- Joined
- Dec 31, 2005
- Messages
- 2,984
I thought I would do a few pic's of the SAR 8 with some of the other offerings in the same size blade with a bit of a comparison on weight and feel and throw in a couple of smaller knife pairings.
The SAR8's nearest comparable is the Basic 9....
As you can see the blades are nearly identical with the only differences being in the grind on the edge and the thickness. The Basic 9 is asymetrical on the grind being a combination of convex one side and flat on the other...the SAR8 is fully convex on both...which is best? Well they are both very good...for me having the ability to use a belt sander to bring an edge back the SAR8 probably works easiest to restore at home.
In the field I think the Basic 9 would be the easiest to bring back as you would just need to use a small field stone on the flat side to touch it up...with a SAR8 you would need a bit of hide glued to the underside of a tobacco tin covered with green chrome compound and a mouse mat inside it with a few sheets of wet and dry if you had let the edge dull a bit...both work fine but in the long run the wet and dry will wear out...the stone will last for years...
Weight wise they are actually very similar...the Basic 9 at .25 and the SAR8 at .220 thick with the extra weight in the full spine just about ties it off...the Basic 9 is on feel just a little lighter...I have'nt put them on the scales...just going off feel...but they do both feel great "fast" in the hand knives. They combine the best of a fighting knife dexterity and with the length of blade they have a very good chopping ability as well.
See Noss's destruction test of a Basic 9 and you will see these knives have great chopping power for their weight...the same applies to the SAR 8...the increased grip to the rear allows a good rearward hold to enhance the length and chopping power and at a guess I would say they will probably be a close tie on chopping.
Personally I am a great fan of these two blades...they epitomise the best designs for "power to weight" performance...I like them for carrying them as well...here the extra lightness is a real advantage compared to others...and as a versatile knife the lightness and dexterity score well in food prep or gralloch work or if used as a combat knife the fast long blades would be what you wanted.
On the handle front there is a fair bit of difference....
The Res C of the Basic scores a lot higher on comfort when chopping...the SAR8 has a pommel which is useable as a Baton...personally I see little advantage in the pommel of the SAR8 that the spine on the Basic 9 cannot be used for...as for toughness of a full spine v comfort of a hidden tang...the Basic 9 is plenty tough with a hidden tang ...the Noss test showed that...but if I was wanting to hammer the pommel to dig in the blade tip...the SAR8 is the best design...that use though is one I have yet to come across in the field.
Field use on things like ferro rods etc...the gimping on the SAR8 is great for this...the Basic 9 is suprisingly also good for a coated blade...I use the undersize finger choil and the edges there are very much at a good "right angle" and the rod settles in there for a secure fit and you can throw a good shower of sparks.
All told the only difference is on the comfort of the handle when chopping...the SAR8 is a very thin profile on the grip...this gives a bit of "shock bite" to the area around your thumb web when gripping to chop...the Basic 9 is perhaps the most comfortable handle for chopping that Busse produce...the only trade off to the two to perhaps even the score a little is that the satin finish on the SAR8 lends itself much better to a "one knife" does it all for things like food prep etc...but ofcourse you could strip the Basic 9... all told therefore I would give the nudge slightly to the Basic 9 on this comparison.
Compare using the Basic 9 "as is" with the benefit of a none glare finish and teamed up with a S5LE for food prep and delicate work and you have for my uses which include the "military" a really great set up...
This "combo" has a great deal going for it.... Total weight on these two probably gives the best "power to weight to functionality" of all the Bussekin blades I have.
If you were to team up the SAR 8 with a smaller blade....and as I say...it's great advantage is that it probably does'nt need one and could exist very well as a one knife does it all...I would probably go with a RMD...
Infact sending in my RMD for a change of scales to match the SAR8 grips and giving it a full satin finish to match would be something I would consider if money were no object. They would make a nice pairing IMO...
I seriously would'nt consider a SAR8 with a SAR4...to me the SAR knives are "stand alone" really...the SAR 4 is quite a heavy knife and for a smaller companion blade you are carrying a lot of weight selecting both.
Looking at how the SAR8 compares with other 8 inch blades the main difference is on weight and chopping ability and on grip comfort...you can also see the weight difference as well by the spine thickness on the grip shots...here are some of the classic comparisons...
SAR8 and NMSFNO...
The NMSFNO is heavier and has a wider grip...
Chopping wise I think the NMSFNO will do better than the SAR 8 in a chop off but the SAR 8'S grip with it's increased depth at the rear gives a slightly more secure grip which is less likely to enable the blade to slide forward and this might even things a little...you would really need to do a chop off to tell..."shock bite" for me there is no difference worth mentioning...they are both comfortable but not as comfortable as Res C...it is only really Res C where you feel a noticeable difference worth mentioning IMO...
The shock aspect though does diminish on how thick the grips are and on how heavy the knife is when using a full tang knife...compared to a FSH Variant which has a .32 thick grip and a tapering blade which gives very good balance but is a lot heavier...the FSH has a lot more chopping power and is a fair bit more comfortable because of the wide area the impact is spread over...
This comparison is'nt exactly "apples to apples" though...the weight difference is going to give the FSH a fair old advantage...but at the same time a disadvantage if you have to carry it a long way. This is only something which you can determine for yourself. For me it is how the knife is carried. On webbing spread over a shoulder harness you don't notice it so much and having a bit of a heavier weight chopper might be more appealing...on a normal belt though and it is a definate noticeable issue...you might want to use a belt and suspenders with knives like this.
