Hollow grinds: Why are they so hated???

J

JD Spydo

Joined
Nov 20, 2004
Messages
4,827
For the past 3 years I have observed that when people are in the knife buying and knife trading mode they more often than not turn up their noses at any blade you put on the table that has a "HOLLOW GRIND" :confused: I had 2 Spyderco Chinook II models that had hollow grinds for trade; but at the same time I also had a flat grind Chinook III and they just went out of their way to trade for the Chinook III and seemingly could have cared less about the Chinook II with the hollow grind.

That is just one of many, many examples of the disdain I hear throughout the cutlery community in their abhorence for Hollow Grind Blades :confused: .

Frankly I just don't get it. Now I do like FLAT Grind blades and several other blade geometries as far as that goes. And the hollow grind blades I have in my USER arsenal are blades I really like too. But usually 4 out of 5 people on the Forums simply hate "hollow grinds" So what's the deal? Is it all just aesthetics? Or is it just a growing trend? I truly want to know why??????
 
From wikipedia - "It produces a very sharp edge but being so thin the edge is more prone to rolling or damage than other grinds. It is unsuited to heavy chopping or cutting hard materials."
 
Yep. If I know that a given knife will be a dedicated slicer, a hollow grind is fine. But for an outdoor fixed blade, which might have to be batoned through wood or used to chop in a survival situation, or for an EDC folder that might also need to be used for some ungodly purpose*, I prefer a flat grind.


*I don't advocate abusing knives or using them as prybars, etc, but if I'm in an emergency situation, I want to be know my blade will handle a tough job, even if that tough job is its last. :o
 
4W4K3 said:
From wikipedia - "It produces a very sharp edge but being so thin the edge is more prone to rolling or damage than other grinds. It is unsuited to heavy chopping or cutting hard materials."
Click to expand...

That's great information there "4W4K3" and I think that was at one time truly the case. And to a certain degree I can sort of agree with it. But with all of these newer super steels that they have I think that performance is greatly enhanced by newer technolgies in metallurgy which make some of these principles and properties better than they used to be.

Why even straight razors were mostly made with "hollow grinds". But they weren't made or designed for rough use either. But if you take that Spyderco Chinook II model I mentioned with S30V blade steel I don't think you are going to have the same problem with it as you would a Buck or Ka-bar from back in the 70s or 80s era. I do indeed agree that a flat grind would probably hold an edge a bit longer than a hollow grind. But with today's newer steels I don't think it's much of an issue anymore.
 
JD Spydo said:
That's great information there "4W4K3" and I think that was at one time truly the case. And to a certain degree I can sort of agree with it. But with all of these newer super steels that they have I think that performance is greatly enhanced by newer technolgies in metallurgy which make some of these principles and properties better than they used to be.

Why even straight razors were mostly made with "hollow grinds". But they weren't made or designed for rough use either. But if you take that Spyderco Chinook II model I mentioned with S30V blade steel I don't think you are going to have the same problem with it as you would a Buck or Ka-bar from back in the 70s or 80s era. I do indeed agree that a flat grind would probably hold an edge a bit longer than a hollow grind. But with today's newer steels I don't think it's much of an issue anymore.
Click to expand...

I was actually going to reply further with just about what you said. That wiki idea is one formed a while back when there was a lot less steel available. Today the steel is stronger and holds an edge better, but the idea still sticks. Prospective buyers need to experience a hollow grind blade all over again to break that line of thinking.
 
In fact, I prefer them most times.

Two of my all time favorite folders are the Spyderco Pacific Salt and the Buck 110.
Both hollow-grinds and both are excellent performers.

Flat-grinds are nice too, but in a 4" folder I don't see that it makes much difference.
 
I think some people say they hate them because they have seen other people say it. I doubt some, if asked, could identify different grinds correctly. This band-wagon mentality is common in any community type situation. So are you still selling those Spyderco Chinook IIs? Kidding...only kidding....I don't want to get infractionized. :D
 
4W4K3 said:
From wikipedia - "It produces a very sharp edge but being so thin the edge is more prone to rolling or damage than other grinds. It is unsuited to heavy chopping or cutting hard materials."
Click to expand...

Wikipedia, good call. I have not used this website much but found an interesting overview of all the various knife grinds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grind

Also, found the below. Both are good references.
http://www.agrussell.com/knife_information/knife_encyclopedia/articles/blade_geometry_faq.html
 
For cutting meat, you can't beat a hollow-grind. Just look at the Doziers (hollow grind)....they slice forever...well, almost forever.
Anything else, you need either a flat or convex grind; the hollow ground edge just won't hold up to much abuse.
 
Aren't all the Chris Reeve folders (Mnandi and Sebs) hollow grinds? I know the Mnadi folders are for sure and I've seen no complaints on edge retention...the steel is S30V to the point made above.
 
Taken from knifeart.com

- The Hollow Grind

The hollow grind is done by taking two concave scoops out of the side of the blade. Many production companies use this grind, because it's easier to design machines to do it. But many custom makers grind this way as well. Its great advantage is that the edge is extraordinarily thin, and thin edges slice better. The disadvantage is that the thinner the edge, the weaker it is. Hollow ground edges can chip or roll over in harder use. And the hollow ground edge can't penetrate too far for food-type chopping, because the edge gets non-linearly thicker as it nears the spine.

