Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Background :
Iin 1937 W. D. "Bo" Randall was inspired by a Scagel knife. The founder has passed, but the knives continue through his son Gary. The knives are not custom as many use it in the current market, essentially "one maker one knife" (not withstanding heat treating), but they contain a lot of hand work. They probably deserve a distinct label like other small shop outfits like Reeve, Busse, etc. .
There is a pamphlet which contains more information plus commentary on the design of the various models, intended use and various options, how to sharpen and care for the knives, well worth reading. I wish more companies would put out such information.
One of the strongest aspects is they are clear on what the knives are not designed to do. They specifically warn against chopping bone or trying to chisel cut through nails, as in order to create an edge which can do this well you have to give up cutting ability. They will however on request craft a heavier edge for really hard work. It is refreshing to see frank discussion of limits of performance for knives.
As a caution on the information, some of it is dated such as "Since Randall Made knives are 100% handmade we are able to use high carbon stainless steel of a quality and toughness that is not and cannot be used in the production of commercial knives." This is in reference to 440B stainless. You would be hard pressed to support that when you consider what Benchmade and Spyderco offer now in regards to stainless production knives. Contention of O1 as the finest forgable carbon steel would also be likely, for those interested Alvin has done an indepth commentary on O1 vs 52100 as knife steels on rec.knives.
What follows are some basic specifications on two well used Randalls, a #5 in stainless and #1 in carbon, some stock work, and some general use. Much more is planned.
The Randall #1, "All purpose fighting knife", is forged from O1 tool steel, through hardened to 55/56 HRC. The blade is 1/4" thick with a full distal taper and weighs 265 g, 465 g in the leather sheath. This one has an eight inch blade, sharpened for 6 3/4" of its length, 1 1/8" wide, with a sabre flat grind which is 5/8" high tapering to a 0.025-0.035" thick edge, ground at 14-16 degrees per side. The knife balances one inch in front of the guard. A shot :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_I.jpg
The Randall #5, "small camp and trail knife", is forged from 440B stainless steel and through hardened to 56/57 HRC. The knife has a sabre flat grind, 5/8" high on a blade which is 1 1/8" wide, a quarter inch thick, with a full distal taper, and weighs 240 g, 380 g in the leather sheath. The edge is from 0.008-0.015" thick and ground at 15-17 degrees per side. The knife balances neutrally on the index finger. A shot :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_V.jpg
Stock work :
Pointing sections of hardwood dowel the Randall #1 was able to rough off the necessary wood in only 8.7 +/- 0.2 slices, and pointed a 2.5x1.5" section of birch hardwood in 8.4 +/- 0.1 cuts, showing solid cutting ability. The Randall #5 took 11.5 +/- 0.5 , and 11.1 +/- 0.3 cuts in comparison, slightly behind the #1 because of the inability to choke up around the guard because it was pointy on top and thus created a leverage disadvantage.
The point profile on the #1 Randall is fairly thin, the tip tapers from 0.220" thick through 3.1" at an angle of 2.0 degrees and is 1.2" wide at the start of the tip. The knife achieves 121 +/- 6 pages into a phonebook on a 50 lbs push and 640 +/- 15 on a hard vertical stab. The #5 is similar, its tip tapers from 0.225" thick through 2.8" at an angle of 2.0 degrees and is 1.15" wide at the start of the tip. It achieves 121 +/- 6 pages on a 50 lbs push and 590 +/- 25 on a hard vertical stab.
The chopping ability of the Randall #1 is low for its blade length due to the light weight and close to neutral balance. On birch hardwood the #1 had 44 +/- 5% of the ability of the Gransfors Bruks Wildlife hatchet when both were used light, swinging from the wrist with a little elbow motion. However when the shoulder was put into the swing, the much greater heft of the hatchet allowed it to pull ahead and the Randall had only 27 +/- 3% of the ability of the hatchet through a couple of dozen sections of wood cut. The #5 has the same weight and near idential blade profile and performs the same when used with a rear grip to shift the balance forward.
