Philosophy of expensive large thick chopper?

[22-rimfire]

Originally Posted by knarfeng: leave as little trace of your passage as possible so that the next person could enjoy the scenery as much as you did.

I agree with that. Rules and laws always seem to take into account a worst case situation and when it comes to back woods areas. There are no policeman other than potentially other hikers out there policing policies. I don't want to get into a fight along the trail with someone who does something a little different than my approach. I think if most people would simply pay attention a little and think about leaving the area or a camp site like you found it generally, you're fine. Spreading the ashes out or burying them is certainly a reasonable thing to do, but like everything else, it is a matter of degree as just spreading them out eventually creates an unsightly place. Keeping the ashes confined to the "fire ring" is a reasonable approach. Include some trash, used toilet paper or similar close by and you have a potential mess. If you have a fire, burn your TP. Carry out cans, bags, and packets that don't burn. I view it as a "sierra club" argument versus ghetto argument. I don't support the Sierra Club or Greens Peace as I think they are a bit over the edge, but I do support the Nature Conservancy.

So do big knives have a place out in these public lands or remote areas? I think so if you are willing to carry them. But that does not include chopping down a bunch of trees just for the fun of it.

 

[stabman]

Since humans arrived on the planet, we've exterminated tons of other species, probably killed off every hominid that looked at all like us, deforested much of the landmass, and dug up vast swaths of land for various toxic or pretty substances.

Somehow this is all fine as long as no one harms any trees or has a fire while camping now that we're so "enlightened"...
I say screw that noise.

I will eat the cows, wear the skin of every animal that looks good on me, and if I feel like having a fire, I sure as hell will.

 

[stabman]

But I'm also not going to be a dick...
I won't chop or burn stuff in a nature preserve.
A provincial or national park is for the people to go use as listed, so I'll follow their rules...or just not go if I think they're stupid rules.
I won't go onto other people's property and screw up their stuff, because that's just dickish.

The rest of the planet is fair game though.

 

[Spey]

5/16" vs 1/4" is meaningless for performance, except regarding overall geometry, because blade width, edge thickness, profile type, all play a far bigger role than the difference between those two:

Here is an 18 ounce Randall Model 12 (shaved down handle, so lighter than specs), blade thickness 0.22", vs a 17 ounces Trailmaster SMIII at 5/16": Same number of hits: The Trailmaster was much sharper than it came stock: It still had no hope against something like the Model 12, it is not even close, so yes I woud say in this case the blade thickness is meaningless, as the difference in blade thickness here is from 0.22 to 0.31, more like 40%, and still the Trailmaster has less than 50% of the performance of a 40% thinner blade.

That being said, I do consider 3/16" as close to unacceptable for a knife intended for chopping... All else being equal, a range between 0.22" and 0.25" seem close to ideal: The Lile Mission here is 0.25", and a thickness of 0.31" would be taxing in geometry even for this very wide 2" wide blade: On a flat ground blade, what you gain in momentum you lose in geometry: I would say that just as I don't like 3/16", I don't like 5/16", but that doesn't mean a high performance knife could not be made out of either thicknesses, just that the thickness would be a hindrance rather than a help.

The Trailmaster blade is way too narrow to be 5/16" and flat ground, and this is evident in the geometry being inherently dull: It just got duller and duller the more I re-sharpened it, even if it shaved easily... The Model 12 is by contrast completely indifferent to sharpening wear, but that is because of its deep hollow grind, which makes this issue completely independent of what thickness it has at the spine... On a flat ground blade it is another issue, and 5/16" is a bad thing for geometry, unless the blade is very wide, as in at or over 2 inches...

Gaston

Your comparisons appear to have quite a number of differing variables used to make an "argument" against my comments related to only changing one variable having meaning. I am going to assume that each of your comparison knives had the same secondary bevel applied before making this type of comparison?

Let's try and simplify just a little.

RE Your comment: "5/16" vs 1/4" is meaningless for performance, except regarding overall geometry"

I respectfully disagree, changing only spine thickness (one knife - Trail Master):
1) The weight of the knife would change (this would change user ergonomics and performance).
2) The primary bevel angle would change (one could argue this would change performance except how it affects/relates #3, but it will change the wedging effect as the blade penetrates).
3) and/or The thickness behind the edge would change (either 2 or 3 or both effectively will change - change in performance both initial and long term).
I am assuming for this example that secondary angle and edge thickness are the same (thickness at the apex).

