Proto BK16 w/ recurve, and some questions.

NJBillK

NJBillK

Custom Leather and Fixed Blade modifications.
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
9,594
@Ethan Becker
There is a thread in the Carothers Performance Knives subforum that caught my attention, and I thought it may work here. Since you like to keep your ear to the ground and eye on us weirdos, I figured why not give it a shot.

I do not know how recently you have poked your head in, but there has been some chatter here and there about the Proto 16 with a recurve, as well as one member that modded his 16 to have some recurve to it.

This got me thinking, and hopefully you (or some other more informed folks) could enlighten us on a few points.

- Why was the recurve originally factored into the design?
- Did the deletion of the recurve have a negative impact on your intended usage?
- Are there certain tasks that are easier with a shorter blade height from the recurve, or any tasks where you prefer a recurve?
- Taking rarity and availability out of the equation, if you had to choose between a recurve, saber, or standard 16, which would you choose as your woods knife?
- What do you see as the individual strengths and weaknesses of each of those three compared to one another?
-----
I would completely understand if you would prefer to not answer the following, but since I have your ear;
- I wouldn't be surprised if the removal of the recurve from the pattern was a financial one. If that is the case, was it more on the production side and the difficulties associated with a recurve, the customer base not being familiar with sharpening a recurve and thus being scared away from the pattern, or a combination of both?

Thanks in advance!
 
this is just my opinion so its not carved in stone. my personal experience has given me this opinion.
a full flat grind makes a good slicer really good for food prep ect.
a recurve scares some people away because they perceive that it is harder to sharpen. that might be enough to
do away with the recurve from a sales point. (just $.02) but on the positive side. recurves seem to cut rope better.
saber grind is really a great compromise as a woods/bushcraft and even self defense blade.
so I like all of the blades but most of my knives are saber ground.
it will be interesting to see what the members say.
 
Well I can answer some of the questions, but maybe not with enough detail to satisfy.

I showed Ethan my recurve 16 two gatherings ago I think. Told him I've always like recurves wanted to know why he didn't keep it for the production blade. The recurve was originaly in the design simply because Ethan loves recurves. We talked about the 4 and 6 and how well recurves served them. However, he said he has grown wiser in his years and his original thought that the recurve design would serve the 16 as well was not the case. If I'm recalling correctly he said something like for the 16s size and intended use the straight edge is going to work better.

Now if I'm correct the saber grind was not of his doing. Kabar made them saber because they need a flat spot to stamp it. When kabar bought the laser engraver Ethan said to hell with that make them flat.

From what I've gathered, the flat grind straight edge version we have today is the version Ethan wants to be on the market. And IMHO I agreed with him it's the best version of the three. But depending on the task it's nice to be able to pick between the three.

I would love if Ethan would chime in and confirm I have my story straight. The conversation happened late at night and there was fair bit of booze consumed by that point.

Of course one of our mods DerekH DerekH is a massive 16 fan and has probably spent the most time talking to Ethan about the 16.

Here are some photos of the three versions. An overlap of the standard and my recurve. And finally a photo of my recurve with the original prototype in Ethan's shop.


IMG_4671.JPG

IMG_4670.JPG

IMG_4672.JPG
 
someone say proto?

smugshot_3870108-X5.jpg
 
personally, i don't see much advantage in a recurve at that size... ideally, recurves to me suggest weight forward, for chopping, which requires "size"...

you want as much blade as possible, in a sense, so a forward curve, "belly", produces more edge for overall length. so, your typical skinners and drop points. good stuff.

otherwise, wharncliffes and [scram] seax patterns. longer edge, straighter, compared to the spine.

why there was never a wharny tweener, or a nessy tweener, is beyond me :D
 
Per Ethan, while the recurve is aesthetically pleasing, in that size there is no benefit (as Bladite said above) and the only thing gained is a difficulty in sharpening.

In terms of Saber vs Full Flat Grind (FFG) originally the knife was a high saber, but there was needed a flat area to stamp, then the laser came, blah blah blah, at the end of the day the FFG cuts better, and thus we have the FFG. Personally I prefer the Saber, but ultimately that is my preference and based off of nothing more than aesthetic preference.

