each time it was the wood that gave. The tip did not take any damage during this exercise.

Figure 14: Drilling and making shavings

During all of this, the Rogue had lost its razor like edge but was still sharp enough to shave or to make shavings as shown in the picture.

Summary
In the end I think the Rogue makes for a beautiful woodcraft knife if a bit care is taken. It batons very well and chops reasonably well, certainly much better than any shorter blade. I think its advertisement is a fair description of its capabilities. Because of the even balance and heavy butt it retains good blade control for small work despite its size.
The critical part of this knife is definitely the tip. It requires some care in use but is still strong enough to perform essential tasks such as drilling if some care is being taken. On the other hand the fine tip allows performing tasks that are well outside the means of a hard use knife such as the RD9.
The blade shape with the long gentle belly that extends beyond the handle and the lack of a guard allows the Rogue to excel in food preparation. It won’t beat a kitchen knife but it does a hell of a lot better than the Buck 119 for example. The close proximity of the edge to the handle without the guard, which might scare some, facilitates close-quarter work.
The handle security is surprisingly good. I really liked the coffin handle during chopping since it flares to give good retention. The facets of the coffin handle give good purchase during drilling and in the ice pick grip (forward or reverse makes no difference as the handle is symmetric). Personally I don’t need a guard, but I would have liked a stronger curvature of the handle in the transition to the blade to give a tactile feedback to the middle finger of where the edge starts, when choking up on the blade.
The handle is sizable enough for even the largest hand with gloves (small handles are a problem often associated with BRKT). However, I think towards the butt it might be too thick to accommodate a small hand comfortably.
The Rogue might not be for everyone, but it will become a close companion of mine. And the bang-for-the-buck is stunning.

P.S. Despite of the length, this is really just an initial review as I have had the Rogue for no more than one week.

 

[Ben Dover]

I want one! Of course, I want a Bob Dozier Wilderness Knife, and a Cold Steel Trail Master, and a Two handed Claymore Sword and a .............

oh heck. I want 'em all!

 

[untamed]

A most excellent and informative review. Thanks for your efforts.

 

[Blue Sky]

I can't remember the last time I saw the Rogue promoted as a "bushcraft" knife but you've made a good case for it, nice review. BTW, how did you generate the blade profile curves?

 

[Dog of War]

Nice work, HoB, excellent pictures add a lot to the presentation, obviously you're as capable with a camera as you are with knives.

Not a bushcraft knife in the usual sense IMO but the design looks like it would perform better on precision work than most blades this size, more versatile than the small blades generally preferred by woodlore types. Interesting comments about the handle, I had wondered about the ergonomics.

 

[ashtxsniper]

great review

 

[Willieboy]

Beautiful knife and excellent review. Thank you.

 

[tj9eb]

P.S. Despite of the length, this is really just an initial review as I have had the Rogue for no more than one week.

Just an initial review???
'Wonder what the final review will look like...
Incredible review thus far. Thanks for not only telling us the facts but also the why's. And thanks a lot for all the good pics!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

BTW, about the handles. BRK&T/Mike Stewart are known to give really outstanding service. If a customer is not satisfied with the handles -or no matter what- he can always send it to Mike and he will redo the handles any way he wants (often without any costs!).
I have had a few smaller issues with some BRKnives and he solved them gladly and freely.

 

[Miketm]

Nice knife! One question though, where'd you get it? It's not on their site yet.

 

[HoB]

Thanks, very much for the nice comments.

BlueSky: That is very easy if you have a caliper. I just mark the blade with a very fine pencile and a ruler in sensible intervals, every mm close to the edge and every 3 mm further up, on the flat grind I went with every 5 mm, since in principle nothing changes anyways. After that you just measure the thickness on each tick mark. You might slip here and there but it shows up in the plot, so you can go back, check your tickmark and your according measurement of the thickness and get very good profiles. This one was done semi-careful, not bad, but you can see that there is still some wandering of the points on the convex grind. If you would do this a few times and average them you would get a cleaner profile.

You also have to keep in mind that the blade of the Rogue is completely "3-dimensional", so unlike on the RD9, the profile changes depending on were you measure it. This one was taken right were the chamfer ends. A little bit closer to the belly the profile would actually a bit thicker, and towards the hilt a bit thinner, but the general shape stays the same and the differences are measureable but not THAT large, probably mostly significant for weight distribution. I was just too lazy to run 3 differnt profiles for 3 differnt sections of the blade, besides the general idea doesn't change.


