Rodent 9

chiral.grolim said:
Definitely reprofiled :thumbup: That is the reason why the coating is so much more worn nearer the edge - I eventually took the blade to a 1x30 belt-grinder, brought it down to 0.038" behind the edge (still fairly stout) from the factory ~0.080.
Click to expand...

Okay, I thought it might be reprofiled. I've used bench stones to thin and convex my Rats and have been very happy with the results. It's interesting to see what others are doing to squeeze the most performance out of these great knives.
 
The Rodent 9 was the first Busse I bought a few years ago.....needless to say you just can't stop at one and know I'm 8 in but the R9 is still one of my go to users....just feels great in the hand and does an insane job at batoning and processing wood...love the handle too...super comfy!
 
chiral.grolim said:
Definitely reprofiled :thumbup: That is the reason why the coating is so much more worn nearer the edge - I eventually took the blade to a 1x30 belt-grinder, brought it down to 0.038" behind the edge (still fairly stout) from the factory ~0.080. That factory edge, while very strong, was just too fat for my purposes - when trying to limb-out fallen oaks around my property, the R9 wouldn't bite deep but just wedge or glance/bounce unless the chop was very well directed and carefully controlled with a LOT of force, i.e. tiring. I like my knives to cut better than my hatchet since they don't have the same weight-distribution for chopping momentum, they need to be able to bite deeper with less force.

I could probably take the R9 thinner than it is, but I'm pretty happy with it as is now :thumbup: My GSO-10 is still a better chopper, but I like the narrower profile of the R9 and it's better for batonning... and throwing :D Also it looks really cool :cool:
Click to expand...

I've never sprung for an R9. I picked up an M9 which I love and finally scored a Mastiff. I see the R9 is .250" thick whereas the GSO 10 is .200" thick. Did the thickness give it the edge over the GSO for batoning?
 
Hard Knocks said:
I see the R9 is .250" thick whereas the GSO 10 is .200" thick. Did the thickness give it the edge over the GSO for batoning?
Click to expand...

It isn't so much a factor of the difference in spine-thickness as the difference in grind.
From the factory, the GSO-10 edge-thickness was lower for improved penetration, the stock thickness is a tad lower, but most of all the blade is significantly wider for a lower bevel-angle and thinner blade in general. It is more akin to a short/stout machete. When the GSO-10 bites, it bites deep, and there is a lot of blade for the wood to exert friction against. When the R9 bites, it's thick edge and heavier grind prevent as deep of a bite, but it quickly forces the wood apart like an axe-head. The R9 still binds, but it does more splitting of the grain as it proceeds and so requires less effort. I thinned the edge to improve the initial bite.

BTW, i should stipulate that I mostly use these on hard oak, not light pine and cedar which may offer too little resistance to compare the two. *shrug*

IMG_0392.JPG

IMG_0393.JPG

IMG_0395.JPG
 
chiral.grolim said:
BTW, i should stipulate that I mostly use these on hard oak, not light pine and cedar which may offer too little resistance to compare the two. *shrug*
Click to expand...

I agree, they both would shrug off softer woods. I'm sure the oak provides a more difficult test and gives us a better look at the contrast in the blades, which you pointed out. Thanks for that :thumbup:
 
Kels73 said:
I'm glad to hear you're enjoying that M9. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

I sure am. Yours was my third. I've got a satin finished ffg le, a saber-ground cg, and then your ffg cg. I've always been a little surprised the M9 never gained more traction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top