Hey, All:
Very interesting discussion. What was particularly interesting for me was the video of Bill Bagwell demonstrating the difference between cutting with the belly of a blade and a straight false edge. When I attended the 2000 Riddle of Steel (and shot the Paladin Press video "Legacy of Steel"), James Keating did the same demo with a piece of cardboard. The belly of the edge bounced the cardboard away, but the straight-clip false edge "bit" every time.
That got me thinking. Since I'm not going to carry a Bowie-sized blade or a something double edged (both from a practical standpoint and based on legalities), why not carry a small, legal blade that basically replicates the function of the straight false edge? Basically, that is a Wharncliffe.
At that time, I had designed one knife for commercial production--the Masters of Defense Tempest. It had a Bowie-shaped blade because I believed, based on everything I had read and heard--that the belly of the edge made it cut better. Based on Jim Keating's demonstration, I began to doubt that--especially in a short, folder-sized blade.
By that time, my system of knife tactics (what later became Martial Blade Concepts, or MBC) had already evolved to focus on tactics that involved disabling an attacker quickly by cutting key tendons, muscles, and nerves. This approach is sometimes called "biomechanical cutting" and is something that I later validated with trauma surgeons and other medical professionals, including the International School of Tactical Medicine. Based on that approach to tactics, my goal was to determine how to achieve maximum cutting performance on MBC's soft-tissue targets (the inner wrist/forearm, bicep/triceps, and quadriceps) with a short, legal-to-carry blade. I had already begun incorporating "Pork Man" demonstrations in my training at that time. Pork Man was a target constructed by butterflying a 4-5-pound pork roast or pork tenderloin, tying it around a wooden dowel (which replicated bone), and wrapping it with about 30 layers of plastic wrap (which replicated the resistance of skin). The resulting target accurately simulated the resistance and basic substance of MBC's preferred targets, with the exception of the blood pressure of living tissue. Since this target allowed me to quantify cutting performance in a relevant way, it became the basis for my testing of various blade shapes.
I made a bunch of Pork Men (and fired up the grill and smoker) and methodically tested a full spectrum of blade profiles from my collection. The best overall performance I achieved was with Spyderco's early Centofante folders, which were Wharncliffes. Hawkbills like the Harpy also cut extremely well, but were awkward for thrusting and tended to "snag" on the dowel "bone."
Interestingly, when I researched the historical application of straight-edged blades, I found many excellent examples--the scramasax. the kampilan, many styles of navaja, etc. I also learned that many cultures renowned for their edged-weapon skills--like Japan--began with straight-edged blades and typically transitioned to curved edges when they introduced cavalry. The reason was that striking with a straight-edged blade from a moving horse imparted too much force into the cut and would injure the rider. Curved blades "bled off" energy, allowing the cut to flow through and leaving the rider's arm attached.
When it comes to self-defense with any weapon, training should be a priority. Once you develop skill in a particular set of tactics, you should also have a better understanding of what types of weapons support those tactics best. Theoretical discussions are always fun, but there is no substitute for training and empirical testing on relevant media.
Stay safe,
Mike