Miketm: Well, I think Mike Stuart will actually agree with me that their webpage is a little bit........outdated . It's a well known problem that Mike admits to . The best source of information is the BRKT company forum on kF. The Rogue however is an older model, but many dealers still have them in stock. You can check for example:
www.mcknightcutlery.com
www.knifeworks.com
www.dlttradingcompany.com

 

[Blue Sky]

Thanks for the explanation HoB, took some time I'll bet.

Incidently, if anyone wants to see all the different models produced by Bark River, this is the most complete listing I've found:

http://brkca.com/

Go on in and then look to the right and you'll see links to lists of current production and discontinued models.

 

[James Green Dragon]

That was an excellent review IMO :thumbup: :thumbup:

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Nice work.

For whatever reasons, the BRKT A2 just takes a beautiful edge ...

A2 is a low carbide steel, unfortunately it is all left very soft which is likely due to the retained austenite which is high in A2. This is likely why I have seen poor performance in extended use because you end up with untempered martensite as the austenite is just metastable. I keep meaning to get Wilson to make a small A2 blade using oil/cold and hit the first torsional peak and see how it handles.

This figure illustrates what nonsense it is to claim that the convex grind cuts somehow better than a flat grind.

Among other things such as it is easier to sharpen, tougher, wards off vampires and cures cancer. This is mainly just promotional hype which is basically - I am using a rare grind which you won't find on production knives because it is too difficult. This of course ignores that you can find the same grind on a $5 Opinel. The biggest problem is actually correlating cause and effect.

It also shows that at 7 mm (roughly 1/4”) into the cut, the flat grind of the RD9 experiences smaller wedging forces since it actually has a smaller cross section.[/I]

That seems a bit absurd of a cross section for that knife as it would be similar to a 3/8" 10" bowie. You can make an arguement for weight for chopping but unless you want the prying strength that is usually not overly efficient. How does it cut in the kitchen compared to a kitchen knife on binding vegetables.

... my RD9 came with an outright blunt edge that was ground wavy to something well above 20 deg. per side and had one substantial misgrind in the edge. It took about an hour on a #220 stone to straighten out the edge and grind it to 15 deg. per side, and even now I still have a slight recurve in it that requires fixing.

Could it be filed? You have way more patience than me, I would have just used the closest power tool.

Now, I have read Mike Steward say that the weight of the Rogue is “in the hand” and others saying that it chops better than a 7” blade ought to do.

The static balance of knife isn't the critical element for chopping because it isn't a static appliction. You are more concerned with the dynamic balance point and you want that close to or even at the tip.

The chopping performance of a 7" knife can reach about 75% of the ability of a 10" one so there is no reason they should be heavily critized. In general perceptions of them tend to be horrible because most people use tactical 7" knives for wood work which is like washing a floor with a toothbrush.

After the blade is full embedded to the spine (where the critical phase begins because you can only baton on the tip and hilt) the batoning becomes a ho-hum with the Rogue, now (again, to my perception) much easier than the RD9.

The RD9 was better or worse? If the wood is much larger than the blade length then you can try several other methods such as using the point and multiple points of entry and/or prying once a crack is made. Generally wedges are a more efficient option however.

You also have to keep in mind that the blade of the Rogue is completely "3-dimensional", so unlike on the RD9, the profile changes depending on were you measure it.

Gnuplot (free) will do 3D mapping it you are industrious enough to provide the data. I think it would be pretty cool, but I hate data collection, which is ironic considering.

-Cliff

 

[JDBLADE]

Excellent review and I can't see why large knives cannot make excellent Bushcraft Knives. Bark River also produce the Sperati Point based on the Kephart design and one of my favourites the Settler

The French Trade Knife Handle works a bit like a Coffin Handle and whilst the blade is only 5.5" long it does chop well and also cuts and slices as good as any of the Bark River Knives.

 

[TorzJohnson]

Thanks for posting the great review and pics. I just ordered one of these last week and it should be here any day now. And your pictures are making the waiting all the much harder!

 

[MVF]

Thanks for a great review! Did I miss it- what did you think of the handle?

 

[HoB]

A2 is a low carbide steel, unfortunately it is all left very soft which is likely due to the retained austenite which is high in A2. This is likely why I have seen poor performance in extended use because you end up with untempered martensite as the austenite is just metastable. I keep meaning to get Wilson to make a small A2 blade using oil/cold and hit the first torsional peak and see how it handles.

