THE Hollow Handle Knife Thread

[TAH]

Sam,

Check out this Colin Cox buttcap. I've never seen a set up like this before. It appears the washer swings out of the way to remove the compass. Pretty clever.

 

[TAH]

Speaking of Colin Cox, I just discovered that he passed away in October 2013. I remember his HH knives well. They were even featured in Jim Weyer's Points of Interest. RIP, Mr. Cox.

Obituary

Here is the rest of the knife that goes with the buttcap above.

 

[radicalbearpaw]

Cool looking knife, what size blade in that model?

 

[TAH]

Not my knife, but here's the description:


Early 80’s knife by Guild Member “COLIN COX”. 10″ blade of 440-C steel with a 6″ handle. A total of 16″. Blade has saw teeth for cutting bone, ice or wood, etc.

Handle is also 303 stainless. Hollow handle for emergency gear. Screw on pommel, also 303, has compass (not working). Skull crusher on end. Compass can be had for $20.00 right from Colin Cox web site.

Handle is checkered to give secure grip. Full guard. Knife is all BLACK. Comes with BLACK leather sheath. Sheath is made by “Johnson”

Cassleberry Florida of “Randall Knives” fame. Pocket in front for sharpening stone.

 

[radicalbearpaw]

That's definitely a cool looking knife, how much do you think there going for price wise

 

[TAH]

This one is priced at $650. I'm not allowed to post the website. If you're interested, PM me and I'll send you the link.

 

[Sam Wilson]

His comment that the First Blood were incredibly light does jive with my impression of how the knife is designed, especially when considering that the heavier designed Neeley SA9 still barely balances on the guard...: The First Blood's deeply squared-off clip grind bevel, which instantly thins the flat ground blade from 1/4" to 1/8" from the clip forward, the fact that the knife is a full overall flat ground -a huge weight-killer, and a problem in keeping sheath scratches confined to a narrow area imho-, the sawback with deep saw notches, the teeths themselves split - removing further blade weight-.

The only item adding significant weight would be the big guard (a huge weight effect, as I found out when trimming the guard of my Model 18...), but opting for screwdrivers tips still would remove a bit of weight compared to a lugged guard I think.

So overall when buying a First Blood, or close equivalent, one should expect a very, very light knife for the size... Not good for chopping, but with the apparent (and sensible, it seems to me) acceptance of batonning, I've moved away from considering chopping the be all and end all of big knives... Still, handle heavy is always bad for utility... This is fascinating to me, as I could not find an accurate balance to weight my CR Jereboam Mk II, and I have trouble believing the claimed 16.6 ounces, as it feels like an anvil right on par with my 21 ounces TOPS Hellion...: It might be just the way the Reeves design "feels"... Randall's Model 18 is said to be around 12-14 ounces, and feels nowhere in the same ballpark as the Reeves, even when it had its full guard...

These kinds of stats are interesting to have an idea of how the knife will feel or perform...: My Randall Model 14 and 18 surprised me by how blade-light they where, and they are really 3/16", not at all the claimed 1/4"... Only the Model 14 is a bit over 3/16" near the guard... When I saw for the first time (on the Arizona Custom knives spec data, of all places) that the Al Mar SF-10 was made of 3/16" stock, I lost all interest in that knife, a $700 monster I had considered buying for months...

I'd be curious to know the weight stats on the Parrish, the First Blood and the Mission.

Interesting post to hear of a Lile carried by an actual soldier (even if not used)...

Gaston

Gaston,

You probably already know this, but there is a reason that the majority of these HH survival knives have a fairly neutral balance. Actually a couple. But one of the primary ones, at least in my mind, is that the majority of them are designed to balance there, are designed that way because they are not supposed to be dedicated choppers. In my experience, most guys want a "survival knife" to be able to perform a lot of tasks well. That almost, but not entirely, precludes that they will excel at one of the big tasks, such as chopping. A good chopper is typically going to have a heavy, weight-forward blade/design. This is a decided disadvantage when performing finer tasks closer to the ricasso or guard. You will be expending a lot of energy to balance that heavy blade while trying to use a small portion of it. A 9" or so bladed knife with neutral balance (at or around the guard) will still chop, just not as good as a very blade-heavy design. It will, however, work much better at carving and general cutting, as well as be much lighter. I doubt most people are going to try and expend a lot of energy chopping if they're truly in a "survival situation."

