Overboard with Blade Thickness: Your Mod's Ramblings

mapper66 said:
Well, here is something I have wondered, and maybe those that know more about steel can say, but the Infi blade was just polished up by my own poor attempts, and the O1 wasn't highly polished but it does have a good patina. The 3V had a satin finish.

Maybe I'll try again with some polished A2 and some rougher 3V. Don't have any high polish O1. Still, the results were pretty dramatic. Maybe I'll do some more testing and post in another thread.

OK, back to the topic of blade thickness :thumbup: Good stuff!
Click to expand...

highly polished finishes will resist corrosion better than satin/bead-blasted finishes because there is less surface area for the water to get into.

someone mentioned coated blades earlier. while the recent trend of coating may have been a result of the masses wanting that tactical look, i think that the onset of blade coatings was a matter of corrosion resistant practicality... honestly, is there anything more practical than coated high-carbon steel in the field? it's generally tougher than stainless, holds its edge reasonably well and can be made razor sharp again with minimal effort. 440C is underrated because of its ability to take on a mirror finish for the reason stated above.

sorry to respond to an OT comment. the fixed blade i took camping at the beginning of the month was maybe 1/8" thick, perhaps a tad less, like 1/12th"... i have a folding double cut camp saw for the really large wood cutting chores...
 
Last edited:
I'm sure I'm about to show what an ignorant woodsman I am, but I like both.

Last week, I was wandering an old logging road when I came to a downed tree, with it's limbs intact that made it almost impossible to get past without going around. I got out my thick bladed knife and in less than a minute I had cleared some of those limbs so I could straddle my way over the log.

Later on, I needed a quick spoon to eat some lunch. I pulled out my little handmade "paring knife" that I made with the help of HNSchwartz and made what I needed. I used the thick blade to chop and cut grass for a mat, and the thin blade for fine chores.

I think many here, even the experts, carry more than 1 blade.

Clint Hollingworth
The Wandering Ones webcomic
http://www.wanderingones.com
 
I think of the people who want the one tool to do everything "cough" tracker "cough" :D

I like having the specific tool, Belt knife should be a good cutter, I see no less than 1/8" and no more than 6-7/32" for me. then what ever chopper you want and a back up to the fixed, either a slippy or a normal folder what ever works.

But I think the big knives come from the need for one good tool, unfortunatly its over done most of the time.
 
Blade coatings save a lot of money and time for the manufacturer.
If one strips off the epoxy coat off a CS, for example, one finds an unfinished steel bar underneath.
 
got it, thanks!

I'm not even sure coating really gets away from the topic. I'll Streeeeeeeeeeeetch things a bit and say that the coatings help increase the utility of carbon steels, which seem (kay, i haven't tested this, but I see thin much more often in carbon and thick much more often in stainless) to run thinner.

Some coatings are actually controlled rust that absorbs oil, too. Pretty cool.

I'm thinking of playing around with gun kote, trying to determine how it will respond to handle epoxies.
 
A thin blade is also strengthend by increasing width, like the Nessmuk. I still believe the very wide tip was an attempt to strengthen the point end while staying thin overall.

Consider a 1" wide blade with a 1/8" spine and full flat grind will have a 3/16" spine if increased to 1.5"wide. Both should slice equally well, discounting friction... I really like users with a full distal taper.

Thin and wide gets it done, even for hacking in the case of machetes.
 
The Nessie is about as good as it gets. By that I mean a Nessie 1/8 inch thick but up to 1 1/2-2 inches wide. Thus offering both strength and slicing power.
 
Great post.....

A few things I've learned over the years......
1) If you only carry one knife, stay within it's limits.
2) Thinner knives are light and tend to cut better.
3) Thicker knives are heavy and can take a beating.
4) No single knife can do all things perfectly.

This being said, my field knife in the Army was a Busse......1/4 inch thick and 6" long. Used it to pry nearly as often as I used it to cut open MRE's. However, I always had a folder to back it up.

Now, as a civilian, the Busse is more of a conversation piece/meatcleaver in the kitchen and almost never goes outside. I still carry an Emerson folder and back it up with a stockman slippie or a SAK huntsman. For a fixed blade it's usually a 3.5" scandi blade that I bought from Ragweed forge and put a walnut and maple handle on. Truth be known..... the stockman gets about 95% of all the love these days. It's a cutter for damn sure! The SAK is usually in my truck and the scandi is in my go bag......go bag is the daily items I use on the job mixed with first-aid kit and small fire and shelter kit.

