Purpose on blade length

[Chicahiro Ishida]

Do you know all?
What do you use 1",2",3",4",5",6",7",8",9",10"and more, blade knife?
I reckon I should think more how to use on length to buy knife.

1" blade seems not usual, and not easy to find.
But I can do many on it! I can cut paper and cloth, peer Apple, and sharpen pencil.

2" is important on Japan as 6cm is low limit on Japanese Gun and Blade low.
I think it has great usual. Many skininng work is possible, and injure men deep enough(hard to kill?).

3" is many tactikal knife's blade. It can kill if hit weak point.
It cannot cut apple, but can cook under 6" fish. For hunting, can do exsept cutting bone.
It can cut many rope.

4" is most hunting and tactical knife's blade length.
This can cut Orenge, skinning most game, piace haert. Good length to game treatment?

5" is too large for folder. It is a few folder 5".
On fixed blade, many tactical knife have this length.
But it is too large to skininng, too small to cooking.

6" blade small bowie is many found.
This can cut apple, cut not so large wood, good for fighting.
It can cut many meat and begitable. Enough length to cook most fish.

7" is too large to carry in suit, but too small to blake wood.

can you know all length?

------------------
Chic Stone

 

[ARtsig1]

Chic,
I used to love the big blade folders, and still have a soft spot for them, but tend to carry a 3.5" to 4.0" blade now. For the last little bit it has been a large Sebenza which has a 3.54" blade. I also carry a smaller double bladed folder to suppliment the Sebenza and to have in case someone ask to borrow a knife. As I have said before; "ain't nobody getting their grubby paws on by 'benza!"

------------------
Art Sigmon
"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me"
Php. 4:13

"For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword"
Heb. 4:12

 

[Starfish]

I'd have to agree with artsig1. My experience with knives has been limited to a handful, and the most useful knives for me have been around 3.5". But I think also that it is not just length that is important, but also blade shape, or style, for a given length. If that makes any sense

Matthew

 

[Bugs3x]

Chic -- am a bit confused about a 3" blade being too short to cut an apple. I eat a lot of apples, and for a strange reason, must peel them. For years, I have cut them into quarters, cut out the core, etc., with a knife with a 2.5" blade at the most.

No, it won't cut an apple like a big carving knife will cut a melon, but if one starts at either the top or bottom, and cuts in a circle around the apple, it enables one to cut any apple under 5" in diameter quite neatly.

I can't remember whether it was a moose or elk, but I recently read that Tim Wegner field dressed one or the other with the SPyderco Mouse, which he designed. The blade is under 2".I'm beginning to think that my penchant for larger blades may be a bit oldfashioned.

------------------
Asi es la vida

Bugs

 

[matthew rapaport]

Its an endless cycle. Little blades cut better, especially when they are thin. Technically it is more correct to say that one can get an efficient edge profile more easily when the blade is thin.

But little blades can not chop, and there are certain other chores - combat related - for which they are not suited. Thus you have this great Darwinian struggle between the large knife that can do it all, but does a lot badly, and the small knife that forsakes being all things to its user in exchange for cutting better!

 

[Esav Benyamin]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by matthew rapaport:
Thus you have this great Darwinian struggle between the large knife that can do it all, but does a lot badly, and the small knife that forsakes being all things to its user in exchange for cutting better!</font>

That's why the large Sebenza was invented

------------------
Welcome to planet Earth - Illegitimis non carborundum!