RAT Cutlery vs. Fallkniven

forum politics is a weird thing.

Look at knife tests dot com :) See what Fallkniven can take. (For those who say stainless is less)


Rat is good But it is not better than Fallkniven. They are not in the same league.
One uses the cheapest carbon steel there is, the other one uses the most advanced premium steels. Its like comparing byrd knives with spydercos.



To each their own.

(I support Good knives)
 
Last edited:
I own the RC3 - RC4 and Izula.

The knife that goes in my backpack all the time is my F1 !

Reason: I like the grip, smaller sheath (zytel), stainless, throws better sparks.

My two favorites of the entire collection I have ... F1 + Izula

and in europe the F1 costs only 2/3 of the RC4
 
While I'm sure end user cost was a consideration in the choice of steel for RAT knives, I'm pretty sure 1095 wasn't chosen based on price but rather for its ability to be easily maintained. Let's face it, no matter how super your super steel is, it can still go from shaving sharp to near worthlessly dull pretty quickly in an outdoors environment. A rock or nail you didn't see in a branch you were cutting can seriously f*** up an edge. Now would you rather sharpen a convex super steel or a simple bevel, easily sharpened non-alloyed carbon steel. Don't get me wrong I love super steel, but having had my Izula now for a couple days, and having beaten on it a bit and reprofiled it and sharpened it a few times, it is amazing how easy it is to maintain. Simple is often better, especially in a wilderness environment,
 
As mentioned above I doubt that cost was the primary concern for RAT when choosing 1095 as their steel of choice. I love 1095 because of its phenomenal impact resistance, edge retention, and the fact that if you have to you can use nearly any simple rock off the ground as a sharpening stone. 1095 is an old steel, but it's still around because it's a high performer. ;)
 
Fällkniven and RAT Cutlery both make good knives. Both have their upsides and flaws. Which would be better for you depends a lot on how and where you use your knives. Personally I prefer Fällknivens, largely because their knives do not have enormous choils and flat grinds with secondary bevels - convex grind and no large choils is better for me. However, RAT does have a much better warranty and 1095 is much less likely to chip than VG10. Still, I prefer Fällkniven. The rubber handles are comfortable in cold weather compared to the exposed tang handles on RATs.

For those who prefer a knife as a cutting tool I feel Fällkniven works better, but for those who intend to seriously abuse their knives RAT Cutlery would be a better choice in part because of the excellent warranty.

theonew said:
Now would you rather sharpen a convex super steel or a simple bevel, easily sharpened non-alloyed carbon steel.
Click to expand...

Although I like 1095, I would just as happily have a convex super steel that sharpens easy. Like, say, VG10 as used by Fällkniven. :D Seriously, VG10 is very easy to sharpen, especially with a convex grind. Or that at least has been my experience in the field. I do not see any meaningful advantage in ease of sharpening to 1095 as compared to VG10.
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
As mentioned above I doubt that cost was the primary concern for RAT when choosing 1095 as their steel of choice. I love 1095 because of its phenomenal impact resistance, edge retention, and the fact that if you have to you can use nearly any simple rock off the ground as a sharpening stone. 1095 is an old steel, but it's still around because it's a high performer. ;)
Click to expand...

Very good point to consider. Not a whole lot you can do in the field to a seriously chipped laminated convex edge and this has happened to a few folks here. Upon return home it needs a trip accross the pond at your expense to fix/replace and possible a return duty tax.
1095 is still around for a reason. Sometimes older is better. ;)
 
Fallkniven H1 for me. Incredible knife. Very useful blade shape. Non-slip handle. Nice sheath. It can be used for any task I need a knife for, and it will do them all very well.

AJ
 
Fällkniven all the way.. :thumbup::thumbup:
It would be nice to see some models done in carbon steel tho..
I also wouldn´t mind to see a full tang Micarta handled series of the Kraton handled models..

That said. I love my Rats (and Barkies), but when it comes down to only one it won´t be a Rat..
(yeah.. Swamprat maybe ;))
 
I think it is pretty plain in this thread that we are getting the usually stupidity of people making comments on knives they have no direct experience with. I'm not talking about Martin (just because he is the post above this one), just making a comment as a whole. Lots of arm-chair internet warriors on both sides of this story.
 
I like the grind and edge on a Fallkniven. It's a real cutting tool. The F1, A1 and A2 are my favorites.
I also like the RC-3 although I'm not a fan of a choil on a short blade.
 
AF said:
I like the grind and edge on a Fallkniven. It's a real cutting tool. The F1, A1 and A2 are my favorites.
I also like the RC-3 although I'm not a fan of a choil on a short blade.
Click to expand...

I agree that the choil on the RC-3 makes it a little less optimum. It is a blessing for those big handed folks who need the extra real estate for grabbing the handle, while longer then the original rat, is still not huge by any standards. For all intensive purposes the RC-3 would have benefited from no choil and having a longer handle that encompassed the choil.

