Scandi , I guess I just don't get it .

if someone started a one-side chisel ground thread, it would have been settled faster.

again, economy. a full-v grind basically wastes 50% of your stock. forging a stock to full-v or even convex is even more time consuming and expensive. if drag for a specific knife use is the issue, then the solution is use thinner stock. the two sharpest blades in regular use anywhere, box cutter and scalpel blades, are scandi grinds using the thinnest stocks available.
 
It's also worth nothing that a chisel grind is basically half a scandi grind. Edge angle being equal, one can argue that a 20 degree chisel grind would cut similarly to a 20 degree inclusive scandi.
 
monger4142 said:
imho, overall the scandi grind is an inferior grind that's still being used because of tradition and looks.
Click to expand...

Thomas Linton said:
Tradition in the UK of maybe ten-years standing.
Click to expand...

Its clearly not inferior or the Scandinavians, Finns and Saami people would not have been using it for so long.....

HOWEVER....I do totally agree that the 'scandi grind' (a phrase that makes me cringe tbh) has been created, or at the very least misappropriated, off the back of the Bushcraft phenomenon, and allowed every Tom, Dick and Harry to jump on the blademaking bandwaggon and stock remove a 5/32" piece of O1 into a Woodlore clone (or versions there of). Some of them do it well, some of them don't.

I find that they are simply too thick and over engineered (a classic British trait ;)) to be truly versatile.....especially when we are told to carry a certain brand of axe and pruning saw with us as well!! They suck at food prep, are marginal at game prep. Thinner stocked blades of this grind, are however, much more usable, the Mora 2000, with it's dual grinds is a good example. If I was just whittling wood though, then I'd be happy to stick with my Roselli Carpenter blade (in Ultra High Carbon steel :) Which does have a secondary bevel).

Also, with regards to the bevel and sharpening; countless times I've seen people ask 'how do I sharpen my Mora' when they've just bought it and realised that its actually ever so slightly hollow ground (due to the use large grinding wheels not belts) and with a secondary bevel. They believe that this is not correct and proceed to flatten the bevel, before even using it! Or blame their inability to produce fuzzy sticks is down to this, not their lack of experience. Grrr...that annoys me!

The 'ease' of sharpening has always been questionable in my mind. Sure, you can lay them flat and remove all that metal on your bench stone, BUT, if I'm in the field, I'd much prefer to be able to just touch up the edge of my knife, with a tickle on a small steel/file/strop/stone. I think this also explains why a secondary bevel is found on true Scandinavian knives, Mora, with the exception of Sloyd (carving knives) and on a Finnish Puukko.

Traditional, handmade leuku, I have found to have a slightly convexed edge anyway. Probably due to there harder use for chopping tasks.

I love puukko....but I'm not a 'scandi-grind' fan (or British brainwashed sycophant :rolleyes:). They are steeped in history and I admire the simple, work like aesthetics, their style of sheaths and so forth....plus I enjoy putting them together. However, I prefer full flat ground knives or convexed edges for my woods knives....not least because I always end up doing the cooking! ;)

Sorry for the ramblings/rantings but I just wanted to echo some of the sentiments here, with regards to the cons of this 'grind'.

Mr O, I won't be surprised if, after handling one, you won't be 'feeling' them any more than you do now.
 
Last edited:
Scandi ground blades don't do much welloutside of chiseling/planing, imo. Any scandi ground knife could be converted to double ground and cut with less resistance, with the same edge durability because the edge bevel could be at the same angle as the original scandi. I tried using a 'bushcraft' knife in the kitchen once, but after the first attempt at an onion (no pun intended) I gave up on the knife. A single bevel is easy to apply when manufacturing, but that doesn't mean it's better for the end user depending on what they do with their knives.
 
Good thread.
I like that Leu. And, that is not a Scandi on the Leu. It's the Japanese kata-shinogi, high chisel grind.
 
