Does "blade width" matter?

[Zulus]

If you use "just one" knife for various tasks you can, indeed, get extremely efficient with it.
The Cai Dao pattern (a very thin cleaver blade) was for centuries the one and only authorized Chinese kitchen knife, for cultural and political reasons (a pointed weapon was for military only, and then it turns into tradition...).
However, I doubt you could skin a duck from the inside (like shown in a movie with Michelle Yeoh, "Final Recipe", I believe). But, hey, skills,...
Cutting down a tree with a SAK is a show of skills (but at heights of inefficiency), filleting fish with an axe would be equally funny and not recommendable.

I can add to that :
while in military I was trained with explosive cords
Actually fantastic tool to cut the trees, very quickly and effectively :^)))

 

[catspa]

But how are they on fish?

Parker

 

[KenHash]

If you use "just one" knife for various tasks you can, indeed, get extremely efficient with it.
The Cai Dao pattern (a very thin cleaver blade) was for centuries the one and only authorized Chinese kitchen knife, for cultural and political reasons (a pointed weapon was for military only, and then it turns into tradition...).
However, I doubt you could skin a duck from the inside (like shown in a movie with Michelle Yeoh, "Final Recipe", I believe). But, hey, skills,...
Cutting down a tree with a SAK is a show of skills (but at heights of inefficiency), filleting fish with an axe would be equally funny and not recommendable.

Exactly as you say. From what I have seen, there are two kinds of Cai Dao. One is closer to the western concept of a "cleaver" in having a thicker spine/blade and used to chop through bones, chicken necks, pork hocks, what have you. But the other kind has a thin blade and is used for fine slicing vegtables, boneless meats, fish.
As I've always said, the best knife for any task is the one you have used and trained with. Leaving aside silly impractical and inefficient extremes of course.

 

[KenHash]

And there you explained to me the purpose of the Deba. Which I never quite understood. But I'm not that great on fish. I grill and cook fish, though. But without filleting first. Would I live on another sea border, though, this could be interesting.

The thin flexible Western fillet knife does a perfect job of cutting out a "filet", trimming ends, getting between the meat and rib cage, removing the skin. But what it can not do is the cut through the backbone, whether behind the neck or at the tail (if a large fish). For that reason, the "proper way" as I have been taught is to cut perpendicular to the fish behind the gill cover down to the backbone. rotate the blade direction 90 degrees towards the tail, and run the knife down along the backbone.
This results in a clean fillet, with the head, backbone and tail all still intact. Which in most cases is tossed entirely.

The Deba is designed to "take-apart" a fish. It has a thick spine that can go through the backbone. With large fish I often have to hit/press the spine with my left hand to add force. But, the thick spine tapers down to a thin edge that allows very fine work and produce a filet even cleaner than a filet knife, in the hands of one trained with it.
Taking the fish apart like this makes sense in cultures where the whole fish is used, head and bones for stock. This is common is both Europe and Asia.

Personally, I think that cooking a fish whole (depending on species) is the best way to enjoy it. But there are many dishes that call for a good filet job.

 

[POCEH KOCEB]

Taking the fish apart like this makes sense in cultures where the whole fish is used, head and bones for stock. This is common is both Europe and Asia.
Personally, I think that cooking a fish whole (depending on species) is the best way to enjoy it. But there are many dishes that call for a good filet job.

Makes perfect sense. I see why the Deba, you are using one knife to process the fish. I'm not aware of recipes where they use the back bone,
but I know few delicious ways to prepare stock for fish soup from heads.

 

[Arathol]

Yes, shame on you. What is a good penance for Zulus? If it were up to me you'd have to cut your next 77 sandwiches with an inner strand of 550 paracord strung up in a hacksaw.

 

[herisson]

Wider blades allow for higher grinds and a gradual transition to a more acute geometry.

Better geometry equals less resistance and better performance.

A good example of this is the typical dagger. Daggers traditionally have narrow blades that severely hinder the ability to create an optimal edge geometry. As a result, most daggers cut poorly.

A wide blade made from thin stock that has a high hollow or flat grind will make a phenomenal cutter.

Unfortunately, many knives are overly thick, narrow and feature shallow grinds.

This is width related. A wide (and thin) dagger should be as strong, or stronger, than a narrow and thick dagger, and be a good cutter, at that. That was the thought at the beginning. With this one I tried to combine piercing & cutting capacities while still retaining strength... It is a dagger who ambitions to be also a good knife. It pierces just fine (and widely...) and cuts as good as needed (really good, actually). Strength, eh... I haven't put it to the extreme, but the geometry (hollow grind with high spine) and the 14C28N steel, should point in favour of reasonable strength for such a thin stock (1/12").

 

[skyhorse]

So around these parts, we talk a lot about how blade length and blade thickness affect function and performance. A longer length for example generally diverges into two possible routes: heavy chopper territory or sleek machete territory. Of course, some knives could competently cover those two fronts. For blade thickness, I understand this as a tradeoff between durability (er, batonability?) or ease of slicing. Thicker blades tend to be more durable but also lose out on slicing ability somewhat.

For this thread, let's define blade width as the distance between the spine and cutting edge. Does width have any noticeable effect on knife function and performance?

Most knives are designed for a somewhat specific purpose. Like this was designed for wood carving but not the best choice to carve a Thanksgiving day turkey.

 

[herisson]

There is "carving" and then there is "carving", like "turkey or chicken carving" business. You can do any of them with a sharp blade... but the purpose designed blade will do it best. I must admit, I carve up those chickens (with any sharp blade, but preferably long) before putting them in the oven.

 

[eveled]

Personally, I think that cooking a fish whole (depending on species) is the best way to enjoy it. But there are many dishes that call for a good filet job.

I agree. It’s easier to eat it off the bone and have no waste. I hate filleting fish.

Come to think of it I also think all meat tastes better if it is cooked with the bones still attached.

To the OP’s question. I dislike wide blades. The only advantage I see is the wide blades don’t want to twist as much. The spine of the blade has more leverage against the edge of the blade.

I have very strong hands and wrists so I don’t need the help the wider blades offer.