Show us your Randalls

Aias said:
10z45j6.jpg


2h5taic.jpg
Click to expand...

I agree. The choil isn't as deep as original. Regardless, it's a beautiful knife. It would a crime to use it. :D
 
Hey guys, it's the angle--the blade with is the same, I'm pretty sure. Now, to find time for user pics!
 
The depth of the choil is NOT the same: A very considerable amount of metal was removed, greatly reducing the height of the "reserve", which is one the things I prize with Randall knives...

Hollow grinds have a portion of the edge's sides parallel to each other, which means as you wear the blade sharpening it, the potential sharpness is unchanged over time. The blade is now much narrower than it was... This picture below is more square, and the difference in the before/after choil is still very obvious:

1jsvt3.jpg


It probably doesn't affect the knife's initial performance at all, but instead of 100 years of sharpening with no edge thickening it probably is down to 20 or 30...

It doesn't mean much in practical terms, but I personally would be very unhappy with this large an amount removed... Instead of a heirloom ready for decades of hard use at full cutting performance, it will be better as a heirloom that is lightly used...

I sent my Model 14 to be re-ground, and the Randall shop did do a fine job of thinning an 18-style point that was so fat and rounded, brand-new, as to be useless except for perfectly safe sheathless sparring...: I was happy with what the shop did, but seeing the above I would not send it to a place that removes so much metal from where it is critically useful...

Gaston
 
OK, so, I brought up my original pic, the one with my hat and the Kabar stockman, and enlarged it until it was the actual size of the knife. Then I took the knife as it is in my possession right now and I placed it over the pic on my laptop screen--the silhouette of blades matched perfectly. I appreciate the close study and attention to detail you gents display, but I am pretty sure steel was not ground away.

And the #5-6 did some work today... it took apart and gutted a butternut squash with a bad attitude, hacked off some relatively thin branches on a disruptive tree in my yard, and skinned and sliced a predatory apple.
 
Could be a very weird picture distortion, but why not replicate a "before" picture to everyone's relief?

I have great trouble buying it, because the original choil would almost fit the entire Randall logo in its depth, while the "after" choil is not even close... Furthermore, the difference in viewing angle is very, very small between the two overall photos, as shown by the lanyard hole location and the radius at the bottom of the guard... There are other clues as well...

Most telling of all, the choil's curvature originally ended with a significant slanted straight portion, this going on beyond the curvature and towards the edge: That slanted straight portion is now completely gone, and the curve goes directly to the edge...

The difference could be less than 1/16" and still create that effect: 1/16" is still a humongous amount of edge height loss...

I know we don't have any real way to "prove" you are wrong, but I doubt the knife can now replicate any of the "before" pictures.

Gaston

P.S. As a side note, I always very precisely measure the blade length on any knife I send for a re-grind, because any re-grind will lose a considerable proportion of length: My Randall Model 14 lost nearly 1/10" at Randall's shop: It is well under 7.4" now... Shortening the blade would allow them to remove considerable edge height, and yet everything will remain "in proportion" as you overlay the knife.

G.
 
Who knows, I may play with replicating my observation for everyone--though time is tight on my part. I'm convinced and happy--which is what really matters anyway ;) Just to be clear, I did not send it in for sharpening or a regrind--all that was done (with regard to the work order) was fixing the handle and buffing the blade. So unless they did work they did not mention/ I dd not pay for... the grinder never touched the blade.
 
Gaston444 said:
The depth of the choil is NOT the same: A very considerable amount of metal was removed, greatly reducing the height of the "reserve", which is one the things I prize with Randall knives.
Click to expand...
I've taken well over ten thousand photos of Randall Made knives in the last fifteen years. No two photos are the same. Your argument is invalid. The same knife with a five inch blade can look to have between a three and eight inch blade length, dependent on camera angle. The camera lens doesn't see things the way a human eye does. Based on personal experience, having sent in a half-dozen RMK's for spa treatment, was that very little metal was removed. This is an experienced comment, based on fact.
 
