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

I will admit a little bias however I wouldn't be asking the question or taking the time to learn the purpose or theory if I wasn't interested in learning . I have other things to do with my time than try to cause a stir or get into an argument . If I was a dumb ass I would base my theory on assumptions , make a prototype I don't fully understand and look for the negative as you suggest .
Well Maybe i am interested in what sets these knives apart from the others . So I ask the questions hoping people who know what they are talking about will answer them as articulately as many have, challenge them a little and study the details . Then combined with a little research of my own and some due diligence,read some books seek out knowledge . I can move forward designing a bushcraft knife with a proper scandi grind and with a bit of an education on how , what , when where. Then with a good baseline I will know what I am trying to accomplish.
Isn't this the way to learn , study just about everything?

I have been in this industry way to long , designing , making and inventing to look only at the surface of,or my initial opinion of, or one persons theory on .... anything. I make no claim on being the authority on all things knife . Which is why I asked the question to begin with. It seems to me the longer I have been in this industry the more I realize how much there is yet to learn. And I love every bit of it as much now as I did when I was a beginner.
 
A zero edge is nothing new to me , I have made them off and on for a long time . What is new to me is the shallow steep angled grinds on these scandi knives . This is what I am trying to understand and learn. I appreciate all the valuable info shared here and feel I have gotten quite a good education on these knives/grinds . Thank you all very much for taking the time to teach this old dog a new trick. I will proceed on making a couple prototypes and buy a few samples.

BTW , I am Swedish , Welsh and Cheyenne so these knives are part of my ancestry as well . I just never used them personally .
 
Much respect. That's why I love BF. Where else can you see one of the most revered knife makers around just discussing different grinds and crap?
 
stoffi said:
You commented:


...huh? :confused:
Click to expand...
Your comment appeared a bit degrading, at least imo. What basically equals a Bic lighter in the knife world, a disposable, mass produced, inexpensive, and largely plastic Mora doesn't seem like something that would better educate a knifemaker like Ken Onion. A blade on the work site that gets thrown away instead of resharpened doesn't seem like a candidate for assessing centuries of history behind a design. A custom made by one of the top makers who studies and designs the test blades for a purpose would be a whole lot better than a $7 Mora, I'd guess.
 
I think he was getting to the point of it being so simple, that it can easily be achieved in mass produced blades.

I'm wondering what a custom maker could do better in regards to pure cutting ability than the Mora?? Besides changing the blade profile, and probably sharpening to a finer edge, but sharpening is something that has to be tackled by the user at some point anyways.
 
Despite remarks above, I think the grind has traditional value because it was cheaper and easier to make on a smaller grindstone - that is a guess. But that fact might also account for the grind's presence on otherwise highly-wrought and well-dressed traditional pieces. Note too that, traditionally, a puukko is slightly hollow ground. Roselli's slightly convex scandi grinds are something of a brilliant exception

More, these are pieces that were designed to function cutting hard things - wood, frozen meat - in the kind of cold that makes metal fragile. The oblique grind angles are a support mechanism, but bring limitations with them - hence the use of a longer, broader, relatively thinner blade with a sometimes higher grind line for butchering

I have a bunch of Scandinavian scandis ranging from 2.5mm - 5mm stock and 3" - 8" in length. They have different virtues. All knives are specialized, I suppose. I don't prefer them to flat ground or convexed edges - they are different and in some circumstances more competent, in others less

SPyderco uses them a lot on folders, but you know this ... and possibly they are there for cost, possibly for toughness. Ask Sal Glesser :)
 
Noddy said:
SPyderco uses them a lot on folders, but you know this ... and possibly they are there for cost, possibly for toughness. Ask Sal Glesser :)
Click to expand...

Spyderco doesn't make any folders with Scandinavian grinds. They produce lots of saber grinds, but those are a different animal.
 
hardheart said:
Your comment appeared a bit degrading, at least imo. What basically equals a Bic lighter in the knife world, a disposable, mass produced, inexpensive, and largely plastic Mora doesn't seem like something that would better educate a knifemaker like Ken Onion. A blade on the work site that gets thrown away instead of resharpened doesn't seem like a candidate for assessing centuries of history behind a design. A custom made by one of the top makers who studies and designs the test blades for a purpose would be a whole lot better than a $7 Mora, I'd guess.
Click to expand...

Err... OK? What I meant was that Mr. Onion would do wisely in testing several blades with this type of grind, before reaching a conclusion.
A Mora would be a simple and cheap solution to begin with. Reading about things is great, but "a picture says more than a thousand words"-type-of-thing, was my meaning.

Btw, what's wrong with a BIC lighter?! They're great!
I prefer them to Zippos and storm-type lighters. Like you said: "disposable, mass produced, inexpensive".
I just get a bunch because they are light (no pun) and cheap and they always work (if dry).

@KenOnion
I hope you did not feel I was being disrespectful toward you.
 
KenOnion said:
I will admit a little bias however I wouldn't be asking the question or taking the time to learn the purpose or theory if I wasn't interested in learning . I have other things to do with my time than try to cause a stir or get into an argument . If I was a dumb ass I would base my theory on assumptions , make a prototype I don't fully understand and look for the negative as you suggest .
Click to expand...

I think this is meant for me. I did not mean to sound combatitive or demeaning in my post, and if it came across that way I appologize. My point was more to say that in my experience when one does not understand a subject, and have vast experience in another area that they know works for them (scandi vs flat ground to use you as an example), that it is often hard to not compare the new with the established; as then the new will almost never be given a fair shake. You have admitted that the design does not seem to be for you- which is identifying that you realize the bias. My suggestion of using the Mora as a baseline it so that you can compare a readily available and base scandi, then be able to use that baseline to create a ScandOnion- which would have your input on an existing design, and then use the ScandOnion to compare to your other knives. With you then having more personalization and experience the testing/comparison will be more pure IMO.