All told I like the SAR8 a lot...and there needs to be some chop offs to sort out my first impressions above...but as a stand alone "one knife" it is a great offering...:thumbup:
The SAR8's nearest comparable is the Basic 9....
As you can see the blades are nearly identical with the only differences being in the grind on the edge and the thickness. The Basic 9 is asymetrical on the grind being a combination of convex one side and flat on the other...the SAR8 is fully convex on both...which is best? Well they are both very good...for me having the ability to use a belt sander to bring an edge back the SAR8 probably works easiest to restore at home.
In the field I think the Basic 9 would be the easiest to bring back as you would just need to use a small field stone on the flat side to touch it up...with a SAR8 you would need a bit of hide glued to the underside of a tobacco tin covered with green chrome compound and a mouse mat inside it with a few sheets of wet and dry if you had let the edge dull a bit...both work fine but in the long run the wet and dry will wear out...the stone will last for years...
Weight wise they are actually very similar...the Basic 9 at .25 and the SAR8 at .220 thick with the extra weight in the full spine just about ties it off...the Basic 9 is on feel just a little lighter...I have'nt put them on the scales...just going off feel...but they do both feel great "fast" in the hand knives. They combine the best of a fighting knife dexterity and with the length of blade they have a very good chopping ability as well.
See Noss's destruction test of a Basic 9 and you will see these knives have great chopping power for their weight...the same applies to the SAR 8...the increased grip to the rear allows a good rearward hold to enhance the length and chopping power and at a guess I would say they will probably be a close tie on chopping.
Personally I am a great fan of these two blades...they epitomise the best designs for "power to weight" performance...I like them for carrying them as well...here the extra lightness is a real advantage compared to others...and as a versatile knife the lightness and dexterity score well in food prep or gralloch work or if used as a combat knife the fast long blades would be what you wanted.
On the handle front there is a fair bit of difference....
The Res C of the Basic scores a lot higher on comfort when chopping...the SAR8 has a pommel which is useable as a Baton...personally I see little advantage in the pommel of the SAR8 that the spine on the Basic 9 cannot be used for...as for toughness of a full spine v comfort of a hidden tang...the Basic 9 is plenty tough with a hidden tang ...the Noss test showed that...but if I was wanting to hammer the pommel to dig in the blade tip...the SAR8 is the best design...that use though is one I have yet to come across in the field.
Field use on things like ferro rods etc...the gimping on the SAR8 is great for this...the Basic 9 is suprisingly also good for a coated blade...I use the undersize finger choil and the edges there are very much at a good "right angle" and the rod settles in there for a secure fit and you can throw a good shower of sparks.
All told the only difference is on the comfort of the handle when chopping...the SAR8 is a very thin profile on the grip...this gives a bit of "shock bite" to the area around your thumb web when gripping to chop...the Basic 9 is perhaps the most comfortable handle for chopping that Busse produce...the only trade off to the two to perhaps even the score a little is that the satin finish on the SAR8 lends itself much better to a "one knife" does it all for things like food prep etc...but ofcourse you could strip the Basic 9... all told therefore I would give the nudge slightly to the Basic 9 on this comparison.
Compare using the Basic 9 "as is" with the benefit of a none glare finish and teamed up with a S5LE for food prep and delicate work and you have for my uses which include the "military" a really great set up...
This "combo" has a great deal going for it.... Total weight on these two probably gives the best "power to weight to functionality" of all the Bussekin blades I have.
If you were to team up the SAR 8 with a smaller blade....and as I say...it's great advantage is that it probably does'nt need one and could exist very well as a one knife does it all...I would probably go with a RMD...
Infact sending in my RMD for a change of scales to match the SAR8 grips and giving it a full satin finish to match would be something I would consider if money were no object. They would make a nice pairing IMO...
I seriously would'nt consider a SAR8 with a SAR4...to me the SAR knives are "stand alone" really...the SAR 4 is quite a heavy knife and for a smaller companion blade you are carrying a lot of weight selecting both.
Looking at how the SAR8 compares with other 8 inch blades the main difference is on weight and chopping ability and on grip comfort...you can also see the weight difference as well by the spine thickness on the grip shots...here are some of the classic comparisons...
SAR8 and NMSFNO...
The NMSFNO is heavier and has a wider grip...
Chopping wise I think the NMSFNO will do better than the SAR 8 in a chop off but the SAR 8'S grip with it's increased depth at the rear gives a slightly more secure grip which is less likely to enable the blade to slide forward and this might even things a little...you would really need to do a chop off to tell..."shock bite" for me there is no difference worth mentioning...they are both comfortable but not as comfortable as Res C...it is only really Res C where you feel a noticeable difference worth mentioning IMO...
The shock aspect though does diminish on how thick the grips are and on how heavy the knife is when using a full tang knife...compared to a FSH Variant which has a .32 thick grip and a tapering blade which gives very good balance but is a lot heavier...the FSH has a lot more chopping power and is a fair bit more comfortable because of the wide area the impact is spread over...
This comparison is'nt exactly "apples to apples" though...the weight difference is going to give the FSH a fair old advantage...but at the same time a disadvantage if you have to carry it a long way. This is only something which you can determine for yourself. For me it is how the knife is carried. On webbing spread over a shoulder harness you don't notice it so much and having a bit of a heavier weight chopper might be more appealing...on a normal belt though and it is a definate noticeable issue...you might want to use a belt and suspenders with knives like this.
All told I like the SAR8 a lot...and there needs to be some chop offs to sort out my first impressions above...but as a stand alone "one knife" it is a great offering...:thumbup:
So maybe I shouldn't thank you...
) Anyhoo—yeah, all for stabbing this one in the head.
