TTKZ, KZ2,.......Killa Zilla 3 next?

RES C handle would take off some weight just by it's self.

A RES-C KZ would also be awesome for the shock absorption.
 
Jroden5446 said:
Mmmm,TT shape handle, 3/16 inch thick with light brigade handle treatment
Click to expand...

I'd be okay with a thinner TTKZ, not sure if I'd want the light brigade treatment though.

Oh, a longer, thinner, TTKZ. I love fatties but something with a 3/16" thick, 13" blade would be scheeeeeew :thumbup:
 
Yall beat me too it, I have been thinking about a Baisc Zilla. That would be soooo sick, .32 thick with full flat grind convex edge. something around 22 OZ would be IMO ideal.
 
M67 said:
I'd be okay with a thinner TTKZ, not sure if I'd want the light brigade treatment though.

Oh, a longer, thinner, TTKZ. I love fatties but something with a 3/16" thick, 13" blade would be scheeeeeew :thumbup:
Click to expand...


I was thinking Light brigade treatment to help move the weight balance even more into the blade to help with chopping. I remember the BWM being very light at 3/16, but not chopping as well as I like. A slightly longer blade would be great as well
 
I'm in. A "Basic" Zilla with a thinner blade, and balanced as a blade-weighted chopper, and Res-C....you guys have some great ideas on this one.:thumbup:
 
M67 said:
I'd be okay with a thinner TTKZ, not sure if I'd want the light brigade treatment though.

Oh, a longer, thinner, TTKZ. I love fatties but something with a 3/16" thick, 13" blade would be scheeeeeew :thumbup:
Click to expand...

NO LITE BRIGADE stuff!!! If you reduce the mass in the hilt (skeletonize) you are going to weaken it period. A thinned down blade will allow harmonics to travel faster and at a higher frequency. This will always impart stress on the metal. Maintain a 3/16 (.1875) thickness troughout like as in the BWM or even go thinner say .115 to .125", but leave the tang a FULL tang. I don't care if you're talking INFI or not thin is thin and it will break due to impact, vibration & harmonics. If you want it blade heavy then make it longer i.e. a MACHETTE with a bolo tip. Now if Jerry made a Machette say .115 I would be all over that. Question is the cost of INFI in a Blade that size. We are always having to examine steels for stress cracks and heat fatigue here at the plant. So it's something I do have some background with. The science of steel is amazing and I learn something new everyday. Skeletonized steel in a small blade is fine cause it will primarily be used for cutting, but hacking/chopping best leave well enough alone and leave it a full tang.
 
The KZ is one of the last 2 Busse Grail's that i have on my list

although i have a nasty feeling that the new NO is going on that list too.

Please don't talk jerry into taking MORE of my money
 
One more thing and that's looking a traditional KUKRI. They have a tappered Tang, but they are NOT skeletonized. This allows for fluid movement of vibration from tip to pommel. When you take harmonics that get generated and then start going around corners if you will, that is where you get you weak point most often. Take a person who forges a blade and what do they do where the tang meets the ricasso? It will have a smooth transition cause if it where say cut or shaped at a 90' angle chances are it would break right there. It creats a week link!!!
 
Yup, been asking for a Bazilla for over a year now... or a Khukrat if we can't get res-c on an INFI Zilla.

Please bring the Basic 8 first though, since that has actually been a completed design.
 
Some great thoughts here :thumbup:

A lighter Res C Zilla in the 22-26 oz range would be fulfilment of a long held wish ...:cool:

If they are going to do a Basic 8 can some please be elf choil and ASM edge with full right angle grinds and no taper just like the originals ....:thumbup:
 
RussMo said:
NO LITE BRIGADE stuff!!! If you reduce the mass in the hilt (skeletonize) you are going to weaken it period. A thinned down blade will allow harmonics to travel faster and at a higher frequency. This will always impart stress on the metal.
Click to expand...

Jerry made a post regarding the light brigade treatment saying specifically that it's not a skeletonizing process, that he avoids skeletonized tangs on anything that will be used for chopping because of the tuning fork effect of amplified vibrations in the hand. With the treatment you don't have empty spaces, you don't have a geometric shell: you have a series of I-beams with radiused corners. Having not used them I can't guarantee that they'll be smooth as butter in use, but they are not exactly what your describing, which has a history of use to verify your points. I-beams are meant to be a half way point between the weakening effects of a lighter bar, but with the strength of a solid heavy bar. No, it's not necessarily as strong as a solid bar but it is much stronger and much stiffer than it's thinned down light but straight counterpart (or skeletonized).

This:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...he-quot-Light-Brigade-quot-Series-(Cool-Pics)
GeminiLightBrigade.jpg

LightBrigadeHandlecutaway.jpg

(I can't help but think the corners will be less sharp on the final product, but I could be wrong)

Is not the same as this:
Balance_Skeleton.jpg
 
Last Visible Canary said:
Jerry made a post regarding the light brigade treatment saying specifically that it's not a skeletonizing process, that he avoids skeletonized tangs on anything that will be used for chopping because of the tuning fork effect of amplified vibrations in the hand. With the treatment you don't have empty spaces, you don't have a geometric shell: you have a series of I-beams with radiused corners. Having not used them I can't guarantee that they'll be smooth as butter in use, but they are not exactly what your describing, which has a history of use to verify your points. I-beams are meant to be a half way point between the weakening effects of a lighter bar, but with the strength of a solid heavy bar. No, it's not necessarily as strong as a solid bar but it is much stronger and much stiffer than it's thinned down light but straight counterpart (or skeletonized).

This:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...he-quot-Light-Brigade-quot-Series-(Cool-Pics)
GeminiLightBrigade.jpg

LightBrigadeHandlecutaway.jpg

(I can't help but think the corners will be less sharp on the final product, but I could be wrong)

Is not the same as this:
Balance_Skeleton.jpg
Click to expand...

LVC, YOUR RIGHT, DAMN I'm sorry all:o !!! Boy do I feel like a dope. Uh, yes the I-beam is the LB. Thanks for the clarification on my brain fart, BUT I still don't and won't own any of the skeleton stuff, but the jury is not back on the I-beam either. I still prefer JUNK IN THE TRUNK !!!

PS: Jerry please excuse my stupid attack!!!
 
Last edited:
I see the technical difference between the I-beam and Skeletonized ... but for strength and proven ability on the chopping front I would much prefer a Basic style handle with a Res C grip shaped on the same design as the TT Zilla. Akin in many ways to a traditional hidden tang khukri.
 
PeterPHWS said:
I see the technical difference between the I-beam and Skeletonized ... but for strength and proven ability on the chopping front I would much prefer a Basic style handle with a Res C grip shaped on the same design as the TT Zilla. Akin in many ways to a traditional hidden tang khukri.
Click to expand...

+1, EXACTLY;):thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top