You're not missing anything. It's my belief that people like them so much because the average user has an easier time at sharpening them. A razor sharp scandi will outperform a so-so sharp convex/flat grind but take an equally sharp convex/flat grind and they will spank a scandi every time. As for wood working, I haven't found them to be better at this either. I find that a well done convex gets me better fuzz sticks then a scandi. As for passing through material like you say, scandi's plain suck. I bought a custom scandi at 1/8" thick and tried to cut an onion with it and got so frustrated that I just about threw the knife across the room. If you do try them out be sure to pick a thin one like a mora. A scandi grind on a thick knife is a waste of steel IMO.
 
"Scandi grind" is a name given by english bushcrafter, nothing more.

In Scandinavia (Denmark, Sweden, Norway) and Finland blades have different grindes after the use they'll be put to. Short blades (carvers and hunters) are usually flat or concave, with a small secondary bevel or lightly convexed edge, while bigger blades (choppers) are flat grinded, with a bigger secondary bevel, or convex.
 
I'm with you, Ken. Give me a nice, full and thin flat grind with a slightly convexed edge anyday.
 
I don't mind a Scandi grind in a thin blade like a Mora or other more traditional Nordic designs. I don't care for it at all in the really thick representations which seem popular right now (maybe less so now than in the last year or two). Also, my Moras seem to do much better once I get down past the "factory" bevel and in to virgin steel. I don't know if they are brittle or what, but I see chipping until they are sharpened a time or two. I also prefer a very small micro-bevel on my hard users, like the one I keep for using in the yard and such. I much prefer a full flat grind or saber grind with a good convex or secondary bevel. I even like a full convex in some designs. I think a full convex is much more useful in a thick blade design than a Scandi grind. Just my two cents.
 
harkamus said:
It's also worth nothing that a chisel grind is basically half a scandi grind. Edge angle being equal, one can argue that a 20 degree chisel grind would cut similarly to a 20 degree inclusive scandi.
Click to expand...

I find a chisel grind works well on a wood chisel, where the length of the blade and handle provide plenty of leverage to control the direction of cut. It works well on a sushi knife where the primary task is cutting paper-thin slices of soft material. On harder material it tends to turn into the cut to an annoying degree, whereas the "scandi" tends to cut straight, since both bevels are the same length and the center of the edge angle is in line with the centerline of the blade rather than being at an angle to the centerline.

I never had any interest in the "scandi" grind until I picked up a couple of Spyderco BushcraftUK seconds and started trying them at work. Frankly, I didn't expect to like them at all. Now when I need to mortise hinges on a new door, that's what gets the call.
 
Lycosa said:
Good thread.
I like that Leu. And, that is not a Scandi on the Leu. It's the Japanese kata-shinogi, high chisel grind.
Click to expand...

It's a scandi, unless a chisel grind happens to be ground on both sides. I'm holding the knife in my hands right now, Rolf. :P
 
Personally, I like the "Scandinavian" grind. I find that my puukkos easily cut as well as any other knife I have, from hollow to FFG to convex. All this talk of binding and drag is largely irrelevant; most people would never notice a difference in practice, without having read about it on the internet and formed a baseless opinion. Hardly anyone is *actually* going to use their knife for enough specialized, repetitive cutting tasks for the grind type to legitimately matter. Blade thickness is a much more noticeable trait.
The major difference from a layman's perspective will be sharpening technique. That's also why there's so much confusion & questioning surrounding convex grinds. I find the Scandinavian grind to be simple to sharpen; but then again, I also find the other kinds just as easy. So... why do I like it? I guess because half my ancestors were Vikings, who came from up that-a-way and used similar tools. ;)
 
There is pretty much always a difference in performance depending on grind, angle, knifedesign and so on. It's just that a lot of people don't notice or take time to compare them. A lot of people may have tried most grinds, but have taken too long of a break between them to remember what those other grinds actually felt like whilst using the next one. I've got a bunch of different knives with pretty much most of the popular grind types and I always notice a difference in performance in different mediums, although it may be quite slight.
 
i just experimented with an old scandi (1/4 inch stock) in slicing an onion. it'll kill you. the reason is one tends to lay the blade against one's knuckles as a slicing template (giving it a glanced angle to the direction of the cut.) this produces very fine cuts when using a v-grind blade or a very thin kitchen knife. but with the 1/4 inch scandi, the result is a bevel surface that's almost 45 degrees off the cutting direction. solution, slice carefully with the blade perfectly vertical (whether free or pressed against the knuckle.)

conclusion: it's just a different blade that can't adapt to a cutting method devised with more standard thin blades or fully beveled ones.
 
