Ideal thickness for a Bushcraft blade

3/32" is by far the most versatile size IMO. I have it on machetes, choppers like my Koyote Leuko, My Fiddleback Nessmuk, many clipped folders, and to me 1/8" is too thick on most slipjoints. I appreciate the easily changeable bevels of a thin grind, the ease in going through fibrous/vegetable matter, and the weight reductions usually seen. Perhaps while camping this weekend I'll have to limit myself to 3/32" or less! My opinion only
 
I have found .100 - .150in on shorter single bevel blades to suit me best, for double bevels .125 - .187in is a good thickness range. Good cutting performance and control.
In general I don't like the flexing of thin blades when carving and whittling.

Once the blade length starts to go higher, 5 - 6 inches, the thicker .150 - .200 works well for me in in wide range of wilderness functions.
 
So many preferences for 3/32"...I would never have guessed. I thought myself, Koyote, and Mora fans were the only ones who liked skinny blades!
 
Tycho,

The more and more experience I have with knives the more and more I'm convinced that the great fixation that exists on bomb-proof knives is absolutely silly for 99% of people. Save a bit of weight and enjoy a knife that can really excel at being a knife.


God bless,
Adam
 
1/8" will handle 99% of what can be done with a knife. I like 1/8" or 5/32" for a general purpose blade for the most part. Good cutting with adequate strength for prying. There are many knives that I like that I'd buy if they were a bit thinner. I have no use for a 4" blade that's thicker than 5/32". I don't have an aversion to a thicker blade though, if the geometry is good and it's a longer blade. My Kabar Potbelly is 7" long and 1/4"thick with a good hollow grind and I have to say that it chops nearly as well as my Kabar Cutlass with it's 11" blade that 1/8" thick with hollow grind.
 
Overbuilt blades are for people who like to beat up their knives...but are too afraid to try it with a thin one. :D
 
Just to be different...this is a fatty...

Cuts like hell though!

IMG_3318.jpg


These work too! ;)

IMG_3374.jpg

IMG_3234.jpg
 
I meant it more for folks who think you can ONLY use a thick knife hard and it's abusing a thin one. Goodness knows there's enough beatings to go around. :p

As far as extra heft goes I like to keep 'em thin but make them WIDE.
Photo on 2011-08-08 at 18.03 #2.jpg
 
Depends on the grind. On a scandi, 3/32" is perfect but this is too thin for full flat or full convex simply because the spine won't be that thickness. On full flat, I really like 5/32" but 1/8" can be awesome depending on how aggressive the maker gets with the grind. I.e. 1/8" can be too thick if the transition to the secondary bevel is not aggressive enough or right. Similarly, 5/32" can provide an amazing knife if the propoer controls on a flat or convex grind are performed to get the primary bevel edge thickness to the right value and when done too aggressively won't be robust enough.

Over time, this is how I learned Bark River can make a knife with slightly less than 1/4" thickness at the spine slice like a demon while a knife maker working 1/8" stock thickness who puts less attention on the grind angles and thickness at the primary bevel produces a clunky slicer. Its also the reason why a thick Barky will chip out under less abuse than the same 1/8" thickness stock described above.

So appropriate thickness for a bushy knife? All depends on the maker and your use patterns my friend.
 
I find that for my use, blade thickness is not a real deal breaker/maker. Steel widths from .15 up to .28 do the job.
 
like stated above, i really don't worry to much about thick/thinness i use everything from moras, koyotes, busses to a 1/4 thick stout camp knife from mr. laconico and it cuts like a champ. i definitely notice the the light weight knives less until i need them but in a good sheath the bigger heavier knives really aren't annoying or in the way at all.
 
1/8" is plenty durable enough. 3/32" is a nasty slicer :)

I've done a lot of bushies in thicknesses from .093 to .125 and there's nothing you really need over that- including batoning and chopping- if you use the right steel, heat treat, and geometry.

3/32 makes the 90% of camping (food prep) much nicer, of course.

Edit-

Okay, I didn't read the whole thread there before posting. I guess I've done a lot of these thin blades! Thanks, guys :D
 
Three millimeters or 1/8 seems about right to me. The .007" would not make any difference.
 
Depends on the grind. On a scandi, 3/32" is perfect but this is too thin for full flat or full convex simply because the spine won't be that thickness. On full flat, I really like 5/32" but 1/8" can be awesome depending on how aggressive the maker gets with the grind. I.e. 1/8" can be too thick if the transition to the secondary bevel is not aggressive enough or right. Similarly, 5/32" can provide an amazing knife if the propoer controls on a flat or convex grind are performed to get the primary bevel edge thickness to the right value and when done too aggressively won't be robust enough.

Over time, this is how I learned Bark River can make a knife with slightly less than 1/4" thickness at the spine slice like a demon while a knife maker working 1/8" stock thickness who puts less attention on the grind angles and thickness at the primary bevel produces a clunky slicer. Its also the reason why a thick Barky will chip out under less abuse than the same 1/8" thickness stock described above.

So appropriate thickness for a bushy knife? All depends on the maker and your use patterns my friend.

Kdg got it right. It's all about edge geometry in my experience. And it took me a long while to realize it. And I'll stop before I start praising mora knives...
 
Back
Top