RTAK 2 Check this out.

The handle design looks superior to the original Livesay RTAK. Interesting to note the 3/16" thick stock. With the full flat grind on that wide of a blade, I'd imagine that it is ground pretty thin. Looks like it is more suitable for soft vegetation that some of the thicker knives in that size range.

How has Ontario been lately regarding heat treat? While I would not expect Livesay quality HT, the RAT-7 models I have used performed very well.
 
I have a RAT-7 in D2, I love it. I wonder If I could get the RTAk 2 in D2
 
What do you do with a big knife that makes you want D2 instead of 1095?

I do have one big knife (Kershaw Outcast) in D2, but in general I think 1095 is better for larger blades as it is tougher, all things being equal. For large blades, high wear resistance as offered by D2 is not something I look for.
 
I like my RAT-7 in D2, I just love it, holds a edge better than almost all of my knives. But for my intents and purposes 1095 would be fine.
 
Love my RAT-7 in 1095:)

When I seen the pics of the RTAK2, I knew I had to get one
and 1095 is just fine. and a thin blade is great.

Did not buy the RTAK1 cause that handle just did not look right:(

I got a few other knives to buy first but the RTAK2 is on the list:thumbup:
 
knifetester said:
With the full flat grind on that wide of a blade, I'd imagine that it is ground pretty thin. Looks like it is more suitable for soft vegetation that some of the thicker knives in that size range.
Click to expand...

The RTAK I had went down under 0.015" at the edge in points, very inconsistent grind. I saw the same problem with the Becker Patrol Machetes. It doesn't take much of a difference in thickness to make a huge change because the percentages are large and stiffness is cubic with thickness. So even if you might not spot visually a 0.025" vs 0.015" thick edge, you will notice it in use immediately because one is five times stiffer and thus more resistant to being bent. I would bet many of the problems with RTAK's osing huge pieces of the blade on light wood chopping were due just to the edge dipping too thin.

-Cliff
 
Do you think the fact that these knives were designed for jungle use is the primary influence, thus people using them on harder northern vegetation (although I am sure that some tropical hardwoods are just as hard) are seeing damage, or do you see it strictly as a quality control issue.

.025" is a great thickness for most woodscraft outside limbing small dead branches, prying out or cleaving through knots, etc.

.015" or even thinner is a great edge thickness for something like a 4" blade or a folding knife. Not what I would want in a chopper tough. Maybe on a machete reserved for grasses and the like?
 
So do you think this knife is too thin to hadle chopping? Its just as thick as the orginal, it should be able to take a beating. I must be missing what you are talking about with the edge thicknesses. can someone please explain this to me.
 
knifetester said:
... or do you see it strictly as a quality control issue.
Click to expand...

Quality control because it varied significantly along the blade and it makes no sense design wise.

Maybe on a machete reserved for grasses and the like?
Click to expand...

Yes, just don't hit anything hidden by the vegetation.I really don't think you can argue for such an edge thickness on a knife of that size because it restricts it severely and the blade isn't optomized for such work. If you are just cutting light materials then you are perfectly fine with a $5 machete.

wade said:
So do you think this knife is too thin to hadle chopping?
Click to expand...

You would need to measure the edge thickness, if it dips significantly under 0.025" then even moderate wood working would not be practical and anything significant would ripple the primary grind.

-Cliff
 
Most, if not all, of the big "choppers" make little practical sense, so the RTAK, either I or II, is hardly alone in being a decontextualized jungle blade.
 
Large chopping blades have many practical variations, khukuris, parangs, goloks, bolos etc., are all working blades.

-Cliff
 
Perhaps it's difficult for some people to understand, but large chopping blades can make a lot of practical sense. Mine are the most-used sheath knives I own. Are they the perfect knife for everybody and every situation? Of course not, no knife is.
 
I don't know if this applies everywhere or not but a relatively short machete-like blade can be awfully handy to have in the bush down here. Leafy vegetation, tough, thorny vines & palm fronds of all shapes & sizes are the rule with pine & scrub oak being the most common hardwoods...

That scrub oak can be pretty knotty - but you can also find it growing very straight allot of times - perfect if one were building a shelter or making a spear. So some degree of woodworking ability along with excellent performance on leafy vegetation makes for the perfect big blade for this climate IMO.
 
Looks like a good large-utility knife. Bit thin add the spine but if it has a relative thicker edge then a TAK it will be sturdy enough. Like to see a nice review of the knife or even a compressing test next to a BK9, Ranger RD9 and larger SRKW (and Busse for a benchmark)!!

Btw: I cant find any info about the knife on the Ontario or RAT websides!
 
I also looked on the ontario and RAT websites and was wondering why it wasnt on there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top