Scandi grinds, Micro Bevels, and possibly a new Bushcraft knife.

D

Daugherty83

Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
3
I have recently been looking into purchasing a more dedicated bushcraft blade and have been looking at cheaper options like the Condor Bushlore as well as the higher end Genesis by LT Wright among others. I know, two completely different knives as far as fit, finish, and materials go as well as price point. Both blades though have kept me wondering though about their respective grinds and edges. Until now, I have only had experience with flat and saber grinds with standard v edges. I've always been a fan of Esee and have gotten comfortable using and sharpening them. The Genesis is said to be a zero degree Scandi with a micro convex edge on it. Because of this micro convex edge and after reading the micro bevel thread in the stickies, I believe I would just upkeep the edge with a strop and/or some sandpaper and a mousepad. The same would go for the Condor. Previously though and after reading and learning about Scandi grinds and how they are so easy to sharpen by laying them down on the easily seen and pronounced bevel my question is this. With the micro bevel given to these blades for much needed strength because a zero degree scandi grind would roll or chip too easy, we would actually never touch the apparent bevel that is obvious from the Scandi grind that I always read was so easy to sharpen? And if so, what is the benefit of the Scandi grind if we are in fact just dealing with the micro bevel whether it be convex or V. Would it make more sense to just order a full flat ground like my Esee's and sharpen as I always have at a set angle with only one bevel ala sharpmaker or dmt stone. I may be over thinking this, but it has got me wondering. Thanks for your help and ideas. Sorry if my ideas and thoughts have not came out in written word clearly. Let me know if I can clarify anything.
 
The most basic benefit to the scandi grind is that it works with woodcarving and bushcrafting so well, and the tip is very strong compared to some other grind types (also a good trait for bushcrafting when boring holes etc).


I believe most simply work the microbevel, not the primary grind, until it becomes a bit large. Then go back and spend a bit more time to grind a new, flat bevel face, microbevel the edge, and start all over again. Some maintain this grind on a very hard strop or softer waterstone and just go with a slight bit of overall convexing, maybe a degree or two per side, not bothering to use a microbevel at all (I'm in this group).

One can grind it totally flat and use it as such, but it should be at least in the mid to upper 20 degrees inclusive or will not be able to tolerate lateral stresses very well. If it is a decent angle, is very easy to maintain this edge and it does work well for EDU.

While some of my Scandis have come without a microbevel, all have had at least a slight bit of convex to the edge. Ultimately, you could pick up the Condor or an inexpensive Mora and try it out - you might not like the Scandi for daily use and a flat primary grind would be a better choice. Is only one way to find out. Probably half of my EDU knives are Scandi.
 
Thanks a lot. I do own a Mora Companion (non HD) and feel it works well. I've only used it a few times though for feather sticks, etc so I don't have much to go by. I think I out think myself when it comes to sharpening different grinds, bevels, etc.
 
I like scandis too but I would stronlgy recommend to only get 1/8 inch blade thickness and even then, for tasks like card board cutting etc, a thin full convex or similiar outperforms the scandi IMO. Sharpening a scandi is easy, just follow the large bevel - well, true and not true. It is actually not that easy to restore a real flat scandi by hand without a "jig". You need a lot of bevel-pressure support/control. I am currently working on a Mora (so likely 1095 steel) that was previously sharpened too sloppy (stropped on leather) so the scandi bevel became too convexed in addition to a microbevel that became a macrobevel. This is on my Norton Crystolone stone (the coarse side that is!) and although I am done with one side and almost done with the other, it took a long time.

Proper maintenance then is the next problem to avoid the above in the longterm. Solution is maintenance on hard backing, HeavyHanded's washboard for instance. I think Martin has also good experience with compound on oak board. I will experiment with some balsa wood and scandi maintenance this weekend but I assume that more than light maintenance is difficult on Balsa since it is quite soft?!

Bottom line, I would not want to have a microbevel on my scandi but then a slight convexity at the apex does not harm either.
 
awestib said:
I like scandis too but I would stronlgy recommend to only get 1/8 inch blade thickness and even then, for tasks like card board cutting etc, a thin full convex or similiar outperforms the scandi IMO...
Click to expand...

IMHO this the factor which determines most which Scandis will work well for EDU. I have a 3" Mora classic that is thinner stock than its larger brothers and it work great. Likewise I took the time to thin down a 4" Classic and it too performs very well for EDU. Also, some of the more traditional patterns made with very wide bevels on a somewhat wider stock (puukkos) are thin enough behind the edge to cross over into EDU territory. I carry mine as much for the barrel handles and large mouth sheaths as anything else.

Spot on re fixing them should they become too out of whack - is a lot of steel to remove by hand.
 
The scandi grind will be more durable than a full flat or full convex grind if the stock thickness is the same, due to the thick geometry. IMO, it doesn't cut nearly as well as a FFG because of the thickness of the primary grind.

If you don't use a microbevel, then it's easy to sharpen in terms of finding the right angle, but it also takes longer due to removing much more metal.

Your choice.
 
Thanks everyone, I think I have a better understanding now. The whole "true scandi" grind versus one with a micro bevel added (convex or V) had me kind of confused. If in fact we run a micro bevel on the scandi, Awestib above recommended using a hard backing to prevent over convexing. This is in contrast to most of what I have read where people are recommending using sandpaper/mousepad and/or a strop. At the end of the day I suppose it's totally about personal preference, but because I'm still pretty new to edge geometry, sharpening, etc. I don't have a strong opinion on either/or. The other question when it comes to these micro bevels is, how pronounced should they actually be when done correctly. Are they plainly visible to the naked eye or is it simply felt? Thanks again.
 
All depends, theres a sticky at the top of the page goes into some details.

Normally it would be just barely visible to the naked eye. In some cases it will be more visible, and certainly as it wears in and the edge gets ready to need a more comprehensive sharpening. It is best done with fine stones, a strop will induce a slight (or not so slight) microconvex by default, it would be contraindicated to force a larger one on purpose. Over a hard stone etc, the paper or leather, per Awestib, will have some amount of deflection - even sandpaper over glass or steel with a light touch will create a slight curvature. On a full convex, one might wish to increase this a little, but on a Scandi, just a degree or two per side is enough to toughen up the edge IMHO.

Martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top