Handles and Large Hands

Comprehensivist said:
Karl,

You are on the right track with your observation that circumference at palm swell is another key indicator how well a handle will fit your hand once you know your ideal number.

I use the Fiddleback twine to measure circumference by wrapping it around the largest part of the palm swell and marking the spot where the twine crosses the starting point. The I straighten the string and measure the distance from the starting point to the mark on the twine to determine circumference.

...

I started including the palm swell circumference measurement to my posts in the "Models, Tang Types, Steel Thicknesses & Weights” thread exactly a year ago. Here is a link to that thread in case you have not looked at it. There is a lot of detailed info there contributed by various members.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...hts/page4?highlight=Models,+Tang+Types,+Steel

It will be interesting to try your elliptical circumference formula against my twine measurements to see how they correlate on a few knives.

Please keep us posted on what you figure out works best for you.

Phil
Click to expand...

Thanks, Phil. That link is useful.

I ran estimates of handle circumferences using (a few of) the measurements provided in the link. Estimating handle circumference with my method seems reliable. Here are measurements from the thread next to my estimates:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/90so67oavlx3nk4/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-23%20at%2011.07.49%20PM.png?dl=0

As you can see, the estimated circumference is consistently lower by about 11% of the estimate. Knowing this, anyone using this formula can figure out handle circumference of a knife. Take half the handle height at the palm swell, half the handle width at the palm swell, and put the numbers into this website:

https://www.google.com/search?q=cir...l5.317j0j9&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8

Take the number provided by the website and add 0.11 times that number to itself. The result is the handle circumference. Note that the 11% value will change; it will be a little lower for rounder handles and a little higher for "boxier" handles. So, the 11% error value is itself an estimate and is also limited by the small number of knives that I checked for this post. As a side note, it looks like Andy's handle "boxiness" is very consistent for these knives.

Is anyone interested in me pursuing this further, or is this a little over the top? This was just a trial run for my own use, but I thought I would share it.

My goal is to go onto a dealer website and estimate knife handle dimensions (width, height, circumference) using pictures. If anyone is interested in a guide for that and/or progress along the way, let me know.

Thanks,

Karl
 
Marl71 said:
Thanks, Phil. That link is useful.

I ran estimates of handle circumferences using (a few of) the measurements provided in the link. Estimating handle circumference with my method seems reliable. Here are measurements from the thread next to my estimates:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/90so67oavlx3nk4/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-23%20at%2011.07.49%20PM.png?dl=0

As you can see, the estimated circumference is consistently lower by about 11% of the estimate. Knowing this, anyone using this formula can figure out handle circumference of a knife. Take half the handle height at the palm swell, half the handle width at the palm swell, and put the numbers into this website:

https://www.google.com/search?q=cir...l5.317j0j9&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8

Take the number provided by the website and add 0.11 times that number to itself. The result is the handle circumference. Note that the 11% value will change; it will be a little lower for rounder handles and a little higher for "boxier" handles. So, the 11% error value is itself an estimate and is also limited by the small number of knives that I checked for this post. As a side note, it looks like Andy's handle "boxiness" is very consistent for these knives.

Is anyone interested in me pursuing this further, or is this a little over the top? This was just a trial run for my own use, but I thought I would share it.

My goal is to go onto a dealer website and estimate knife handle dimensions (width, height, circumference) using pictures. If anyone is interested in a guide for that and/or progress along the way, let me know.

Thanks,

Karl
Click to expand...


Karl,

If you like, you could try your method on at least three of the four knives I've purchased from Blade HQ, and then I could measure the circumference of each with a string the way Phil does so that you can see how well you did: Black Ash Runt, Black Ash Bushcrafter Jr., and Rattlesnake Toboggan.

Jim
 
joarthur said:
Karl,

If you like, you could try your method on at least three of the four knives I've purchased from Blade HQ, and then I could measure the circumference of each with a string the way Phil does so that you can see how well you did: Black Ash Runt, Black Ash Bushcrafter Jr., and Rattlesnake Toboggan.

Jim
Click to expand...

Thanks Jim, that's a great idea. I predict handle circumferences around the palm swell are:

Model / Circumference / Width / Height

BC Jr:................3.21" / 0.82" / 1.01"
Runt:.................2.96" / 0.74" / 0.95"
Toboggan:..........3.22" / 0.82" / 1.02"

How did I do?

Karl
 
Karl,

OK. Height: Runt .937; Toboggan .985; Jr. 1.21. Circumference: Runt 2.76; Toboggan 3.0; Jr. 3.03. (Toboggan is a little wider than Jr., which seems to make up for Jr's greater height.) You're pretty close but I'm not sure the info will be as useful as you hope.

There's just no substitute for actually trying the knives.

Consider two grips -- thumb on top, and thumb on side:

-- The Runt and Camp Nessmuk are the only two models I have that are very comfortable in both grips. Yet one has a smaller circumference than the Toboggan and Jr., and one has a considerably larger circumference. Plus, my Runt and Camp Nessmuk both have narrower palmswells than the Jr. and the Toboggan.

-- Of all my Fiddlebacks the Jr. and Toboggan are the most comfortable with thumb on side. They are acceptable with thumb on top, but the butt ends that help make the side grip so comfortable and secure with a three-finger grip for thumb/side, make the thumb/top grip less so. The Toboggan is somewhat more comfortable than Jr. for thumb on top, I think because the swale on the top of the Toboggan's spine makes for a flatter surface for the thumb to press on.

