Ti's The Season

I'll not discuss Any matter with you as I've noted how you put Buck down and assert your opinions. And do not ask for my personal information. DM
 
David,

Very sorry to upset you. Not at all my intention. Offer to send you a knife was sincere.
 
Ok, I'll cut up some more pumpkin using this knife which is a Buck (Camillus made) and has a flat grind blade of 420HC. I'm uncertain on their heat treating recipe but we'll say it's near the same and of good quality. I don't recall this models number (334) but I couldn't find another model quickly with a flat grind. I know it's mfg. is from around 2000. I came up processing meat even before university meat science. So, it's not like I have little experience using a flat grind. Probably more than most here. So, I'll entertain this notion in my topic for certain satisfactions. DM
 
Last edited:
Ok, I think I've got it sharp. I took it first to my Norton JUM 3 coarse crystollon using a 15* guide. Then on to the fine crystollon and finished it off on the Norton fine India. DM
 
The 426 has a tip that is a wee thinner than the Buck Trapper. So, I noticed the first 1/4" inserts a little easier. I would insert it that far and began a rocking cutting motion, with both knives. Once I had the eye outlined I'd then go back over it deeper. Following this pattern until the item could be lifted out. The surface skin was tight and hard. Still both blades went right on with no hang ups or hesitation. I could push it on through the thickness and pull the blade down and it cut. Both types of grinds were well done. I've see some flat grinds with convex edges the would have hung up and required more force. Like a 110 two dot. Which has a thick convex semi hollow grind. These didn't. Even the shoulder on the bevel of the 426 I could feel slightly more than the shoulder on the Trapper. But apparently it wasn't enough to separate a difference in cutting ability. The two were very equal. If someone could notice a difference in the way they cut they are better than me. If the blade grinds are done well (thin). NO thickened shoulder at the bevel it will be hard to notice a difference. But if they are thick in that area it will be noticed in the amount of force required to make a cut or insert. Also, if you have a favorite grind then use that and enjoy it. Saying, something like I prefer this grind. Not this one is better. As there are many factors that come into play making one better.
Now, with softer materials, like in skinning you may not notice the extra force required to initiate a cut with the convex edge. Because the softer material gives, allowing a cut to separate rather than resisting. Just what I noticed while conducting these tests. Which are on going. I'll give the Trapper to my wife and let her use it in the kitchen and see what she notices. Then the next chicken I cut up I'll use it and see how it performs. So, that's the story for today. DM
 
David,

Thank you very much.

By way of clarification, when you say "thick" or "thin", gather by your recent post (#28) that you are talking about the blade thickness just behind the edge? And when you say "shoulder", you are referring to the transition from the edge bevel to the primary grind; that is, "the shoulder of edge"?

If so, I see why we are only now beginning to communicate. By thickness, I'm referring (and thought you were referring) to thickness at the spine and by "shoulder", I'm referring to the transition from the primary grind to the flat of the blade.

In my experience, slicing things like potatoes, pumpkin and butternut squash (the hardest), there are 2 periods of resistance. The first, is just as you describe, when the edge first penetrates the surface and, just as you describe, I find this is primarily related to the thickness of the edge (or just behind the edge). We both agree that Buck's Edge 2000 profile is excellent in this regard.

The second phase of significant of resistance is when the shoulder of the grind goes below the surface. In general, sharp shoulders (stock Mora or current 110) seem to hang up and drag significantly, demanding a second, harder effort to force the knife through and often "popping" or breaking the cut piece off. When dicing butternut squash, I can shoot cubes across the counter with some knives. In general, I find that full flat blades (Case Sodbuster or your Camillus) or thin convex blades (Opinel) do much better in this regard, as there is a slow, consistent increase in width as the blade "splits" the hard material. The pressure is both easier and more consistent. In general, I find knives with noticeable but rounded shoulders to be somewhere in between. There is still noticeable pressure when the grind should enters the material but due to the rounded nature of the shoulder, there is less drag compared to a sharp shoulder. The older 110s and 500s have nicely rounded shoulders, as does the sabre grind Schrade-Walden H-15 I posted a picture of.

