hmm, this could get intersesting.

[Fonly]

Well, I got to thinking today (as you all know I do from time to time )
I wanted to have a contructive Debate over how much more efficent a 7" knife, foldig saw and a sak, could be over an axe and small knfie. What benifits are there, when a knife, saw and sak are used, rather than an axe and a knife.

Anyways, I was thinking about what is the ultimate Fixed blade, in the 7" range, for the price, materials used, and over all form and function.
Now, the reason this coms to mind, is that as some have said in the past, its nice to have that knife, that works in between the axe and a small knife (7" well say) I know that I have many times not wanted to use an axe, due to a number of reasons, so I've used a folding saw, and a 7 inch blade.
The reason for this is because, the amount of weight that it takes to carry an axe and a smaller knife, you could reduce half or almost, by carrying a folding saw and a 7" knife and a sak.
Sawing your wood, then batoning it with a large knife.

So, what chores are needed while in a survival situation, or just plain hiking?
Well, to start things, whynot shelter building and weight. The weight of a saw and 7" knife are going to weigh less than an axe right off the bat, which is of course a great thing.
Now, What are resonable sizes for the supplies going to be used in a shelter? A 2"-3" Support Limb would be enough, then their are the small brushings, and diffrent scraps need for the finishings, this would apply from an A frame, to a lean to. A saw would work great for those limbs, and the smaller small limbs, less energy needed, and lets face it, alot safer.
Then we come to fire building, Now, I personally have used an axe for many years. To be honest, ive used for pretty much everything, But i know there have been a few times that it would have been nice, to just saw up some wood, rather than taking the energy to chop it up. Now, true you can chop wood while out'n'about, but is it not safer to saw the wood, the baton it?

I mean, what are some reasons that you guys can think of, that an axe is going to be better, and suite needs better than a folding saw and a 7" blade?
How much safer is it going to be to use a knife and saw rather than an axe?


In a little bit, I wanted to get into modes of carry as well.

 

[JimMLa]

On a canoe trip with a group of people in a well used area, the only fire wood we could find other than twigs was fallen trees. We took turns with the axe and made a nice fire. Totally unneeded, but it was fun. I don't think a small saw would have been up to the job. Also, no one carried the axe when we did short hikes.

 

[Fonly]

On a canoe trip with a group of people in a well used area, the only fire wood we could find other than twigs was fallen trees. We took turns with the axe and made a nice fire. Totally unneeded, but it was fun. I don't think a small saw would have been up to the job. Also, no one carried the axe when we did short hikes.

how large were the trees? A saw with a 6"blade like a gerber or fiskars may have worked?

 

[JimMLa]

Pretty big. It took several of us to drag/roll the cut pieces to the camp, and we took turns on the axe. Again, it was more for fun than being needed. We also left a nice pile of wood for whoever came along after us.

 

[Fonly]

Pretty big. It took several of us to drag/roll the cut pieces to the camp, and we took turns on the axe. Again, it was more for fun than being needed. We also left a nice pile of wood for whoever came along after us.

Ok, well there ya go, a reason for an axe.

 

[hikeeba]

Fonly, for this exercise, are you referring to a full-sized axe or say something like a 14" hatchet?

 

[Fonly]

smallest, I would say 17". I use a 19" wetterlings, so.

 

[roughedges]

for felling and splitting a large(r) tree I prefer a full size axe to a large knife and a large knife to a hatchet. Of the three, I am usually found with the large knife. No saw for the most part, I've found I can do dang near anything that needs doing with one of the knives I carry on me.

If I were just going out to clear lanes or a trail then I'd take a machete and hatchet. Or just a khukuri, I seldom get to play with one of mine. For a good long walk though, for me, nothing beats the combo of a large knife (7"), small knife and a sak. And if I'm not going too far from civilization, I'll even sometimes leave the large knife at home.

 

[Fonly]

Yeah, mabye to clarify more. Lets say your going on a trip, acrost a lake, then a 5 km hike into a favorite camping spot or something.
You would most likly have an axe (if you take one) attached to your pack.
Where as, your knife (7") would be on your belt. And heck even the saw could be attached to your belt, though I keep my saw in a psk, that rides inder my left arm.

 

[frank k]

The basic combination that I keep coming back to is a 3 ½ to 5” fixed blade knife and a SAK or a multitool with a saw.


I tried a few 7” knives (a BK7, Ka-Bar and a Bushman) against the smallest SAK saw I have (Vic. Lumberjack) and I found that the little SAK saw was a much safer, more efficient and generally a faster “chopper” than any of the 7” blades.


If I feel the need for more than a 3 ½-5” knife and a SAK saw, I’ll add a folding saw and/or a machete. The only time I would want a full sized axe is for four wheeling off road and then only as a backup for a chain saw. Hatchets are fine for hunting or canoe trips and car camping, but they are too heavy to for me to carry very far and a 3.4 oz. Fiskars sliding saw can safely handle any wood cutting I am likely to need short of building a log cabin, feeding a wood stove or cutting up a big tree blocking a road.