For me, Thick has it's place.....but for now, my preferance is for thinner blades that cut REALLY well.


P.S. did I mention my go bag has a small pry bar in it;)

Jason
 
Personally, as someone whose spent LOTS of time in the great outdoors, I prefer a thick knife. Here's why. I chop with mine. I baton with mine. Chopping with a 1/8" thick blade just doesn't work as well as it does with a 1/4" thick blade. The added mass, and hence increased kinetic energy, goes a long way. Before you say "I use a hatchet..."

I don't take a hatchet. I prefer a large, thick knife by itself, rather than a large, thin knife accompanied by a hatchet.

I've dropped thin knives onto rocks (accidentally) and broken them. I've chopped with thinner knives, and a little too much lateral stress can easily snap a thin blade.

I've dug holes, and chopped up exposed roots with a knife, and hit rock. If you do this with a thin blade, don't come crying to me when you need to completely reprofile it.

If all you ever want to do is slice and stab, then a 1/8" blade is just fine. But if you need to subject it to heavy chopping, digging or batonning, then you'll probably wish you had a heavier blade.

Long story short? I beat the crap out of my heavier knives, and I have a lot more faith in their ability to take that beating.
 
I tend to forge my kives from either W2 or 1084. They all have full height grinds that are either fully convexed or flat ground with a convex edge. I start out with stock that is 1/4 or bigger. In the case of W2, I always start a little thicker because I pound it out from round bar. I always lose some steel because I am forging. For hunters and smaller fighters , I usually end up somewhere north or south of 3/16. With big knives, 1/4-7/16, depending on the length and width of the blade. i am currently working on a big chopper. it is 10 x 1 3/4 and is right around 5/16 at the ricasso. But it has a full distal taper, so it actually feels much lighter than you would think. with no handle or guard and about 1 inch of the hidden tang to be trimmed off, it balanced about 1 1/2 inches in from of the plunge cuts. With a burly African blackwood handle, that balance point should move back otwards the handle a bit when it is finished. I thought that I had only committed 2 cardinal sins. I made a hidden tang big chopper and made it light. Guess I'll have to add a third........stock too thick:D
 
Why do I keep reading about people digging with their knives rather than, say, making a digging stick?
 
sometimes , its just not convienient to go find a digging stick .. but the knife is there in your hand ....

I have done it a couple times , years and years ago .... now I go the digging stick tho

digging doesnt do any kindness to the blade edge

I dont mind opening tin cans with my knife tho ...
 
i think thick knives are due to the availability of cheap steel - a Kabar short bowie can be had for just $35 and it's 1/4" thick and a blade over 7". That's a lot of steel for very little money. Our grandparents would be amazed that so much steel was so cheap.
 
TWBryan said:
I'll use thin for slicing and thick for chopping,why compromise and carry just one?
Click to expand...
Exactly.

A lot of people are fixated on the "one knife" concept, thats part of the reasoning for overly thick knives.
The idea that you can (should?) only carry one knife so therefore it must be supertough/superthick. But this usually results in superheavy as well.
These knives are often as heavy or heavier than the combined weight of a small hatchet and mora-sized fixed blade.
To me weight and functionality are more important than this obsession with paring your tools down to just the "one".
Don't get me wrong i do like and own big knives but really most of the time lately i carry a small hatchet and a mora sized knife.
-------------------------------------------------

I think this is kinda related to the whole multitool vs.SAK thing as well.
The heavy "one fixed blade knife" idea is akin to the "one large-supertough/multifunction multi-tool" idea.

People want their (one) tool to do many things. Some people see reducing the number of tools as being more important than things like weight or functionality.

A lot of this "one" fixation relates to "fashion" and the cool/fun/daydream hero factor.
King Arthur and Excalibur, Jim Bowie and the Bowie knife, Rambo and the Rambo knife, Bond and his Walther.
For many big knives and beefy multis just have more eye candy/romantic appeal than more simple traditional type tools.

Its all a personal choice/preference thing really, no real right or wrong. If it works for you go for it.
I'm kinda bipolar on this myself as i vacillate between Big knife/multi-tool and Hatchet/Mora/SAK camp.

:D
 
Last edited:
Here's my take:
The thick knife is driven by two main factors (again, my opinion), and several smaller factors.