Which Ethan prefers, I would say the FFG, and Curtis named the thought process behind that pretty well.

Something to keep in mind is that somewhere around here there is a picture of most of the original tweener prototypes, and some of the different necker prototypes, and not all of those were Ethan's designs or ideas, there were a few options that were committee designs or Tooj's ideas attached to Ethan's handle.

At the end of the day the 16 was the one Ethan wanted, and it has proven to be a hell of a knife.
 
I would definitely rather have the flat ground straight edged version. Saber grinds offer a level of robustness that I don't need and sacrifice cutting ability for it and while recurves do excel at certain cutting tasks like cutting rope I find them less versatile overall.

The only thing I would change about the standard flat ground 16 is to make the scales thicker and the blade longer. I prefer a blade about 5-5.5 inches which I know isn't the preferred size. I also realize that I could put liners under the standard scales but that is limited by the straps on the stock sheath which I am a fan of. I really like the stock sheaths. I do wish it had adjustable straps like some Ontario sheaths.

I wonder is there has been any talk about making the stock sheath shorter now that the BK15 is discontinued? I guess I would maybe change that? Or you could make the 16 longer? ;) :)
 
bearfacedkiller said:
I would definitely rather have the flat ground straight edged version. Saber grinds offer a level of robustness that I don't need and sacrifice cutting ability for it and while recurves do excel at certain cutting tasks like cutting rope I find them less versatile overall.

The only thing I would change about the standard flat ground 16 is to make the scales thicker and the blade longer. I prefer a blade about 5-5.5 inches which I know isn't the preferred size. I also realize that I could put liners under the standard scales but that is limited by the straps on the stock sheath which I am a fan of. I really like the stock sheaths. I do wish it had adjustable straps like some Ontario sheaths.

I wonder is there has been any talk about making the stock sheath shorter now that the BK15 is discontinued? I guess I would maybe change that? Or you could make the 16 longer? ;) :)
Click to expand...

The stock straps will stretch to accommodate liners. And they will more than likely not redo the sheaths to be shorter as that would involve renegotiating with the sheathmakers and retooling and all that entails.

I can see the appeal of a longer BK16, but for me I think it would be too much.
 
going off on a couple of tangents: I do like the sheath, too, but it would be REALLY nice to have them in black (I'm trying to convince the supply officer here that fixed blade is the way to go, 16 of course for field inspections, as per ease of use/cleaning/strength etc, but a tan sheath won't fly with the uniform); aaaand...has anybody scandi'd a saber 16??
 
I love my ffg 16 but am always on thelook for a saber even though i know it wont perform quite as well at cutting tasks. I just love the way it looks!
 
Thanks for all of the replies folks.

I know of the generalities of recurves, but I was curious if the benefits were more of the subtle kind.
- do they featherstick slightly better due to catching and holding the limb being cut? (Push cut vs slicing)
- Does a recurve offer any benefits to skinning game?
- Does anyone else sharpen their BK4 with differing edge angles?

• one of the benefits if a recurve is the ability to selectively sharpen sections with differing angles (more stout for the convexed area, more acute for the heel), though that can be done with a straight edge, it is easier/more accurate with a recurve/tracker shaped blade.
• I was under the impression that the original recurve wasn't one continuous curve, I thought it had a flat at the heel end, thanks for the pics of the original(s).

As far as flat vs saber:
I wasn't aware of the engraving aspect, so thank you for the enlightenment.

- I considered some of the aspects a saber ground blade; stouter blade, steeper secondary grinds which result in a steeper shoulder angle at primary bevel junction.

The one thing that didn't really jive was that the blade would be any thicker BTE, since all it would take was a steeper secondary to get to a comparable thickness BTE.

While a flat ground blade would make for a slightly more slicey blade, it would make for a less stout blade.
• Wouldn't these differences be so slight that they would be hardly noticeable?

Does anyone have enough experience with both to offer an educated opinion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top