For designs where slicing is important, but the slice doesn't need to go too deep, this grind is an excellent choice. Many hunting knives are hollow ground, because field dressing is often best done with a knife that slices exceptionally well through soft tissues. Unfortunately, if you hit a bone, you can chip the edge, so the flat grind (see below) is also used often.

Another advantage of the hollow ground knife, at least at the beginning, is ease of sharpening. Most hollow grinds thicken slightly towards the edge. That means that as you sharpen (at least at first), the blade gets thinner and easier to sharpen. After this, however, the blade begins thickening non-linearly and sharpening will become more difficult.

The ultimate push cutter, the straight razor, is usually hollow ground.
 
JD Spydo said:
That's great information there "4W4K3" and I think that was at one time truly the case. And to a certain degree I can sort of agree with it. But with all of these newer super steels that they have I think that performance is greatly enhanced by newer technolgies in metallurgy which make some of these principles and properties better than they used to be.

Why even straight razors were mostly made with "hollow grinds". But they weren't made or designed for rough use either. But if you take that Spyderco Chinook II model I mentioned with S30V blade steel I don't think you are going to have the same problem with it as you would a Buck or Ka-bar from back in the 70s or 80s era. I do indeed agree that a flat grind would probably hold an edge a bit longer than a hollow grind. But with today's newer steels I don't think it's much of an issue anymore.
Click to expand...

? compare the strength of a Chinook II in hollow to a Chinook III in flat. It still applies, especially since you're dealing with the exact same steel in different geometries. One leaves more steel behind the edge when compared to the other.
 
JD Spydo said:
That's great information there "4W4K3" and I think that was at one time truly the case. And to a certain degree I can sort of agree with it. But with all of these newer super steels that they have I think that performance is greatly enhanced by newer technolgies in metallurgy which make some of these principles and properties better than they used to be.

Why even straight razors were mostly made with "hollow grinds". But they weren't made or designed for rough use either. But if you take that Spyderco Chinook II model I mentioned with S30V blade steel I don't think you are going to have the same problem with it as you would a Buck or Ka-bar from back in the 70s or 80s era. I do indeed agree that a flat grind would probably hold an edge a bit longer than a hollow grind. But with today's newer steels I don't think it's much of an issue anymore.
Click to expand...

Leaving razors aside (it is contrary to the point you are making), can't go with the logic here. No matter the steel improvements, other grinds will still prove sturdier than the hollow grind. You have a point that the difference may not mean much practically today, with a given knife people want it to be as sturdy as possible, at least for some applications. It's not as though people had an arbitrary amount of sturdiness arrived at in the 19th century (or whenever) that only a non-hollow ground knife would have which is now exceeded by the steel quality.
 
For my small slicers, a good hollow grind can't be beat. Don't forget that it sharpens quicker also. For larger knives, I like flat.
 
4W4K3 said:
From wikipedia - "It produces a very sharp edge but being so thin the edge is more prone to rolling or damage than other grinds. It is unsuited to heavy chopping or cutting hard materials."
Click to expand...

Just a note on the hollow grind. Chris Reeve's fixed blades are generally though to be quite capable of hard use. Strider's tanto style knives are also hollow ground, or maybe used to be. Hollow grinds can be as strong or weak as the one grinding them wants. 1/4" bar stock with a 1/16" deep hollow taken out of both sides is still hollow ground, but easily capable of the tasks listed above. These styles of hollow grinds dont slice any better than flat grinds, especially thinner flat grinds, and they sure dont sharpen easier because of the amount of metal that has to be removed to do it. There are such wide ranges of geometry that the properties of a certain grind type (hollow, flat, convex) are pretty much up to the grinder and limited by the stock thickness and width.
 
Heres' how I separate the hollow and flat grind. On a deep hollow grind, the more you use and sharpen the blade, thickness stays the same. On a flat grind, the higher you go , the thicker it gets. That is why I prefer hollow grind plus it looks cool !!:thumbup:
 
The popularity of the Flat grind, and more so the convex grind has by a large margin come from the ABS Rules. As this forum is largely geared to the Smithed blade, It only stands to reason that it would be preferred here. Go somewhere else, and you will find the opposite. People by and large don't hate either type. They are just different way to get to an end. Or edge- Haa! Both have they're places. And always will. For the heavy task, or for the unskilled user, a heavy flat will work in most cases. For fine work, in skilled hands, the hollow excels.
 
Hollow grinds bind in deep cuts in stiff materials compared to other grinds.

Phil
 
I don't have any hollow grinds anymore, except for my grandfather's straight razor. Even my Dozier was ordered with a flat grind.:p

But having said that, I don't buy knives for chopping or prying. I insist on hair splitting sharpness for my knives. Some say that a true razor edge weakens the edge. I don't know, but I don't care either. I carry a small belt axe for chopping and prying. My knives are for cutting, and only for cutting.

I can replace a belt axe for far less money than a Dozier or Bark River. And the axe is greatly superior to a knife for splitting wood. I shudder at the thought of "batonning" a fine blade through a piece of wood!:barf:

Ben
 
Low saber hollow grinds get hung up on and bind in dense material much more readily.

That's all there is to it... cut anything besides meat or floppy stuff, all else being equal (stock thickness, final edge thickness and angle), the full flat pushes stuff out of the way more gradually and hence cuts through thick dense material with less effort.

e.g. Tomatoes vs. watermelon; linoleum vs. cloth....

The worst knife I ever used for cutting 4-ply cardboard? Buck/Strider 880. My goodness, that was an exercise in futility.

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