-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Chopping videos in HD, 29+ Knives, axe, hatchet and saws (+ new SARGE 7)
- Thread starter l2lku2
- Start date
Thanks, I never thought I would ever post any videos but I am glad that you are enjoying them. I took a lot more yesterday but I think it is getting to, or may have passed, video overload stage so I will not post all of them. One that I did take however illustrates some of the answers to your question re. the 171 vs Res-C handle.
What I carry most often in my car is either the B11 or the SAR-8, my two favorite Busse. I carry them because they are light, versatile and comfortable. Both perform way out of their league as big knives trying to be bigger knives and as big knives trying to be smaller knives. When I go to the beach I usually take a Fallkniven of some sorts because they are stainless and because I need any excuse to sometimes carry something other than a large Busse.
I have seen pictures of people taking down monster trees with Busse Mistresses so anything is possible I guess. For anything sizable I would still reach for a large axe. If all that I have is a large knife, I feel comfortable up to about 6", maybe 7" at a stretch if that is all there is, but not if it is killer tough wood. Around the house I have used a B11 and small axes / hatchets & saw most. That excludes the dead chopping tree in the back yard that has seen all my choppers. I need some machetes.
I am not sure what the 171 handle material is but I read somewhere that it is what they use for horse-stall-mats.
On the knife, on average it feels slightly more compressible than the Res-C on the B11 & B10. The reason I emphasize on the knife, on average is because both materials differ in how compressible they feel in different areas. For example if I squeeze the very rear of the B11 & B10 handles (where there is no, or little tang) hard with my thumbs and index fingers (like a crab with both pincers, not a knife grip) the Res-C compresses more than further down where it is thinner and closer to the tang. The same with the 171 material - more compressible where thicker, less so where thinner.
I know that is stating the obvious but the point is that the 171 handle feels more compressible on average because it is a much thicker handle on average with a distal taper, and hence even more handle material vs tang steel. So I don't know which material would actually be more compressible in equal thicknesses.
As for shock / vibration, I cannot recall the relative levels of the B11 vs. 171 (next test
) but I have never felt that to be a serious issue with either of them.In terms of texture, they are both fairly grippy but the Res-C is a little more grippy. Some may prefer that and others won't because more grippy is also more prone to causing blisters.
For me the advantages of the 171 handle over almost any other chopping knife handle that I have ever felt are due to a number of things:
Many knife handles rely on the rear drop at the bottom of the handle (heel) to eliminate the knife sliding forward. The problem with that is when you do snap cuts and the knife rocks back in your hand at the top of the stroke, the heel rubs and presses against your little finger. At the bottom of the stroke when the knife moves forward, again it rubs and presses against the little finger with even more force. I don't have meaty paws so it presses almost directly against the bone of my little finger and that starts to hurt very quickly.
The 171 handle does not rely only on a heel. It relies on the outward swell of the handle in addition to the heel. The outward swell presses against the side of the hand where there is plenty of cushioning. On the other side the swell also presses against the front digits of the little finger. Very importantly, the bottom area of the heel is very wide and slightly rounded, so it distributes the pressure over a wider area. So overall that spreads the pressure over the entire rear side of the hand, not just on the middle of the little finger like many other knives. The same holds true for the front of the belly at the bottom of the handle where the index finger grips. It is wide on the 171 providing good grip at the top of the stroke and the bottom.
Because of the weight of the 171, my snap-cutting action is very limited, i.e I do not rock it back very far on the top of the stroke, I have to grip tighter so it does not slide back at the top of the stroke and the handle is a relatively long, so pressing against the little finger is not that much of an issue. So your hand won't hurt as quickly but the downside is that the knife is heavy and you have to hold-on tight so your hand will fatigue faster than with the lighter snap-cutters. Nothing is free.
Well that is my experience anyway.
Apologies for the lengthy post, I try to explain myself as thoroughly as I can.
[video=youtube_share;tVNgw7OjeSg]http://youtu.be/tVNgw7OjeSg[/video]
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,964
Great set of videos! Very informative and helpful!
Thank you for posting them!