Note: I consider the primary bevel to be the initial grind, and the secondary bevel to be the one that extends to the cutting edge (apex).

I still believe that; I disagree that a 25% increase in spine thickness is "pretty meaningless".

From my experience, I would suspect one of the main reasons your Trail Master was so far behind say the Randall (your photo & description) is directly related to the thickness behind the edge (possibly also secondary bevel angle & edge thickness at the apex). Any chance you care to share that comparative info (thickness behind the edge & secondary bevel angles from the comparison of Randal vs. Trail Master)? Additionally, it appear these two knives feature radically differing secondary bevels (flat vs. hollow).

In general, I think we are both more or less agreeing that saying a person can not make a judgement on a knife assuming one variable does not affect another. Changing spine thickness alone, changes other variables too.

I also agree with you that at some point increasing thickness and weight becomes a hindrance to overall performance, unless all variables are taken into consideration and overall design puts all variable working together for the design purpose.

Additionally, it "appears" we also agree that somewhere ~.25" is that threshold for most users (probably less). I think Cliff Stamp's reviews of that Keffler Chopper (post above) is a good illustration. The additional thickness and resultant weight kinda does the chopping for you, but only in very specific circumstance, and the user needs to understand that he must adapt to the tool to extract the maximum performance from the design. That Silverback has a lot going on there that is not readily apparent to the casual observer who looks and just sees a thick blade spine thinking that's what "makes" the knife (multiple primary bevel angles, multiple thickness behind the edge, multiple grip positions, multiple swing dynamics for different performance, etc. etc.).

NONE of these variables are meaningless, in my mind. At least that's my opinion.

Regards,

 

[hauntedchild]

I have a few large knives, not many but a few and just ordered another. Now there is a time and place for everything, I also have many hatchets, axes and saws. I honestly am just as comfortable at times splitting my wood with either but at other times ive felt more comfortable with my knife. I am also a believer that the right tool for the job makes it easier and safer. But with all that said there are knives that are/were designed over eons to do the very task in question parangs, goloks, bolos and others im sure and they get used daily for all cutting and choping task from cleaning small game to felling trees, food prep and shelter building. I believe that because we have access and the resources to use more tools that we sometimes discredit the ablity of some tools and or the people that choose to use them. I used one of my larger blades solely in a one tool challenge for close to a month everywhere I could and learned a great deal from this about my capabilities and the tools and I think thats the biggest problem with people's decisions about rather or not to use a larger than readily acceptable blade by most. All large knives are not created equal. If your looking for a large chopping blade get one intended/designed for chopping, this doesn't meen you go out and attempt to fell a redwood and it doesn't mean you have to split a 8-12" round in half in one swing. Start on the edges and work your way around until its small enough to safely span the wood with your tool of choice. It always safety and common sense first and foremost.

 

[Herlock]

About camp fires, being the regulations here quite strict, one common practice it's to keep and maintain the "fire-ring" one find on the spot, rather than creating another one . This helps both safety (the fire is already "contained", so to say) and natural landscape "conservation". This is accepted also by Rangers. The stoves are a good option (I own a small one from Bushcraft Essentials) if I am not planning to grill big things . They are perfect for me when I go for a cup of coffee or a soup only. Besides, if raining hard, for me they only work under a tarp. As far as garbage there are no excuses for me: bring it home. In this respect we are also supported by Laws and regulations but it's very much on us. Fortunately in "my" mountains people are quite respectful :thumbup:. About large choppers I had my say already , but there are no restrictions at all for those here when one is hiking or camping (i.e.: justified reason)

 

[tatalley10]

So I have a kukri, an axe (Hultafors),and a folding saw. All these tools I deem worthy to carry for backpacking bushcrafting.

The kukri is a short machete that can fell small saplings and clear paths, but also can be used as a draw knife...so on and so forth...

The axe...well sometimes you just need an axe, where as the saw is obviously for crosscut wood needs like fire or shelter making. And also makes great cuts for standing wood to split with axe...

