Randall Made 12-9, BUSSE FBM FBMLE, Bill Buxton, field test knife review

O

oohhaann

Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
38
I bought a Randall 12-9 merely because another thread made curious how Randall Made Knives basically compare to a contemporary design. I used a Busse FBM LE for 6 years. It was a so so chopper. It was a little too thick with a steep edge that would not penetrate hard woods well, plus, it had a flat grind and would basically gall onto the tree when you did manage to get a deep cut in a softer wood. The steel was ok, would chip like any other high quality knife that hit a rock in the process of being used in the field. The blade material, marketed as INFI, relies on the steep bevel to hold its edge, if you take it down a bit to improve penetration, it goes dull like any other quality production knife. I used it for 6 years and chopped hundreds of small trees that grow out of control on my rural property. It was thick, hence strong. Finally sold it because it took too much energy to use and found it unproductive in the field. Next I used a Bill Buxton made of forged 52100, it was was much better, and held an edge like no other. I did not take Bill's advise and ordered an 8 instead of a 9 inch blade, and it was a bit too short.
image.jpg5_zpstfmiihc7.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
image.jpg4_zps2aajacu6.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
image.jpg3_zpsbdv6vggq.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
image.jpg1_zpsegwlivte.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
image.jpg2_zpsvyt8nw5t.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]As a result of the other thread I decided to try a Randall 12-9 made of a very high quality Swedish tool steel. I used it to cut a few dozen trees. It was the most effective chopper of the three. The cuts were deep even in hard woods, the hollow grind did not gall, the edge held up better than the Busse, but chipped a bit easier when the edge came in contact with a rock than the Bill Buxton. I used in an abusive manor in an effort to cause a break at the tang, which I presume is approximately 1/2 X 1/4 X 4.75 inches as it appears to be based off a #14 CDT grind. It seems one would have to break this knife on purpose in order to effectuate failure. The Randall and the Bill Buxton are expensive, and expensively made. The Busse appeared to be mostly machine made, but high priced. My point is, Busse prices into its MSRP an abuse warrantee. The FBM LE in 2007 was a simple construction $375 knife that actually retailed for $697 sans a sheath. The price of the hand forged Randall and Buxton do not reflect a warrantee for abuse, so the buyer has to self insure the knife under certain circumstances, but they are forged, and the advantage to a carbon steel blade seems to be the same as on the cranks of a mountain bicycle, forged units require less material to create the same amount of strength compared the those CNC'd or chucked, machined, and ground, making this production method perfect for a hollow grind blade. The cost of self insuring the knife for abuse versus having it packed into the retail price would be a consideration a purchaser would have to weigh relative to their own personal comfort level, either you pay upfront, or only if you break it.

A pic of the Busse after my gunsmith ground down the glass breaker.
image_zpsk7iehm0l.png
[/URL][/IMG]

A pic of the Bill Buxton when it was new
image_zpsn7qjdtwg.png
[/URL][/IMG]
 
Last edited:
excellant review.. like to see when someone actually puts a nice knife to use. I am to lazy, but the review was to the point and i enjoy it..

Thanks
 
I am not surprised... I never understood how thick edges, convexed or not (makes no diffence in my opinion), were supposed to perform better than thin ones, like those Randall usually puts on their big knives at 0.5 mm to 0.6 mm wide at the V-bevel's top. After watching my Chris Reeves 8.75" Jereboam out-perform my 9.25" BK-9 (the CR with a slightly sub-optimal 1 mm wide edge bevel top), I never understood how hollow grinds were supposed to be "inferior" as chopping implements either, given that they tend to be heavier-bladed (since they typically have no distal taper, unlike most fully flat ground blades) and also have the potential to be thinner-edged, and that there seems to be little or no binding in wood...

On the contrary, the hollow grind's secondary grind line prevents "sticking", and hardly causes much "drag" in wood when this grind is placed two thirds or more up the blade's side...

Another, much unsung, advantage of thin-edged hollow ground choppers is that the top of the hollow, when striking hard in small diameter soft wood, actually greatly reduces vibration and shock to the hand. This is because it "decelerates" the blade gradually as the hollow grind widens in a curve (thus acting as a very effective "buffer", or "shock absorber", especially in the few early blows where the blade is fully "pinched" by wood), instead of stopping suddenly and harshly as the non-gradual deceleration of a flat grind. The difference is more noticeable the more the wood diameter becomes smaller from 4" down, and thus more within the reach of normal knife chopping use... This "soft" deceleration greatly reduces vibration and hand fatigue on multiple medium limbs (not so much on one really big one), even if the handle is full uncovered round metal, like the Chris Reeves 8.75" one-piece line, whose handle proved much more confortable for chopping -bare handed- than even that of the BK-9...

DSC01414_zpsbf26d88c.jpg


I also find that, on a forged Randall 440B blade, when using a very sharp bevel of 10° per side (even if as thin as 0.5 mm at the top) it is still strong enough to support heavy chopping on maple, and even some reasonable side wrenching loads on pressure-treated 2X4s, since it took heavy leveraged loads to cause even minor damage on my Model 14...: Two minuscule chips, and some very mild edge sideway deformations, both with no effect on performance... (Be warned straight edge portions are far more vulnerable to gradual side load chipping/bending than the edge's belly, so keep gradual side loads to the edge's forward belly, and there will be no damage at all, even with such an extremely thin edge all the way to the point...)

I really like the ergonomics of the Model 12's handle pictured by the OP, as most have much more unconventional (often thicker-looking) handles it seems...

The Model 12 used by the OP was in 0-1 Carbon steel: The edge-holding of the Randall would have been slightly better in stainless, as Randall's forged 440B has proved more resilient chopping concrete than even INFI (and 440C edge-holding has also proved superior to all others -at the time- in a very elaborate 1990s test on various materials, including two early CPMs and INFI).

It does appear that with Randall you do get superior performance: I just wish the blade finish, and grind symmetry, was a bit more in line with the price...: At least the edge grind is paralell and centered to the spine, but that is about it...

Gaston
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top