Schrade SCHF42 Raven Is Discontinued

[Mistwalker]

came today. had no experience with a Griffin designs prior. have plenty of schrades though....

very well throughout design. when I first saw this thread, visually it didn't appeal to me right away. after reading on the design and such it started to catch my eye. in the hand it is impressive. plenty of reviews by folks who do reviews.....so i wont bother with that. came sharp, decent bevels, and fit and finish quite good for the 40 or so bucks I paid. gonna put it to use it today...View attachment 982188

what I really like is the ffg and blade shape and the very thick and strong tip on it.

what I dont like is the grivory scales are a bit slippery so gonna maybe rough those up. with micarta, huge improvement as a user.

I used this hard today and wore it on my belt all day.

Poaching some fatwood

The start on making a one stick fire

I don't like what 3V would do to the cost, nor do I know that it would be worth it. Would you three in particular feel that sticking with 1095 and the 3/16 thickness would be better than say 5/32 O1 or A2? Or even O1 or A2 in 3/16?

 

[jbmonkey]

I don't like what 3V would do to the cost, nor do I know that it would be worth it. Would you three in particular feel that sticking with 1095 and the 3/16 thickness would be better than say 5/32 O1 or A2? Or even O1 or A2 in 3/16?

I like a2 and o1 better in general.....that said I'm not a knife designer so I tend trust knife makers and experts like ya to make 'em right for us......

I already have the 1095 ones. might add another if in a different steel though just cause.....

 

[buckfynn]

I don't like what 3V would do to the cost, nor do I know that it would be worth it. Would you three in particular feel that sticking with 1095 and the 3/16 thickness would be better than say 5/32 O1 or A2? Or even O1 or A2 in 3/16?

I agree with jbmonkey, you are the designer and know what is best for your designs.

As for me being a consumer, I would prefer either O1 or A2 (doesn't matter, I like and have used both extensively) over 1095. Concerning thickness definitely like 5/32" over 3/16". I wouldn't mind even seeing 1/8" for the 42D or 55.

Also I have several of the 42D and 55 in 1095. I doubt if I could justify a reason for buying any more in 1095.

 

[MolokaiRider]

I don't like what 3V would do to the cost, nor do I know that it would be worth it. Would you three in particular feel that sticking with 1095 and the 3/16 thickness would be better than say 5/32 O1 or A2? Or even O1 or A2 in 3/16?

Thanks for asking for our opinion.

I’m a fan of good geometry. A thinner grind is always an improvement in my opinion for a belt knife.

I have used many different knives to baton wood, but only for fun...not as a normal activity. I find the harmonics of batoning a thin edge can possibly lead to edge leading stress fractures; potentially shortening the life of the tool.

I prefer a knife to cut well over having a knife survive axe, hatchet, maul, or froe tasks.

I really enjoy 1095 and CPM 3V. I have not used O1 or A2. If they perform similarly to 1095 I’m pretty sure I’d like them.

 

[Mistwalker]

I like a2 and o1 better in general.

Me too, for a knife for knife uses They don't have the flex 1095 has, but they take a harder keener edge well in my opinion.

I agree with jbmonkey, you are the designer and know what is best for your designs.

As for me being a consumer, I would prefer either O1 or A2 (doesn't matter, I like and have used both extensively) over 1095. Concerning thickness definitely like 5/32" over 3/16". I wouldn't mind even seeing 1/8" for the 42D or 55.

Also I have several of the 42D and 55 in 1095. I doubt if I could justify a reason for buying any more in 1095.

Thanks, I'm usually a pretty good judge of grind performance and my preferences, I just like to ask other users their prefs as well and seek all the best compromises. I've been told my hyper-awareness causes me to study unlikely circumstances and take them into account because that's one of the effects of PTS issues. This is likely at least partly true, but in this case thinner was not an option through Schrade due to their chosen method of mounting the scales by threading the tang. Since that was the case I error-ed the design geometries more toward the combat/tactical/survival applications of their designs, to make them error on the side of being tough hard use tools at an affordable price. Through another form of manufacture I could make adjustments in the dimensions here and there to tweak the balances and inertia development in some cases, and go with thinner steel. I could see 1/8 for the Mockingbird, (the 42D) and even the Blackbird (55) unless anticipating more extreme stuff from urban survival type applications. But for the balance, inertia development, and strength I personally want in the 42, it needs to be at least 5/32 in my opinion, and even then with an adjusted blade length to compensate for the loss of mass from thinner steel.

Thanks for asking for our opinion.

I’m a fan of good geometry. A thinner grind is always an improvement in my opinion for a belt knife.

I have used many different knives to baton wood, but only for fun...not as a normal activity. I find the harmonics of batoning a thin edge can possibly lead to edge leading stress fractures; potentially shortening the life of the tool.

I prefer a knife to cut well over having a knife survive axe, hatchet, maul, or froe tasks.

I really enjoy 1095 and CPM 3V. I have not used O1 or A2. If they perform similarly to 1095 I’m pretty sure I’d like them.

Thanks, I agree. I live in a temperate rain forest and I have never had to baton anything a decent heat treat on any commonly accepted good knife steel couldn't handle, to get to a natural accelerant or drier kindling. They each have their strengths and weaknesses but some similarities too.