I did not mean to sound as if you were consciously trying to discredit the grind, you were very clear that you want to understand something you do not. I have found that often people are unaware of how biases cloud judgement until pointed out specifically, and my scientician mind thought this would be a good way of negating the bias, by finding fault, fixing deficiencies that you see, then making a decision based on multiple samples. I'm sure it would have been clearer in person (I dislike posting by phone too), and honestly await your results/discoveries, and why they were true to you, even if the same does not hold true for me.

Regards, sorry for rambling.
Kris.
 
Stoffi , Nope I never thought there was any disrespect . I appreciate your thoughts and logic.

Kris , You didn't sound combative or demeaning .

Guys , I am very appreciative of the thoughts and opinions discussed here . I posted this thread to learn. I was merely stating that I am open to the experiment , I will be careful not to bring any bias to the party and will rely on solid facts when doing my analysis. I thought i was being fairly clear in my approach to this and although I didn't shy away from my thoughts and critiques earlier in this thread . I felt I needed to to fish out the details and passions for these knives to understand for myself what this thing is all about.

Aloha!
 
Stoffi , Nope I never thought there was any disrespect . I appreciate your thoughts and logic.

Kris , You didn't sound combative or demeaning .

Guys , I am very appreciative of the thoughts and opinions discussed here . I posted this thread to learn. I was merely stating that I am open to the experiment , I will be careful not to bring any bias to the party and will rely on solid facts when doing my analysis. I thought i was being fairly clear in my approach to this and although I didn't shy away from my thoughts and critiques earlier in this thread . I felt I needed to to fish out the details and passions for these knives to understand for myself what this thing is all about.

Aloha!
 
Looking forward to hearing how you feel about them after some experimentation. I had a scandi folder when I was somewhere between 8-12 years old, remembered it cut like a demon outdoors and indoors, but have not owned one since then for any comparisons. I've been curious about getting a small scandi fixed blade to try out on family's land for building traps and primitive archery.

Hope to see some photos of what you come up with.
 
Part of the problem is simply communication. People are using words to mean different things.

A Mora, an puukko with a diamond cross-section (and a secondary bevel), and a Mears "Bushcraft" are all being called "scandi's" and boy are they different.

I think Ken, from what he says, is thinking of the Mears "Scandi" - relatively thick at the spine (compared to the Mora or puukko), bevel less than 1/3 of the height and no secondary bevel. I have an Adventure Sworn of the last pattern, and it is very different from any other knife I have used, including a good many Scandinavian and Finn knives.
 
If you'll take the time to discuss with nordic knifemakers you'll find a wide range of thoughs, but you will never hear them call the grind "scandi" and I say: never. You will hear about flat, concave and convex.

b80.jpg

jaaranen75.jpg

215.jpg

strande95p.jpg

puronvarsitommi120.jpg


I suppose that you would call "scandi" only the first one, but all these blades come from nordic country.

The first is swedish and has a low flat grind, the second is forged by a Saami smith and is concave with convex edge, the third is norvegian and is lightly concave, the fourth is danish and higher flat grinded, the fifth is a rhombic finnish blade, flat grinded.

"Scandi grind" is simply and only a marketing given name.
 
I have a few of those rhombic grinds from Joonas Kallioniemi and Jukka Hankala - both in Bohler silver steel. I really like them a lot.
 
So, Ken,

Are you going to give a Scandi Grind bushcraft design a go? A Scandi bushcraft is one knife I don't have yet but have almost pulled the trigger on a few times. Just wondering . . .
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
Spyderco doesn't make any folders with Scandinavian grinds. They produce lots of saber grinds, but those are a different animal.
Click to expand...

To a point I agree - to a point - given that that most scandi grinds have a secondary (at least a micro) bevel - a true zero can be quite unstable. And that EKA for instance take the secondary bevel up quite high
 
Last edited:
Ken, I have had the same thoughts as "CUTS LIKE A KRIS."

It seems like you have two goals here:

1) is to learn why "we" like scandi knives.

2) is to be able to make an effective one yourself.

-Goal #2 is side-tracking you from the most efficient way to figure out goal #1. You could solve #1 by buying a mora and using it. If you want to know why people like the grind used on Mora knives, try one directly.

Your goal of learning why the scandi grind is liked by so many is not primarily based off of custom knives, it is largely based off of the basic cheapo Mora.

All that should be made clear is that you don't need to make anything to figure out goal #1. (Further research is good, but by all means do not miss the step of buying a Mora)

If you are looking to start making "scandi" knives, then what you are doing is great and that will help you accomplish goal #2.

By not buying a mora however, you may never fully understand the answer to goal #1 -if your design differs from it.

Is that way off base or is this making sense to anyone?
 
Nobody has mentioned that a fair number of the "scan do" ground British bushcraft knives are NOT made from thin stock for a knife their size.
 
BINGO! Not that I'm experienced in thse types of knives because I'm not, but that crossed my mind when I read one of the earlier posts that questioned how you make a better Buschcraft type knife than the cheaper, value brands and the one thing that crossed my mind was "put more rigidity into the knife and more inertia behind the spine". It seems to me the more efficient direct transfer of energy from the user via a stiff, thick blade, with good steel and a good HT will translate into better cutting (vs. slicing) performance except when fileting a fish . . .

jdm61 said:
Nobody has mentioned that a fair number of the "scan do" ground British bushcraft knives are NOT made from thin stock for a knife their size.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top