-- With long fingers and relatively narrow palms like ours thickness helps. But the real difference with Fiddlebacks is the shaping. Our fingers are always going to situate more diagonally on a handle than most. Those Fiddlebacks that become keepers for me have contours where the parts of my hand that press against a handle and thus make for a secure grip just have the contours in the right place, regardless of the angled finger placement. My search has pretty much ended with two Runts for perfect 2-finger grips; the fat Toboggan and BC Jr. for 3-finger grips; and the Camp Nessmuck for all fingers on the handle. If models come along with handles in the 5 1/3 - 5 1/2 length range, I'll probably give them a try. I'm also curious about Allen's Big Palmer for a 3-finger grip that might be as comfortable for thumb-on-top grip as for thumb-on-side. Good luck with your search.
 
Jim,

Well, it was worth a shot. It is not completely a loss.

I suspect that cross-sectional shape (round versus boxy) is playing a big role as I mentioned a few posts ago. I haven't given up yet, but it will probably be more complicated than correcting the estimate by a fixed value of 11%. I got that value from just a few knives. The way to actually do this is to measure hundreds of knives and look for patterns.

I don't have that much time to commit, but it certainly is cheaper than buying several knives. You made the correct point that there is no substitute for holding a knife in your hand. I was hoping my method would at least narrow the search, and it probably has helped a little.

In the meantime, I will take a best guess for my next purchase. I'll keep in mind your comments on what has worked for you. Right now I am looking for an all-purpose bushcrafting knife, and I think a Terrasaur is a good bet. Hopefully it fills my hand a little more than this beautiful Kephart.



Before someone says anything, yes it looks funny to hold a knife that way.

Karl
 
Hey Karl,

Thanks for your input in this thread. I admire your willingness to do some research and learn as much as possible about what model(s) are the best candidates for you given your long fingers. As carpenters say, "Measure twice and cut once." Mistakes are costly when you are working on a limited budget. Take your time and be patient until you know exactly what you are looking for. "Friday fever" can be an expensive disease if you don't have a plan.

I have cycled through a lot of Fiddleback models to learn that the most comfortable handles to me are a thicker handled Bushcrafter and the Camp Nessie. That opinion has stayed the same for over a year now. If I was smart, I should have listened to Nathan's voice of experience earlier because he came to the same conclusions months before I started my quest. Instead, I had to do it the hard way through a lot of trial and error. As Jim pointed out above, there is no substitute for hands on experience with the knives. That is true, but you can narrow the amount of trial and error you need to do by studying the writings and photos of those who have gone down this road before you to look for common threads.

Good luck with your ongoing research and future purchase decisions. Feel free to ask a lot of questions along the way and share your experience with the knives that you get. The more people contribute their experience, the better the community is here.

One more thing. If you get serious about this as a hobby, I recommend that you upgrade your membership level to Gold to support the forum and get the benefits of having a mailbox for sending and receiving personal messages (PM's) with other members. Some topics are better discussed one-on-one through a PM rather than a public post.

Thanks,

Phil
 
Comprehensivist said:
Hey Karl,

Thanks for your input in this thread. I admire your willingness to do some research and learn as much as possible about what model(s) are the best candidates for you given your long fingers. As carpenters say, "Measure twice and cut once." Mistakes are costly when you are working on a limited budget. Take your time and be patient until you know exactly what you are looking for. "Friday fever" can be an expensive disease if you don't have a plan.

I have cycled through a lot of Fiddleback models to learn that the most comfortable handles to me are a thicker handled Bushcrafter and the Camp Nessie. That opinion has stayed the same for over a year now. If I was smart, I should have listened to Nathan's voice of experience earlier because he came to the same conclusions months before I started my quest. Instead, I had to do it the hard way through a lot of trial and error. As Jim pointed out above, there is no substitute for hands on experience with the knives. That is true, but you can narrow the amount of trial and error you need to do by studying the writings and photos of those who have gone down this road before you to look for common threads.

Good luck with your ongoing research and future purchase decisions. Feel free to ask a lot of questions along the way and share your experience with the knives that you get. The more people contribute their experience, the better the community is here.

One more thing. If you get serious about this as a hobby, I recommend that you upgrade your membership level to Gold to support the forum and get the benefits of having a mailbox for sending and receiving personal messages (PM's) with other members. Some topics are better discussed one-on-one through a PM rather than a public post.

Thanks,

Phil
Click to expand...

Point taken. Thanks Phil for the kind words, and thanks everyone for bearing with me. Sorry if I got carried away.

Karl
 
Marl71 said:
Point taken. Thanks Phil for the kind words, and thanks everyone for bearing with me. Sorry if I got carried away.

Karl
Click to expand...

Karl,

I have more ideas and suggest we continue by PMs, if you upgrade to a paid membership that allows PMs. If you aren't sure whether you are ready to subscribe and are willing to state your email in a post, post it here and we can talk more, but I think you can post PMs with a Basic Membership, which is $10.

What Phil says is true -- about costly mistakes, membership, and the rest -- although the Bushcrafter was only one of two models that I knew right out of the box I was returning to the dealer. I've tried 15 models and spent a lot in transactions cost. Your posts and concerns have been thought provoking to me and worthwhile. Maybe my experience and costly mistakes can provide some lessons to you.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top