Food preperation :
In the kitchen the Randall #1 is hampered by the large guard which locks the knife off of the cutting board and prevents overhand grips around that section of blade. It does do well is as a carving knife, making long and deep slices carving up a roast or making slices of bread. For crusty bread the knife works well with a coarse finish, for most meats a high polish works best assuming more of a push is used instead of a sawing motion.
It also worked well slicing up pork fat. Both have similar profiles and the only difference in how the knives cut the fat was due to the difference in the sharpness. The #1 had been used for some chopping on hardwoods earlier in the day and was sliding a little on the skin, but still readily cut the pork into strips :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_pork_fat.jpg
In peeling potatoes and other precision work, the #5 worked better as it was more neutral in balance. The cutting and general handing ability is similar in all regards except the greater weight in the blade of the #1 causes more fatigue.
Both knives can easily cut up the potatoes into sections, these ones were fairly coarse, but finer cuts were easily possible. Adding some onions, the only real significant difference was that with a fully optomized kitchen knife with a really thin blade, as part of th mincing, the blade runs under the fingers:
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/japanese_utility_onion.jpg
With the Randalls thicker blade the onion had to be turned on its side to allow the cuts :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_onion.jpg
This is a bit more awkward and time consuming, but again just a few minutes more to get the desired results :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_potato_cuts.jpg
Just how much more effort is required? The japanese utility kitchen knife from Lee Valley cuts a thick potato with less than a pound of force. The Randall's take 5-7 lbs because the profile thicker to raise the overall durability and strength of the knife.
The difference in force changes through various vegetables of course. On smaller ones like broccili stalks the Japanese knife takes 1-2 lbs and the Randall's are much closer and take 4-6 lbs. On soft fruits and vegetables like bananas and tomatoes the Randalls glide through them easily as the foods are not stiff enough to induce any wedging action. On really thick vegetables like turnips the Randalls will take a lot more force and need at times the off hand needs to be used to force the blade through the cuts. Here the sharpened top edge on the #1 is problematic.
In short, the Randall's are not optomized for food prep due to being designed for a wider scope of work, but with a little thought to method can handle what ever is necessary. They also work a lot better than many tactical knives or other combat knives many of which tend to run heavier edge with thicker primary grinds (SOG, Strider, TOPS, etc.).
Brush Work :
The Randall's were used to construct a basic lean-to, as the chopping ability is light, a location was scouted for which would require a minimal amount of cutting, and which had a decent supply of soft woods which if needed would be cut effectively.
The basic frame took about ten mintutes, all was wind blown except for two alders as main supports. Alder is softer than white pine, and the Randall #1 had no problem cutting even a two to three inch section in just a few chops. The basic setup :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_basic_frame.jpg
On top of this framework were boughs. A shot after ten minutes of layering :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_final.jpg
The inside :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_inside.jpg
Note this is just the start, to make the shelter decently rain resistant or even able to cut high wind, about three times as many boughs would need to be layered on.
Abuse :
The #1 Randall was used to dig a decent sized hole in rocky soil with only minor denting to the edge. There was no chipping or significant damage of any kind. It dug the hole on the right, and yes those rocks were leveraged out :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_hole.jpg
The digging was done fairly carefully, no power slams, using the knife to work into the soil and loosen it, so it could be scooped out with the hand. On the larger rocks the sides were excavated until the rock could be popped out with just wrist leverage applied to the knife. The #5 also took part in the pick action with similar results :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_5_hole.jpg
Edge retention :
The Randall's were used alongside the Manix to cut 1/4" ridged cardboard. All knives were sharpened with edges formed with a 20 degree microbevel from the medium Sharpmaker rods. The S30V Manix was able to cut about three as much cardboard and retain the same level of sharpness. No significant difference was noted between the stainless and carbon Randall.
