Lately I have been seeing the HI AK Bowie knife come in at about 21-23 ounces. In the past I had seen the AK bowie being over 30 ounces in weight with a spine thickness of 7/8ths or 1/2 inch almost. Has anyone purchased the lighter AK Bowies? Why do you think they switched recently to making AK bowie so much lighter in weight? The 30 plus ounce AK bowie does seem insane but I am just wondering what the pros and cons are of each blade?
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Lighther weight AK Bowie vs Heavier one
- Thread starter kazushi
- Start date
I have a 24ozer never had one of the heavier ones but if you are interested in a HUGE one see...
[Please do not link to sales from the exchange in the discussion forum. It's against the site rules. It is especially offensive on Yangdu's showroon floor]
then you can let us know.
[Please do not link to sales from the exchange in the discussion forum. It's against the site rules. It is especially offensive on Yangdu's showroon floor]
then you can let us know.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure what the exact thickness of mine is, right now they are all piled up in a cedar chest. I would love to get one of the heavier 30oz ones but like you I do think it may be a little rediculous. I assume they were mostly for chopping/batoning, actually it sounds great for batoning now that I think about it. I could be wrong but 1/2" sounds wrongfully thick, have you seen one that thick? I assume you meant 3/8 not 7/8.
It was kind of a joke, the thread I linked has been closed and the knife I assume sold. I wasn't trying to plug a sale and I Meant no offense or to possibly cost HI sales, the $600 or so I spent here in the last week alone should attest to that. Regardless, I apologize for being ignorant to the rules and for offending Yangdu.
The old ones from long ago wre 1/2 inch thick at the spine, all the way thru the handle. I've had the pleasure of handling a couple.
While they seem unweidly and heavy, they were both surprisingly nice choppers.
I have no idea why they've gotten lighter and thinner, but i like them just the same.
While they seem unweidly and heavy, they were both surprisingly nice choppers.
I have no idea why they've gotten lighter and thinner, but i like them just the same.
- Joined
- May 9, 2002
- Messages
- 12,676
Well, if I remember correctly, the first AKBs were designed to sort of make the most nukeproof knife possible. They were insanely thick. By the time I came on the scene, most were 3/8th inch thick and very serviceable. I had a Munk Chunk several years ago. It was just entirely too massive at 32oz and 1/2" thick. It was a great cleaver, but thats about it.
I'm actually really curious about these light AKBs. If you search my old posts, you'll see I'm one of the knife's biggest fans. A lighter version would make for a much better hiking bowie. If one pops up with a wooden grip...look out
I'm actually really curious about these light AKBs. If you search my old posts, you'll see I'm one of the knife's biggest fans. A lighter version would make for a much better hiking bowie. If one pops up with a wooden grip...look out
I guess your right as Karda confirmed the 1/2" spines. I have a UF with a 1/2" spine and that thing is a monster. My 22" 65oz GRS is slightly thinner I think. Now I want to dig mine out and measure it.
Well, if I remember correctly, the first AKBs were designed to sort of make the most nukeproof knife possible. They were insanely thick. By the time I came on the scene, most were 3/8th inch thick and very serviceable. I had a Munk Chunk several years ago. It was just entirely too massive at 32oz and 1/2" thick. It was a great cleaver, but thats about it.
I'm actually really curious about these light AKBs. If you search my old posts, you'll see I'm one of the knife's biggest fans. A lighter version would make for a much better hiking bowie. If one pops up with a wooden grip...look out
There was one up today, might still be there!
Kazushi:
With these hand-made knives there's only a very loose relationship between spine thickness and weight. The blade geometry, depth of fullers, even the handle type all affect the weight. I have a beautiful WWII khukuri by Vim Kami that's 17" long and 26.5 oz light. I was pleasantly surprised, when I received it, that this WWII has a full 1/2" thick spine. The relatively light weight makes it easy to handle, and that thick spine makes it feel and look indestructible. At the other end of the usage spectrum, fighting knives tend to be lighter and thinner, since speed is of the essence and the main purpose is self defense rather than chopping through logs.
I don't know whether there's a direct (or indirect) relation between the weights of various models and customer requests, but there have been quite a few posts in recent months by people hoping for lighter weight versions of particular models. It may also be that the spine thickness and weight of a particular knife depends on which piece of steel the kami picks up to make it, or what mood he's in.
The pros and cons are what you might expect. A bigger or stronger person can handle a heavier blade. Regardless of strength, a person who does a lot of chopping or goes on long hikes might prefer a somewhat lighter weight version that is less tiring to swing or carry. A person who already has one or more "users" and is into collector-mode might want the biggest, heaviest blade available because it's going to hang on the wall or lugged out (with both hands and maybe a wheelbarrow) to impress friends. These are all perfectly legitimate reasons to prefer one size or another.
The best thing of course is to get several models in two or three different sizes, and with horn and wood handles. Like some other forumites you'll end up with a collection of 50 or 60 HI knives. Then you can hide the knives and declare bankruptcy.
-- Dave
With these hand-made knives there's only a very loose relationship between spine thickness and weight. The blade geometry, depth of fullers, even the handle type all affect the weight. I have a beautiful WWII khukuri by Vim Kami that's 17" long and 26.5 oz light. I was pleasantly surprised, when I received it, that this WWII has a full 1/2" thick spine. The relatively light weight makes it easy to handle, and that thick spine makes it feel and look indestructible. At the other end of the usage spectrum, fighting knives tend to be lighter and thinner, since speed is of the essence and the main purpose is self defense rather than chopping through logs.
I don't know whether there's a direct (or indirect) relation between the weights of various models and customer requests, but there have been quite a few posts in recent months by people hoping for lighter weight versions of particular models. It may also be that the spine thickness and weight of a particular knife depends on which piece of steel the kami picks up to make it, or what mood he's in.
The pros and cons are what you might expect. A bigger or stronger person can handle a heavier blade. Regardless of strength, a person who does a lot of chopping or goes on long hikes might prefer a somewhat lighter weight version that is less tiring to swing or carry. A person who already has one or more "users" and is into collector-mode might want the biggest, heaviest blade available because it's going to hang on the wall or lugged out (with both hands and maybe a wheelbarrow) to impress friends. These are all perfectly legitimate reasons to prefer one size or another.
The best thing of course is to get several models in two or three different sizes, and with horn and wood handles. Like some other forumites you'll end up with a collection of 50 or 60 HI knives. Then you can hide the knives and declare bankruptcy.
-- Dave