Now if you want a hollow handled chopper for general wilderness use, that's a different story. But I believe the reasons mentioned above are why it is so common to find HH knives geared for "survival" that are balanced the way they are.

Sam

 

[Sam Wilson]

Sam,

This is my solution to not permanently installing a compass in the buttcap, but still utilizing the space in the buttcap. The pouch also prevents unnecessary scratches on the lens from other loose items in the handle. Like you said, this allows the compass to be easily removed for pounding or taking continuous bearings.

Tom,

I think that is an excellent way to do it. I don't have a hole in my cap to put the compass, even temporarily, but I do something similar when I carry my Reeve Project II. I put it in the hole in the buttcap and put a cottonball over it. But the pouch is nicer. That NATO compass you have is very neat, too. That is about the only button compass I will trust. Nearly every other one I've used simply decides where North will be depending on what mood it's in.

Sam,

Check out this Colin Cox buttcap. I've never seen a set up like this before. It appears the washer swings out of the way to remove the compass. Pretty clever.

Now that I like A LOT. That is a very cool idea, and just goes to show there's nothing really new under the sun. Mr. Cox made some really nice knives, HH and others. I used to see him at shows, or his knives anyway (I don't specifically remember meeting him) in Missouri. That model there looks like the Blood Strike or First Strike or something like that, but I could be totally wrong on that. I almost ordered one of his monster 10" HH beasts right before he passed, had even sent an inquiry to him about it. But he passed before he responded, if he even got it.

Either way, that seems to me to be about the best solution to the problem around. Well played by Mr. Cox. :thumbup::thumbup:

Sam

 

[Gaston444]

Gaston,

You probably already know this, but there is a reason that the majority of these HH survival knives have a fairly neutral balance. Actually a couple. But one of the primary ones, at least in my mind, is that the majority of them are designed to balance there, are designed that way because they are not supposed to be dedicated choppers. In my experience, most guys want a "survival knife" to be able to perform a lot of tasks well. That almost, but not entirely, precludes that they will excel at one of the big tasks, such as chopping. A good chopper is typically going to have a heavy, weight-forward blade/design. This is a decided disadvantage when performing finer tasks closer to the ricasso or guard. You will be expending a lot of energy to balance that heavy blade while trying to use a small portion of it. A 9" or so bladed knife with neutral balance (at or around the guard) will still chop, just not as good as a very blade-heavy design. It will, however, work much better at carving and general cutting, as well as be much lighter. I doubt most people are going to try and expend a lot of energy chopping if they're truly in a "survival situation."

Now if you want a hollow handled chopper for general wilderness use, that's a different story. But I believe the reasons mentioned above are why it is so common to find HH knives geared for "survival" that are balanced the way they are.

Sam

I agree that most Hollow Handle "Survival Knives" balance neutral, or even well behind the guard. I don't agree this is deliberate: It would make little difference in slicing ability if the balance point is 1/4", 1/2" or even 1" in front of the guard. They are not refined tools for refined use. Large fixed knives below 10" are always short on blade mass.

The reason most hollow handles are handle-heavy, besides overbuilt handle tubes, is that they often try to have sharp point profiles (using a full flat grind doesn't help either, compared to a blade-heavier sabre grind). The reason they do this is that, like it or not, most "Survival Knives" know they have a "Combat" requirement to fullfill for their potential public... (This is why, generally, blunt-tip profile survival knives tend to be more serious and pricy items than the more Mall Ninja "pointy" ones...)

