Short question regarding blade thickness

H

halbschaf

Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
191
Hello everybody
What I'm thinking about is, what is the advantage of a blade 8 mm thick over a blade of for example 6 mm, which aswell is a strong one, especially if it's made out of good steel. I cannot see the necessity of such a heavy blade, you only have to carry much weight for nothing. A knife with a 6 mm blade also is no lightweight, good for chopping and betoning. A knife I have in mind for example is the CS trailmaster. Possibly someone knows reasons for the hefty blade.
Greetings from Germany
Holger
 
I always assumed a little stronger and some people like thicker steel...so the makers give 'em what they want

Looking forward to more information......
 
When you are using a 10" blade and 5/16ths inch thickness, you are in the kukri or machete area. Great for busting your way through the rainforest. Not so useful for light camping.
Light batoning can be accomplished with a much shorter, thinner, lighter blade. I would prefer to carry one fixed blade, about 5/32" thick, carbon steel with heat-treat of 57-59, 4"-5" blade length to serve as one all-around knife for the "woods and light camping."
Something like a Survive!Knives model in CPM-3V or even a stainless in CTS-20CV or M390. Here is a link to a relative newcomer...yet extremely popular with users and growing very rapidly.
www.SurviveKnives<dot>com
My opinion only...
 
Because people are obsessed with chopping, batonning, and survival. And "overbuilt" folders. So knife companies make the stuff. One certainly could debate if one really needs a chopper or to baton or a folding prybar. People who spent a lot more time living outdoors certainly got along fine without them for a long time.
But it's not really the point. Point is, people like them, they make them happy, so makers make and sell them. If something else comes along and people get tired of them...makers wont make/sell them.
 
Thick blades is a trend. You hear people say, "thick blades inspire confidence." If you need a thick blade to build your confidence, you probably have other issues to deal with.
 
Marcinek and Locutus, that's also my opinion. Staying longer in the wilderness, it's anyhow better to carry an axe or tomahawk with you additional to a good knife. I also prefer a knife with a blade around 9 inches, but not one with a blade third of an inch thick. So thanks for the answers.
 
Locutus D'Borg said:
Thick blades is a trend. You hear people say, "thick blades inspire confidence." If you need a thick blade to build your confidence, you probably have other issues to deal with.
Click to expand...

Lol that's funny. True indeed.
I went through the phase of wanting a blade with thick spine (0.5") and after having my pants pulled down by it i started looking into blade with generous belly with substantial spine thickness. My comfort zone is 2.5-3" wide on the belly for better penetration but nimble enough to not tire myself down with 3-5mm max at the spine. This is pretty much what i prefer for a knife at 16-20" long.

Coming to blade with 8mm thick spine, it will be a compact blade which i want to have a little bit of everything (yes i'm being greedy here) which i can use it for heavier work. You could say it's becoming a handy hatchet with some leverage.
 
marcinek said:
People who spent a lot more time living outdoors certainly got along fine without them for a long time.
Click to expand...

They also "got along fine" with primitive bows and flintlock rifles. Aannnnd they also missed more than they hit, had a lot of misfires and broke a lot of knives. The longest-running success story of any knife in history is basically a chipped rock, so if that's your criteria, why bother with steel at all? ;)

Having said that, my general philosophy is "Thin is In and Light is Right". Meaning that cutting performance and comfort in use are almost always more important than brute strength, especially with some of the truly impressive alloys available to us today.

On the other hand, sometimes you just plain want a sturdy knife that can chop and slash effectively. I always chuckle when people whine about how big and heavy knives like the Trailmaster are (right around 15" long and just barely over a pound), and proclaim from the mountain tops that anyone with any sense would just carry a hatchet... most of which spec out around 15-18" long and anywhere from 20 oz to two pounds. :confused: :D

On the other other hand, I agree that a 3" blade over about 1/8" thick is just dumb. Folders and small knives with 1/3" spines are just wasting steel.
 