I am struggling with what size fixed blade I need for "everything else"? My eyes says less than 5" should do but then my mind is attacked by what if ninjas and I start thinking about the 6" length again. Jury still out on this fight. I do know that I want cpm-3v for this knife steel. I'll probably end up making several knives and testing till I find what works best for me...



8"-12" thick blade knifes seem more like sharpened pry bars than tools, yet my kukri falls in this catagory and I have rationalized it in my mind somehow... probably due to its weapon tool utility factor. I don't know of many other knives that fall in the OP constraints that are well known and have such utility.

 

[wildalex18]

I have 2 hatchets and a kukri, the kukri is awesome, just not that practical in this era. I use it mainly for clearing invasive trees and practicing the ancent art of this small sword/large knife. Great for letting off steam

 

[tatalley10]

If I were to make a chopper I would totally copy off the condor hudson bay knife as it seems a good blend of old and new. But I would also beef the steel to a minimum of D2 steel for wear and toughness with cpm3v being the tip top of the toughness scale. A 3/16" full flat with a .25" deep secondary bevel at around 20 degrees, and a 2" blade depth would be a sick bush knife pared with a sub-5" task blade 3/16" scandi grind by 1.5". But they would both need a single dangle/dual carry option... then only an axe/saw need be on the pack...

 

[Czechmate]

I have a few large knives, not many but a few and just ordered another. Now there is a time and place for everything, I also have many hatchets, axes and saws. I honestly am just as comfortable at times splitting my wood with either but at other times ive felt more comfortable with my knife. I am also a believer that the right tool for the job makes it easier and safer. But with all that said there are knives that are/were designed over eons to do the very task in question parangs, goloks, bolos and others im sure and they get used daily for all cutting and choping task from cleaning small game to felling trees, food prep and shelter building. I believe that because we have access and the resources to use more tools that we sometimes discredit the ablity of some tools and or the people that choose to use them. I used one of my larger blades solely in a one tool challenge for close to a month everywhere I could and learned a great deal from this about my capabilities and the tools and I think thats the biggest problem with people's decisions about rather or not to use a larger than readily acceptable blade by most. All large knives are not created equal. If your looking for a large chopping blade get one intended/designed for chopping, this doesn't meen you go out and attempt to fell a redwood and it doesn't mean you have to split a 8-12" round in half in one swing. Start on the edges and work your way around until its small enough to safely span the wood with your tool of choice. It always safety and common sense first and foremost.

Well said. :thumbup:

That last part in bold is not very common nowadays...

I've found through use (and abuse :foot that I can make due with a 7" blade as an all in one woods blade; with the caveat being that I'm definitely not splitting logs with it LOL. At that size range a variety of tasks can be accomplished while still being very easy to carry on a belt.


2" high blade for reference on the cut depth. :thumbup:

Single strike against a maple sucker; cleared those up quickly LOL (1 1/2" tall blade)

Some examples of the 7" (roughly) blades (including the two in the pics above) that have become my go-to woods blades:

Back to the big stuff!

The bottom knife was custom made based on my design & overall measurement/specs. It ended up actually coming out thinner than expected due to the almost full flat grind given that it is one quarter of an inch across the spine. Once I sharpen it ( it just has a rough edge on it now), it will end up being even thinner unless I bring the angle up which will still leave it thin behind the edge.

Long story short I kind of wished I had asked for heavier stock as this feels too lean behind the edge and the overall grind IMHO for the sort of heavy use I want to subject this knife too LOL.

 

[ocnLogan]

Interesting read. Most of what I've thought from reading the OP and first few posts has been discussed, so I won't be very lengthy.

Environment and use/intended purpose are really the big drivers in thickness and other blade design considerations. Personally, I've found that .25in (or thicker) blades just aren't for me, particularly in smaller blade lengths. I have a BK2 that I got as my first "real" knife, and because of its wide chord, its actually not "too" bad of a slicer, and the ~5in blade is pretty versatile. However, I've never once needed that much strength/weight, and as such as I've had more experience and purchased other blades, I haven't carried/used it in well over a year. I've seen a few 3-4in .25in thick blades... and I can't imagine what I'd use one of those for, and find them confusing (personally).

