Eric :
I can't think of a folder made that has that kind of obtuse primary profile.
As noted I was specifically referring to edge thickness not the primary grind cross section. However sabre-flat grinds are common on folders, and while the angle of the primary grind on the folders is a little more acute in general, we are only talking about a few degrees in the difference, and since the TAC-11 starts out thinner than a lot of them, it will remain on equal footing with the folder until decently high in the grind as the rate of thickening is slow as it grows roughly as 2 * height * primary grind angle / 60.
Is the gain in sheer strength worth the cost in cutting performance?
The main reason the cutting performance is relatively low is that the edge angle is rather high, in comparison to light use knives not tacticals. Once it was reduced down it would fare well in comparison on most materials such as ropes, fabrics, flesh, light vegetation and slicing woods. As an example consider the performance of the modified BA3 and Opinel on hardwoods, they cut very close to one another as the edge profiles are very similar even though the BA3 is a sabre grind on much thicker stock. In the beginning I intended to alter the edge profile on the TAC-11 to illustrate this, but since I did so in other reviews while this review was underway I didn't feel the need to show it once again. As well turning it into a clone of my other knives edge wise would have reduced my overall blade versatility, and quite frankly made the design incoherent.
I think a $4 prybar is much better suited for those tasks.
The knife makes a far better prybar than the prybar does a knife. But yes if you could carry a few tools you would be better off. For example a light use folder, a small pry bar and a decent machete or hatchet depending on the vegetation.
In addition, the knife has no belly, which drasticly limits the type of work it is well suited for.
Many common utlity knives have no belly, in fact the most popular utility knives don't (Olfa / Stanley). This asepct of geometry really only makes a large difference in a few areas. For example if you are skinning you want a smooth arc, as well as if you are using a cutting board you want to be able to rock the blade, as well on cutting soft vegetation a nice curved tip does well, more machete use for the latter than a medium class knife of course.
Now there is a slight reduction in overall slicing ability due to the lack of curvature, but this effect is easily swamped out by other factors such as edge angle and grit of sharpening finish. You will only really notice a difference in edge curvature if you compare the performance to something which is *really* different like a hawkbill. I had a small hawkbill from Neil Blackwood for some time and you could really notice the hooking effect of the blade curvature, this extreme of a knife has of course its restrictions as well.
The straight line profile of the TAC-11 also has advantages, mainly in regards to ease of sharpening. Matching the angle of a curved edge is fairly difficult as you need to rotate the blade to keep it perpendicular to the hone. With the TAC-11 you simply sharpen the edge in even strokes, no rotation of the blade is necessary, and then switch to sharpen the tip.
[INFI]
... comparable in toughness to A8 and much stronger
INFI is a very tough steel I would agree, however it is not much stronger than A8. They are both similar alloy steels at similar RC (INFI is spec'ed one point harder). The strength difference should be within a few percent. The wear resistance is though probably largely in INFI's favor.
The TAC 11 is heavier than a Busse #7 (400 v. 340 g) and the #7 gives the added strength of 1/4" stock and the cutting performance of a full height flat grind.
The TAC-11 is essentially a fully flat ground knife out of 5/16" steel with the sides trimmed down near the top. Even before the sides were trimmed down the cutting ability between a fully flat ground 5/16" and 1/4" blade is going to be very close. The strength is going to be very similar as well, slightly in favor of the Basic though as it is significantly wider.
Isn't it likely that the blade will fail before the handle?
Yes, since the tang isn't tapered, even at 3/16" it would still be significantly stronger than the blade. Even with weaker tangs, it is rare to see a blade break there because the stress is usually concentrated in the blade. The thick tang does however put the balance in the handle. If the balance was shifted forward, even with the reduction in mass, it could result in more strain on the wrist, is is the torque not the raw mass that is the critical factor.
You asked about a comparion to something like a Busse Basic, that is a question I have been thinking of myself ever since getting the Camp Tramp awhile ago, they are both promoted for combat/tactical use and as heavy use knives but are radicallt different in design. The difference between them comes down to three main aspects :
First the guards, as you mentioned they are quite large on the TAC and do prevent some grips and make other types of cutting difficult, like using a cutting board for example. They are also squarish and thus abrasive though this can be fixed with some dremel work. Thus the Busse has an advantage in regards to ergomics for grip versatility and several types of cutting like food prep in the kitchen. The TAC-11 however has a large advantage in regards to grip security and the very wide pommel makes a very functional hammer.
Second the straight edge vs belly. As noted in the above the Busse has advantages for overall cutting ability (slight) and again a rather large advantage for food prep in the kitchen. The TAC-11 has a greater ease of sharpening, and this especially comes out in very hard tasks like digging and other hard point contacts. If you damage the tip on something ground like a Busse in order to remove the damage you have to grind the entire edge back, on the TAC you simply grind the small area of the tip. This both speeds the process up and minimizes steel waste. The TAC-11 also can use the secondary point to score materials and it functions like the apex of a very large serration to protect the rest of the edge.
The edge profile. This is probably the largest difference and you will notice its effect as soon as you do some cutting. The TAC-11 has a much more obtuse edge angle than the new Swamp Rats, it is almost double. This gives up a lot of cutting ability for a large increase in durability. This is a functional advantage only if you see hard bone, metal, rock and the like on a regular basis. However because of the very narrow edge profile this is easily changed if you wish, though if this is the kind of cutting you intend to do, there are other knives that would be better suited for this work.
Which one is the better knife? I recently loaned the GB wildlife hatchet out to friends who work construction, it came back with extensive edge damage and some handle denting (which would have lead to failure in short order). I then gave them a cheap Estwing hatchet with a much thicker edge profile which fared much better which they all liked because of the stronger edge and more durable handle. However if I had to take one in the woods I would chose the GB in a heartbeat.
Know what you want to do and what it takes to do it.
-Cliff