Last edited:
Ok, but what would be the disadvantage if the trailmaster had a blade of 6 mm thickness instead of 8?
 
halbschaf said:
Ok, but what would be the disadvantage if the trailmaster had a blade of 6 mm thickness instead of 8?
Click to expand...

2mm less support steel for lateral prying, and that much less mass for chopping.

But why do you set the value at 6mm? That seems rather arbitrary. Why not 5mm? 3mm? Depending on the length of the blade and its intended use, you may trade the added weight and strength of a thicker blade for something thinner/lighter - machete vs bowie, scalpel vs chisel. If you've already decided to accept the weight and strength of 6mm, then given the intended use of the tool, is another 2mm of weight/strength more of an advantage or a disadvantage? 6 mm isn't exactly a machete of scalpel, it's already heavy. Perhaps another 2 mm would noticeably enhance chopping ability via added momentum, or perhaps it would detract via slower speed and higher fatigue, or perhaps it wouldn't be noticeable at all, in which case you focus on more important aspects of the design like handle comfort/retention or blade-shape or balance, etc. If the 8 mm design is better in these respects, they out-weigh (pun intended) the detriment (or not) of a minor increase in thickness, imho.
 
I´m talking about a knife like the trailmaster and tasks for what it is made. For a machete 3 to 4 mm will work, and I would never buy one - or a folder - with an 8 mm blade. So it´s not arbitrarily.
6 mm thickness on a 9 inch blade out of good steel means a hefty and sturdy knife, imho.
Over the years I have had more than 150 Bowies, survival- and fighting knives, daggers and boot knives, fighting machetes und regular ones and more, most of them made by a good knife maker. I cannot remember one blade that was stronger than 5 mm - with not any problems. Years ago I also made some knives by myself.
Now in my much smaller collection I have two bowies with blades of 6,3 and 6,5 mm thickness - and this is a good choice - the other ones have 4 to 5 mm, with one exception: a bowie which I received as a gift has this 8 mm thick blade, also made by a German knife maker, and it´s too heavy to carry it as a belt knife, I only use the back of the blade to sharpen other knives.
More than 20 years ago I remember that my survivaltrainer told me about a knife of which I never had heard before - the CS Trailmaster. In his opinion the blade was too thick and the knife maker, who made knives for him, made several of the same design (but with wooden or Micarta handles) and a blade of 4 mm thickness. During a hard winter (minus 30 degrees Celsius) they tested the CS TM and the 4 mm blades by chopping icy birch wood. The CS blade failed, the edge was damaged. Not so the 4 mm blade.
Nevertheless, for a long time I am thinking about to buy the CS TM, so I´m only asking for a good reason for these 8 mm - that´s all. I am far away to say that it is nonsense, I only like to hear other arguments. If the only one would be more weight for chopping power or a thicker back for better betoning, ok.
The SK 5 version has a price of around 350 US dollar here in Germany, and unfortunately I don´t find an alternative.
Hoping my English is understandable enough and don´t lead too misunderstandings.
 
Thickness is only generally useful for prying or splitting. It is only an advantage for chopping when the form of your profile is dimensionally limited. The edge region itself should be kept thin. Spine thickness only is useful for describing the maximum thickness of the blade (presuming no grinding at the spine) but it's the section of the blade actually doing the work during the cut that is more important than the spine.
 
Locutus D'Borg said:
Thick blades is a trend. You hear people say, "thick blades inspire confidence." If you need a thick blade to build your confidence, you probably have other issues to deal with.
Click to expand...

Ha! ...No doubt. if you "need" a blade 1/3" thick to feel like a man, maybe it's time to put that money toward your sex change or a convertable corvette. I as well love the idea of a "tank" of a knife that will survive a nuclear war, but honestly I've never had any trouble with the 3/16 blades i've carried for the last 10 years and that's kind of what I've settled on as my personal carry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top