Thank you for posting them!
stjones
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2010
- Messages
- 3,608
Excellent job!!!
I LOVE seeing the different choppers working. It gives an individual that hasn't handled them an idea of what it can/could do.
I have a B11 on the way so I was especially drooling over those.
Thanks for time and hand sacrifice!!!
I LOVE seeing the different choppers working. It gives an individual that hasn't handled them an idea of what it can/could do.
I have a B11 on the way so I was especially drooling over those.
Thanks for time and hand sacrifice!!!
Cool videos, I was wondering what the bwm cf chopped like compared to the b-10 and 11. Thanks for all the comparisons:thumbup:
I of course love the B11, it is in a different league, especially the asymmetric one. I would choose the B10 over the BWM CF in its current form.
Frankly the BWM CF surprised me, but not in a good way. My understanding was that the CF blades had very thin edges (my SARSquatch CF does) so I expected this to penetrate well but it is actually one of the worst in this entire lineup. It just does not seem to penetrate at all. Looking at the edge on mine it is fairly obtuse.
And I think it is evident I do not like the handles of the BWM series because of the pinky bite.
But I think this knife has a lot of potential because it is not too thick so it is relatively light and has good balance so it is relatively fast. And the BWM CF is gorgeous to my eyes. So I think with a re-profile and a handle modification it has the potential to be a very good chopper.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
- Messages
- 558
What are your thoughts on the NMFBMLE? haven't herd anything about that one. I would have figured the NM would have been the king chopper of all them, except for the comp knives. I would love to see a .25 zero edge grind with light brigade mod to the handles for the NM.
The edge on my LE is too obtuse to penetrate well enough for my liking. It is a heavy knife for me so not a favorite for accuracy or extended use and the same issues with the handle style than the BWM.
I have read good things about the thinner .25 like you mentioned, so I want to try one of those with a good edge.
The LB treatment does sound intriguing but I wonder whether it removes much more metal and how that would affect the balance because this is a long and heavy blade.
I have read good things about the thinner .25 like you mentioned, so I want to try one of those with a good edge.
The LB treatment does sound intriguing but I wonder whether it removes much more metal and how that would affect the balance because this is a long and heavy blade.
Last edited:
The video is probably a little misleading because I pointed out 2 areas on it.
But I would describe the worst handle as the one that hurts the most where I could not use it at all after just a short period. To my best recollection, that would be the Becker and Fehrman. The reason for those 2 is because the handles on those are very short so the little finger is in constant contact with the heel and the angle of the heel is higher so the finger does not slide over it, but presses right against it. The BWM & Fusion handles also but with those being longer, I could mitigate it by moving my hand forward, away from the heel and with less powerful strokes and a tighter grip, still use it somewhat. OK for the BWMLE and ASH Wacker that are sharp enough to still penetrate with less power, somewhat with the FBMLE but not with the BWM CF or NMFBLE that need a lot of momentum to do much.
With the more compact handles of the BK9 & Fehrman, the only option is to lift your little finger out, or to hold it behind the heel, gripping with only 4 fingers either way. While that may work on shorter, lighter knives, I don't like that on a larger, heavier knives.
I love the Becker handles for regular use, except for the misalignment of the scales to the tang so you feel the ridges of the tang, but for chopping I do not like them at all. On the Fehrman I already had to remove the sub-hilt which was really not good for chopping.
On the other end of the spectrum, the DSSF was virtually unusable with the particular gloves that I was wearing because it slid forward without any retention. With bare hands, grippier gloves or a forward lanyard it will not be as much of an issue. So ironically, the complete absence of a heel seems to be more of an issue than the presence of a heel.
My preferences for chopper handles are the side swells and rounded wide heel (like the 171) and also the SAR (4 , 6 & 8) type handles where there is a gradual increase in the width toward the rear, without a sharp heel. The SAR 8 needs slightly thicker scales to reduce the pressure between the thumb and forefinger, but I think it is a good design to eliminate pinky bite while still providing good grip. And the Chopweiler, also needs slightly thicker rounded scales for the top pressure area but the profile is probably perfect for my preferences, good grip with no pinky bite. And of course the B11 / B10 handles with preference to the B10 handles that have no ridges and thumb grooves.
