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

As most traditional knives it cant be removed from the context of its origins, the scandigrind type knives works well for its intended use over here. Also i pretty sure there are traditions behind it, were just used to work with it, everybody use it everywhere from carpenters to fishermen to housewifes. Scandinavians are actually quite conservative and dont like change.
 
I'm thinking I need to make two identical knives said:
Several of the Enzo blanks come ground scandi or flat or convex. They have good steel and once you put on a nice handle they have good resale value. People really wanting to thrash out the differences could buy one of each and see which they prefer.

While the British Bushcraft fad has brought the scandi grind to the masses, they hardly invented it. I think it's hysterical that people complain about them being poor food prep knives...sort of like complaining that their kitchen knives did a poor job of carving an ax handle.

Scandi it not my favorite grind, but my Enzo Trapper carves wood better than my Bravo 1, Dozier Elk Skinner, or Falkniven F1. Its not a huge difference, but it's certainly enough to notice and appreciate.

The fact of the matter is that most of us have many more knives than we actually have any use for. It's because we enjoy knives. When I bought my Trapper I didn't expect it to do anything my other knives wouldn't do, I just like using different knives and learning the strengths and weakness of different designs.
Click to expand...
 
Same bevel hight but different geometry, while remaining inside the nordic blades, gives different carving performances.

A is a big sized blade with low flat bevel, but the same will happened with a small blade with low bevel
B is a small sized blade with flat grind 1/2 of total hight.
C is a rhombic section blade.

The rhombic section touch only with the very edge and could touch with a tiny part of the side that will slide away due to its own geometry. The flat blades will touch with the edge, the bevel-side junction, the side itself and/or the spine giving less possiblity in carving.

Rhombic blades are essencially used in carving and hunting even if they can stand batoning etc if properly made and thick enought when bevels start. Normally rhombic blades have bevel high 2/3 of the blade itself.
 
OK, I just don't understand what cutting medium looks like the inside of a circle (hose or pipe?), so now I feel like as if everyone else gets it except me. Also, I've never seen a rhombic blade before, but it seems interesting in concept.
 
Rhombic section is essencially finnish. Seems like it was created in 1700, but it's possible it's even older. What is sure is that is one of the trademarks of the Tommi puukkos and is thanks to them that is now more famous also out of finnish borders, even if it's common in Finalnd to see it also on "normal" handmade puukkos.

I don't mean the family business like Kauhavan Puukkopaja, Puukkojunkkari, Lapin Puukko, WoodsKnife, Eräpuu etc as they use mainly factory blades by Lauri Metalli Oy,
I mean knives made by blacksmiths or knifemakers that forges their own blades and creates their knives from start to finish.
 
The part I didn't understand was the circles of the diagram. I don't understand why the illustration has circles to demonstrate the contact surfaces, since pretty much very few mediums will contact a blade in that way. Could you please explain?
 
I suppose the creator of the drawing , that should be member here too with nickname L.V., thought that was clear for woodworkers. While carving an axe handle or a spoon for example you'll have to make circular cuts (I do them pivoting with the thump) for shaping or finishing. Let's say it like so, when using rhombic section the wood carved tends to curl and spiralize more than with other two.

After having tried all three configurations I found out the same thing and when I saw the drawing I understood what it ment, but I can tell you, if you haven't tried rhombic section it's hard to get.

I hope I menaged to be clear enough...
 
I think this blade geometry has for purpose to reduce the radius when digging the wood. Improves the leverage working as well.

Not sure though, I've never used this geometry.

dantzk.
 
OK, got it. You started talking about something else. I just didn't see the connection with the previous conversations. The rhombic shape is interesting but would probably deserve its own thread..?
 
As I've said "scandi grind" is a marketing given name for identify a low flat grind. As the discussion spread also on scandinaviana and finnish knives too I put in something I thought woukd be interesting.
 
KenOnion said:
Thanks for all the feedback guys ! Feel like i have a pretty good starting point.
Click to expand...

And if you feel like sending a few prototypes to me , so you can put the "Tested In Sweden" stamp on the knives , I´d be pretty OK with that !



1234,,,JK,,,:D
 
The only scandi (assuming that's the correct term) that I have had experience with is a 3v Shookum bush tool, and it has performed admirably in the field for both skinning deer, batonning, finer wood work (fuzz sticks/notchings etc) and general camp chores due to versatilty, ergonomics and edge retention. In fact, it ousted a few other high end production fixed blades from my pack, and is currently, and has been for a couple of years, my go to knife for the field for the reasons mentioned above. (some prior pack items for reference were Busse Basic 5, Busse SAR). Both of which are fantastic blades.
Actually, not to long ago I was considering trading it, just to try something new/different and then I remembered all the others I had before it, and how it has (from an overall perspective) been the best of many elements to me, and I could not let it go. It has the record, from my limited experience for staying the go-to field knife for me, for this long. Not saying I won't change eventually, but it has set the standard pretty high for another to displace it.

As a side note, I got it primarily to work with wood, as that is what I deal with while in the woods :-), and all the other uses are secondary to me, but even in secondary uses (skinning etc) it has pleased me well, especially considering that the performance for secondary uses, was in no way off enough to justify carrying another knife specific for those uses. Whereas other knives I have had for skinning etc, did not meet my needs in finer wood working, or perhaps batonning etc and justified, or left me with the feeling that I should carry another knife/tool more specific to those potential needs. That to me is the allure of the Shookum's versatility, but then again, it may be that the 3v has made the difference.
 
Last edited:
Ken, I've had what you could call a love hate relationship with scandis. I prefer a flat ground blade with a convex edge. However, I've had lots of custom and production scandis over the years, and have not kept any of them. Then I picked up the Skookum Bush Tool from Rod Garcia in a trade. I don't know if all of the hype is warranted, but it is a great knife. I am currently on Rod's list for a flat ground Skookum, I guess I am just set in my ways?

I also have a Dozier bushcraft coming up for production soon.

If you have the chance to get a SBT, I would go for it.

BTW I picked up a CRKT Ripple for my little brother, he is not a knife nut, but the Ripple is his go to worker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top