Last Visible Canary
actively parsing hurf durf
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,577
theres a few things to consider when looking at the differences between the tank buster, the hell razor, the satin jack, and the badger attack.
I'm doing all of the comapison with the assumption that the amount of metal directly behind the edge will be same for each knife.
compared to the hell razor - it has the tac handle wich has heavier palm swells, and a skull crusher pommel that is a little less versatile then the sf handles pommel, but pointier and a little better at breaking things. The hell razor is 3/16 with a saber grind that terminates roughly at the center of the blade, where as the tank busters saber grind is very very high, almost a full flat or full convex (depending on what its going to be). at the same thickness, the tank buster will have a better cutting geometry (weaker), where as the hell razor will have a better chopping geometry (stronger). The hell razor has a longer edge, but less curve to the belly, making the hell razor better at long stroke slicing, but the tank buster better at skinning and any application requireing a heavy belly curve.
Compared to the satin jack - because it has a taller blade, and the same high saber grind, it has a slightly better cutting geometry. the shorter blade is easier to carry and conceal, and it has the slight recurve and larger belly to help in cutting performance. because the satin jack is longer, it will be better at chopping, though the height of the tank buster may help with that a little.
Compared to the badger attack - it is taller, wich will mean it will have a better cutting geometry, but will require the object to seperate more when the knife penetrates. I'm not sure if there will be any difference in chopping performance because of the reletively small difference in forward weight created by the taller heigth, but shift in high saber geometry.
my feelings on the tank buster - I hate choils. I hate them even more on short blades. I've used short knives with recurves and even small choils, and it always got cought. Because most of what I cut is bags and plastic and bunches of packing paper, i need to be able to use the edge from tip to ricasso without any interruptions in cutting ability, otherwise part of the material is gaurenteed to hang up on it.
If I had to choose between the tank buster and the badger attack - I'd choose the badger attack. given similar weights, I'd rather have the less tall blade profile for general user ease. I've found that taller blades are more akward and require more thought and skill to use for general applications.
While I like the recurve portion of the blade, I beleive that it is literally completely wasted by the presence of the choil, since the ability to just put the edge on the material and saw through it quickly is removed, since you have to watch where the material is to keep it from hitting the choil. to me, the benefit of the recurve is not extending the belly portion of the blade, but rather creating an area where the material is naturally held in place during a slicing action, making it more user freindly and requiring less active controll of your cutting action and the position of the material being cut.
SO.... unless you need it for skinner, you want a slightly more acute cutting geometry then the batac, or require a shorter geometry keeping the sjtac and hr out of your requirements, I'd go with the sjtac. I prefer the sjtac over the hell razor because of its more compact, and I dont need the added metal inherent in a half saber grind, or the versatility of the sf handle.
well, in a perfect world buy all of them. In a limited world, I think the sjtac has the best of everything.
I'm doing all of the comapison with the assumption that the amount of metal directly behind the edge will be same for each knife.
compared to the hell razor - it has the tac handle wich has heavier palm swells, and a skull crusher pommel that is a little less versatile then the sf handles pommel, but pointier and a little better at breaking things. The hell razor is 3/16 with a saber grind that terminates roughly at the center of the blade, where as the tank busters saber grind is very very high, almost a full flat or full convex (depending on what its going to be). at the same thickness, the tank buster will have a better cutting geometry (weaker), where as the hell razor will have a better chopping geometry (stronger). The hell razor has a longer edge, but less curve to the belly, making the hell razor better at long stroke slicing, but the tank buster better at skinning and any application requireing a heavy belly curve.
Compared to the satin jack - because it has a taller blade, and the same high saber grind, it has a slightly better cutting geometry. the shorter blade is easier to carry and conceal, and it has the slight recurve and larger belly to help in cutting performance. because the satin jack is longer, it will be better at chopping, though the height of the tank buster may help with that a little.
Compared to the badger attack - it is taller, wich will mean it will have a better cutting geometry, but will require the object to seperate more when the knife penetrates. I'm not sure if there will be any difference in chopping performance because of the reletively small difference in forward weight created by the taller heigth, but shift in high saber geometry.
my feelings on the tank buster - I hate choils. I hate them even more on short blades. I've used short knives with recurves and even small choils, and it always got cought. Because most of what I cut is bags and plastic and bunches of packing paper, i need to be able to use the edge from tip to ricasso without any interruptions in cutting ability, otherwise part of the material is gaurenteed to hang up on it.
If I had to choose between the tank buster and the badger attack - I'd choose the badger attack. given similar weights, I'd rather have the less tall blade profile for general user ease. I've found that taller blades are more akward and require more thought and skill to use for general applications.
While I like the recurve portion of the blade, I beleive that it is literally completely wasted by the presence of the choil, since the ability to just put the edge on the material and saw through it quickly is removed, since you have to watch where the material is to keep it from hitting the choil. to me, the benefit of the recurve is not extending the belly portion of the blade, but rather creating an area where the material is naturally held in place during a slicing action, making it more user freindly and requiring less active controll of your cutting action and the position of the material being cut.
SO.... unless you need it for skinner, you want a slightly more acute cutting geometry then the batac, or require a shorter geometry keeping the sjtac and hr out of your requirements, I'd go with the sjtac. I prefer the sjtac over the hell razor because of its more compact, and I dont need the added metal inherent in a half saber grind, or the versatility of the sf handle.
well, in a perfect world buy all of them. In a limited world, I think the sjtac has the best of everything.
