Sorry, DWRW. Didn't mean to sound as if I was asking you to justify what you're doing. It's valuable work--I just hadn't seen a disclaimer as to range of weight and thickness within a given model here in this thread, so thought I'd mention it.
For purposes of comparing one model to another, I think what you're doing can be useful. As I said above...it's nice to have some ballpark info. Thanks for putting it together.
No problem. That is probably more of me tending to go too far to make sure I am as clear as I can be. Sorry for my wordy posts. I didn't really take anything you said wrong or as a negative.
Just as an example of what I was saying, you show the CG BWM at 22.4 oz. and the SHBM at 19 oz. That would suggest that the BWM weighs almost 18% more than a SHBM, a significant difference. However, if you check DowntownDM’s post #30 in the following thread:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=687951
…you’ll find that SHBM’s weighed anywhere from 19 oz to 26 oz. I had one @ .25” thick that weighed 22 oz, and on the same scale my BWM w/canvas micarta weighs 22.5 oz.
So someone seeking one or the other, a BWM or SHBM, with the idea that the weight differential is as shown in your thread, might find the result surprising.
I am not sure why there would have been so much variance on the older SHBM's, but 19 ounces to 26 ounces is a 7 ounce variance - which I consider HUGE!!!
I wasn't around WAY back when some of the Straight Handled knives were being sold and never justified the secondary prices. So, I have not had one, let alone 2 or more to compare. But, something doesn't sound right about a 19 - 26 ounce variance . The range of weights you are saying exists begs some questions:
Were the SHBM's generally sold with many significantly different sizes, shapes, grinds?
Or was there one "MAIN" size, shape, grind with a few varients that are getting mixed up and certain owners now do not know if theirs is a "Standard release" or a variant?
Was a certain knife with specs being provided modified significantly?
I have not seen G10 being used on any of these older (old school) knives, so I don't think handle material would likely have been a factor in the difference in those weights and at most, G10 typically would only account for about an ounce or so variance - still leaving 6 more ounces of variance - STILL a HUGE difference.
The difference between the Skinny ASH1 at .1875" thickness to the ASH1CG at .32" thick is about 6 ounces. But, that is a HUGE difference in knife thickness specs.
ANY way you slice it, a 7 ounce variance between SHBM's seems VERY questionable to me.
The first thing that jumps out at me is the 19.0 weight itself. I had actually noticed that the SHBM showed 19.0 ounces. That was not one of mine that I was able to measure myself. (Many on my list I did confirm myself.) I got that 19 ounces from one of the Busse Specs sites and noticed that 19.0 ounces does seem too low. I included it anyway, but now the more I think about it and look at the dimensional specs, 19.0 ounces seems just "obviously" too low and most likely wrong (????). I would tend to guess about 22 - 23 ounces or so (?????).
Heck the SHSH was 19.3 ounces with same thickness and 2.5" shorter blade and 2.0" shorter overall - which also sounds wrong as well since I doubt the SHSH has a .5" longer handle (????). Some of those old school specs seem pretty messed up!
Maybe I just need to remove the SHSH and SHBM until I can get better confirmation on the specs.
I think I will just remove those two old school blades till I can see some better evidence to support the accuracy of those numbers.
------------------------------
Aside from the questionable old school knives, the newer knives seem very often to be pretty tight in tolerances and the specs seem about right. CNC use seems pretty evident. Notice your measurement of the BWM at 22.5 vs. another at 22.4 - I had 22.4 also on my chart, not sure if from the same source or not - maybe a 3rd source. Anyway, pretty consistant at all within 1/10 of an ounce. I am very fine with that small a weight variance.
Knives starting around the Ergo era seem to be pretty consistant if clear on specific standard released version and not including custom variants.
I became active with Swamp Rat and Busse around 2005. At about that time, knives were already pretty standardized in most cases. Pretty much the entire Swamp Rat line and Scrap Yard line is very standardized with a few variants being "Obvious" varients from shows and Ganzaaas.
Since at least as far back as the Ergo series, from what I can tell, the Busse line seems fairly standardized as well. Most customs and variants are fairly obvious with only a few excepts that don't seem to change the weights and specs too much.
I tend to have a bit of a problem with all of the MANY variations of the Game Wardens, AD's, and MS's. There are so many different blade thicknesses offered for each of those, that it is hard to know what was "Standard".
That is why I don't have the Game Warden, AD or MS listed on my chart - yet! I am open to suggestions on how to incorporate those three into my list.
I would like to just put down 2-3 of the most common of each including weights and specs identified by thickness. I don't want to have 20-30 of each with about the only differences being .02 ounces between each variation.
The FSH is another that is getting a bit muddy as to which is standard between the many .25" - .27" flats and saber grind options. But, at least with the FSH, right now I have been able to distinguish and properly notate:
FSH (Saber grind).. = 19.0 ounces; .25" thick
FSH (full flat grind) = 22.0 ounces; .27” thick
HH (Saber grind)... = 23.0 ounces; .27" thick
.
) more consistantly and accurately enough to keep spec variances to WAY less than a 7 ounces difference.
