- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Messages
- 718
The following is not a review or performance test. There is no chopping, cutting or pushing blades to their limits. Certain Blackjack models have clearly been based on classic Randall designs. As a long term admirer of Randall knives I was keen to have a look at how close they are. The results are shared below.
The 2 knives selected for comparison are both known as 1-7. The Randall designation would indicate that this is a Model 1 with 7 inch blade. Other Blackjack models such as the Number 5 depart quite significantly from the Randall naming convention.
From the pics you might think that these look quite different. The Randall has the classic leather washer grip and the Blackjack a micarta saber grip. That’s just these particular knives. The Blackjack comes with a similar leather grip option (and a few others as well) while the micarta grip is an extra cost option if you are ordering your own Randall. Yes they look a bit different but the difference could well have been the other way round.
Appearances
The dimensions of the 2 knives are very close. They both have nominal 7 inch blades and grip length is similar. The Blackjack gives the appearance of being thicker through the blade. The Randall is thickest towards the centre line of the blade and tapers back towards the spine. The Blackjack does this to an extent but it not as pronounced. The last few inches of the top edge of the Randall blade are usually sharpened but not so with the Blackjack. If you are the type that likes to baton, the Blackjack would do better at it. The Blackjack is clearly based on the Randall but the blade profile is not identical.
Grips
Comparing the 2 different grip styles is not really valid. Instead I compared the Randall grip to another Blackjack (Model 5) that has a leather washer grip. The Blackjack Model 5 could well be referred to as the 1-5 as it is essentially the same knife as the 1-7 but with a shorter blade. The leather Blackjack grip is a little chunkier than the Randall and the retaining nut is not as pronounced. The Randall seems to have a little more drop. In the hand the Randall feels lighter and slimmer. I’m no student of knife fighting but I did some fencing many years back. There is a ‘liveliness’ to the Randall that brings fencing to mind. There is something evocative that is hard to nail down. The Blackjack doesn’t do the same thing for me, despite being every bit as functional as the Randall.
Guards
The Randall has a double brass guard and the Blackjack a double nickel silver guard. The Randall can be ordered with nickel silver as an extra cost option.
Blades
The Randall blade is forged 01 and the Blackjack is A2. You can order a Randall in stainless if you want and there are plenty of Blackjacks around in 1095. The Blackjack has a convex edge and the Randall is more conventional. The Blackjack was razor sharp out of the box. When I received the Randall it was delivered with quite a dull edge.
Workmanship
I couldn’t pick between the 2 of them. Both are nicely finished with good grind lines. Neither had any noticeable faults or blemishes.
Sheaths
Both came with leather sheaths. The Randall has the sharpening stone pocket on the front. The Blackjack sheath has some holes for tying the sheath to packs etc and could fit a much wider belt than the Randall. Workmanship on the Randall sheath was noticeably better but both sheaths are functional.
Conclusions
I like them both. I suppose that the most profound difference is that you can readily buy the Blackjack now. The Randall can be ordered but be prepared to wait 4 or 5 years or pay a premium. The Blackjack costs considerably less under any circumstances. From a value perspective, the Blackjack is hard to beat, although the Randall is a great investment option.
Both will do most things required of a knife. The double guards could get in the way for some purposes. Both are tough, well made knives that should stand up to a lot of work. To me they have aesthetic qualities that distinguish them from other capable but less elegant designs, but that is subjective. The Blackjack might have some advantages if you need to chop or baton.
The 2 knives selected for comparison are both known as 1-7. The Randall designation would indicate that this is a Model 1 with 7 inch blade. Other Blackjack models such as the Number 5 depart quite significantly from the Randall naming convention.
From the pics you might think that these look quite different. The Randall has the classic leather washer grip and the Blackjack a micarta saber grip. That’s just these particular knives. The Blackjack comes with a similar leather grip option (and a few others as well) while the micarta grip is an extra cost option if you are ordering your own Randall. Yes they look a bit different but the difference could well have been the other way round.
Appearances
The dimensions of the 2 knives are very close. They both have nominal 7 inch blades and grip length is similar. The Blackjack gives the appearance of being thicker through the blade. The Randall is thickest towards the centre line of the blade and tapers back towards the spine. The Blackjack does this to an extent but it not as pronounced. The last few inches of the top edge of the Randall blade are usually sharpened but not so with the Blackjack. If you are the type that likes to baton, the Blackjack would do better at it. The Blackjack is clearly based on the Randall but the blade profile is not identical.
Grips
Comparing the 2 different grip styles is not really valid. Instead I compared the Randall grip to another Blackjack (Model 5) that has a leather washer grip. The Blackjack Model 5 could well be referred to as the 1-5 as it is essentially the same knife as the 1-7 but with a shorter blade. The leather Blackjack grip is a little chunkier than the Randall and the retaining nut is not as pronounced. The Randall seems to have a little more drop. In the hand the Randall feels lighter and slimmer. I’m no student of knife fighting but I did some fencing many years back. There is a ‘liveliness’ to the Randall that brings fencing to mind. There is something evocative that is hard to nail down. The Blackjack doesn’t do the same thing for me, despite being every bit as functional as the Randall.
Guards
The Randall has a double brass guard and the Blackjack a double nickel silver guard. The Randall can be ordered with nickel silver as an extra cost option.
Blades
The Randall blade is forged 01 and the Blackjack is A2. You can order a Randall in stainless if you want and there are plenty of Blackjacks around in 1095. The Blackjack has a convex edge and the Randall is more conventional. The Blackjack was razor sharp out of the box. When I received the Randall it was delivered with quite a dull edge.
Workmanship
I couldn’t pick between the 2 of them. Both are nicely finished with good grind lines. Neither had any noticeable faults or blemishes.
Sheaths
Both came with leather sheaths. The Randall has the sharpening stone pocket on the front. The Blackjack sheath has some holes for tying the sheath to packs etc and could fit a much wider belt than the Randall. Workmanship on the Randall sheath was noticeably better but both sheaths are functional.
Conclusions
I like them both. I suppose that the most profound difference is that you can readily buy the Blackjack now. The Randall can be ordered but be prepared to wait 4 or 5 years or pay a premium. The Blackjack costs considerably less under any circumstances. From a value perspective, the Blackjack is hard to beat, although the Randall is a great investment option.
Both will do most things required of a knife. The double guards could get in the way for some purposes. Both are tough, well made knives that should stand up to a lot of work. To me they have aesthetic qualities that distinguish them from other capable but less elegant designs, but that is subjective. The Blackjack might have some advantages if you need to chop or baton.
Last edited:
