What are the pros & cons of the ZT Battle Mistress?

A

Ad

Joined
Mar 9, 2000
Messages
752
I am really hot on getting a Battle Mistress at the upcoming Blade Show West in September. I was wondering what the reasons were behind making thie ZT Battle Mistress with a thinner, lighter blade. Will it be a better fighter? Will it chop as good or almost as good? I camp out once in a while, but most of my outdoor fun is spent in the deserts of California. Is the heavier blade that much more beneficial? I was hoping that some of you diehard Busse fans (or maybe even Mr. Busse himself) could shed some light on this. Thanks.
 
Welcome Ad, to the Busse Forum.

Check this thread on the origin of the ZTs:

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=136586

I would say that a head-to-head chopping tests between BM/ZT and BM/E would go to the BM/E. Weight and edge grind on the BM/E better suited for the major chop jobs.

I can't speak to the 'fighter' pros and cons.

The BM/ZT will be rare, due to only 400 produced. The BM/E will be around for awhile. You may be disappointed if you wait until Sept, they may be all gone.

HTTH and welcome once again,

Seth
 
Welcome AD,
The BM-E will be the better chopper but, the ZT will still be an outstanding performer. The weight savings is also a definite plus. The ZT BM-E has definitely become a favorite of mine. On a side note, if you have small hands, you'll find the ZT a better fit.
Yours in nuclear chopping,
Andrew Pinchen
 
Thank you for the replies. I can't wait to hold some of these babies at the Blade Show West.
 
Andrew, Is it safe to assume the blade on the ZT BM is a little thinner behind the edge and has better penetration potential than the standard BM. It is important for me that a knife be able to cut and stick. I am considering buying the ZT set but it is scary for me to spend that much without being able to handle the knives first. I do not want a sharpened prybar - plenty of those available for less money. I really like the idea of 3/16" steel in these and am hoping this makes for a better all around knife.
 
I have two sets, Buy it, take it out chop the crap out of stuff, use it till it breaks. (yeah Right) It's lighter, has a faster swing speed and guarantied for LIFE.
but my EDC is still my AS:)
 
Originally posted by averageguy
Is it safe to assume the blade on the ZT BM is a little thinner behind the edge and has better penetration potential than the standard BM.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. While the ZT stock is thinner (3/16" vs 1/4"), both blades are not flat ground all the way to the spine. Rather, the primary bevel appears to consume about 3/5 of the height of the ZT blades (edge to spine dimension) from my eyeballing the pictures of the ZT series.

Making the following assumptions and doing the geometry, we find some interesting results:
  • ZT stock thickness = 3/16", BM-E stock thickness = 1/4". We will actually be using only 1/2 of each of these thicknesses for our calculations. That way we can use right triangle geometry.
  • Assume that the edge-to-spine height of the ZT BM blade equals the edge-to-spine height of the BM-E blade. For my calculations I used 3.0" as an arbitrary number. Yes, I know that number is too big. But it shouldn't matter what the number is as long as it is the same for calculating both blades.
  • Assume that the primary bevel consumes 3/5 of that edge-to-spine dimension on the ZT BM and uses 5/5 (all of) that dimension on the BM-E. This means that we are calculating an angle on the ZT BM of 1.8" of blade height (3/5 of 3.0" at 3/32" thickness) and on the BM-E an angle of 3.0" of blade height (all of 3.0" at 1/8" thickness).
  • Ignore the secondary bevels that actually create the edge, since we are interested in how much steel exists behind the edge. This will be determined by the primary bevel grind angle.
The formula I used was: (mathmeticians, please tell me if this is wrong!!)
  • For ZT BM
    angle = arctan ((3/32)/1.8) Double that angle to get the included angle of the ZT BM.
  • For BM-E
    angle = arctan ((1/8)/3) Double that angle to get the included angle of the BM-E.

If my calculations are correct (and they could easily be wrong), the primary grind angle on the ZT BM is actually about 25% more obtuse than on the BM-E. (~6 degrees included angle for ZT BM vs ~4.8 degrees included angle for BM-E)

So according to these numbers the BM-E should actually penetrate better than the ZT BM. While the ZT stock is thinner, the controlling factor is that the primary grind does not run linearly from the edge all the way to the spine on the ZT BM. Thus it makes a "fatter" angle behind the edge.

All of this is based on only one blade geometry factor. When you include other factors (weight difference of blades, balance of handle/blade combos, power/speed factors, compressability/flexibility of material being chopped, etc) this may not influence the penetration any more than the other factors.

Yours in nuclear numerical obfuscation,
Greg
 
Hi Greg, That is an interesting analysis. Mr. Busse kindly responded to an email I sent and indicated plainly that the ZT series are indeed better for slicing and piercing than the standard series which suggests to me that the blade is thinner behind the edge. Although he did not actually say that the blade was thinner behind the edge. It would be nice if some lucky owner of both of these models would eyeball them and post his comments here. Pleeeaaase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top