Melvin-Purvis said:
I've taken well over ten thousand photos of Randall Made knives in the last fifteen years. No two photos are the same. Your argument is invalid. The same knife with a five inch blade can look to have between a three and eight inch blade length, dependent on camera angle. The camera lens doesn't see things the way a human eye does. Based on personal experience, having sent in a half-dozen RMK's for spa treatment, was that very little metal was removed. This is an experienced comment, based on fact.
Click to expand...
Precisely---well said.
 
Indeed... and now for the fun... the #5-6 is seeing regular use, from the kitchen to the yard to the hiking trail--and the patina is coming back:
xayiqe.jpg
 
Don--mostly meats and fruit. The meats were both raw and cooked/marinated (at different times, of course). And the fruit were mostly apples for the kids. I did do some light wood carving/ whittling as well. In any case, I would wash or wipe down the blade and leave it un-oiled for a while to really let the patina set, then a quick wipe down with a Ballistol. Man, I am just so impressed with how this blade performs; I'm used to Busse, with their thicker edges/ geometry... this is quite different. I really love this knife.
 
Melvin-Purvis said:
I've taken well over ten thousand photos of Randall Made knives in the last fifteen years. No two photos are the same. Your argument is invalid. The same knife with a five inch blade can look to have between a three and eight inch blade length, dependent on camera angle. The camera lens doesn't see things the way a human eye does. Based on personal experience, having sent in a half-dozen RMK's for spa treatment, was that very little metal was removed. This is an experienced comment, based on fact.
Click to expand...

I've studied aircraft photos, and the numerous distortions of big complicated subjects, for miniature modelling purposes for around twenty years, and I have heard these same arguments over and over... While it is very easy to exaggerate a difference in amplitude of error from a real aircraft to a model (on the knife here the difference could be as little as 1/16"), the general outcome is almost always that when there is smoke there is at least some fire...

I could pick out, for instance, that a Jagdtiger's glacis plate was shorter than a Kingtiger's glacis plate: I estimated, from photos alone, the difference between 2.5 and 3.5 inches: It came in at 2.75", this on a 51.75" plate versus 49"...: I was the "discoverer" of that, as it appeared in no books, including Panzetracks...

I've seen people argue against differences in the spine thickness of a Me-109 when the differences I measured from the real aircraft to the model amounted to 80% in places: And they still claimed not to see it...: I've learned there is no limits to what people are willing to say they don't see when it suits them...

Another example: On an Al Mar SF-10 on Ebay, I noticed the grind bevel ended over 3 inches from the point, when in almost all others SF-10s the grind ends around 1.5 inches or a little more: The seller, a professional in the trade, still said it looked like all other SF-10s to him...

If Randall can take 1/10" off the length of my Model 14 for a minor $35 job, I am sure they can take 1/16" off the edge of any knife...: Even 1/10" was likely impossible to see without taking a ruler to my knife, because the ratio is over the whole blade length, and the point has no close by reference like the choil area here. I'm not saying they ruined the above knife, but it certainly looks noticeably different.

Gaston
 
Aias said:
10z45j6.jpg
Click to expand...

Aias,

At first, I thought the choil looked like it lost some depth after it was cleaned, but now I'm not so sure. To satisfy curiosity and for fun discussion purposes, if it isn't too much trouble, could you replicate this photo as close as possible? It would be interesting to compare before and after photos of the knife taken at the same angle and distance. It might also help to put this topic to bed one way or another. Thanks! :)

Great knife, BTW. I have the same knife with a 5" blade.
 
You bet; I'll do my best. Maybe by today if things are not too busy. Best, Anthony
 
From these pics, there looks to be a difference... though I think that there is a bit of an angle to the tilt of the knife from one pic to the next.... As I hold it, my intuition tells me nothing is different. What can I say...
 
now I think I get it, the top pic has a tip down (or is it tip up???) tilt to it... I'll try to take another pic later.
 
To me, the choil looks a tad less deep, but not as much as I originally thought. It could very well be the camera lens playing tricks. Regardless, it's a beautiful knife with great lines. Hope you enjoy it as much as I have enjoyed mine. Thanks of the photo, Anthony, and taking the time to post it. :thumbup:


 
Thanks again TAH, from the pics it does look that way... can't really tell in person. Yours is quite fine as well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top