Hollow grind on large fighters?

Quiet Storm

Quiet Storm

Joined
May 17, 2002
Messages
5,757
Do you think that hollow ground blades on large fighters (with an overall length of 10+ inches) are a good idea in order to make the knife feel fast and light?
Or do you believe that a hollow grind weakens the edge too much?
 
Hmmm, I'm not a fan of hollowgrinds anyway, except on very fine cutting tools like caping knives, detail work knives, scalpels and razors. The idea of a hollowgrind on a large battel blade runs completely polar to my concept. I ascribe to many Bagwell ideas about combat knives - I like carbon steel, flat grinds, convex edges, distal tapers and broad blades for battle purposes - 8-12 inch blades depending on the terrain. I think the Camillus BK-9 is pretty close in terms of a factory knife, or the CS Trailmaster. I also like the Ontario Spec-Plus Survival Bowie.
Maybe backed up by a second or third knife for those other specialised work - a hawk, 4inch utility knife etc, tactical folder etc .

Those are my biases but I have to admit - with many modern steels like S30V, being the king of them all, blade breakage may be a fantasy rather than anything that happens in real life, hollow grind or not. If it works for you, use it.

Cheers. Jason.
 
Well, on the smaller end of your scale, 10 inches overall is not very big at all, and unless it was made from stock a half inch thick, it will be plenty light and quick without hollow grinds. If we start talking about something around 20" long, then perhaps hollow grinds might be an option if quickness is a priority.

Keep in mind that the grinds are a lesser part of the equation when it comes to cutting. Edge geometry is what makes the blade cut for its intended purpose, and the edge geometry can be controlled separate from the grinds.

Also, when it comes to weight and quickness, we can't always assume a lighter blade will be quicker. If the maker knows what he's doing, he will include the proper tapers in the grinds to make the blade naturally well balanced. He can also do tricks with the weight of the pommel to fine tune the blade for speed or whatever you want to do, but the blade must be properly built for the purpose first. Now, to make a very generalized statement, I'd say on average, a smith who makes big flat ground or convex ground blades will probably still produce a knife that feels more lively in the hand than a stock removal hollow ground knife of similar size. Reason: chances are the smith put in the proper tapers since it's so easy with a hammer, while stock removal makers rarely do, but rather leave lots of dead weight on the spine near the front of the knife.

I'll also say I have a flat ground Rio Grande camp knife, or spear point Bowie, that's 18" long. That sucker is quicker than the dickens! (very low moment of inertia) It used to be 21" long and balanced so the natural center of percussion was near the point. When 3" were broken off the tip, it shifted the balance point (and accompanying centers of rotation) pretty far back. Now it completely sucks as a chopper, but that point is lightning quick for thrusts. (again, be reminded of the compromises involved when making a blade very good at one thing)
 
Thanks for the replies so far, please keep 'em coming.

Jason,
I was talking about fighters, not what is generally referred to as combat knives.

John,
Jerry Hossom's knives are the reason why I've been re-thinking the issue of hollow grinds on large knives...I usually prefer flat ground blades - but Jerry's reportedly lightning-fast knives (and damn good lookin') really got me thinking.

the possum,
I was talking about knives with an OAL of 10+ inches, not necessarily just 10 inches.
 
You need to define what you mean by "fighter". Many people use that term generically for a large fixed blade. If, by fighter you mean a blade whose sole purpose is geared toward an offensive attack, with defensive characteristics secondary to none existent; or are you referring to a large fixed blade that can be carried and used to do many tasks, such as utility work, self defense or offensive. Once defined, it is much easier to answer your question.

the possum - I understand what your saying about what a good smith can do with a knife, but you are making a generalization that isn't accurate. Someone skilled at stock removal can easily accomplish the same thing. While not a large blade by the stnadards given here, Al Polkowski's Bulldog is a larage fixed blade that is one of the best feeling blade I have ever held, it feels very light and moves with extreme ease, it feels like an extension of your body. Jerry Hossom is another who makes a very well balanced blade. Darrel Ralph as well. Most of the makers you see on the forums have the skill to accomplish this. At the same time, a lesser skilled smith would have a hard time even coming close to accomplishing any of these things. It all comes down to skill of the maker.
 