They were also used for some rhubarb cutting, very acidic stalky vegetation. After 400 cuts, all the knives could still shave, though the carbon Randall was slightly behind the stainless one which well matched the S30V Manix. Corrosion was likely a large factor in the blunting as the O1 #1 took a visible patina.
Sharpening :
The Randall's are soft enough to be readily filed, the O1 #1 responds significantly easier to a file than the stainless #5, no difficulty in telling them apart by feel. After the hole digging it took less than five minutes to restore the edge to a hair shaving finish. The edge was set with a file, honed with a x-coarse SiC waterstone and then polished with finer stones ending with 0.5 micron CrO on leather.
Handle :
The handles are well shaped for comfort in extended use irregardless of the nature of the grip as it isn't indexed for any particular orientation or abrasive. Of course this reduces security compared to aggressive grips like the Reeve checkered grips or the highly contoured handes that McClung runs. The Randalls get their security though the prominent guard which works well in most conditions however if the grip is compromised with oils or fats it becomes difficult to control the knife and keep it from rotating. Randall does offer grips with more prominent finger grooves which aid in security at the cost of grip versatility. The large full guard does prevent certain grips such as thumb on spine for control as the top section of the guard is in the way and digs into the thumb :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_thumb_grip.jpg
However a modifed version works well :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_overhand_thumb_grip.jpg
As does a full split which is used for draw knife work and other precision carving :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_carving_grip.jpg
The latter two grips are functional mainly as the guard is so well rounded that it can be worked around with little discomfort. The #5 doesn't have the full guard of the #1 but has similar issues with overhand grips as the top of it is actually fairly pointy.
Sheath :
The leather sheaths for both knives are well constructed and still solid after many years of use. There is about 1/8" or so of space around the blade at the sides which allows them to enter smoothly. However they tighten around the choil region. Once the belt loop is engaged the knife is held very securely.
Ref : http://www.randallknives.com/
-Cliff
Iin 1937 W. D. "Bo" Randall was inspired by a Scagel knife. The founder has passed, but the knives continue through his son Gary. The knives are not custom as many use it in the current market, essentially "one maker one knife" (not withstanding heat treating), but they contain a lot of hand work. They probably deserve a distinct label like other small shop outfits like Reeve, Busse, etc. .
There is a pamphlet which contains more information plus commentary on the design of the various models, intended use and various options, how to sharpen and care for the knives, well worth reading. I wish more companies would put out such information.
One of the strongest aspects is they are clear on what the knives are not designed to do. They specifically warn against chopping bone or trying to chisel cut through nails, as in order to create an edge which can do this well you have to give up cutting ability. They will however on request craft a heavier edge for really hard work. It is refreshing to see frank discussion of limits of performance for knives.
As a caution on the information, some of it is dated such as "Since Randall Made knives are 100% handmade we are able to use high carbon stainless steel of a quality and toughness that is not and cannot be used in the production of commercial knives." This is in reference to 440B stainless. You would be hard pressed to support that when you consider what Benchmade and Spyderco offer now in regards to stainless production knives. Contention of O1 as the finest forgable carbon steel would also be likely, for those interested Alvin has done an indepth commentary on O1 vs 52100 as knife steels on rec.knives.
What follows are some basic specifications on two well used Randalls, a #5 in stainless and #1 in carbon, some stock work, and some general use. Much more is planned.