So even though I could feel two hotspots on the NMSFNO I could still use it for quite a while because it did not hurt that much - it is not a heavy knife and the angle on the heel is not high so the finger slides a little, reducing the pressure. I already had a blister between the thumb and index finger so I felt that on that slight angle at the top of the NMSFNO handle, but of course it was not caused by the NMSFNO but by others collectively the previous days.
I will retest some of the knives again with fresh hands.
But I would describe the worst handle as the one that hurts the most where I could not use it at all after just a short period. To my best recollection, that would be the Becker and Fehrman. The reason for those 2 is because the handles on those are very short so the little finger is in constant contact with the heel and the angle of the heel is higher so the finger does not slide over it, but presses right against it. The BWM & Fusion handles also but with those being longer, I could mitigate it by moving my hand forward, away from the heel and with less powerful strokes and a tighter grip, still use it somewhat. OK for the BWMLE and ASH Wacker that are sharp enough to still penetrate with less power, somewhat with the FBMLE but not with the BWM CF or NMFBLE that need a lot of momentum to do much.
With the more compact handles of the BK9 & Fehrman, the only option is to lift your little finger out, or to hold it behind the heel, gripping with only 4 fingers either way. While that may work on shorter, lighter knives, I don't like that on a larger, heavier knives.
I love the Becker handles for regular use, except for the misalignment of the scales to the tang so you feel the ridges of the tang, but for chopping I do not like them at all. On the Fehrman I already had to remove the sub-hilt which was really not good for chopping.
On the other end of the spectrum, the DSSF was virtually unusable with the particular gloves that I was wearing because it slid forward without any retention. With bare hands, grippier gloves or a forward lanyard it will not be as much of an issue. So ironically, the complete absence of a heel seems to be more of an issue than the presence of a heel.
My preferences for chopper handles are the side swells and rounded wide heel (like the 171) and also the SAR (4 , 6 & 8) type handles where there is a gradual increase in the width toward the rear, without a sharp heel. The SAR 8 needs slightly thicker scales to reduce the pressure between the thumb and forefinger, but I think it is a good design to eliminate pinky bite while still providing good grip. And the Chopweiler, also needs slightly thicker rounded scales for the top pressure area but the profile is probably perfect for my preferences, good grip with no pinky bite. And of course the B11 / B10 handles with preference to the B10 handles that have no ridges and thumb grooves.
So even though I could feel two hotspots on the NMSFNO I could still use it for quite a while because it did not hurt that much - it is not a heavy knife and the angle on the heel is not high so the finger slides a little, reducing the pressure. I already had a blister between the thumb and index finger so I felt that on that slight angle at the top of the NMSFNO handle, but of course it was not caused by the NMSFNO but by others collectively the previous days.
I will retest some of the knives again with fresh hands.
Last edited:
Some pics to illustrate the previous post:
The 2 blisters show where the majority of knives with a heel and a palm swell and belly create hotspots because those are the 2 areas that resist the knife sliding forward, in addition to the index finger at the bottom of the handle belly.
On the Fehrman and the BK9, the handle is so short that the little finger is constantly in contact with the heel. In addition, they do not have a palm swell at the top or a belly at the bottom so the little finger takes the most pressure when the knife slides forward or rocks in the hand at the top of the stroke. Once your hand hurts, you cannot move it forward to avoid the heel. Lifting the little finger out or putting it behind the pommel is the only option. In fairness, the Fehrman did have a sub-hilt that I had removed but for me it caused more issues than not. The scales also did extend further down the heel and I had that removed but only because they ended in sharp points so they actually hurt more than helped. I don't know whether to remove the heel or put on thicker, contoured scales that extend all the way down the heel and round that area.
The heel on the Becker is wide but the tang is is not flush with the scales so the thin tang pressures the little finger. There is no palm swell at the top and very little belly at the bottom so like the Fehrman, the forward motion is arrested mostly by the little finger. The Becker scales can be moved but if you align it in one place it mis-aligns in another so there is always some ridge at the top or the bottom, rear or front.
