Polar Opposite Knife Testing?

[stanley_white]

As I read the many outstanding reviews posted in W&SS as well as other forums I see two trends:

1. "Bushcraft" style knives seem to be tested / reviewed using skills such as fuzz sticks, spoon making, batoning, and other "fine edge" oriented skills.

2. "Chopper" style knives seem to be tested / reviewed using skills such as chopping through large logs, slashing through overgrown vines, and digging etc.

So I was thinking...

Could we, as W&SS, design a "Polar Opposite Test" taking one or two elements from each type of test / review and make them into a standardized test?

I envision something like making a fuzz stick, making a spoon, batoning through a wrist sized log, hacking through a wrist sized log, and digging a hole of some size.

Thoughts?

-Stan

 

[6shooter]

Well, there's two different lists of general tasks a knife is expected to be capable of, because they are two different types of knives designed with different intentions in mind.

Of course, in a survival situation, a knife may be called upon to perform tasks not within the "intended use" of the design, but it would be expected that it won't perform those tasks as well as a knife that was designed for them.

You certainly could carve a spoon with a big 10" blade, but it would be a lot more awkward than using a smaller blade. And I actually kinda like using a bigger blade to make fuzz sticks because I find the weight of the blade helps it "slide" through the wood easier.

And yeah, you could use a 4" bushcraft blade to hack through limbs, but it would certainly take a lot longer.

There are some different methods to help compensate for areas that a certain style of knife wasn't really intended for. IE: Cross grain batoning with a smaller knife rather than hacking and chopping, or different holds and choking up on a bigger blade for finer tasks.

I think it's generally understood what a basic knife design is intended for, and capable of, which is why you see the same sort of stuff in reviews of the same types of knives. Nobody expects a 1/8" thick 4" blade scandi ground knife to be able to chop very well, so nobody bothers to incorporate chopping into a review of that knife.

 

[fixer]

the more specialized any tool is the worse it does at other tasks.

a golock typically has to point and would suck at carving a spoon... tho you could use it to at least rough out the shape.

a curved spoon knife has no weight to it and is gonna be really bad at trying to chop anything.

medium sized general purpose knives will do many things reasonably well.... but won't do as well at any of the more specialized tasks as something intended for that task.

the jobs that need to be done can vary based on geographic location. for example... there ain't a lot of vines here in the desert.

 

[numberthree]

I'd never dig a hole with a Mora style knife; I'd make myself a digging stick. If I only have a big knife, I'll use chopsticks instead of a spoon, or drink right out of my cup or bowl, rather than bust my ass trying to carve a spoon. The real survival skill is to adapt to what you have available and use it efficiently to help you accomplish your goals. With this attitude, you are far less dependent on having a particular type of knife, or on having a knife at all...

Fit tasks to tools, not tools to tasks... sometimes you might have no choice, but that's far more rare than we usually admit.

That's why a standard 'test' would never provide much valid comparison; the psychology of using each style of knife is very different.

 

[pitdog]

I think I've done all those ya mention with my Knatchet except the digging and looking at the shape of it I'd think it would perform quite well as a small spade !:thumbup:

 

[JCK]

I'd just like to add that I do think you can dig with a smaller knife. I was watching man vs wild, and he dug a decent hole with his knife still in the sheath, and he generally does use his knife. Of course I don't know whether they replace it after each episode, and I'm not trying to start anything, but I think that a smaller (around 4" +/-) blade is capable of doing digging and chopping, but maybe just not very effectively.

 

[Mistwalker]

I tend to be bad about taking a knife out of its intended element at times just to see how it will do.

Like chopping with a smaller knife. This knife by Dylan Fletcher only has a five inch blade but because of the blade shape, weight distribution, and handle ergonomics it chops better than a lot of knives of the same dimensions.

And it is definitely tough enough to take some abuse

 

[Mistwalker]

This pry knife by TOPS was designed for urban applications and I am sure it never had any sort of bushcraft figured into the design, but TOPS does some very sharp edges so it will work in a pinch.

When I take a knife out of its intended element and it does well...or better than one might expect I'll show that. If it doesn't do very well at something it wasn't designed to do then I either don't use that information or don't go into it much because I see no point in stating the obvious or seeming to denigrate a knife for not doing well at something it wasn't designed to do in the first place.



As stated earlier, there are other techniques besides chopping that can be employed with smaller knives such as cross-grain batoning. This knife would easily handle this same technique with a larger diameter limb but I chose to keep the work in what I considered "proper context" and just let that information be implied by the photos rather than put the knife in what many makers would feel an unfair test of their knife.

 

[SouthernCross]

G'day Stan

Thoughts?

To be honest, I think anyone would have a job ahead of them to come up with a "standardised test" that would be meaningfull to enough people.

Just as an example, I'll include what I look for in a knife review.

The reviews that interest me the most are the ones that show a knife in sustained use, doing the tasks I'm looking to use the knife for :thumbup:

Not only does a long term review give me an idea about the knife, but it also gives me the opportunity to have a look at the reviewer. After all, I also want to know if the reviewer knows what they are talking about

As far as "Bushcraft" knives are concerned, I'm only interested in a review that not only shows how well the knife goes at working with wood, but also shows how well it goes at other tasks (eg game prep, fish prep etc).

Since I don't carry a large blade, I'm really not interested in the sorts of reviews that feature the chopping ability of a large knife (I carry a hatchet for that )


How would someone like me (with my preferences) benefit from an agreed standardised test that includes features I'm not interested in?




Kind regards
Mick