THE Hollow Handle Knife Thread

Thanks g&l. Like I said, the entire knife is made with remarkable precision. I'm questioning if Steve fine soldered the blade/guard connection or if that is just epoxy? I've look at it with magnifiers and I still don't know. Any thoughts?
 
I'm leaning towards epoxy because it looks very much like Newt Martins guard to blade joins. Especially since he epoxies the blade into the handle I think you said anyway.
 
Congratulations TAH!! It's a beautiful knife, and very rare!! And also in excellent condition...
 
Thanks Dave and Jackal. Dave, I agree. In the advertisements that I have seen for this knife, a soldered blade/guard connection has never been mentioned, so I'm assuming it isn't soldered.
 
Not bashing as I've always liked the hollow-handle concept, just a genuine question (that may have been answered multiple times somewhere else):
Given the potential drawbacks of the multi-piece hollow handle and the limited storage area it provides, why NOT go with a full-tang knife and a sheath that has a waterproof compartment to store the survival kit?
Was it a concern of loss of sheath (and thus the survival kit)?

I know they predate WWII, but seemed to really take off thanks to the Rambo franchise.
 
robgmn said:
Given the potential drawbacks of the multi-piece hollow handle and the limited storage area it provides, why NOT go with a full-tang knife and a sheath that has a waterproof compartment to store the survival kit?
Was it a concern of loss of sheath (and thus the survival kit)?
Click to expand...
Gaston recently said it best in his comment below and it made sense to me. :) And honestly, I don't see any potential drawbacks with a multi-piece hollow handle knife, if it is properly built and used for its intended purpose. If there is a task where I would hesitate using a quality HH knife, I would also hesitate using a quality fixed blade knife as well.

Gaston444 said:
What always amuses me about people dismissing Hollow Handle Survival Knives is that they always say you can carry extra stuff on the sheath and not in the handle... They say this exactly as if there was something preventing doing both!
Click to expand...
 
I was going with the engineering fact that a multi-piece design is inherently weaker than a single piece, even if multi-pieces are made that are amazingly strong.

Yes you can do both, but is the tradeoff one that makes sense?
If you actually needed the knife for your survival, is the risk of "because I CAN" worth the possible problems it could entail?
Personally, I would want a knife that was damn near indestructible, and have a pouch the size of a film container on my sheath rather than a knife that SHOULD be indestructible, but crap may happen.

Strictly theroetical/conversational here.
I have no plans to become John Rambo, and no plans to be a Gaston with a Lile blade in my bike shorts.
 
robgmn said:
I was going with the engineering fact that a multi-piece design is inherently weaker than a single piece, even if multi-pieces are made that are amazingly strong.

Yes you can do both, but is the tradeoff one that makes sense?
If you actually needed the knife for your survival, is the risk of "because I CAN" worth the possible problems it could entail?
Personally, I would want a knife that was damn near indestructible, and have a pouch the size of a film container on my sheath rather than a knife that SHOULD be indestructible, but crap may happen.

Strictly theroetical/conversational here.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, but again, in a survival situation, I would treat a HH knife and a fixed blade knife with the same consideration. I wouldn't want to jeopardize my only knife no matter how it is engineered. So, for me, in a survival situation, I would rather have a HH knife and sheath, both packed with survivals items, rather than a fixed blade knife with survival items only in the sheath. The trade off for a "possibly/slightly" stronger fixed blade knife vs. double the survival items isn't worth it to me.
 
TAH said:
I understand what you are saying, but again, in a survival situation, I would treat a HH knife and a fixed blade knife with the same consideration. I wouldn't want to jeopardize my only knife no matter how it is engineered. So, for me, in a survival situation, I would rather have a HH knife and sheath, both packed with survivals items, rather than a fixed blade knife with survival items only in the sheath. The trade off for a "possibly/slightly" stronger fixed blade knife vs. double the survival items isn't worth it to me.
Click to expand...

There is no reason a hollow handle knife can't be as strong as any fixed blade knife. You can check here

http://1911combatsurvivor.blogspot.com/

for my field tests though there are many other HH knives that are well up to anything you ask of it.
 
Mark Knapp said:
There is no reason a hollow handle knife can't be as strong as any fixed blade knife. You can check here

http://1911combatsurvivor.blogspot.com/

for my field tests though there are many other HH knives that are well up to anything you ask of it.
Click to expand...

Not arguing that, but it is a fact that a single piece is almost always stronger than something that is joined/jointed in some way.
A multi-piece knife can certainly be made to exceed any punishment we may ever throw at it (i.e. using it as a link in a chain to pick up a bulldozer bucket). In fact, is there any history on a high-quality HH breaking under use?

