SDFK versus UF

somniloquist

somniloquist

Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
1,445
Hey gang,

I just acquired a first generation UF and it is a beautiful piece. Slender, tough and clearly well designed for its somewhat dual purpose. I also have a FK2 which seems excellent but is obviously a bit shorter (but about the same weight as the UF). The potential use of the UF as a weapon is interesting to me, I guess, but I'm just a regular guy and not looking to fight with anything scarier than a log for the fire or some chow on the grill.

After perusing this forum a bit more I have come to know about the SDFK. It strikes me as a knife built along a similar design brief to the FK2 but longer and with thicker stock. It looks awesome. Now I have what is I'm sure a familiar dilemma; which one would be better for me, the UF or maybe the SDFK?

Before everyone piles on and says get both, I really can't. Getting one of these knives (or any knife) up into Canada adds a fair amount of expense. Plus, though I love spending time outside, I can't devote as much time to it as I would like and I don't want nice tools like these lying around unused if I end up favouring one over the other.

So here is my question: if you were to pick a knife somewhere between the FK2 and my 9.5" Busse BME2 for backcountry camping, batoning and food prep, which is your preference? UF or SDFK? Weight is somewhat of a factor for me for long portages or hikes but I'm kind of looking for something between a smaller knife for mostly cutting (FK2) and a big chopper for processing wood (BME2). Your thoughts and comments are most welcome. And if anyone has a photo comparing the UF and the SDFK, I'd be grateful to see it 😀 Thanks for looking!
 
I don't think you can go wrong with either. The UF is going to be slimmer and lighter but retain a lot of very usable blade length - you aren't going to break it and it will do all of your knife work with ease and LOTS of style.

The SDFK is a big gal and the differences in weight and size are pretty notable. That said, it is a heavy duty field knife that will chop, baton, whittle, etc. If you can be ok with the extra weight and girth, it won't ever fail you and it might prove to be more comfortable in use while tackling the heavier work.

Here are a couple of shots next to a UF2.

4n2WToj.jpg


ZvxFED3.jpg
 
Pàdruig said:
I don't think you can go wrong with either. The UF is going to be slimmer and lighter but retain a lot of very usable blade length - you aren't going to break it and it will do all of your knife work with ease and LOTS of style.

The SDFK is a big gal and the differences in weight and size are pretty notable. That said, it is a heavy duty field knife that will chop, baton, whittle, etc. If you can be ok with the extra weight and girth, it won't ever fail you and it might prove to be more comfortable in use while tackling the heavier work.

Here are a couple of shots next to a UF2.

4n2WToj.jpg


ZvxFED3.jpg
Click to expand...
Isn’t that a Signature Series SDFK?
I await mine with baited breath 😁
 
Tough call .... but I'd pick the UF[2].

Forget the fighting ... it's a great utility knife, and a 6" blade at around 8oz is rare. The low weight means (for me) that it actually gets carried ... a lot. And regarding it being a fighter, it means that the handle is super ergonomic however you hold the knife.

Now, if you want to keep a knife in your truck the SDFK might be better.
 
ferider said:
The SS SDFK is actually lousy at batoning, compared to the OP's BME2, swedge and all.
Click to expand...
The “SS/SDFK“ was meant to be either the SS or the Basic SSDFK and even with swedge, on the SS, I would think the length/height would give it the advantage over the UF2 in batoning, which is one of the criteria op gave.
I don’t baton so my opinions are not worth a whole lot, but I warch lots of videos 😁
 
Jason M D. said:
Isn’t that a Signature Series SDFK?
I await mine with baited breath 😁
Click to expand...

That it is! The wait is most definitely worth it - I look forward to seeing yours when you get it.

unwisefool said:
I'm going to go in a different direction and suggest the basic field knife. I like it better than the FK2. It's a little longer and just seems a bit more robust with a more stabby tip. To me the SDFK is too thick.
View attachment 2081642
Click to expand...

This is a most excellent suggestion. It will also be rather obtainable since more are going to be made this year.
 
My opinion does not count as much as most of these lucky folks who have collections of CPK greatness. I only have 2. I will say that if I had to pick one knife to take on any camping/hiking or potential survival outing, I truly cannot think of a knife better than the SDFK for what I like in a knife. The handle is perfect for a variety of grips and bug enough to use with gloves. The blade shape is great for pretty much anything. I don’t mind the weight and it is lighter than some of my larger blades I carry for chopping/clearing. It is so well made it is crazy, and around the same price as a Bark River or Cold Steel 3v. At my remote cabin I place a go-bag by the front door in case of an earthquake or fire- the SDFK gets tucked on top of other gear prior to getting rolled up because it is the knife I would choose over all my others for a shtf scenario miles from help.
If you simply want a great knife but don’t need it to be as large, or as robust as the SDFK then you already know the answer.
Good luck with your decision and enjoy whichever you get.

Now the DEK2 on the otherhand….. I want one! 🤣
 
Wow guys, you post a thread with a question and 5 hours later, you get 17 responses. A big thanks to everyone who replied here, it has helped me with my thinking and decision making a lot. This sub forum always struck me as a particularly friendly one and your responses confirm that impression.

Pàdruig Pàdruig your photos were very helpful and exactly what I was hoping to see. The sharpened blade length of the SDFK doesn't seem much longer but the stock thickness seems quite a bit more noticeable. The SDFK seems like a chonky one that could take pretty much anything. But maybe a bit too thick? I'm not sure.

ferider ferider your comparison of weights and prices was also very helpful. I was sort of zeroing on the more affordable of the two SDFKs and seeing that it basically weighs double the UF may have decided it for me. The UF seems to pack a lot of sharpened edge and durability into a relatively light blade. As a guy who will carrying a knife while humping portage bags around, a half pound for an extra inch or so doesn't seem like a good compromise for my purposes. But man, the SDFK still does look very nice...

Anyway, I'm lucky enough to have a bigger chopper that works well and perhaps the SDFK is more like a slightly shorter chopper rather than a more all arounder type blade like the UF?

Here's another question for the gang, especially to those who own both pieces: do they cut similarly? Is one or the other a lot slicier or thinner behind the edge? I'd still like to cut things at the end of the day, not just bash through logs. 😂
 
tinfoil hat timmy said:
utility fighter if you already have a 9'' blade with you
Click to expand...
I would definitely agree here. I should have mentioned before that I would like bring the UF/SDFK for trips where the Busse stays home. It is a sweet blade and I love it but it's definitely big and heavy.

My usual set up is a saw+knife instead of axe for wood processing. Often that is a large Silky saw plus Busse but that's a lot of size and weight. I picked up the UF for the light weight and pretty bombproof D3V steel for a lighter set up but I'm still wondering if I went too light or just light enough? I may have to wait for the snow to melt to know for sure...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top