Talonite TTKK Review

[Joe Talmadge]

Cliff --

Just realized I missed a couple of your questions.

First, what's Trace's waiting time like? Well, you should ask him, but generally it seems to be a few months at least. Trace, when ya gonna go full time?

About coarse edges on talonite, I'm interested in testing that out myself, but haven't done so yet. I do plan to rough up the edge and see what happens as it polishes. Rob's description of this piqued my interest.

Joe
jat@cup.hp.com

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Rob, Ron Hood compared a Talonite and A2 blade in the following thread :

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002398-2.html

which described the Talonite blades edge being much more resistant to damage than the A2's under heavy use.

As for the rod test, I have seen it described as sort of wiping the blade along the rod using pressure straight down. Because of the high pressure due to the low contact area, some edges don't react to this well.

-Cliff

[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 21 September 1999).]

 

[dogboye]

Originally posted by bald1:
Great stuff as always. Joe, for those who don't know, offered suggestions when I was putting together specs on the Chimera by Rinaldi. We ended up with basically identical blades. The handles are different. Those finger cutouts aren't as impeding to grip variances as most might think. There's a recent review elsewhere on the Chimera by another owner which addresses this. One thing they do do is provide protection to the hand which I really wanted.

If I may ask, what were the factors in designing the two different handle shapes. It seems to me at a casual glance, on the web pages, that there is very little difference in the blade shapes, or the "dropped guard." Even the blade <u>length</u> is really close, or even overlapping, between the TTKK and the Chimera.

How is the balance on the two? Joe mentions chopping with the TTTKK, but pretty much only addresses the performance of the Talonite. I tried to search, but couldn't find any review of the ATS-34 TTKK. How does the TTKK, or the TTTKK, and/or the Chimera perform balance-wise in chopping?

Thanks.

------------------
"Absolute safety is for those who don't have the balls to live in the real world."

 

[Joe Talmadge]

In designing handles, I feel that to some extent or other, once you have a good fundamental handle, you're compromising between security and comfort. Speaking generally:

A handle that has 4 finger grooves, assuming the grooves are the exact right size for your hand, will be very very secure. But in extended use your fingers will rub up against those grooves and hot spots will definitely develop. Also, 4 finger grooves definitely limits the number of useful grips.

A lightly contoured handle, loveless-style, will provide excellent comfort in a variety of grips. But it just won't have the security of the fully-finger-grooved handle.

I was designing for extended camp, kitchen, and utility use, so I designed a more Loveless-style curvey and comfortable handle which gave me lots of grip options. I then added a front finger groove to give me just a bit more security than the standard Loveless style.

My *guess* is that Bob came from the other direction. He tried more finger grooves for even more security, but only two, so he got a little less security than a 4-finger-groove handle, but got more comfort and grip options.

Evidently, we both like my blade design concept. The objective here was to have a thin wide blade for exceptional edge geometry for both shallow and deep cutting jobs. The drop-blade provides finger protection without a guard, which means the blade is more useable for kitchen type chores. Classic drop-point blade, with all the advantages that this blade format provides.

Chopping in wood was a never a design parameter for the TTKK. I carry something that's really good for chopping -- like a machete or axe -- when I'm camping. Big jobs are best done by big knives, and I've never been a fan of using a mid-size knives to do big jobs. For the TTKK, I was looking for something that would totally excel at all the smaller jobs, since I had a big knife already for the bigger jobs. At 1/8" thick at the spine, even the 5.5" TTKK doesn't have the weight to make it a good wood chopper. Chopping food though, the design is very very good.

Joe

 

[dogboye]

Thanks Joe! It seems obvious to me by looking, and further by reading your latest post above, that both the blade and handle shapes were well thought out. Your post above does a wonderful job of explaining your thought process, and invoking various considerations regarding a knife purchase that I have in mind in the distant future: a "walkabout knife" (borrowed that from someone on another forum, but it well describes what I'm looking for).

The knife would need to be fairly light (don't have a specific quantification of that yet), with a slightly blade-heavy balance. I would want the blade length between 4 and 6 inches, with less than 5.5 being best. Not highly stainless, but stain resistant. So far, all personal opinions, based on previous knives that I've had.

The knife would be used as my primary cutting utensil for anything that I had to do while backpacking (distances up to 50 miles, hence the desire for reasonably light weight). This typically involves simple work, like cutting rope, small branches, shaving sticks for kindling, and cutting food. It might be called on for heavier work in an emergency, and I would like it to be able to chop, even if not well. The Buck Vanguard that I already have (the run-of-the-mill version) does all this pretty well, except for two things: (1) the steel is low-end enough that it just doesn't hold the edge like I want it to (I don't want to pack in extra sharpening implements either, and I can't sharpen on a river rock... yet); (2) it isn't at all blade heavy, nor does it provide a lanyard hole, which can make up for the balance a little.

I know there's the Buck Master Series, but they have gotten so scarce, the price has gone higher, and for that amount of money, I can get a good custom. From what I have been reading, the TTKK (or maybe the Chimera) may fit the bill, as might the Griffith Marshall or Tracker. So, there is where I'm coming from in my questions.

------------------
"Absolute safety is for those who don't have the balls to live in the real world."

 

[Joe Talmadge]

I love the design of those Griffith knives. The narrower blade has some advantages versus the wider TTKK blade, and some disadvantages too. The TTKK blade will be much better for some types of food prep, like chopping veggies, but the narrower Griffith blade will be better for paring. The Griffith knife provides a bit less finger protection for general use, but the narrower blade has advantages at times. The TTKK comes with a multicarry sheath, and for all I know the Griffith might also.

The TTKK can be had in a variety of steels and thicknesses, though again, since Lynn is a custom maker, I bet he has the same.

If you're planning on doing some light chopping, a 5/32" or even 3/16" TTKK would still cut well, but do a little bit of chopping. The narrower Griffith knives might be at a disadvantage here. But I'm not keen on chopping with a knife this short in any case, so for me it wouldn't be an issue.

I've been pondering the purchase of one of those Griffith knives for quite a while now, too. Not as a replacement for my beloved TTKK, but because I like the design and just feel like I should have one.

Joe