I work from home on Wednesday and will try to post pictures. I'm pretty certain I can cause apple slices to crack using a current Buck. The pictures should help.

Just to reiterate, I love my Bucks. The big ones are excellent hunting/fishing knives where the hollow grind works really well for me. But yes, I do find flat grinds more versatile for my every day uses. YMMV, of course.

Thanks for hanging in there with me. I appreciate it.
 
The answer to your 1st two questions is yes.
Much depends on each blade and how & who ground it.
My 426 Buck light has a 1994 stamp. So, prior to Buck's move to Edge 2000. This topic was brought up in another posting.
I like the way it cuts but I can see problems with them as guys will break the tip. Buck may leave more metal on that area. For production knives there is more to consider than just grinding a blade that will cut nice. DM
 
OK, I was able to conduct a different test today. Upon arriving home I noticed we had a chicken injured. Who knows what from but most likely from a wild animal coming by and spooking them. So, I processed the hen for the freezer using the 334 jumbo Trapper. All went well until I went to separate the 2 thighs, the pulley bone from the breast and half the breast. These being the heaviest bone structure. The blade require extra force to initiate the cut. More so than other knives. Was this a function of the grind?
I doubt it. As the edge wasn't penetrating anything at this point just bone. And I don't think the grind is too thick. As my wife used it this morning to slice tomatoes. Which it cut fine. It could be the steel as I've noticed the powder metallurgy steels initiate hard cuts with less force. Another possibility is this chicken is 7 mos. so older than most I process. Take your pick. This is additional cutting information to ponder. DM
 
Dave,

I was finally able to get into the kitchen to cut up a potatoe and take some pictures to try to explain better why I don't care for a hollow grind for slicing hard things like this. The pictures will help but won't give the whole story. I'll try to not be too wordy...

Here are the 4 knives I used.

Untitled by Pinnah, on Flickr

The first is an Opinel #10. It's blade is about the same thickness as a 110 and it's a very mild convex. The convexity is most noticeable starting 1/2 way down on the blade, making the blade quite thin behind the edge compared to a full flat grind.

The second is a Case Sodbuster. It's a full flat grind and the thickest of the bunch near the edge.

The third is a newer Buck 110. You may be able to see that I've modified the blade by thinning the shoulder of the hollow grind. You may be able see how much further down the blade the flat comes.

The fourth is an older Buck 110 that I've not thinned.


IME, there are two different moments when I feel the blade when cutting potatoes and squash. The first is the initial piercing of the skin and as you described, the thinner the edge the better. The new 110 and the Opinel are the best in this regard. The old 2-dot is a bit worse, as you might expect due to the thickness behind the edge and the Sodbuster is also not good, again, owing to the relative thickness behind the edge.

The second moment is when the blade's grind gets down into the material, like this.
Untitled by Pinnah, on Flickr

For me, this is where the shape of the grind has a huge influence in how the knife moves through the material. For me, the worst is the stock hollow grind. I think the issue is the amount of drag that is created as the material tries to move past the shoulder of the blade grind. This 2-dot 110 isn't the worst that I own, thanks to the rounded shoulders. A modern stock 110 would be the worst in the bunch thanks to how sharp the grind shoulder is.

The best, by head and shoulders and not even close is the Opinel. My sense is that the convexity of the blade helps to open the potatoe up a bit like a good splitting maul does. My hunch is that this frees up the apex at the edge to really continue to cut with out binding up.

Overall, I have to call a draw between the thinned modern 110 and the full flat Sodbuster. The 110 initiates the cut better but the full flat grind of the Sodbuster keeps going with no hang up. I call it a tie.

This is the kind of cutting, over and over, where I can tell the difference in slicing ability. The hollow grind knives bind for me and require a hard second effort. The result is a definite thump as the blade pops through and hits the cutting board often accompanied with popping the new slice away from the knife.

Untitled by Pinnah, on Flickr

The best, by far, is the Opinel which starts the cut well and then just flies though the potatoe with much less effort.

The full flat Case and the thinned 110 are different. The thinned 110 starts cuts much easier than the Sodbuster but it hangs up worse. It's not any where near as bad as a non-thinned hollow grind. Definitely a noticeable improvement.

