Campanion: Camillus vs. Ka-Bar

[Bridgeman]

Okay, a little help from the folks who might have used both of these blades. I have a Camillus BK2 and a Ka-Bar BK2. When I first received the Camillus, I was a bit disappointed to find it was actually .210" (even though it was advertised EVERYwhere as .250"). When I saw Ka-Bar pick up the contract I was tickled (in a manly way of course) and ran out and picked me up a Ka-Bar BK2 which is every bit of .250".

Well, they are both still sitting here crying to go to work. Problem is that my dad really wants one and I plan to give him one of mine. Or, if the opinion swings way toward the Ka-Bar, maybe peddle the Camillus and buy another Ka-Bar. For those who have used both, which one did you prefer? I really like the heft of the Ka-Bar, but do those additional 40 thousandths help its over-all usefullness or hurt it?

Thanks...

 

[chuckinohio]

Above all the Camillus is somewhat of a collectors item due to manufacturing shifting to K-Bar.

If both knives are intended to be users, and collector appeal is not an issue then it is a toss up. The added heft of the K-Bar version will aid you if you plan on doing any chopping with your BK-2, and that is the only real advantage I ever saw between the two.

The BK-2 is better suited to batoning than chopping, but it is capable of it in a limited capacity.

Some folks obsess over weight when out hiking, therefore the slimmer blade would give you an extra ounce or so to consider.

For all intents and purposes, they perform the same IMO.

Chuck

 

[Bridgeman]

Thanks chuckinohio. I will give the Ka-Bar to dadinohio, put the Camillus away (no one yell at me, please), and buy another Ka-Bar for me. Or put my BK7 to use instead!

Any additional opinions on the thickness difference will also be appreciated.

 

[killa_concept]

Chuck pretty much said it all... if the Camillus hasn't seen much use, it could be worth something some day. I agree with your choice (get another KaBar BK-2 though, it's an awesome knife )