- Frank

 

[roughedges]

in that circumstance I would probably be loaded out for backwoods luxury. I don't believe I'd take a full size axe though. Any tree fall so low over the water that I'd even think about cutting it... well, I'd rather use a chain saw. or just go over it. And I won't fell a live tree unless its dying, my situation is critical, or its on my own land- so a felling axe is pretty much out.

Although, most watercraft can carry so much gear and 5km is such a short hike that I might just take a hatchet and large knife both. and fresh food and a whole cook set and some wine to share with my lady.

heh. generally, whenever I am in a canoe I'm taking much more gear then I need! I'd stow both the large knife and hatchet though and just keep a small fixed blade on my belt.

 

[bulgron]

The basic combination that I keep coming back to is a 3 ½ to 5” fixed blade knife and a SAK or a multitool with a saw.

Yes. My trio for serious multiday hiking is a LM, a 3.5" neck knife, and a 5.5" belt knife. If I'm doing a simple day hike, I might leave the neck knife at home since it exists only for backup purposes.

I have yet to find the outdoors chore, including shelter building and firewood gathering, that I cannot perform with that trio.

But take me to the desert and I'll probably add a machete to the mix, just because of all the pointy things to be dealt with there.

So if I'm hiking, what do I need an axe or a 7" blade for? I keep reading these threads waiting for someone to say "and HERE'S a reason why you need to go bigger," but so far no one has.

Not that I'm trying to slam anyone or criticizing anyone for going bigger. It's just that I can't figure out why as a matter of habit anyone would bother to carry bigger than 5". Heck, plenty of people get by on 4". Heck, Les on SurvivorMan gets by on just a LM. Frankly, I keep thinking that my 5.5" belt knife is on the too-big side by about an inch.

Again, I'm not trying to criticize. I'm curious. That's all.

I'll go back to lurking on these threads now.

 

[Fonly]

Yes. My trio for serious multiday hiking is a LM, a 3.5" neck knife, and a 5.5" belt knife. If I'm doing a simple day hike, I might leave the neck knife at home since it exists only for backup purposes.

I have yet to find the outdoors chore, including shelter building and firewood gathering, that I cannot perform with that trio.

But take me to the desert and I'll probably add a machete to the mix, just because of all the pointy things to be dealt with there.

So if I'm hiking, what do I need an axe or a 7" blade for? I keep reading these threads waiting for someone to say "and HERE'S a reason why you need to go bigger," but so far no one has.

Not that I'm trying to slam anyone or criticizing anyone for going bigger. It's just that I can't figure out why as a matter of habit anyone would bother to carry bigger than 5". Heck, plenty of people get by on 4". Heck, Les on SurvivorMan gets by on just a LM. Frankly, I keep thinking that my 5.5" belt knife is on the too-big side by about an inch.

Again, I'm not trying to criticize. I'm curious. That's all.

I'll go back to lurking on these threads now.

No, thats a fair statment, like I said I wanted some constructive comments. So, Why the need for a 7" knife, well, I can say that it comes in handy for spliting wood, to get to the dry stuff. Its allways nice to have that extra 2" for spliting. Also, its usful when taking down smaller saplings, or things like that.

 

[roughedges]

bulgron: I don't think there is any such thing as one right knife. It entirely depends on the individual, the environment, etc. I mean, most all of us could make do with a sak classic or some flaked obsidian but what would be the point of that except to train oneself enough so as not to become too dependent on the knife you would normally carry, regardless of its size?

But its really all a matter of personal preference. Any two given people, given sufficient skill, could certainly make do with the same knife but that does not mean that their opinions of using it will be the same. "It should be smaller." "No, it should be bigger." I'm rambling no doubt but what it coems down to- opinions differ.

That being said, and in my opinion only, I do believe that there are things a large knife can do that a smaller one can't- at least not as well. of course, the same can be said for a smaller blade also. So, I don't worry at all about which is better, or which I need to be carrying, and usually carry both.

 

[bulgron]

That being said, and in my opinion only, I do believe that there are things a large knife can do that a smaller one can't- at least not as well. of course, the same can be said for a smaller blade also. So, I don't worry at all about which is better, or which I need to be carrying, and usually carry both.

What I'm looking for is, what are those things?

Here's my thinking: For most civilian non-commerical outdoor activities, the goal is to go lighter whenever possible. This is why, for example, I don't carry a hatchet around; I don't normally need it. In fact, I never feel the need for one.

So I'm off on a normal, routine hike and something happens. I get lost. I get hurt. I get stuck. So now I need to make fire and build a shelter. If I have a LM with a saw and a 5"-ish belt knife, how am I disadvanted as opposed to carrying a 7" belt knife?

I can get bigger wood, is that it? But as a matter of strategy, I don't need or want bigger wood. I want to work quickly so I'm probably focusing on smaller wood, wood that I can get with the 5" blade and/or the LM saw.

Maybe the problem is that I'm not thinking about the right environment? I mean, I know that I don't like to go to the desert without an 18" machete. So is there an environment in which routine hiking activities would be best supported by a tool in the 6" - 10" category? If so, do tell.

BTW, obviously some activities require bigger tools than 5". For example, trail building. But even there I leap up into the 10" category. And if you think you're going to be chopping a lot of wood, then I suspect you should go all the way to an axe, if not a gas-powered chainsaw.