Deep bellied Busse-like tip profiles, on the other hand, are blade-heavier, but very combat ineffective (perhaps unknowingly): There is the mistaken notion out there that broad skinner-like (or Tanto) deep bellied points can be combat effective if they are sharp... Largely untrue, unless unrealistically thin, and even then...: Point flesh-slicing ability (through any clothing) goes out the window with deep bellies, because straighter edges are much closer to a "hook" shape than a skinner's rounded belly... A knife that is truly intented to be capable of combat must have as little blade belly as possible, which inevitably robs forward mass, unfortunately...: Narrow-bladed Daggers are often assumed to have poor cutting points: As long as their edges have no deep bellies near the point, they will in fact slice with the point through clothing far better than the sharpest skinner, because their edge profile is closer to a "hook", and "grabs", instead of pushing the clothing away: Not having a tendency for "pushing" clothing of unknown thickness is a pretty steep requirement, yet it is in fact the bare bones minimum if the knife is to be even useable as a weapon (something Randall 18 style blades drastically fail at out of the box, btw)...

If you look at the Chris Reeves 8.75" Jereboam design (and ignore the overly heavy-walled handle), it is very obviously designed to be as blade-heavy as possible, while still having a combat-effective point in lateral profile, and this is the correct way to design a survival blade meant to be useable in combat (it is one of the best example how to do it imho, but for more combat emphasis it should have had less edge belly, with a more heavily dropped clipped point): In the 80s, HHs were often referred to as "Survival/Fighting knives", which is also probably why the Model 18 was called the "Attack/Survival": "Combat Point" profile sharpness and forward-heavy balance are the two antagonistic requirements that are causing the handle-heavy problem on nearly all "Survival Knives", but, on the Model 18, the problem of light blade weight never entered the picture...: It is actually neither pointy nor blade heavy, the worst of both worlds, but at least they made it thin-edged!...

The following Jereboam design features demonstrate Chris Reeves was trying to combine a combat constraint with the most forward weight balance possible:

Combat constraint: Blade cannot be too wide: 1.375" is on the narrow side for nearly 9"

Blade-heavy features: -0.255" thick blade
-Lowest possible sabre grind for a narrow blade: Big 0.521" wide full-thickness flat.
-Deep hollow grind to compensate for fairly low sabre grind (still 1 mm thick edge, a fail imho).
-Bowie Clip started as late as possible: Barely 2.8" from the point on 8.75"...
-Full blade thickness carried to within 1.3" of the point(!!)
-Very long massive Ricasso: 1.1"
-No finger choil on Ricasso

It is very apparent just how far forward the blade weight was intended to go in this picture... Too bad the thick handle walls work at cross-purpose...:

(This is so pronounced here this knife does exhibit an extremely clumsy and ineffective point for slicing tasks, but the problem woud be greatly diminished if it had less edge belly: A gain for combat and survival!: A grinding problem of deep bellies on sharp "combat" point profiles is that they often force an opening of the edge grind angle as they curve, because a fast-narrowing blade profile is harder to keep thin in edge cross-section...)

I am aware that chopping is actually dangerous in the field, and largely replaceable by notching/breaking or batoning, but since you can't predict how or why a "Survival" knife will be used, I would say that, over six inches, a blade-heavy design is always better than an otherwise identical/similar blade-light design. Also, handle heaviness tends to fall out of the sheath more (if the snap is broken or simply undone), and to be less confortable to carry.

Gaston

 

[RX-79G]

Anyone know what this thing is?

It's fairly small. I don't know if that's an original sheath.



Also, where does one get the micro NATO compass?

Also also, I think I'm going to FFG my Schrade SCHF1SM. I did some measurements and it should work fine. The tip will come out on the thin side, but that's okay. These are pretty nice knives, but a better grind will make it more useful.

 

[Sam Wilson]

I agree that most Hollow Handle "Survival Knives" balance neutral, or even well behind the guard. I don't agree this is deliberate: It would make little difference in slicing ability if the balance point is 1/4", 1/2" or even 1" in front of the guard. They are not refined tools for refined use. Large fixed knives below 10" are always short on blade mass.