Unless I was having a wood-chip salad, I wouldn't use a "scandi" for food prep.

It is a specialized tool. Especially the ones with slim 2 1/2" blades. Great carvers.
 
Well , I guess having a wood plane , spokeshave ,skive ,chisel would have there uses when making tools and weapons in the field . I have always used a good field knife with a flat ground blade to work well for these purposes . I have also found a good hollow ground folder to be quite useful too provided they are ground on a very large wheel and have a nice thin and convexed edge. Good geometry, good steel and good heat treating makes all the difference in the world . Flat , Hollow and convex all have there strengths and weaknesses depending on the task they are intended for . This scandi thing defies all logic for me with the exception of using them as a plane , scraper or a skive . Where they may excel at those jobs they will fail miserably in other tasks in my opinion . I may change my mind when I finally put one through the paces but for now they defy all logic and reasoning . Kinda like using a sharpened cold chisel to cut through a ham , Not the best choice. That being said I do get the horizontal chisel tool concept and would consider it a useful accessory in the field . But for now I wouldn't replace my chopper , Machete , hunting knife , or folder with one.I would consider it as an accessory or addition to what I already carry in the field although I have found the knives I already carry to work quite well in the field and can do what a scandi can do and a whole lot more. But then again , I am not a minimalist , I do not spend months in the field fashioning my utensils with a knife and or fashioning a bow and arrows out of a tree limb. I have many wood working tools and none of them have a scandi grind . I have many leather working tools and none of them have a scandi grind. There must be a reason for this as these tools are professional quality tools and if scandi were the best option for these tasks , i would think them to be more prevalent in the marketplace . Same can be said for wood carving tools , no scandi there either.
Which leads me to my next thought , If the primary purpose for the scandi grind other than ease of sharpening for an amateur is to shave , scrape and act as a field chisel . Why not design a tool for field use that accomplishes these tasks such as a pocket spokeshave with a chisel head or something to that extent ?
 
I guess Ill throw in my .02, scandi grinds for me at least work great in processing wood and maintain there edge phenominally. But that can be said about a nice full flat grind as well. I guess it all comes down to preference. As for the drag on the blade I have found that thicker stock needs a thinner edge for less drag. I find that 1/8 stock is great for scandis. I use scandi's on my kiridashi designs and they are extremely sharp and durable as anything. Anything over 1/4inch thick stock is very hard to have good edge geometry and maintain it.

A true scandi is very nice for making certain traps in the woods as well. I guess thats the reason why the tracker design is so famous because theres a combination of the convex edge (for chopping) and the scandi (for precision wood work). For edc work I guess you could say the scandi isnt as practical as say a flat or hollow but if the knife will be used for precision wood work and wood craft the scandi cant be beat.
 
Elkins , I am gonna make a scandi ground knife and give it an honest go . If it doesn't perform , I won't go any further with it . If it does , Maybe I will do something scandi . Never been one to follow empty hype though, either it works or it don't . If at the root of this scandi thing is the desire to have a field tool to scrape,skive and chisel in the field , I would be better focused to design a tool for those purposes than try to try to ask a common knife to fulfill those tasks via a scandi grind.
I have spent two days watching videos ,and reading everything scandi and either I am still missing something, i'm a moron or this is hype. To each his own I guess, next step is to make one and try it out for myself and keep an open mind.
 
So how is a zero ground 20 degree combined ground 1/8 inch blade superior to a 7 degree combined flat ground and slightly convexed 1/8 blade keeping everything else the same superior ? drag coefficient alone dictates much less drag on the flat ground blade. I wouldn't consider a sharpened cold chisel a good candidate for precision anything .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top