Do you like em thick or thin?

FullMetalJackass said:
For fixed, as thick as I can get. I harass my favorite knifemaker to make me pieces at least 4.5 mm thick, the more the merrier. Get an Austin Goldman knife or a Faalkniven, you'll never come back from a thick yet properly executed knife.
Click to expand...

You think 4.5 is as thick as you can get?

24a920d9dac041d3fba2a9a26f06b5f6a24c61e109e333589baf3b1c9ddab245.jpg


What's that make that 8mm thick piece of O1 steel I have at home waiting for me to turn into knife?

Also I'm a little opposite. I prefer knives to be THIN unless they're for chopping. Apart from chopping 3-3.5mm is plenty thick for virtually anything I'll throw at it.
 
I like the aesthetics of a thick blade, but they are mostly impractical. I have owned midtechs and customs that I sold off because they are embarrassingly bad at cutting. It's unfortunate the trend has gone that way as thin, great cutting knives with an appealing design are pretty rare now.
 
hudak said:
I like the aesthetics of a thick blade, but they are mostly impractical. I have owned midtechs and customs that I sold off because they are embarrassingly bad at cutting. It's unfortunate the trend has gone that way as thin, great cutting knives with an appealing design are pretty rare now.
Click to expand...

I agree it's very hard to find high quality production knives that cut well. I think this is due to customers abusing their knives and also stainless is back in. I don't care what anyone says if I want a knife that's say 5/32 or 1/8th of an inch at the spine I want carbon for its flexibility. Won't hold an edge as long but is sharpenable and is more versatile imho.
 
Lots of questions and answers, need is the final answer. My fixed blades are game knives and they are all Dozers. If I needed a knive for survival in the toughest situation it would be a Busse or the like. I would say 3/16 to 1/8 for game, 3/16 up to 5/16 for survival. The must all have a edge that will cut
 
singularity35 said:
Really? The sharp thick knife won't cut whateve it is? What happens? The edge just slides off?
Click to expand...

Haha, no. Of course a sharp thick knife will cut a tomato. It just won't slice it. Two reasons:

The thickness of the blade will deflect the direction of the cut. The more thickness, the more deflection; the edge wanders through the cut and the result is a wedge-shaped tomato slice.
Edible, but unattractive.

A thicker blade must displace more tomato, causing your already uneven slice to bend to accommodate passage of the blade.
The seeds and juicy innards of the tomato will remain on the cutting board and never find their way into the sandwich.

So if you want mangled, uneven sandwich components, by all means, use the thickest knife you can find.
But if you insist on carrying a thick blade, maybe consider throwing a SAK in your back pocket in case you need to make a cut with any precision.
 
Pericles said:
Haha, no. Of course a sharp thick knife will cut a tomato. It just won't slice it. Two reasons:

The thickness of the blade will deflect the direction of the cut. The more thickness, the more deflection; the edge wanders through the cut and the result is a wedge-shaped tomato slice.
Edible, but unattractive.

A thicker blade must displace more tomato, causing your already uneven slice to bend to accommodate passage of the blade.
The seeds and juicy innards of the tomato will remain on the cutting board and never find their way into the sandwich.

So if you want mangled, uneven sandwich components, by all means, use the thickest knife you can find.
But if you insist on carrying a thick blade, maybe consider throwing a SAK in your back pocket in case you need to make a cut with any precision.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, I understand. I prefer thin knives for cutting too.

I was just asking what can thin knives cut(separate into different pieces) that thick knives can't.

I have been using knives and machetes since I was 12 or so since my both my father and my mother owned separate farms. I think I have a passing grasp of what geometry can do. Besides, I also love to cook and mostly do the cooking at home.

The point of my question is that I see a lot of posts implying that thick knives can't cut which is total bovine anal exudate. It's like you're totally effed if you only have a thick knife and need to cut something. I have seen families in the hinterlands with only a bolo that is their all around tool. From building their nipa huts houses to food prep. They manage to make it work and in fact, they thrive. Basing on some posts, they would have starved to death because they only had a bolo to prep their food with.

BTW, what do you put into your sandwiches? And what knives do you consider thick? I agree that it's much easier to cut ham or sausages with a thin knife but it's not impossible to do the same with a thicker knife.
 
Last edited:
What is considered thick?
I prefer most of my fixed blades between 4 and 6 mm depending on lenghth and width of the blade for wood prep use mostly...
for kitchen work I prefer thin blades.
 
singularity35 said:
BTW, what do you put into your sandwiches? And what knives do you consider thick? I agree that it's much easier to cut ham or sausages with a thin knife but it's not impossible to do the same with a thicker knife.
Click to expand...

Tonight, sopressata and bucherondin on sour ficelle.

Your question made me curious, and hungry.
So I had a sandwich making contest.http://m.imgur.com/a/177hM

I compared the salami- and baguette-slicing capabilities of four knives with different thickness and geometry but all very sharp:

Mercator K55K, 2.3mm
ZT0450, 3mm
Hardware store kiridashi, 3mm
Nepalese kukri, 10mm

The results were predictable:
The thin, flat-ground K55K excelled at both tasks, and won the honor of spreading the soft cheese.
The ZT0450 did fine but not great, thanks to its narrow saber grind.
The chisel-ground kiridashi cut cleanly but at an odd angle, making it difficult to make thin slices.
The massive, steep convex of the kukri cleaved the sausage and smashed through the bread.
All of the sandwiches tasted great, though.