Well, the edge neither rolled nor chipped and the tip held despite its acuteness. So I can't say that I have any complaints in this regard. But because of the concurrent S30V threads I pointed out that my favorable impressions of A2 is restricted to BRKT as I have not had the chance of trying A2 from a different maker. So I don't know whether it is a general feature of A2 or whether BRKT does it better than others.

This is mainly just promotional hype which is basically - I am using a rare grind which you won't find on production knives because it is too difficult.

In this case you hear those statements more of some of the users than of the company. Mike is actually pretty quiet about why he uses the convex grind. Judging by the elaborate handle materials he likes to use, I think a good portion of it is the elegance of the full convex grind. And I must say, that alone makes it worth it on some knives. I think, knives should be allowed to look beautiful, if the "beautification" doesn't impede performance. Just my $0.02 though.

You can make an arguement for weight for chopping but unless you want the prying strength that is usually not overly efficient. How does it cut in the kitchen compared to a kitchen knife on binding vegetables.

Well, I definitely wouldn't want less mass on the blade of the Rogue, keep in mind, it is already 6 oz lighter than the Ratweiler! Actually binding isn't that big a problem (but maybe you are calling binding what I would call wedging), but yes, most kitchen knives are more efficient, but then again, they aren't 0.225" thick to begin with. I do, however, have a Deba that is 8 mm at the spine. They are pretty close in performance, though the Deba has a more useful shape for pure kitchen work.

The static balance of knife isn't the critical element for chopping because it isn't a static appliction. You are more concerned with the dynamic balance point and you want that close to or even at the tip.

Huh? You have to explain that one to me. I don't know what you mean or estimate the dynamic balance?

The chopping performance of a 7" knife can reach about 75% of the ability of a 10" one so there is no reason they should be heavily critized. In general perceptions of them tend to be horrible because most people use tactical 7" knives for wood work which is like washing a floor with a toothbrush.

Tsk, tsk, Cliff, you caught yourself in a nonsensical statement . That of course depends on the 7" knife and the 10" knife. A 20 oz 7" knife with a heavy forward balance will of course out-chop a 4 oz. 10" knife with all the weight in the handle. If you turn things around the 7" knife will not approach 75% of the chopping ability. So the only way to really compare the lengths would be by scaling an optimized 10" chopper in all dimensions to 7" so that everything remains comparable and I doubt that you will get to 75%. Even if you take two optimized chopping blades I would be surprised if you get to 75% because that would be less of the length equivalent and for pure weight reasons I would expect chopping ability at least quadratic in length. Well at some point the effort in lifting the blade will become significant but this is no issue on these blades.

The RD9 was better or worse?

Once the blade was fully embedded the Rogue was in my opinion quite a bit EASIER to baton. Which is another reason, why I wouldn't want the profile to be thinner as I very much suspect that the stronger wedging effect is largely responsible for it. It also helps reducing binding. There was a pronounced sticking point in batoning. In the very beginning the blade is acute enough, that you can almost push the blade in without a baton. Then it suddenly get difficult (more difficult than the RD9 at the same point) and pretty much as soon the blade is fully embedded you can tap the blade through that you almost don't want to call it batoning anymore...easier than with the RD9. Of course since the RD9 has so much more real estate to clobber on, during the batoning, it batons very well, too.

If the wood is much larger than the blade length then you can try several other methods such as using the point and multiple points of entry and/or prying once a crack is made. Generally wedges are a more efficient option however.

Good points. I am not done with it, but yes I want to try some larger rounds as soon as I have more time. I was racing a bit against daylight, when I did the above, but there is looot's of Cherry left

Gnuplot (free) will do 3D mapping it you are industrious enough to provide the data. I think it would be pretty cool, but I hate data collection, which is ironic considering.
-Cliff

Oh, I have access to several plotting programs with 3-D capability, but I am not sure about your assessment of my patients. I agree, it would be cool,....but I pass on collecting the data aswell .

With all the talk of chopping you have to keep in mind, that I wasn't looking for a 7" optimized chopper, but for an all-purpose blade that retains a significant enough chopping and batoning advantage to justify the loss in agility and increase in weight over a traditional 4-5" woodcraft blade. Otherwise I would have probably been best of to go for a similar weight, with the Mini-Hatchet.

 

[HoB]

Thanks for a great review! Did I miss it- what did you think of the handle?

I talk a bit about the handle in the summary, do you have any specific question that I might be able to answer?