The Becker handles are thick and nicely rounded though so they distribute pressure well in the V between the index finger and thumb, provided you align the scales with the tang.
The Fusion and BWM handles use the same design concept, a sloping rear, a palm swell and a heel. So the forward motion is arrested by the index finger at the front of the handle belly, the V between the index finger and thumb, and the little finger, with the latter feeling the most pressure. The rear part of the palm is on the downward sloping handle and the middle two fingers are on the round part of the belly so neither of those two areas resist the forward motion, except for what I would consider negligible friction relative to the other 3 areas mentioned.
The scales do not extend all the way down the heel so sometimes the little finger presses only against the thin tang / heel, especially when the knife rocks in the hand at the top of the stroke, forcing the little finger further down the heel.
The handles are longer so when the little finger starts to hurt, you can move your hand forward but then the index finger and V has to provide the arresting grip so that works for lighter knives and very sharp knives that do not need to be swung too hard.
The top of the handle, where the V between the index finger and thumb rests, is too thin on some knives, not distributing the pressure well enough and some are too square, putting all the pressure on the 2 corners.
Magnum scales (contoured handles) also provide surfaces on the side of the scales to arrest the forward motion somewhat with the front section of the palm and front digits of the index finger, rear side of the palm and front digit of the little finger.
The absence of any, few, or a single slope to arrest the forward motion of the knife, as in the DSSF, with really only the front of the belly providing that, makes it very hard to chop when the hand cannot grip it tightly enough, like with slippery gloves as I experienced.
Here are some design elements of handles that I find very comfortable.
The Chopweiler slopes upward toward the rear on top of the handle and slightly less so at the bottom. That means that the palm of the hand provides the bulk of the force to resist the forward motion of the knife. The palm is soft so it does not hurt. The very slight slope on the bottom of the handle means that all the fingers provide almost equal resistance to the forward motion and the grip pressure is on the softer inside of the finger, not the rear side where there is less padding and it hurts easier and more. Depending on your hand size and finger length you can move your hand forward and backward to where you find it comfortable.
The SAR 8 has the same basic concept but the majority of the forward movement arresting slope is at the bottom, not both sides as on the Chopweiler. But you can also move your hand to a position you find comfortable. But the Chopweiler and the SAR 8 are thin at the top so do not distribute downward force in the V.
The Benchmade 171 uses the side swells at the rear to arrest the forward motion against the soft rear of the hand, and the first digits of the fingers and also with a rounded heel and full length scales, not exposing the heel, therefore distributing the pressure along the finger and rear part of the hand. It does not have a palm swell at the top but has a belly to provide some grip for the index finger and contoured scales with a gentle rearward slope, not a bulge, to provide some grip for the front section of the palm and front digits of the index finger.
The top is wide to distribute the downward pressure in the V.
As I already stated, I also find the B10 & B11 handles comfortable but I need to analyze them more to understand why. The only thing I have learned from them so far, is that I seem to like thinner handles for fast, snap cutters. The grip afforded by a thinner handle seems to loosen my wrist for a snapping action more than a very thick handle where I cannot close my hand around it properly and allow it to rock in my hand. But again, I need to do a lot more testing and thinking about this before I understand it enough to comment conclusively.
Well, I have certainly repeated the same things too many times now!
The 2 blisters show where the majority of knives with a heel and a palm swell and belly create hotspots because those are the 2 areas that resist the knife sliding forward, in addition to the index finger at the bottom of the handle belly.
On the Fehrman and the BK9, the handle is so short that the little finger is constantly in contact with the heel. In addition, they do not have a palm swell at the top or a belly at the bottom so the little finger takes the most pressure when the knife slides forward or rocks in the hand at the top of the stroke. Once your hand hurts, you cannot move it forward to avoid the heel. Lifting the little finger out or putting it behind the pommel is the only option. In fairness, the Fehrman did have a sub-hilt that I had removed but for me it caused more issues than not. The scales also did extend further down the heel and I had that removed but only because they ended in sharp points so they actually hurt more than helped. I don't know whether to remove the heel or put on thicker, contoured scales that extend all the way down the heel and round that area.
