Scientific Experiment, Desert Rat vs BK9

Joined
Nov 27, 2003
Messages
1,317
For those with an inquisitive nature, working with a Desert Rat at the moment, performed a highly specialized scientific test with it today.
Put the DR out on the patio in 95 degree weather six inches away from, and directly parallel to, a Becker Combat Bowie, with both carefully oriented at a 90-degree angle to the afternoon sun and laying on a precisely calibrated white resin patio chair. 49 minutes later, I retrieved both knives and evaluated the handles on both objectively.
Guess which handle was not too hot to hold in my hand, and which one was.
Denis
 
Excellent guess!
Did you find any more of those "Have To Kill You If We Tell You" release forms so I can sign one & have you tell me what the coating formula is on the DR?
Smoothed off where I cut the trees down, but still very much there.
Denis
 
So, in order to justify the huge difference in cost between the two knives, we have to perform "tests" to determine how hot the handles get when exposed directly to the sun at specialized angles for almost an hour?

Great!
 
There's a better way? :eek:
Actually, I chose the tan Rat because I wanted a lighter color than black for cooler use in hot deserts. All those desert BDUs the military uses in sandy places aren't just for blending in amongst the dunes, the lighter colors are cooler than the darker shades. I was comparing the two colors & materials, thought I'd pass it on in case anybody was interested.
Email me separately if you want to duplicate my testing protocol & I'll give you the elevation, humidity, and time of day so you can precisely reproduce the experiment on your own. :D
Denis
 
Actually, the reason to pay the higher amount has been demonstrated many times over in just general performance. But after so many dozens and dozens of threads talking about superior design, steel, and warranty, it's nice to see something different. ;)

And, BTW, as someone who's spent a lot of time in hot deserts, I can confirm that exposed tangs can be unfriendly to say the least. When it's 120F and direct sunlight, you don't even want to touch the plastic buttons on your shirt, let alone anything metal.

Edit: Though, I agree, the specialized angles weren't necessary. Metal being the wonderful conductor that it is, the tang would have been uncomfortably hot at any angle. :)
 
Hi T1,
I agree with your agreement.
But, I didn't want to run the risk of anybody coming along later & claiming I rigged the experiment by laying out the knives with the handles closer to the sun than the blades.
There's always somebody who has to nit-pick these things. :rolleyes:
Denis



(We're supposed to justify cost differences?)
 
(Don't worry about justification--it's usually useless banter. I mean, after all, I could complain about the high cost of Beckers compared to P.O.S. chinese knock-offs, wondering if we're really supposed to believe in the Becker's superiority just because the "tests" say so. Who do these "tests" think they are, anyway?! ;) )
 
I don't consider $160 to be an outageous price to pay for a Desert Rat, or $60 for a BK9. If you need high performance as opposed to way cool looks, it'll cost you. What's your life worth? I wouldn't bet mine on a $20 Chinawan.
Besides which, those Chinawans just heat up entirely too much in the desert. Not very good for constructing sand castle shelters or skinning horny toads for survival food, either.
Denis


(Sometimes those tests do get a little uppity. :D )
 
Just looked at the Schrade site.
A 100-year-old American knife-making institution outa business.
Buy your quality blades now before the Chinawans are all that's left.
Denis
 
I would say there is an infinite amount of difference in quality between the $20 blade and the $60 BK9.

But that's not what I'm talking about, is it? I'm talking about the difference in quality-- or at least, utility-- between the BK9 and the $160 Swamp Rat.

I don't believe the Swamp Rat is necessarily overpriced, however. It's just that the BK9 is a heck of a deal.

I would buy a Swamp Rat if they made one with a 12" blade or so, and a little bit thinner.
 
komondor said:
I would say there is an infinite amount of difference in quality between the $20 blade and the $60 BK9.

Yes, but the person buying the $20 blade probably wouldn't see the difference. The point is that now that you've owned a Becker you see the value. Most of the people on this thread have owned and used Beckers and now own Rat's. They see the "difference", at this point you don't because you don't own any Rat's.

I do agree with you Becker makes a good knife especially for the money, but we make a great knife for the money ;)

:D:D
 
I do agree with you Becker makes a good knife especially for the money, but we make a great knife for the money


So when you coming out with that machete?? :)

I really think there is a market for high-end, machete-style blades, from makers such as yourself. I picture at least a 12-15" blade at 3/16" thick. Maybe something modeled after the Hossom Millennium machetes-- made out of your SR-171 stuff, of course (or whatever it's called :) ).

Anyone else want one of these?
 
komondor said:
Maybe something modeled after the Hossom Millennium machetes-- made out of your SR-171 stuff, of course (or whatever it's called :) ).

:( it says what steel it is on the website (sr101)... its one of the things that makes swamp rat worth getting (among many others)...

i would feel very sad if swamp rat came out with a blade patterend after a hossom, or any other maker outside of busse. it would just make me sad. if it was a collaberation, that would be entirely different.

there was a sword thread that had a photoshoped swamp rat on it that looked like an american kensei blade (from busse) that had a battle rat handle on it. i would love to have one of those (& would be willing to go on a prepay waiting list if one ever starts), for me, it would be the ultimate machete.
 
