Hiking knife RC-3 or RC-4 ??

W

wiiawiwb

Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
56
Hi everyone. I am in need of a knife for hiking. I rarely backpack any more but hike alone almost every weekend.

I like the idea of the HEST but am not sure it would be legal in my state (NYS) so, for now, I'm not going to take a chance. I will decide between the RC-3 and the RC-4.

My gut tells me the RC-3 would be better, as it would be lighter, but there's the nagging voice telling me that in a true survival situation you'd wish you had the RC-4.

Any thoughts?
 
Go for the 4 its a Great knife and i have both and totally would take the 4 over the 3, i also have the 6 which is actually my favorite and actually ""carry" that and the 4 sleeps in my pack till needed. I too live in NY and never had any problems.
 
Not sure why the HEST would be a legal problem but the bigger 4 wouldnt? I'm not too good on New York laws, but that seems strange to me.
 
The 3 is hard to beat man. I use the both for general outdoors, just a matter of which one I feel like carrying that day, but when I want to prep tinder or food I almost always go for the 3. Like most others will say, you're going to wind up with both sooner or later :) I'd start with the 3 though, and go from there. In a true survival situation its not what you have, its what you have with you and how you use it. Good luck.
 
The 4 is only about 5/8 ths of an inch longer... no big deal.

Having said that, I'd go with the 3 for hiking if yo are doing a multi day backpacking trip just to shave a little weight. In the end, every once adds up to that 50lbs most of us carry for a week in the woods.
 
So far, the 3 is my favorite knife hands down, but honestly, the Izula, the HEST, the 3 or 4 are all fine hiking knives. Just about any of them will get the job done for you, and in case you didn't know this, the #1 most used knife for thru hikers is.... The Swiss Army Camper or Huntsman (don't remember which).

I can't picture any scenario in which you would find that you would have been better off with the 4 over the 3, or vise versa. I think it is purely a comfort and matter of taste for each person, verses a true functionality question.

A year or so ago, Rat had a contest on here about PSK's, where you could only take a pocket kit and a RC blade. At the time all I had was the RC-3, so I took it. I was surprised that even thou I didn't have my bigger TAK-1 or any one of my larger blades, the 3 handled everything I needed it to do (better then any other part of my PSK kit).
 
I love my 3, but if you have really large hands the 4 might be a bit better as it has a longer handle.
 
I'd go for the 3. Thinner blade slices better and is still plenty strong enough as long as you dont try to disassemble a tank, baton through a house, or some other such tomfoolery. Jeff himself maintains that the 3 is the best knife in the ESEE lineup.
 
I really like the H•E•S•T for hiking, but it sounds as if you're concerned about legalities in your area, so I'll leave it alone.

As others have mentioned, the ESEE-3 or ESEE-4 would work. They actually both have the same handle, but the 4 feels slightly different as the blade is thicker. I personally prefer the 4 because it is a bit more stout and comes with a Kydex sheath. But I also use this for my camping knife and I prefer to hike trails that are a bit less traveled. Realistically, the Izula would serve 95% of what you would need on a standard hike.

You might want to consider carry options in addition to the knife before you buy. I think the Molle back adds a bit of versatility, depending on your gear. These are available for both the 3 and the 4.

The good (and bad) thing about ESEE knives is that there are multiple styles to fit everyone's taste/preferences.
 
I'ld go with the 4. I have one I take hiking. It's a great all around knife. I also suggest you invest in the molle back.
 
wiiawiwb said:
Hi everyone. I am in need of a knife for hiking. I rarely backpack any more but hike alone almost every weekend.

I like the idea of the HEST but am not sure it would be legal in my state (NYS) so, for now, I'm not going to take a chance. I will decide between the RC-3 and the RC-4.

My gut tells me the RC-3 would be better, as it would be lighter, but there's the nagging voice telling me that in a true survival situation you'd wish you had the RC-4.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

You might start by deciding what you will actually do with your knife while hiking. For me, a knife is dead weight 90% of the time, used for food prep 9% of the time, and 1% for all other uses.

Limited to these two knives, I would choose the RC-3 because it's lighter, thinner, and better for preparing food. In a survival situation, which is unlikely, I would make do. In practice, I very seldom carry more than a 3 oz/3" folder for hiking, and I own an RC-4. However, in a true survival situation, I'd wish I had a chain saw.
 
I will be carrying it solely for survival.purposes. If I get lost, break a leg, etc I would need it to use to cut branches, strike my ferrocerium rod, make kindling and other survival needs.

It won't be used as a "camp knife" to cut meat, food and other related camping activities.
 
gwlee said:
In practice, I very seldom carry more than a 3 oz/3" folder for hiking, and I own an RC-4. However, in a true survival situation, I'd wish I had a chain saw.
Click to expand...

Well said, I would also think that the 3 would be very useful and meet all your "normal" needs. I was thinking about all this survival situation discussion and how everyone talks about what you need out of a knife. While I agree with many of them a large camp knife is great, but would you have it on you at all times in case this "survival" situation comes up?

Then I got to thinking, I have never heard a true survival situation where the person comes out saying damn I'm so glad I had that Rambo survival/Tom Brown tracker or whatever knife you need to survive. It is always just, "damn I'm glad I had a knife." Now don't get me wrong if I'm hiking up to 5-6 thousand feet in May, I will have a chopper of some kind(axe, machete,10in blade). Dry wood is not always easy to find in 5ft of snow.

In a true survival situation I would also wish for a chain saw and splitting maul. I would get by with any knife I had. Knowledge is king, pick the one that you like the most, ie fits your hand, weight restrictions, and personal taste. When in doubt go with your gut!
 
It's a toss up... either one will do just fine. :thumbup:
Try to handle both and see which one "speaks to you". ;)
 
wiiawiwb said:
I will be carrying it solely for survival.purposes. If I get lost, break a leg, etc I would need it to use to cut branches, strike my ferrocerium rod, make kindling and other survival needs.

It won't be used as a "camp knife" to cut meat, food and other related camping activities.
Click to expand...

In the context of my day hiking adventures, "food prep" means making a fresh sandwich on the trail rather than eating a soggy mess that's been in my pack for six hours, so a knife is not essential, but it's useful, and it's available in an emergency, so I MIGHT carry a knife on a day hike, if it doesn't weigh too much or take up too much room. For me, a small folder is ideal.

If you are concerned about not having enough knife to survive in an emergency, or you go hiking for the opportunity to carry a knife and practice your survival skills, you might prefer the RC-4, which is marketed as a small "wilderness survival" knife.
 
wiiawiwb said:
I will be carrying it solely for survival.purposes. If I get lost, break a leg, etc I would need it to use to cut branches, strike my ferrocerium rod, make kindling and other survival needs.

It won't be used as a "camp knife" to cut meat, food and other related camping activities.
Click to expand...

I'd still get the 3. It meets all those criteria. I'm pretty sold on the thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top