Another question to ask is: how bad of a predicament would i be in if my knife broke ? If you are in your backyard or car camping, prob not a big deal. If on an extended hike or adventure or an expedition, that answer could be different. Bring enough knife for the situation at hand. Everyone has different comfort levels. Find yours before a life & death situation arises.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
How important is blade thickness?
- Thread starter NjHart
- Start date
I have been thinking about this lately, and I think for most peoples edc uses, our knives are way over built. I know a lot of people do work there knives pretty hard, but my benchmade 707 is overkill for what I find myself doing with an edc blade. I just like the knife a lot, the axis lock is what I like the most.
Sonnydaze
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 11,700
3mm or about 0.125" is pretty normal for casual EDC. Good slicer. (Plenty of good casual carry knives, even fixed blade hunters, are only about 0.100" or 2.5mm.)
4mm is okay for heavier duty, light chopping of smaller branches.
5mm is too darn big for EDC; this is more like a dedicated chopper. This is ~0.200". Keep in mind that the Strider SMF (U.S. Marine folder) is only 0.190".
If you don't spend your life in the woods, be happy with 1/8", which is 0.125" or about 3mm, depending on how you look at it.
4mm is okay for heavier duty, light chopping of smaller branches.
5mm is too darn big for EDC; this is more like a dedicated chopper. This is ~0.200". Keep in mind that the Strider SMF (U.S. Marine folder) is only 0.190".
If you don't spend your life in the woods, be happy with 1/8", which is 0.125" or about 3mm, depending on how you look at it.
I would also say that this question tends to do with what your knife is being used for. I would not buy a 1/4-inch blade unless it was a really large chopper, as I find that thickness just impedes cutting. If you tried it, you would notice your blade starts getting stuck as you slice deeper, and it becomes a real pain. I know that thick knives like the bk2 are popular amongst many people, but I just don't understand them.
Blade thickness isn't that important in terms of function, but I am leery of paying a lot for a very thin blade "just in case". A reasonable thickness makes the knife feel more solid. I wouldn't want to spend a wad of cash on a folder with a blade of Opinel-thickness since I could just buy an Opinel if I wanted a really thin blade and I wouldn't be afraid of it breaking.
I'm convinced that thick blades (thicker than 1/8") are all about aesthetics, not practical concerns. I view it as kind of a signal that the knife was an extravagant use of steel, correspondingly more effort and resources were used to manufacture it, and this extravagance also reflects on the consumer who chose it.
Back in the day, knife blades were largely thin, for a few pretty good reasons. One, thin blades usually cut better. Thin also means less steel, meaning less cost. Thin is also easier to grind in the factory.
As consumers gained more disposable income, knives became more accessories to be adorned with symbols of the increasing affluence. One of these symbols was to use an overly thick piece of steel for the blade. Let's face it... thicker just looks more badass. Additionally, a thicker slab demands more grinding to become a knife, meaning more work hours, and increased wear and tear on tools. The thicker blade resulted in aesthetics suggesting superior durability and bulk. Which is a way to distinguish itself from less expensive knives, especially appealing to knife nuts, even if the extra durability and bulk was rarely needed, and actually might hinder cutting performance.
I like the aesthetics of thick blades. But I carry and use thin blades, because they work better, and are easier to maintain. I wish all my pocket knives had blades like an Opinel. Even a nigh indestructable knife like a Tramontina machete is less than 1/8". IIRC, they're closer to .080".
Back in the day, knife blades were largely thin, for a few pretty good reasons. One, thin blades usually cut better. Thin also means less steel, meaning less cost. Thin is also easier to grind in the factory.
As consumers gained more disposable income, knives became more accessories to be adorned with symbols of the increasing affluence. One of these symbols was to use an overly thick piece of steel for the blade. Let's face it... thicker just looks more badass. Additionally, a thicker slab demands more grinding to become a knife, meaning more work hours, and increased wear and tear on tools. The thicker blade resulted in aesthetics suggesting superior durability and bulk. Which is a way to distinguish itself from less expensive knives, especially appealing to knife nuts, even if the extra durability and bulk was rarely needed, and actually might hinder cutting performance.
I like the aesthetics of thick blades. But I carry and use thin blades, because they work better, and are easier to maintain. I wish all my pocket knives had blades like an Opinel. Even a nigh indestructable knife like a Tramontina machete is less than 1/8". IIRC, they're closer to .080".