My definition is a knife like those Jerry Hossom makes. Or something along the lines of a CS Black Bear Classic.
I don't think that there's a difference between "offensive" and "defensive" knives, because all fighters need to be suited to "attack", even if that attack is just a response to a BG's attack and therefore a defensive move.
 
I actually agree with you about the really isn't a difference about offensive or defensive blade. I have had people here and on different forums explain what they felt the differences are. For them and the level of skill they might have I could see that. For me and my level, there isn't much of a difference. If the knife will not be seeing any utility use, then you are losing nothing in a large hollow ground blade and are actually gaining the advantage of possible finer slicing edge. There isn't even a problem with light utility tasks.
 
Originally posted by Quiet Storm

John,
Jerry Hossom's knives are the reason why I've been re-thinking the issue of hollow grinds on large knives...I usually prefer flat ground blades - but Jerry's reportedly lightning-fast knives (and damn good lookin') really got me thinking.
Click to expand...

Hossom's knives affected me the same way (they just blow me away in every size catagory. WICKED). The mere mention of a fighter, however, especially one like the CS Black Bear, automatically brings this Geno Denning to mind, which ain't exactly chopped liver. Sure wish I had that kind of moolah to spare.

http://bladeart.com/artists/geno_denning/geno_denning.htm
 
Dang, that sub-hilt by Denning is a fantaastic looking knife.

As has been mentioned, I don't think you need to have a large blade hollow ground to make it quick in the hand. As long as the blade has a properly done distal taper, a flat grind will be light and quick enough. On a big fighter, I think the choice of hollow or flat grind will usually be a matter of personal preference.
 
Originally posted by Dirk

the possum - I understand what your saying about what a good smith can do with a knife, but you are making a generalization that isn't accurate. Someone skilled at stock removal can easily accomplish the same thing. While not a large blade by the stnadards given here, Al Polkowski's Bulldog is a larage fixed blade that is one of the best feeling blade I have ever held, it feels very light and moves with extreme ease, it feels like an extension of your body. Jerry Hossom is another who makes a very well balanced blade. Darrel Ralph as well. Most of the makers you see on the forums have the skill to accomplish this. At the same time, a lesser skilled smith would have a hard time even coming close to accomplishing any of these things. It all comes down to skill of the maker.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, yes. I know. That's why I said I was making a very broad generalization. I knew I shouldn't have said it. :footinmou

I guess the main point I was trying to get across is, you can't assume a hollow ground knife will be lighter or quicker than a flat or convex ground knife of similar size. It all depends on the skill of the maker.

Another thing occured to me. Is this blade supposed to be purpose built for speed only? Or is it supposed to be quick, while at the same time fairly good at __________ ? (fill in the blank) Don't forget the basics. Blade shape has a lot to do with performance. If you want only speed, a long, flat ground, extremely slender dagger, (say- a blade 12" long, but only a half inch wide) can still be made quicker than a thin hollow ground Bowie blade of the same length. So, do ya want speed only, or do you want a quick knife that can also slash or chop?
 
I consider a knife fight a once-in-a-lifetime event so I don't worry about the edge durability of a fighting knife much. In civilian circles your knife would probably end up in an evidence locker or you'd be out ditching it somewhere so I assume a knife needs to perform its defensive role a total of one time.

What I want in a large or small fighting knife is absolute razor sharpness (except I'll go back and put a little tooth on the edge after stropping). I particularly want it to effortlessly slice through any kind of jacket material (particularly leather). I want the slightest touch of the edge to open flesh like a scalpel. For me hollow ground is best. I would also go with a broader thinner blade than is common. My slash tests indicate that the belly of the blade is critical. I don't want that real thick.
 
Originally posted by Keith Montgomery
Dang, that sub-hilt by Denning is a fantaastic looking knife.
Click to expand...

I don't look at that picture very often because every time I do, I need to use a bathtowel to dry the drool off my keyboard. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top