That 6" - 10" category continues to puzzle me. I mean, I can completely dig it if the answer is, "I just like blades in that size." But that's a completely different answer from, "Really, you'd benefit from that bigger size."

So I continue to seek enlightenment. Thank you for your patience.

 

[roughedges]

As far as I know, on this issue there is no enlightenment to be found. Personal preferences differ. If they didn't, I figure there would be a lot of knifemakers seeking employment. Or at least the knife world would be a very boring place.

Like I said before, its a matter of personal preference. The entire point of my above post was only to explain that what is needed is very far from what one wants. I would even argue that your own personal preference is far beyond what anyone truly needs on a hike of any length. After all, for thousands of years our ancestors made do with any sharp edge that they could fabricate, usually from stone. In that sense, it occurs to me that all that any knowledgeable outdoorsman needs is the right stone and the knowledge/hand-eye coordination to fracture it correctly.

Anything beyond that is a matter of personal preference.


Do you understand my point, bulgron? If you don't think you need a larger knife, you don't need a larger knife. hell, I know I don't need one but I carry one anyway because I like having it around. for me, theres something to be said about a knife that can limb 2-4" branches every bit as well as an axe and still handle a multitude of other chores. Like I said, its subjective and anyone else's mmv.

edit: didn't mean not to answer all your questions.

What I'm looking for is, what are those things?

IMO, a big knife is better for: fire duty, digging a hole for latrine, shelter contruction (though I will use both ), batoning wood, etc and worse for the finer skilled tasks like kitchen duty, game prep, whittling for fun or survival, etc.

If I have a LM with a saw and a 5"-ish belt knife, how am I disadvanted as opposed to carrying a 7" belt knife?

I don't believe you are at all.

And, for me, environment changes my load out very little. Except for trail building or deep jungle I'll never carry a machete, I find they are often a nuisance for me, never found a comfortable way that I could carry one except in my hand. But a 7" blade doesn't bother me at all.

 

[bulgron]

Do you understand my point, bulgron?

Yes, I understand your point on personal preference completely. After all, thousands of people go hiking every year without even so much as a SAK on them, and it all works out for them in the end.

I guess what I'm looking for is that one good argument that I can use to justify purchasing that bigger knife. Still haven't heard it. But I'll keep looking.

 

[roughedges]

Yes, I understand your point on personal preference completely. After all, thousands of people go hiking every year without even so much as a SAK on them, and it all works out for them in the end.

I guess what I'm looking for is that one good argument that I can use to justify purchasing that bigger knife. Still haven't heard it.

Well, you won't get one from me. My opinion, you'll never know whether you like a larger knife unless you try one out for a couple days in the woods. It may or may not be your thing but me, or anyone else, saying this or that shouldn't influence your opinion in the slightest. In fact, I'll do my best not to let it.

 

[Fonly]

I guess what I'm looking for is that one good argument that I can use to justify purchasing that bigger knife. Still haven't heard it. But I'll keep looking.

well, other than shelter, fire prep, is eaiser. i mean, True mundain task, a multitool and a 5" blade is fine. But what is mundain?
Walking down your favorite trail, or trkking through the brush.

Thats what im talking about, for sure if im on a trail, thats allready made, than all I'll have is a multitool and a 4"knife.


So, to set it up again, Were on a trip acrost the lake, the to take a trip in the woods with no trails, your not so much blazing a trail, but its the woods. You get to where you want to setup camp, what would you find the Best, "middle" of the road setup?.

 

[foxyrick]

I was given a 6" bowie knife when I was ten. I really got used to the feel of it and it went everywhere in the woods with me. It was, apart from a few folders, my only knife; so it got used for everything. Chopping included as I didn't have a saw or hatchet to build my 'dens' or chop firewood.

I still like the feel of a good blade around 6" long as my 'primary' user. However, that is purely personal preferance; it's what I'm most used to handling.

I don't think that it offers any real advantage over a smaller (4" or so) fixed blade plus a SAK saw (the longer, locking SAK's). If I knew that I was likely to cut more wood, I would like a larger folding saw so as not to put too much strain on the little SAK. The smaller fixed blade is for heavier jobs than I trust the folding blade on the SAK for.

So, in a 'woods survival' situation, the 4" fixed blade plus SAK would really cover it all for me. I could even get along with just the SAK.

The bigger blades might be more fun, or a good big chopper might be useful if you want to build a log cabin. That's getting away from the 'survival' issue though, which is a case of staying alive short-term.

If it's camping that we're talking about, rather than survival, I would always have a bigger blade with me; weight regardless. It's not really needed, but I like it and would enjoy chopping branches for the fire instead of sawing them. It's sort of, more 'primal'. 'Man Makes Fire' type of feeling! But do I get any practical advantage from the larger blade? No.

On a final note, I find it *really* difficult to think of 'just one knife', or even just two. When I go backpacking, I'll always have at least two fixed blades (4" plus huge chopper), maybe three (add a nice 6"er). Plus a SAK or two! I never quite got the knack of 'lightweight' hiking.

Just my opinions, for what they're worth.

Rick.