I do have a BK9 (3/16in thick), and that is as thick as I can conceive of needing in a knife, which means that most of what I need can be much thinner (in my mind, the longer the blade, potentially the thicker the "required" stock, unless its a machete). My BK9 while not 5/16 thick, is of what I've found to be a useful length/size. I find that it works great at camp, and actually does out chop my hatchet (which, admittedly is pretty lame), as like others have said, chopping performance really increases sharply past ~8in or so. And I would say my rough size limit would be a ~.25in 14in long Golok or Parang of some sort (I know khuks can be thicker, I've just never used one).

At this point though, I rarely chop anything. My folding saw cuts anything that needs to be cut, simply because its so much faster/safer. The BK9 is great for what batoning I "need" (usually one piece of woods worth, if that), and does great at other tasks like limbing (way easier than my hatchet would be), making pegs/etc.

However, those that are saying that longer blades have better edge retention... that just is not true. They do have *more* edge, but you don't get better retention. When you chop, its almost always with the same portion of the blade, so that area gets dull at a "normal" rate. Same thing with carving (usually right by the handle), and that area doesn't magically retain its edge better either. So while you may get some more time between sharpenings, its just because you've moved to a portion of the blade that is less ideal for the task than the one you started using the task for (which, admittedly is better than not having it, but its not the same thing).

On the camping front, I think I'm pretty close to how 22Rimfire sees things. Rules are good, to keep people from cutting down live trees/etc, but I also still strongly prefer to have a campfire if it is possible. In areas that are extremely popular/overused, then I can see how collecting deadfall/etc could be problematic.

 

[tatalley10]

What i wanna know is why more big choppers aren't made from metals like D2, and CPM3V?

I get they are harder to field sharpen but if they are harder to damage then less field sharpening is needed right? Or am I missing some other important metallurgy reason?

 

[22-rimfire]

I would guess because they tend to be expensive. Big choppers aren't for everyone also.

 

[tatalley10]

True, tiz why I decided to make my own...lol

 

[sideways]

Big knives are a macho rite of passage.

 

[stabman]

Big knives are a macho rite of passage.

That's odd...I view the small knife crowd that way at times.
"I'm so manly I don't need more than a 2 inch blade. Scratch that, I don't need a knife at all, I'll just break a rock in half and skin an antelope with that."

If you want to play the judgement game, it can be played multiple ways.

 

[sideways]

I'm glad we agree... Small knives are for people who are already weighed down by their massive manhoods.

Carry on!

 

[stabman]

I'm glad we agree... Small knives are for people who are already weighed down by their massive manhoods.

Carry on!

Of course, in the Becker sub-forum, I just used a small knife (3.2 inch blade) to win a big knife (7 inch blade).
I guess that means my manhood is variable in size...

 

[sideways]

Of course, in the Becker sub-forum, I just used a small knife (3.2 inch blade) to win a big knife (7 inch blade).
I guess that means my manhood is variable in size...

Nah man, I saw that thread, and it's just shrinkage from the cold water.

[video=youtube;BEnKLhi83J8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEnKLhi83J8[/video]

It was an interesting tracker mod you ended up with btw. :thumbup:

 

[stabman]

Nah man, I saw that thread, and it's just shrinkage from the cold water.

[video=youtube;BEnKLhi83J8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEnKLhi83J8[/video]

That does make a lot of logical sense.

It did show me both what a smaller knife can accomplish, and what I want a larger one for.
You can certainly make do with a smaller knife; if you die in the woods because the knife was small, you were probably going to die anyway.
A larger one can make certain tasks easier or faster though.

I always have something big and small with me when I go in the woods though, as then I have the best of both worlds. :thumbup:
The things that are easier with a big knife get done more easily.
The things that are easier with a small knife get done more easily.
Which then equals more relaxation time! :thumbup:

And big is all relative; my old security supervisor thought a 1.5 inch blade was big...because she'd been a prison guard before, and saw what those guys did with tiny blades.

It was an interesting tracker mod you ended up with btw. :thumbup:

Thanks.
It actually works too, including the quarter -round area.
Which is something I was trying to figure out how to do, as I want to make a Tracker variant at some point. Now I have a good idea of how to proceed.