The Randall #1, "All purpose fighting knife", is forged from O1 tool steel, through hardened to 55/56 HRC. The blade is 1/4" thick with a full distal taper and weighs 265 g, 465 g in the leather sheath. This one has an eight inch blade, sharpened for 6 3/4" of its length, 1 1/8" wide, with a sabre flat grind which is 5/8" high tapering to a 0.025-0.035" thick edge, ground at 14-16 degrees per side. The knife balances one inch in front of the guard. A shot :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_I.jpg
The Randall #5, "small camp and trail knife", is forged from 440B stainless steel and through hardened to 56/57 HRC. The knife has a sabre flat grind, 5/8" high on a blade which is 1 1/8" wide, a quarter inch thick, with a full distal taper, and weighs 240 g, 380 g in the leather sheath. The edge is from 0.008-0.015" thick and ground at 15-17 degrees per side. The knife balances neutrally on the index finger. A shot :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_V.jpg
Stock work :
Pointing sections of hardwood dowel the Randall #1 was able to rough off the necessary wood in only 8.7 +/- 0.2 slices, and pointed a 2.5x1.5" section of birch hardwood in 8.4 +/- 0.1 cuts, showing solid cutting ability. The Randall #5 took 11.5 +/- 0.5 , and 11.1 +/- 0.3 cuts in comparison, slightly behind the #1 because of the inability to choke up around the guard because it was pointy on top and thus created a leverage disadvantage.
The point profile on the #1 Randall is fairly thin, the tip tapers from 0.220" thick through 3.1" at an angle of 2.0 degrees and is 1.2" wide at the start of the tip. The knife achieves 121 +/- 6 pages into a phonebook on a 50 lbs push and 640 +/- 15 on a hard vertical stab. The #5 is similar, its tip tapers from 0.225" thick through 2.8" at an angle of 2.0 degrees and is 1.15" wide at the start of the tip. It achieves 121 +/- 6 pages on a 50 lbs push and 590 +/- 25 on a hard vertical stab.
The chopping ability of the Randall #1 is low for its blade length due to the light weight and close to neutral balance. On birch hardwood the #1 had 44 +/- 5% of the ability of the Gransfors Bruks Wildlife hatchet when both were used light, swinging from the wrist with a little elbow motion. However when the shoulder was put into the swing, the much greater heft of the hatchet allowed it to pull ahead and the Randall had only 27 +/- 3% of the ability of the hatchet through a couple of dozen sections of wood cut. The #5 has the same weight and near idential blade profile and performs the same when used with a rear grip to shift the balance forward.
Food preperation :
In the kitchen the Randall #1 is hampered by the large guard which locks the knife off of the cutting board and prevents overhand grips around that section of blade. It does do well is as a carving knife, making long and deep slices carving up a roast or making slices of bread. For crusty bread the knife works well with a coarse finish, for most meats a high polish works best assuming more of a push is used instead of a sawing motion.
It also worked well slicing up pork fat. Both have similar profiles and the only difference in how the knives cut the fat was due to the difference in the sharpness. The #1 had been used for some chopping on hardwoods earlier in the day and was sliding a little on the skin, but still readily cut the pork into strips :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_pork_fat.jpg
In peeling potatoes and other precision work, the #5 worked better as it was more neutral in balance. The cutting and general handing ability is similar in all regards except the greater weight in the blade of the #1 causes more fatigue.
Both knives can easily cut up the potatoes into sections, these ones were fairly coarse, but finer cuts were easily possible. Adding some onions, the only real significant difference was that with a fully optomized kitchen knife with a really thin blade, as part of th mincing, the blade runs under the fingers:
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/japanese_utility_onion.jpg
With the Randalls thicker blade the onion had to be turned on its side to allow the cuts :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_onion.jpg
This is a bit more awkward and time consuming, but again just a few minutes more to get the desired results :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_potato_cuts.jpg
Just how much more effort is required? The japanese utility kitchen knife from Lee Valley cuts a thick potato with less than a pound of force. The Randall's take 5-7 lbs because the profile thicker to raise the overall durability and strength of the knife.
The difference in force changes through various vegetables of course. On smaller ones like broccili stalks the Japanese knife takes 1-2 lbs and the Randall's are much closer and take 4-6 lbs. On soft fruits and vegetables like bananas and tomatoes the Randalls glide through them easily as the foods are not stiff enough to induce any wedging action. On really thick vegetables like turnips the Randalls will take a lot more force and need at times the off hand needs to be used to force the blade through the cuts. Here the sharpened top edge on the #1 is problematic.
