Matthew :
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">It seems that the Juniper you picked out was hard enough to bend over the RCM, but not quite enough to bend the thicker Battle Mistress.</font>
The edge on the BM was actually thinner than the edge on the RCM (more acute edge grind). However, yes, the primary grind is thicker on the BM. In hindsight I should have measured the specifics of the RCM when I first got it. I usually don't do this right away as it tends to influence what I do as I quickly form performance expectations based on them and that could bias what I do.
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I suppose if you moved on to old dried bones, you might wreck the latter edge too...</font>
I have tried the BM on heavy seasoned bone and yes at the angle I have it (16-18 degrees) you will see some damage, but it is sub mm in depth and will not cause the blade to ripple as happened to the RCM, this was damage that extended above the edge grind.
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Its always good to know what the limits of a particular configuration happen to be</font>
I think that this is about as valuable as you can get, but there obviously comes a point at which it is unreasonable to expect someone to repair a blade that was damaged from something you didn't have to do and knew that doing it was going to harm the blade. I have taken light use knives and cut harder and harder materials until they chipped out. Would it then be reasonable to expect the maker to grind these chips out and give me a fresh edge - well no.
There are makers that will do this though. I have worked with five (off the top of my head) that have gone far above what I would expect and have offered to repair blades that have taken intentional damage as soon as we discussed the results. You don't even need to ask, they will just offer to restore the knife. But in general I don't expect this kind of service - but I do obviously gravitate towards the people that offer it. Not because I want it in and of itself, but only the highest level of products tend to have it.
Accidental damage I think should be covered, as it gives security of use, however it would rarely if ever be used for obvious reasons. Most don't have a problem with that.
If you are using the blade to do something that it was designed for or promoted as being able to do then I think that you should be covered for obvious reasons. However there are makers that will use tests of performance as promotional tools and not cover damage greater than they report if you do them. I don't agree with that, but as long as they are clear about not covering it I can just avoid them, so no harm done.
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">its also a good idea to bear in mind what the knife was designed to do when you're not testing, but really using where your life depends on it...</font>
Yes, and because I have damaged more than a few blades on this and consider it one of the most stressful things you can do, I discussed it with Newt at length before buying the RCM.
I still think the profile can work, 12+" long blade, 3/16" stock, full flat grind, 2" wide blade, but you need a steel that is significantly stronger than 1095. 3V would be a nice option, too bad R. J. Martin is not taking custom orders, the limbs would probably fall off themselves if they saw that coming. The Bush Hog from Camillus might be workable as well. I am seeing too much damage on the Machax, but Will Fennell has said that is not the expected behavior.
-Cliff
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 12-19-2000).]