The heel on the Becker is wide but the tang is is not flush with the scales so the thin tang pressures the little finger. There is no palm swell at the top and very little belly at the bottom so like the Fehrman, the forward motion is arrested mostly by the little finger. The Becker scales can be moved but if you align it in one place it mis-aligns in another so there is always some ridge at the top or the bottom, rear or front.
The Becker handles are thick and nicely rounded though so they distribute pressure well in the V between the index finger and thumb, provided you align the scales with the tang.
The Fusion and BWM handles use the same design concept, a sloping rear, a palm swell and a heel. So the forward motion is arrested by the index finger at the front of the handle belly, the V between the index finger and thumb, and the little finger, with the latter feeling the most pressure. The rear part of the palm is on the downward sloping handle and the middle two fingers are on the round part of the belly so neither of those two areas resist the forward motion, except for what I would consider negligible friction relative to the other 3 areas mentioned.
The scales do not extend all the way down the heel so sometimes the little finger presses only against the thin tang / heel, especially when the knife rocks in the hand at the top of the stroke, forcing the little finger further down the heel.
The handles are longer so when the little finger starts to hurt, you can move your hand forward but then the index finger and V has to provide the arresting grip so that works for lighter knives and very sharp knives that do not need to be swung too hard.
The top of the handle, where the V between the index finger and thumb rests, is too thin on some knives, not distributing the pressure well enough and some are too square, putting all the pressure on the 2 corners.
Magnum scales (contoured handles) also provide surfaces on the side of the scales to arrest the forward motion somewhat with the front section of the palm and front digits of the index finger, rear side of the palm and front digit of the little finger.
The absence of any, few, or a single slope to arrest the forward motion of the knife, as in the DSSF, with really only the front of the belly providing that, makes it very hard to chop when the hand cannot grip it tightly enough, like with slippery gloves as I experienced.
Here are some design elements of handles that I find very comfortable.
The Chopweiler slopes upward toward the rear on top of the handle and slightly less so at the bottom. That means that the palm of the hand provides the bulk of the force to resist the forward motion of the knife. The palm is soft so it does not hurt. The very slight slope on the bottom of the handle means that all the fingers provide almost equal resistance to the forward motion and the grip pressure is on the softer inside of the finger, not the rear side where there is less padding and it hurts easier and more. Depending on your hand size and finger length you can move your hand forward and backward to where you find it comfortable.
The SAR 8 has the same basic concept but the majority of the forward movement arresting slope is at the bottom, not both sides as on the Chopweiler. But you can also move your hand to a position you find comfortable. But the Chopweiler and the SAR 8 are thin at the top so do not distribute downward force in the V.
The Benchmade 171 uses the side swells at the rear to arrest the forward motion against the soft rear of the hand, and the first digits of the fingers and also with a rounded heel and full length scales, not exposing the heel, therefore distributing the pressure along the finger and rear part of the hand. It does not have a palm swell at the top but has a belly to provide some grip for the index finger and contoured scales with a gentle rearward slope, not a bulge, to provide some grip for the front section of the palm and front digits of the index finger.
The top is wide to distribute the downward pressure in the V.
As I already stated, I also find the B10 & B11 handles comfortable but I need to analyze them more to understand why. The only thing I have learned from them so far, is that I seem to like thinner handles for fast, snap cutters. The grip afforded by a thinner handle seems to loosen my wrist for a snapping action more than a very thick handle where I cannot close my hand around it properly and allow it to rock in my hand. But again, I need to do a lot more testing and thinking about this before I understand it enough to comment conclusively.
Well, I have certainly repeated the same things too many times now!
Last edited:
Great info thanks
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
- Messages
- 4,555
AWESOME VIDEOS!!!! you have one hell of a collection and some killer toys. I love all of them but I do have to agree that bm171 is a chopping machine. and so is that wett small hunting axe lol. again very nice
Thank you.
Congrats on the B11. What do you think of it so far? I look forward to reading about your perspective on it.