Nessmuck question.

[fishon217]

I'm in the process of making my first nessmuck and I'm wondering if anyone has an opinion
On the best primary grind to go with.
Flat, hollow, etc.
I'm using 5/32 1095 if that helps.
Here's my profiled blade.

 

[Kentucky]

Flat ground is the standard for nessmuks..Its a slicing type knife..I guess hollow would work too but Ive never tried a hollow grind on a nessmuk.

 

[james terrio]

A full flat grind will make that a really nice slicer, with stock that wide and reasonably thin :thumbup:

 

[fishon217]

Thanks guys. That's the answer I was expecting.
Full flat grind it will be. Thanks again.

 

[Hengelo_77]

full flat with a rounded spine

 

[fishon217]

Is there a functional reason for rounding the spine or just for Aesthetic appeal?

 

[Fiddleback]

Convex.

 

[Mudbug007]

I gotta ask. It's hard to tell the overall size of that knife so forgive me for asking this, but man that handle sure looks too tall to me! By the way, my vote if for a full flat grind as well.

 

[Rick Marchand]

In my understanding, Nessmuk knives are supposed to be very thin blades capable of flexing... more like 3/32" or even 1/16". I believe he describes them as such in his book.

 

[Error 404]

Howdy neighbor, I'm originally from W. Spfld. too.

 

[12345678910]

In my understanding, Nessmuk knives are supposed to be very thin blades capable of flexing... more like 3/32" or even 1/16". I believe he describes them as such in his book.

I was thinking that as well, especially if you believe that it was originally made from a reshaped Old Hickory.

 

[Kentucky]

In my understanding, Nessmuk knives are supposed to be very thin blades capable of flexing... more like 3/32" or even 1/16". I believe he describes them as such in his book.

They were but thats not the way most people want them these days..Most like 1/8" it seem..

 

[james terrio]

They were but thats not the way most people want them these days..Most like 1/8" it seem..

Funny how even though we have much better steel now, everyone "needs" blades twice or three times as thick as what was used successfully for centuries, isn't it?

 

[Phil Dwyer]

Here's what Sears (Nessmuk) had to say about it...

"A word as to knife, or knives. These are of prime necessity and should be of the best, both as to shape and temper. The "bowies" and "hunting knives" usually kept on sale, are thick, clumsy affairs, with a sort of ridge along the middle of the blade, murderous-looking, but of little use; rather fitted to adorn a dime novel or the belt of "Billy the Kid," than the outfit of the hunter. The one shown in the cut [below] is thin in the blade and handy for skinning, cutting meat, or eating with. The strong double-bladed pocket knife is the best model I have yet found and, in connection with the sheath knife, is all sufficient for camp use. It is not necessary to take table cutlery into the woods. A good fork may be improvised from a beech or birch stick; and the half of a fresh-water mussel shell, with a split stick by way of handle, makes an excellent spoon."

 

[12345678910]

Funny how even though we have much better steel now, everyone "needs" blades twice or three times as thick as what was used successfully for centuries, isn't it?

Because in the olden days, good knives were relatively precious and no one ever pounded them through bricks as "testing"
All they had to do was cut in real world situations

 

[james terrio]

Good point, Count. It's also true they didn't have car doors they "needed" to cut through

Don't get me wrong, I make and enjoy choppers and stout tactical knives too... but it makes sense that the nessmuk style is better suited to a light, thin blade with a very acute grind.

 

[Kentucky]

Funny how even though we have much better steel now, everyone "needs" blades twice or three times as thick as what was used successfully for centuries, isn't it?

True enough..These knives were meant for meat, though really isnt that what all knives were really meant to do in the beggining? Cut meat?

 

[Rick Marchand]

Sears was very outspoken when it came to camping and the gear involved. There are many ways to approach wilderness living. I agree with some of his advice and ignore other bits. Some of it may be due to the fact that he was 5',3", 103lbs... my 10yr old daughter finds a 1/8"thk, 6"long camp knife to be a clumsy affair, too. So much has changed since the time he was paddling the Adirondacks... resources, game and the advent of modern gear. It is a different ballgame.

 

[james terrio]

Many if not most of the factory-made "sporting" knives of Sears' time were indeed quite thick, with narrow blades and short bevels that did nothing to help them cut well. Too short to chop with and too blunt to slice worth a hoot. Of course, there are plenty like that today as well. He's certainly not the only writer (before or since his era) that felt such knives were best suited for rubes and dudes, and that a boring old kitchen knife was a far better performer.

Some of it may be due to the fact that he was 5',3", 103lbs... It is a different ballgame.

I'm 6'3" 240# or so, and I don't like a clumsy knife either. Small game, fish and small trees are still opened up and made smaller pretty much the same way they were a hundred years ago.

Anyhoo, we're drifting badly... my apologies. Back to the OP's question, I think he should take advantage of the geometry he already has in that blank and make 'er a slicer.

 

[fishon217]

Hey guys. Thank you all for the advice. I didn't think the nessmuck would bring about such lively conversation.
Mudbug; I'm not surewhat you mean by the handle being too tall. Please explain. The overall length is
A bit under 8 inches.
I'll post some more pics as the knife progresses.
Thanks again guys.