The reason most hollow handles are handle-heavy, besides overbuilt handle tubes, is that they often try to have sharp point profiles (using a full flat grind doesn't help either, compared to a blade-heavier sabre grind). The reason they do this is that, like it or not, most "Survival Knives" know they have a "Combat" requirement to fullfill for their potential public... (This is why, generally, blunt-tip profile survival knives tend to be more serious and pricy items than the more Mall Ninja "pointy" ones...)

Gaston

I disagree, although I can't speak for other makers. What do you think makes a blade lighter, thus moving the balance point farther back toward the guard? Removing more metal, and having a thinner grind. This also makes a better cutting knife, all things being equal. There are only a finite number of things that can be toyed with to balance a knife. Blade length and thickness, grind type and height, guard size and thickness, and the handle tube dimensions as well as buttcap material.

The longer you make a blade, the more metal you have to grind to balance it, unless you want a very blade heavy design. It's that simple. A 10" blade with a scandi grind is going to be massively blade heavy, regardless of handle tube dimensions, within reason. A 10" blade with a full flat grind (Assuming 1/4" stock and distal taper, which should be there for performance) is going very quickly to start balancing near the guard. MOST people do not want a very blade heavy design

A full flat grind is typically going to increase, not decrease cutting and chopping potential. Look at competition cutting knives, where the sole function is to cut. You're going to see it dominated by full height grinds. They bite deeper and are typically balanced better. When you talk about it not mattering where the balance point is as far as relation to slicing ability, you have to understand that you can't just slide a weight and decide where the knife is going to balance. The factors I mentioned above are all going to have to be juggled to balance it properly, and there's a reason that most of the knives you're talking about keep winding up with a balance point right around the guard. I do it on purpose, I imagine some of these makers do as well.

Sam

 

[TAH]

In the 80s, HHs were often referred to as "Survival/Fighting knives", which is also probably why the Model 18 was called the "Attack/Survival": "Combat Point" profile sharpness and forward-heavy balance are the two antagonistic requirements that are causing the handle-heavy problem on nearly all "Survival Knives", but, on the Model 18, the problem of light blade weight never entered the picture...: It is actually neither pointy nor blade heavy, the worst of both worlds...

The blade on the 7.5” RMK 18 isn’t lightweight by any means. If the 18 had an aluminum buttcap like the CRKs, it would be blade heavy too. The 18 wasn’t designed to be a chopper. The 18 was designed as an all-round survival/fighting knife, but with emphasis on survival - hence the reason for the spear point. The spear point is for strength during prying, not to pierce clothing. At the time the 18 was developed, Randall already had knives designated for combat/fighting with Models 1, 2, and 14. The 18 wasn't intended to take their place. It was all about survival, but to step in as a fighter if necessary.

 

[panzertroop]

Just got this sheath from J leather for my Boker. Bad ass! I plan on painting the knife and rewrapping the handle.

The knife is a heavy beast and J's sheath is built solid to hold her. This thing is quality!

 

[JD Mandrell]

Wow, that Apparo sheath is great!

 

[TAH]

Just got this sheath from J leather for my Boker. Bad ass! I plan on painting the knife and rewrapping the handle.

Very nice! Did you have to send your knife or did he have another Apparo on hand? Are you sure you want to paint the knife and rewrap the handle? It looks dang good in that sheath right now. :thumbup:

 

[panzertroop]

I sent him the knife. I am not a fan of the silver color but I appreciate your input. I see a Kryptek pattern in it's future. LOL

 

[TAH]

I understand. I'm sure it will look good. What was the turn-a-round time on the sheath?

 

[panzertroop]

IT took awhile but it was a freebie and I am a friend so I wasnt in a big rush.

 

[TAH]

Also, where does one get the micro NATO compass?

Hope this isn't considered "deal spotting", because at $39.95, it's hardly a deal. Don't let the price scare you. They're very high quality. You won't be disappointed.

NATO Compass

 

[Sam Wilson]

That's a beautiful sheath, Panzer. Very nice.