Which do you like better?

G

Gossman Knives

Edged Toolmaker
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Messages
9,410
Which design do you like better, the Kephart or the Nessmuk knife and why. What are you judging your answer on, use of the knives or appearance?
Even though i've made alot of both, it seems the Kephart is taking over as far as orders that I have for each. This question is just to satisfy my curiousity.
Thanks in advance.
Scott
 
Kephart by far. (can`t you tell by my avatar ;)) I think it`s more practical for all around use, especially for food preparation, and general camp chores.

John
 
personally I think the kephart design as a broader range of practical application as a woods knife...while the nessmuk is more limited...but the nessmuk patern has a nostalgic quality to it that makes it cool...if I had to pick one I'd pick the kephart....HMMMM or perhaps the new Grossman creation the "nesshart"??? LOL
 
I suppose I should defer on this question until a later date. I don't have a Kephart yet, or the "mystery knife" being made for me right now by a forum member. I do have the Fiddleback Nessmuk and really haven't yet found it to have any limitations to speak of. I didn't receive it until this past winter's deer season was over, and my planned winter canoe voyage had to be cancelled, but hopefully I can give it a workout on the skinning pole and on the river this fall.

After the new knife arrives, I'll consider having a Kephart made and then compare all three side by side. I do like the appearance and feel of the Nessmuk. Anyone who has handled one of Fiddleback's creations can attest to the fine feel in weight, balance and eye appeal.
71xt646.jpg

And the pattern of the Kephart was preceeded by the "mystery knife" by some years, also celebrity endorsed by an early turn of the century outdoorsman.
 
My nessmuk of yours is one of my favorite blades. I prefer a blade with more curve to it. The Kephart and "bushcraft" style blades don't appeal to me. I also like a curved handle, which would look odd on a Kephart. I'd say the only spear point knife I like is my Ranger Shiv.

IMG_4912.jpg


IMG_3970.jpg
 
Kephart for me. I find it more useful and jsut like the pattern better I guess.
 
I like the Kephart, because it works better for me at wood-working tasks. The curves on the nessmuk would certainly help with food and game prep, but that's not what I primarily carry a knife for (personally).
 
i would also have to say the kephart... i definately has a more utilittarian design to it..
 
Unfortunately, I do not own any of yours, so I am speaking of just the patterns in general. With that in mind, I prefer the Kephart, and here is why.

Back in the day of both Nessmuk and Kephart, going into the outdoors was a bit different. I mean, when was the last time you were able to pick hemlock browse for your bed, cut down green stick for your tent structure, or cut down a green tree as fire backing/reflector? Today, we have much more gear, requiring us to use tools less. Another example is many people take a cook stove of some sort. Even though I would like to, I have not made a 5 foot log stove before.

With that in mind, people like Nessmuk/Kephart always talked of using a combination of tools, including a hand ax. The sheath knife was generally one of 3. This allowed the sheath knife to have a much more specific use. Today, with all the gear we have, not requiring to do as many things with natural materials, many people forgo the hand ax, and carry a couple knives.

I typically do take a hand ax in my daypack, but there are obviously times when I do not. If I have an ax, either design is sufficient. But, when I dump it, it will now require my knife to do more work (not be as specialized) as it was before. Therefore, I want one that can do as many things well as possible.

For that, I think the Kephart design has a bit of edge. At least for me anyway. Your mileage may vary :D

My 2 cents.

Brian
 
The reason I'm asking is that, believe it or not, I have not used either knife in the field. :) I've made more of each then I can remember but have no experience using them. That's why I really depend on customer feedback. One example is a Kephart I made for someone last summer. He emailed me a few weeks ago telling me the knife is always at his side. It was used on a number of deer, fish, turkeys and alot of camping trips. The one time I watched the use of a Nessmuk I made, was 2 deer seasons ago when my hunting buddy field dressed and skinned a whitetail with it. There have been alot of others who contacted me with positive feedback on both designs.
Scott
 
Bear Claw Chris Lappe said:
The Kephart is a much more useful blade overall to me.
Click to expand...

I agree, but then I have owned David Farmers interpretation of the Nessmuk, and only saw firsthand Scotts interpretation of the Kephart in his shop. As for the knife itself, I really liked Davids knife, but I had no use for it. It found a very appreciative home BTW.

So, no, no Nessmuk for me.
 
Kephart by far. To me. The nnessmuk is a fine kichen knife :D but nothing more. The wider blade is good for food prep but can get in the way of other bush tasks.

Its charming though.

Just me
 
The kephart has a little bit more going for it in terms of form = function aspect. It is also more versatile in that it can be made thick or thin. The spear point makes it more useful for stabbing/drilling applications.

The Nessmuk seems much more suited to being thin and is optimized for slicing/skinning.
A year ago when I first joined the forums, I really couldn't say I liked the Nesmuk style at all. In fact, having never heard of Nesmuk himself, I thought the looks were kind of hokey. Of course, back then I was really into the Japanese look and leaned more tactical. I've since come to really admire the design and definately see similarities between it and the D.H. Russell belt knife. I particularly like the Nesmuks that have symmetry to them, where the handle has a bit of hump and a flow that matches blade. I only just ordered my first Nesmuk so it will take some experience to see how it works for me.

I currently have a kephart style knife, but at 0.25", I now find it too thick. Again, at the time I was more into thick and now am getting back to thin.

One thing - you can make a much prettier Nesmuk than you can a Kephart.
 
Gossman Knives said:
The one time I watched the use of a Nessmuk I made, was 2 deer seasons ago when my hunting buddy field dressed and skinned a whitetail with it.
Click to expand...

I bet the nessmuk style would just excel at whitetail skinning. However, if I am lucky I only do that a couple times a year. I still have 360 some odd days for other stuff to. That puts skinning into the "low use" category, for me personally anyway.

These are the things I try to keep in mind when select the "main" knife I will carry. My selection will definitely not skin as well as a nessmuk, but for the percent usage, I am cool with that. It would also be rare to skin in the field, so being able to have a separate skinning knife, aside from my woods carry is always another option.

Even when I was doing a lot of trapping, and skinning many animals per day, I did not carry a "skinning" knife. I always had those in the fur shed.

I guess the reason I get all long winded on this type of thing is that it seem people make their knife selection based on the .001% chance that they need to do something, and go with that knife. Failing to consider that the things you use a knife for 99.999% of the time have been sacrificed based on that selection.
 
I've used both. The Kephart from Bark River, and a Nessmuck from Dale Evans. The Kephart is my pick, although there's nothing wrong with Dale's piece.
 
Gossman Knives said:
....believe it or not, I have not used either knife in the field. :)......Scott
Click to expand...


I am a Kephart fan myself and I like the Bushcrafty-types as well. Like Spooky', my primary uses are for woodworking. I could get by with either for small game and have used a Green River that looks like a Kephart on my last two deer but I didn't skin them - just field-dressed them.

Scott, your Kepharts practically define "Kephart," but you have a number of knives which, with a tweak here or there, could be called "Kephart." The PSKs and WTK for example. Do you find that they serve your purposes? If they do, they pretty much have most of the characteristics one might mention if describing the key features of a Kephart.
 
I like both, but have never used a Kephart. I like the look of it though. The nessies I have are excellent slicers and while I am not a hunter, I have used them outdoors in some of my landscaping projects and they are tougher than I thought.
Previously, I had just used them for food prep but I look for my knives to be more "all purpose" and the nessies work just fine for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top