Just my quick $0.02 worth on machetes and worth what you pay to get it: ;)
For a machete-type blade making it 3/16" thick at the spine is running about 50% too thick, unless it has a strong distal taper. Even with the taper, I'd prefer making it from thinner stock than 3/16".

On a machete blade to be used chopping grassy materials and light mostly non-woody type vines, constructing it 3/32" thick (1/8" at most) at the spine is IMHO about right. YMMV.

This snipped comment, as Duke Ellington might have put it, "Ain't Necessarily So", with thanks to RI Shooter for his educational correction below. (comment inferring that period Bowie knives were blades of approximately 1/8" thick removed)

Blades don't need to be terribly thick to be strong.... Consider the number of ABS test blades are in the range of 1/8" thick and are still quite strong.

(edited to add) I'm one of those folks Eric mentioned who has owned and currently owns both Becker and Rat blades. To me, they are each the "Pick Of The Litter" in their respective price window because both makers offer high bang for the buck to the consumer.
 
Rokjok, I'mcurious why you think classic bowies generally had blade thickness
of 1/8". I've examined many classic bowies of the 1830's to 1860's period at
knife shows over the years. Originals, not repros. The vast majority of them had
blades about a 1/4" thick. Many were thicker, in the 5/16"-3/8" range. The thinner
ones, which tended to also be the smaller 6" or so blades, still looked to be about
3/16". The collectors literature that I have, including the magnificent
Bowie Knife Book, also overwhelmingly indicates thicker blades.
 
RI Shooter, My apologies if I mis-spoke. I certainly defer to your experience and research in the Bowie field and will append a qualifier to my post above.

The basis for my belief in the thickness of Bowies was interpreted from comments I recall seeing from contemporary makers of that style of blade. My impression is that the Bowie is a slicer/cutter of high efficiency with a fairly wide blade ground at very flat angles to thin edges. I figured that it achieved its chopping ability purely from the length of its typically pretty long (10-14") blade rather than the mass of its steel in front of the guard.

Unfortunately, I don't own any strictly bowie-style blades at present. The one I recall owning previously was the CS Trailmaster. While it had a 5/16" thick blade, I simply assumed that fact had more to do with Cold Steel's motivation to make a brute-force blade than historical accuracy.
 
As made by most modern makers, especially by many smiths, the bowie
IS a superb cutter/slicer. This is achieved by full hight flat or convex grind,
typically accompanied by distal taper. While modern makers do use 3/16"
stock in some bowies most are 1/4" stock. A properly made bowie with a 10"
blade a 1/4" thick, and 1 1/2" wide, full flat or convex grind, distal taper to
about a 1/8" near the tip, usually only weighs between 13 and 16 ozs,
depending on the desired balance. They are superior cutter/slicers that retain
great chopping ability for their size and weight.

It is a mistake to translate this into thinking that original bowies were
made or balanced this way. Some of them were. This is particularly true
of the American made bowies, although some of the Sheffield made were
also similar to the modern smiths bowie. A very large number of the original
were not like this at all. Many of them use a partial saber ground, rather
than a full hight, often on very thick stock. They are heavy, and not
particularly well balanced by our smith standards. They are very blade
heavy, and often have handles much smaller than modern knives.

The Bowie Knife Book and a number of others quote original accounts
from British "tourists" of the 1830's and 1840's that comment repeatedly
on how long and heavy bowie knives were. There was no real standard.
The British Sheffield makers that actually made most of the originals would
make them in lots of as small as a couple of dozen, to anyone who would
pay, to any design desired, since Sheffield knives were essentially hand
made. The American knives that were often made by surgical instrument
makers were almost all one off customs made for a particular customer. The
same is true of the frontier forged bowies, and many of them are quite
thick and blade heavy.

The modern smiths have copied and developed the very best of the
originals, and we tend to define best as fast, light, and strong for the
weight. In my opinion the modern knives, whether forged or ground, are
superior in feel, fit, finish and performance to all but a very small proportion
of the originals. Nevertheless, I am judging by our standards. The original
users often had their own preferences, which were not the same as ours.
 
I am using this comparison because I own both of these. The Becker is by all rights a Hell of a knife, untill I pick up the Camp tramp.The Becker is a lot of knife for the money, and for those on a budget or for any other reason, its a great deal. If you are into quality, durability and feel of a knife, the camp tramp is simply on another level. The comparison between the two is imho not an apples to apples comparison. I will say that the becker is a respirene handle away from being a totally different knife itself.The handle of a knife, especially in hard use, is a defining factor, and the respirene handles on the swamp rat line make a huge difference.

If I were to( and I have not) test the two side by side, I believe the Camp Tramp would out perform the Becker BK9( a larger knife) hands down.But then one is a combat bowie and the other a utility/ camp, chopper.

I believe that if you want to compare the BK9, it would be fair to stay in the price range and let it shine like it was intended. Same for the Camp Tramp.

I am a novice user/ collector, please consider these remarks when weighing the validity of these statements and opinions.
 
Back
Top