First, si the desire for that holy of holies: the do-it-all blade. Look at the popularity of batoning. Really, it takes a lot less effort to split wood with a hatchet or kukri than by beating the hell out of even a large knife. Some dig with their big knives. I'll confess to trying the do-it-all approach. I tried it with a Kumar Karda:
KumarKarda3.jpg

Yep, 1/4" thick, 14.5" OAL. Used it to clean fish, dress a hog, cut tent stakes, prep food, etc. Know what? It worked. It worked pretty well. But it suffered from the bane of all do-it-all tools: it wasn't as good as a specialized tool.

Second, is the survival mentality. Specifically, that we (at least North Americans) tend to think in terms of military survival, either from active service, or just that the most mpublicized "survival" stuff is based on military training. Now in military SERE (especially for aircrews), you only have this tiny friggin underseat kit. You WILL NOT have more than one knife. Too much other stuff to pack in that tiny box. Again, you only have ONE KNIFE. Add to that fact that you probably won't be doing much trapping, lean-to or debris hut building (too much signiture for the enemy to track), whittling of fuzz sticks or the like. You may have to carve out a walking stick due to leg injury. Having a chopper will get you there faster than a slicer. Not as pretty, but quick is the key. Also, there is a very real possibility that this blade will be rammed into someone's body, twisted about, rolled around on the ground with, etc. Let's face it, in this kind of situation, a puukko is not what you want. However, this is a specialized situation, that dictates one knife, and it better be a sturdy one.

I think it's largely a mistake to base our wilderness choices on the military model. First of all, we don't HAVE to only carry one "sharp". Second, we probably aren't going to be fighting with one. If you have to fight, you probably won't go there, or if you do, take a gun. But, military survival shows, fiction and not are popular, and people do what is popular on TV (witness all the guys that go out and buy desert cammies because it's what the troops engaged in fighting are wearning, even though those people live in very green areas. . .).

I guess the thing that boggles my mind is that people insist on taking only one sharp into the woods. Why does it HAVE to be Chopper vs Mora, Kukri vs SAK? Why not both?
IMO the "Cpl Punishment Duo" can accomplish all the woodscraft that needs to be done. Take a chopper like a kukri or hatchet, and take a slicer (any of the smaller, thinner "bushcraft" blades, SAKs, even some of the shorter butcher knives will do).

If you're not doing anything real heavy duty, one of the Busse family, Ranger RD series, RAT-7, etc coupled with a puukko (to include Moras) or SAK will cover just about anything you need. If you're in a more northerly climate where you may need to gather more/larger pieces of wood or build more heavy-duty shelter, a good hatchet (or axe if you really need it) and a smaller knife will do nicely. It's really not that hard.

If you're doing something specialized, then add the appropriate tools. I have a very nice Rappala filet knife for when I want to clean small game or fish.
 
Cpl Punishment said:
I guess the thing that boggles my mind is that people insist on taking only one sharp into the woods. Why does it HAVE to be Chopper vs Mora, Kukri vs SAK? Why not both?

IMO the "Cpl Punishment Duo" can accomplish all the woodscraft that needs to be done. Take a chopper like a kukri or hatchet, and take a slicer (any of the smaller, thinner "bushcraft" blades, SAKs, even some of the shorter butcher knives will do).
<SNIP>
If you're doing something specialized, then add the appropriate tools. I have a very nice Rappala filet knife for when I want to clean small game or fish.
Click to expand...

Pretty much the way I feel. I RARELY venture into the woods with just one blade.

Stay sharp,
desmobob
 
Thin blades chop just fine. A Tramontina machete never gets thicker than .085". It is a combination of massive enough, and long enough, to chop just fine.

i think thick knives are due to the availability of cheap steel - a Kabar short bowie can be had for just $35 and it's 1/4" thick and a blade over 7". That's a lot of steel for very little money. Our grandparents would be amazed that so much steel was so cheap.
Click to expand...

I think this is a good point. In addition, cost of working such thick steel was prohibitive. Back in the day, thick blades most likely were made by costlier forging. Stock removal on a 1/4" billet would be unheard of. I suspect really long, thick blades such as Bowies were mostly considered play toys of folks with more money than sense. Chopping tool of choice was an axe. Long knives were thinner agricultural tools for cutting cane, stalks and brush. Heavy knives were often specialized for specific tasks, such as cleavers.

These days, modern manufacturing allows for more variety of cheaper steel largely manufactured by automation. What was once a boutique style of knife, the thick, heavy chopping capable knife, most likely in some Bowie style, is more available for more people than ever, in a wider variety, and for less money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top