But Murphy has a law. And he likes to apply it when it is least desired.
Witness the blades that snap under light use due to unknown inclusions, or the epoxy-secured scales that pop off even though testing proved there would be NO NEED for pins.
Crap happens, and my father-in-law's luck would be that he gets a lemon (my luck runs slightly better than his :-)
 
Last edited:
robgmn said:
I was going with the engineering fact that a multi-piece design is inherently weaker than a single piece, even if multi-pieces are made that are amazingly strong.

Yes you can do both, but is the tradeoff one that makes sense?
If you actually needed the knife for your survival, is the risk of "because I CAN" worth the possible problems it could entail?
Personally, I would want a knife that was damn near indestructible, and have a pouch the size of a film container on my sheath rather than a knife that SHOULD be indestructible, but crap may happen.

Strictly theroetical/conversational here.
I have no plans to become John Rambo, and no plans to be a Gaston with a Lile blade in my bike shorts.
Click to expand...

TAH said:
Hey Mark,

Directing this at me, you're preaching to the choir. :D :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Sorry Bud, I wasn't directing it to you, I meant to quote robgmn. But I wouldn't even give them "possibly stronger" We have proven otherwise. The construction of the Buck is a fine example. I'd put the Buck, mine and many others on this thread against any fixed blade.
 
robgmn said:
Witness the blades that snap under light use due to unknown inclusions...
Click to expand...

I agree, a blade snapping is more likely than the possibility of the blade/handle connection failing on a high quality HH knife. This is why I am more concerned with deep cut sawteeth than the blade/handle connection, especially if some type of forceful lateral movement is performed.
 
TAH said:
For Gaston...:)


Click to expand...

Thanks TAH! I'm guessing this is a Parker-Imai catalogue: Very interesting...

What is unique about this knife is that it is in a sort of "high" low-end range of '80s Hollow Handle factory knives, yet it has correctly dipped sawteeth that are moderately functional (1/4" notches), full 1/4" (or more) stock thickness, excellent blade quality and indestructible handle attachment strength.

It apparently was quite a bit cheaper than the Buckmaster.

The interesting thing is that if you were looking, back then, at blades 9" and over, your only choice was super-expensive customs, or very shoddy thin-stock blades, such as some of the aluminium handle Parkers, like this one below: Barely 1/8" stock (I'm pretty sure it was under 5/32" when I handled one) and purely cosmetic sawteeth:

s-l1000.jpg


The above knife's handle attachment was actually pretty strong, but the blade was so thin and light it made the entire knife quite useless as a chopper. Blade was loosely ground too, nothing like the precision of the K-692...

As far as I know, in 9" blades and above, the K-692 was the only really big Hollow Handle knife that bridged the gap between high end customs and the cheapo factory crap intended for teenagers. The closest thing I can think of from that period is the non-Hollow Handle Gerber BMF that had a much smaller 8.9" blade, and was far more expensive...

As I said, the only downside fo the K-692 is its enormous weight. At least 27 ounces (knife alone), when even my Colin Cox is barely 23-24, and my Lile Mission 17... Because of the weight, it tugs at the waist, and I had to resort to a thick fluffy hankerchief that I slip under the pants, belt-level on the opposite side to the knife, to pad the skin against the "tug": It becomes quite comfortable then, but I really wonder if they put depleted uranium in this thing...

Gaston

P.S. BTW I scored the last all-black Colin Cox at the Mike Welze site. Can't wait to see it and report back on it... This one is of a more widely produced Cox pattern that already existed in the 1980s, but the older sawteeth were different back then, and mine looks so mint I doubt that it is that old... A key issue on that one will be the Sabre Hollow Grind's blade weight compared to the Full Flat Grind Lile, since they are the same exact length, and similar in handle diameter/size... Of course the Lile will be lighter, but by how much will be interesting to see, since the Cox blade appears narrower and closer in overall size to the Parker K-692...
 
Last edited:
Gaston444 said:
Thanks TAH! I'm guessing this is a Parker-Imai catalogue: Very interesting...
Click to expand...
Actually, it's an advertisement from an old Blade Magazine. If you would like a much better copy, let me know your email address and I'll send you a color scan.

Gaston444 said:
As far as I know, in 9" blades and above, the K-692 was the only really big Hollow Handle knife that bridged the gap between high end customs and the cheapo factory crap intended for teenagers. The closest thing I can think of from that period is the non-Hollow Handle Gerber BMF that usually had a much smaller 8.9" blade, and was far more expensive...
Click to expand...
Good observation. I can't think of any others either.

Gaston444 said:
Its only downside is its enormous weight.
Click to expand...
Yep, my new Running River is heavy too, but not unreasonably heavy by any means. I don't have a scale to accurately weigh it. I guess extra weight goes with the territory for a knife with all stainless parts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top