Length of the ricasso

Mark Knapp

Mark Knapp

Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
4,421
So let's talk about the length of ricassos. The ABS leans a little bit toward almost square, or, a length that is a little bit shorter than the width.

Lately, I have been seeing very short ricassos that seem to be about 1/4 inch long. They look very nice to me, I think I like them that way, or maybe just a little longer, like 3/8 inches.

Is the trend toward shorter ricassos? Do you like them? Are longer ricassos just a waist of space or do they serve a worthwhile function other than aesthetics?

What do you think?
 
shorter ricasso gives you more edge, but takes away your ability to put your finger in front of the guard. For my uses, I'll take the addtional cutting surface.
aesthetics are a different matter, and proportions will dictate what looks good and what doesn't, imo.
 
IMO, the specific overall knife design determines what length ricasso will look best.
We see quite a few knives with short ricassos on this forum but I haven't noticed a widespread trend.
 
I think Lorien is right. I like a longer ricasso on a hunting knife for extra grip in front of the guard. To choke up on the blade. Otherwise it is what looks best on the overall design.
Gary
 
On conventional construction, I prefer a 5/8" long ricasso......pretty close to the
golden mean that was discussed here some years ago.....I believe by Bailey Bradshaw.

But...for integrals...because of more gradual transitions, it's really difficult to find
a rule-of-thumb that applies....we just have to see what ballances out best.....
 
From an entirely aesthetic standpoint, I've so rarely seen knives where I thought the ricasso was too short. However, I've seen a LOT of knives where the ricasso appears too long.

It's easier to err one way than another. I don't have the need to choke up on any knife, so I'm referring to my sixth sense. ;)

Coop
 
I feel like Nick Wheeler deserves a shout out for the compressed ricasso. He's the one who other guys are starting to emulate in this regard.
The truncated ricasso is the new raised clip.
Funny, these design innovations....
 
This came in yesterday and I thought it may be worth a look.
Almost no loss of cutting edge with the closeness of a choil.
I like it a lot.
Just a few quick cell pics but you'll get the idea
0118142110_zpsf0558fb8.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
0118142112_zps88db522b.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
 
SharpByCoop said:
From an entirely aesthetic standpoint, I've so rarely seen knives where I thought the ricasso was too short. However, I've seen a LOT of knives where the ricasso appears too long.

It's easier to err one way than another. I don't have the need to choke up on any knife, so I'm referring to my sixth sense. ;)

Coop
Click to expand...
I agree Coop, a ricasso that's too long can ruin the looks of a knife in a hurry.
 
Lorien said:
I feel like Nick Wheeler deserves a shout out for the compressed ricasso. He's the one who other guys are starting to emulate in this regard.
The truncated ricasso is the new raised clip.
Funny, these design innovations....
Click to expand...

Right on. I also recall seeing very short ricassos on some of full tangs by Burt Foster, which I really liked the look of.

On most knives I prefer the look of a short ricasso. An 'average' length ricasso doesn't detract from the knife, but it doesn't grab my attention. A long ricasso usually looks strange to me.

The ricasso/heel area on Lin Rhea's recent Southland Bowie (you know the one) is a great example of how visually striking a short ricasso can be.
 
a big ricasso can be a real pain in the ass when you're hacking through viney stuff and light brush.
 
Lorien said:
I feel like Nick Wheeler deserves a shout out for the compressed ricasso. He's the one who other guys are starting to emulate in this regard.
The truncated ricasso is the new raised clip.
Funny, these design innovations....
Click to expand...

I won't deny that I've found inspiration in the work of many of this site's makers, but in my case I've been going with a short ricasso pretty much since my first knife, based on personal preference.

Primarily, I prefer the looks of it. A ricasso that is long enough to choke up on comfortably adds a lot of length to the knife with no added usable blade length. Generally, if I were to make a knife longer, I'd rather do so by adding to the usable edge.

In bushcraft, I also find that the short ricasso can allow the rear corner of the blade to be used in concert with the guard for tasks such as notching dowels, or as a guide for cleaning bark.

I also agree that on larger knives, a long ricasso can be a hassle when clearing brush or de-limbing.

Normally I only use a slightly longer ricasso on guardless designs or those where it is aesthetically suitable, or where ability to choke up is a non-negotiable design aspect.

Edit: I wanted to add, I'm still a pretty new maker, and for a while I was worried that I was doing something "wrong", because I saw longer ricassos on so many knives. It just seemed that it never looked right to me when on the drawing board, so I just went with my gut. I will admit, this thread makes me feel a bit better.
 
Last edited:
I think we're talking about knives with fitted guards, are we not?
 
on fulltang knives, a lengthy ricasso is often expressed as a finger 'choil', from what I've seen
 
IMO, on longer hunting knives (4.5-6") a longer ricasso or choil is really handy for doing close, controlled work with your forefinger on the spine. You're mostly using the belly or point anyhow - don't usually need extra cutting edge. Minimal ricasso is better on smaller hunting knives. I agree a smaller ricasso generally looks and functions better on a large knife.
 
Bob Leedy said:
IMO, on longer hunting knives (4.5-6") a longer ricasso or choil is really handy for doing close, controlled work with your forefinger on the spine. You're mostly using the belly or point anyhow - don't usually need extra cutting edge. Minimal ricasso is better on smaller hunting knives. I agree a smaller ricasso generally looks and functions better on a large knife.
Click to expand...

Ditto on what Bob says functionally. Esthetically, I feel the same as Bob. I'll drink to that. :)

- Joe
 
Like most of us, I started out as a "user" maker. In that regard I leaned toward shorter ricassos because in my experience as a big game guide (in one season I could skin/cape up to 20 big game animals. I'm not a game hog, that's in a three month period in the fall.) a shorter ricasso (1/4") meant less wrist fatigue. With a short ricasso my index finger could stay behind the guard where it was safer, no need to choke-up. As I bridged the gap from working knives to those more in the collectable realm, my early designs stayed with me and I sometimes took ridicule (not to be confused with critique) for those designs.

You got to make what the people want, if you don't fill a demand, someone else will. I lengthened my ricassos and to my eye they were more pleasing than crowded ones, but it's also clear that an overly long ricasso can quickly destroy an otherwise very nice knife.

I was thinking of both Nick's and Lin's fine examples when I started this thread. I lot of great points are being made here, sometimes functionality and aesthetics collide when talking about knife design. There are some basic parameters that must be met but you really need to understand a makers objectives and perspectives to know why he/she made the choices they did.

I started this thread with hidden tang, fixed-guard knives in mind but I think the principals are transferable.

I am starting to get a sense that most people would agree that for instance, on a med size Bowie say one with a 8-9 inch blade and a proportionate handle, if the width on the ricasso was 1 1/8 inches, a length of anywhere from 3/8 to 1 inch would be acceptable. Do you agree? If you do agree, that's a fairly wide margin.

If you were submitting knives to be judged by the ABS, what guide lines would you use? I may be starting to make my knives soon.

Thanks everyone for participating, we got some good conversations going.
 
Last edited:
I seem to like somewhere around 2:1 (W:L), but 1.5:1 is probably safer if you were trying to keep it pleasing for the most possible eyes without worrying about it being too long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top