I admit that I'm a sucker for a thick spine myself sometimes, that kukri is about 3/8" at the handle. It's all about what you want to use it for.
Even for chopping, though, I still find myself reaching for a machete before the kukri most of the time.
 
Pericles said:
Tonight, sopressata and bucherondin on sour ficelle.

Your question made me curious, and hungry.
So I had a sandwich making contest.http://m.imgur.com/a/177hM

I compared the salami- and baguette-slicing capabilities of four knives with different thickness and geometry but all very sharp:

Mercator K55K, 2.3mm
ZT0450, 3mm
Hardware store kiridashi, 3mm
Nepalese kukri, 10mm

The results were predictable:
The thin, flat-ground K55K excelled at both tasks, and won the honor of spreading the soft cheese.
The ZT0450 did fine but not great, thanks to its narrow saber grind.
The chisel-ground kiridashi cut cleanly but at an odd angle, making it difficult to make thin slices.
The massive, steep convex of the kukri cleaved the sausage and smashed through the bread.
All of the sandwiches tasted great, though.

I admit that I'm a sucker for a thick spine myself sometimes, that kukri is about 3/8" at the handle. It's all about what you want to use it for.
Even for chopping, though, I still find myself reaching for a machete before the kukri most of the time.
Click to expand...

I'm really not arguing about which one cuts better.

My point is would a thick knife be unserviceable for cutting?

BTW, what the heck are you eating? I don't recognize those. hehehe

Here's my first post just to recap.

singularity35 said:
Is there anything that a thin knife can cut that a thick one can't?
Click to expand...
 
Thick knives can usually still make the same cuts as thin ones, but the issue is less of a question of "can" as much as a question of effort. You'll have to use way more energy struggling through cuts with a thick blade when a thinner one would zip right through with ease. And there are right and wrong ways to do thick knives. A BK-16 and BK-2 actually have the same primary grind angle, so the cutting performance is nearly identical between the two since the further behind the edge you get the less influential the geometry is on cutting performance. But spine thickness should only be so great as is necessary to provide required rigidity and durability.
 
If we are cutting phonebook paper, tomatos, and their likes or opening mails, yes thin blades outperform thick ones. But if we are cutting tree branches, roots, wires, and similar things, thick blades are preferred. Therefore, the claim that "thin blades cut better" is actually flawed. It really depends on what is being cut.
 
Thick, for fixed. I have Bark Rivers I consider thick and they process deer wonderfully, may be because of the convex edge is my best guess. For a fixed blade knife go thick or just get a machete or fillet knife if you want thin. I know that's a little extreme. But heck, one mans thick is another mans thin. For me the thick blades work better at what I'm using it for. But then again I carry Strider and Medford folders, they work nice when I don't have a fixed blade hanging from my hip. I'm a firm believer in 2 is 1 and 1 is none so I generally have two blades on me and my thinnest although not a fixed blade is a ZT 0450, that one handles my thin blade requirements.
 
sharp_edge said:
If we are cutting phonebook paper, tomatos, and their likes or opening mails, yes thin blades outperform thick ones. But if we are cutting tree branches, roots, wires, and similar things, thick blades are preferred. Therefore, the claim that "thin blades cut better" is actually flawed. It really depends on what is being cut.
Click to expand...

Hence the qualifier of "only as thick as necessary." In the case of roots and wires a thicker edge is needed to withstand impact with resistant or damaging targets, but with chopping with an axe you're using the spreading force to wedge off chips from the trunk so the ratio of penetration to wedging force needs to be properly balanced. Just branches? No thick blade necessary. And generally while you'll want the edge apex on a root cutter thick enough to resist damage from the dirt and rocks, you still want the geometry behind that edge to be thin enough to still penetrate well under the circumstances.
 
singularity35 said:
Is there anything that a thin knife can cut that a thick one can't?
Click to expand...

It's not what it can cut, it's how easily it can do it.

Ever try to cut cardboard with a thick knife.....then done it with something like a 2mm thick Spyderco? WORLD of difference. Thin knives go through stuff like a light saber....even when they are partially dull.
 
sharp_edge said:
If we are cutting phonebook paper, tomatos, and their likes or opening mails, yes thin blades outperform thick ones. But if we are cutting tree branches, roots, wires, and similar things, thick blades are preferred. Therefore, the claim that "thin blades cut better" is actually flawed. It really depends on what is being cut.
Click to expand...

No way. I can cut branches better with an ESEE-3 (1/8" stock) than I can with a thicker ESEE-4 or 5 which is why I no longer have them but I still have the ESEE-3. If you're talking about chopping or hacking at things that's a different story. Use an Ax.

I have tried to use a knife to cut at roots and ended up going and getting my ax. Knives don't work as well as an ax on roots. Do you actually have experience cutting roots with a knife as well as an ax? I ask because I think if you did.....you wouldn't make the statement you did.

If what you say is true then why have machetes been made of 1/8" steel for 50 to 100 years or more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top