Curiously, I like the choil on the RC-4. I find I often use it during close up work or with my finger as a tactile detection of where I'm on the blade when not looking at it. The choil also does its actual purpose of making sharpening easier. I have a bunch of choil-less blades that were ordered mainly because I fell into the anti-choil crowd for a little while. On all of those blades, where the blade ends right at the handle, I get a flat spot because I have a difficult time sharpening that 0.5 cm or so part of the edge and usually end up smoothing out the ricasso part from stray swipes on the stone. On the RC-3, I'd prefer to have a tiny choil for sharpening like on the Izula rather than a choil/finger notch combination that it has. On the RC-4 I like it the way it is.

The RC-5 has no choil. I think this knife more than any, except the RC-6, needs one!
 
Some questions and comments:

I had a black micarta F1 that cut like nothing else i've ever had but those Swedes must have tiny hands. I also had the IDUN which really could have beeen my "One blade" but again the small handle killed it.
I think Fallkniven is unaware (or doesn't care) how many more knives they could sell by just adding 1/2" to the handles on their fixed blades.
Click to expand...

Rat RC 3 handle 4.93 F1 handle 4.5

Does anybody know how long the part of the handle of a Rat 3 that your fingers actually wrap around is? I'm assuming the handle length stat includes the guard which looks to be half an inch.

Now would you rather sharpen a convex super steel or a simple bevel, easily sharpened non-alloyed carbon steel.
Click to expand...

I'd personally rather sharpen a convex edge over a v grind any day. With the V grind I usually have to get the angle just right to get the optimum edge while the convex is easier.

As far as the super steel the RATs are 57 rockwell? and the F1 is 59, not too much difference.

I'd give the RC3 the edge on slicing though since it's 1/8" right??
 
hollowdweller said:
Rat RC 3 handle 4.93 F1 handle 4.5
Click to expand...

I'm measuring my RC-4 right now, but it has the identical handle, just thicker due to the blade width sandwiched between the slabs. The total length of the mircata slab is 4". However, from the end of the trough at the finger guard (where you index finger sits at the edge of the mircata guard) the length is 3.5" + 0.25" of extended pommel (modified pommel). The total length measured at the end of the choil (using it as a finger notch) to the end of the handle is 4.5" + 0.25" of extended pommel.

Hope that helps. I don't know where the measurements of 4.93" come from, but they don't mesh with my RC-4 measurements. I have no idea about the F1.
 
kgd said:
I'm measuring my RC-4 right now, but it has the identical handle, just thicker due to the blade width sandwiched between the slabs. The total length of the mircata slab is 4". However, from the end of the trough at the finger guard (where you index finger sits at the edge of the mircata guard) the length is 3.5" + 0.25" of extended pommel (modified pommel). The total length measured at the end of the choil (using it as a finger notch) to the end of the handle is 4.5" + 0.25" of extended pommel.

Hope that helps. I don't know where the measurements of 4.93" come from, but they don't mesh with my RC-4 measurements. I have no idea about the F1.
Click to expand...

It comes from an ad and me subtracting the blade length from the OAL.

I'll have to do an actualy measure ment of the F1 tonight. So on the 4" one there KGD what is the overall thickness of the scales??
 
On the RC4- each mircata slab is just shy of 3/16" (including the liner). The total width of the blade (a bit difficult for precision because of the rounded scales) is 9/16". The RC-3 will be 8/16" thick because of the thinner blade.
 
kgd said:
I think it is pretty plain in this thread that we are getting the usually stupidity of people making comments on knives they have no direct experience with.
Click to expand...

Do you say this because some people actually prefer the Fallkniven?
 
Elen said:
Seriously, VG10 is very easy to sharpen, especially with a convex grind.
Click to expand...

hollowdweller said:
I'd personally rather sharpen a convex edge over a v grind any day. With the V grind I usually have to get the angle just right to get the optimum edge while the convex is easier.
Click to expand...

I guess I'll just never understand this convex is easier business. With a straight V grind its pretty easy to feel the correct angle as it runs across a stone, with convex you have to consider not only the angle but the downward pressure applied. Press a little too hard and you have effectively rounded the edge. If you want a little more cutting ease with a V grind its pretty easy to just lop off the shoulder where the edge meets the primary bevel. Also if your edge is too thin for the work you are doing its easier and more precise to correct this with a V grind. I think its funny sometimes when you ask a convexer what angle he used on his final edge and he says, "I don't know, it's convex".

Other than the convex edges I've seen that were sharpened by Simon, I've yet to see a convex edge that was anything more than just passably decent.

All this aside, my original comment was meant in the context of a survival situation where you had a uselessly dull knife and no mouse pad, sandpaper, or stone. My fault, for not being clear about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top