In contrast, I find the Case takes more work to start the cut, but once it starts, it goes through the potatoe with little effort.

Well... tomorrow I'm having hashbrowns.

Untitled by Pinnah, on Flickr

I'm happy to send you this thinned out 110 and an Opinel #10 to play with in the kitchen if you want.

The Opinel is a horrible hunting knife but the blade's grind is more versatile for my uses. It's definitely a great slicer. I would love to have a Buck with an Opinel grind.
 
Ok, I see your point about grind profiles. I don't think you can keep from being wordy. To me a convex edge is just sloppy sharpening. Reducing the primary bevel's shoulder, then a concave face up to the secondary bevel's shoulder (which should be at or near the blades spine) is the real slicer. But not all folks like this grind. IF you get a chance read 'V-Sharpening Convex Edges' over in Maintenance. As you'll like some of what they're posting. Thanks for the knife pictures and the cutting time to express your point. DM
 
Last edited:
David Martin said:
Reducing the primary bevel's shoulder, then a concave face up to the secondary bevel's shoulder (which should be at or near the blades spine) is the real slicer. But not all folks like this grind.
Click to expand...

For me, the high hollow ground works best if the transition at the secondary bevel is convexed or flattened, otherwise it causes drag in things like potatoes. We have different experiences. No high hollow I've used outslices the thin convex grind of the Opinel.

IF you get a chance read 'V-Sharpening Convex Edges' over in Maintenance. As you'll like some of what they're posting.
Click to expand...

Yes. My pref... v edge for kitchen and hunting, convex edge for shop, wood working (curls better) and EDC.

Thanks for the knife pictures and the cutting time to express your point. DM
Click to expand...

Ditto
 
I've noticed woodcarvers stropp their blade a lot, creating a convex edge, thus the edge doesn't penetrate deep into even soft wood. Which is the type cutting they like. Look at many hatchets they're made the same way. They penetrate a little then bind up causing a shallow cut. In cross cutting like limbing you'll really notice it. I came up processing meat and have much experience with what works in that area. A thin flat grind with no convex edge. And a thin high concave grind with no convexing & wide blade works. There will be some convexing on edges after repeated stropping and sharpenings. This should be removed to increase performance and prevent binding. Thank you for your comment.
I just finished conducting the above potato cutting test using the model 426 & 334. I cut up several potatoes in like manner. NOT finding any hanging up at the blade spine of either model. Even though the 334 has a increase in blade taper all the way back to the pivot and is a little thinner than the 426's blade at the spine. I initiated the cut starting from near the point and pushing in and down through the potato. As the material encountered the thickest portion of the blades spine each expressed a Slight hesitation. Barely discernable. They both just cut on through and the slice lay beside the others. These to blade grinds are very similar and I enjoy using them.
This is the second time I've conducted cutting tests at your suggestion and finding no difference. DM
 
Last edited:
David I just want to say that Buck trapper is nice. I haven't seen that model.
 
Thanks. I like it as well and will carry it some. I'm guessing around 2000-2002 is the only years these were offered. The drop point blade is stamped 'Buck'. The only mark on it. DM
 
Last edited:
Ok, I noticed something about the flat ground blade of Buck's model 334 (in Pinnay's defense). I said these tests were on going. This evening after dinner I got my toothpick out to clean my teeth. It being used from lunch and dull, I knew some sharpening was needed. I was carrying the 334 and pulled it out to whittle my toothpick. I noticed how it bit into this soft wood. So, I got out my 426 Buck Lite and sharpened the other end of the toothpick. There was a difference. After sharpening the toothpick several times I've concluded that the 334 does whittle wood better. Was there a difference in the level of sharpness in the two? I doubt it as I've been testing both these knives since Halloween and they were sharpened just before the pumpkin cutting. I don't think any more cutting has been done with one than the other. I think the 334 with the flat grind is more a 'V' wedge and has not had enough stropping to become convex like the 426. Thus, it digs and bites in better. While peeling out a larger sliver of wood during this toothpick sharpening. My observations. DM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top