In short, the Randall's are not optomized for food prep due to being designed for a wider scope of work, but with a little thought to method can handle what ever is necessary. They also work a lot better than many tactical knives or other combat knives many of which tend to run heavier edge with thicker primary grinds (SOG, Strider, TOPS, etc.).
Brush Work :
The Randall's were used to construct a basic lean-to, as the chopping ability is light, a location was scouted for which would require a minimal amount of cutting, and which had a decent supply of soft woods which if needed would be cut effectively.
The basic frame took about ten mintutes, all was wind blown except for two alders as main supports. Alder is softer than white pine, and the Randall #1 had no problem cutting even a two to three inch section in just a few chops. The basic setup :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_basic_frame.jpg
On top of this framework were boughs. A shot after ten minutes of layering :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_final.jpg
The inside :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_leanto_inside.jpg
Note this is just the start, to make the shelter decently rain resistant or even able to cut high wind, about three times as many boughs would need to be layered on.
Abuse :
The #1 Randall was used to dig a decent sized hole in rocky soil with only minor denting to the edge. There was no chipping or significant damage of any kind. It dug the hole on the right, and yes those rocks were leveraged out :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_hole.jpg
The digging was done fairly carefully, no power slams, using the knife to work into the soil and loosen it, so it could be scooped out with the hand. On the larger rocks the sides were excavated until the rock could be popped out with just wrist leverage applied to the knife. The #5 also took part in the pick action with similar results :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_5_hole.jpg
Edge retention :
The Randall's were used alongside the Manix to cut 1/4" ridged cardboard. All knives were sharpened with edges formed with a 20 degree microbevel from the medium Sharpmaker rods. The S30V Manix was able to cut about three as much cardboard and retain the same level of sharpness. No significant difference was noted between the stainless and carbon Randall.
They were also used for some rhubarb cutting, very acidic stalky vegetation. After 400 cuts, all the knives could still shave, though the carbon Randall was slightly behind the stainless one which well matched the S30V Manix. Corrosion was likely a large factor in the blunting as the O1 #1 took a visible patina.
Sharpening :
The Randall's are soft enough to be readily filed, the O1 #1 responds significantly easier to a file than the stainless #5, no difficulty in telling them apart by feel. After the hole digging it took less than five minutes to restore the edge to a hair shaving finish. The edge was set with a file, honed with a x-coarse SiC waterstone and then polished with finer stones ending with 0.5 micron CrO on leather.
Handle :
The handles are well shaped for comfort in extended use irregardless of the nature of the grip as it isn't indexed for any particular orientation or abrasive. Of course this reduces security compared to aggressive grips like the Reeve checkered grips or the highly contoured handes that McClung runs. The Randalls get their security though the prominent guard which works well in most conditions however if the grip is compromised with oils or fats it becomes difficult to control the knife and keep it from rotating. Randall does offer grips with more prominent finger grooves which aid in security at the cost of grip versatility. The large full guard does prevent certain grips such as thumb on spine for control as the top section of the guard is in the way and digs into the thumb :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_thumb_grip.jpg
However a modifed version works well :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_overhand_thumb_grip.jpg
As does a full split which is used for draw knife work and other precision carving :
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/CliffStamp/Randall/randall_1_carving_grip.jpg
The latter two grips are functional mainly as the guard is so well rounded that it can be worked around with little discomfort. The #5 doesn't have the full guard of the #1 but has similar issues with overhand grips as the top of it is actually fairly pointy.
Sheath :
The leather sheaths for both knives are well constructed and still solid after many years of use. There is about 1/8" or so of space around the blade at the sides which allows them to enter smoothly. However they tighten around the choil region. Once the belt loop is engaged the knife is held very securely.
Ref : http://www.randallknives.com/
-Cliff
