Which is better for batoning? Scandi or Flat?

Daniel Koster

www.kosterknives.com
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
Joined
Oct 18, 2001
Messages
20,978
Which grind is better for hard push-cuts (ie. batoning) where edge thickness, strength and toughness are serious considerations?


Before you answer, consider this rendering:


ScandiVsFlat.gif



2 knives, both 1/8" thick, 1.25" tall blade (average/typical/common dims).

1st one with a Scandi grind set at 13 degrees (26 inclusive)

2nd one with a Full Flat grind that has an edge thickness of 0.013" around 0.025" behind the edge (sharpened at the typical 30 degrees inclusive). Yes, we would consider this more of a "keen" edge, and not a "beater". But since most bushcraft/survival knife owners tend to gravitate more toward "keen" (while tactical guys prefer "beater"), then I think this is a fair comparison.

Have a look at the 2 knives overlaid in cross section. There is a ton of steel "backing up" the edge on the scandi grind. That equals out to more strength, more stiffness (resistance to lateral torsion forces) and more mass (less vibration/chatter).

Then have a look at the edges zoomed in at 16x. This is all done in CAD and these drawings were done to scale...not just drawn up in Painter. :rolleyes:
If you go 0.005" behind the edge of the flat-ground blade, the 2 knives are exactly the same thickness.

So, is it worth giving up stiffness, strength and mass on a difference in thickness so miniscule you need a microscope to see it?


Next time you hear someone say a Flat grind outperforms a Scandi in batoning, point them to this thread. ;)


Is it possible for it to happen? Sure! If you take a Scandi-ground knife with a simple carbon, thin steel (1/16-3/32") grind it too thin at say 10 degrees. Then take a flat ground knife with a heavier edge thickness - say around 0.030", a better quality steel, and a steeper sharpening angle - 40 degrees inclusive. Yes, I agree that you'll see more of a difference in cross section and performance.

BUT....you still give up stiffness, strength and mass.


Personally, I think it has more to do with the way it was used, and less with the grind itself. As with most things...it's most likely operator-error.

I make a knife that matches the 2 profiles above. Same steel, same heat-treat, same blade profile, same handle. One is scandi, one is flat ground.

My testing conclusions are this:

  1. both knives "get the job done"....*shrug*
  2. the scandi ground edge tends to last longer
  3. if you let your wrist "twist" while holding the knife being batoned, you will eventually damage your edge - regardless of grind.
  4. the flat ground edge enters quicker on the first baton, but the scandi ground edge opens up faster and has less binding throughout the split.

I have video to back this up, I just need to finish editing it. ;)

I'm not saying the Scandi-grind is the only grind to baton with...I just want to put some evidence out on the table for those that are skeptical, unfamiliar, or even saying the Scandi grind is "too thin" or "too delicate" or "too keen" and cannot be used for batoning. It's baffling to me, but every once in a while I'll see someone post this on the forums.

I've put these in the hands of 12/13-year-old boy scouts and let them wail on them. If you ever need a real test (and your blood pressure can handle it), let a young, energetic, non-knife-knut person use your "nicer" knives... and give them free reign. I've done it many times and yes I have cried inside a few times (:() watching but have learned some valuable lessons about real-world performance. I have a more experienced and careful hand - from decades of knife ownership, bushcrafting, scouting and knifemaking...any test I do will be "flavored"/biased. But a 12-13 y.o. kid (even my own son)...they tend to push things to the limits and even beyond into abuse at times.

With no skills, no technique, and basic instruction = my scouts have put both the grinds through wood pieces all the way to the bottom over and over again. The scandi lasts longer and it's obvious over time that it works better and has the advantage. (apples-to-apples, all things equal except grinds)

I felt this needed to be said, to give some balance to the hearsay that sometimes trickles down (telephone-game-style) amongst users and buyers of bushcraft and survival gear.

YMMV

Daniel Koster
KosterKnives.com
 
In my experience, definitely a Scandi. It wedges the wood apart, where sometimes a flat grind can bind up. Great renderings and write up by the way. It always helps to see pictures to grasp something new!
 
Honestly? I'll take a sabre grind. Best of both worlds. Still got a lot of unground spine to wedge it apart with, but you've got more edge to work into tough wood that doesn't want to split. Most scandi grinds are thin blades, too, whereas you can find some thick sabre ground blades that make better wedges (the Esee 5, for example. That thing splits wood like a hatchet.)
 
The Esee 5 also weighs 16 oz. and is, as you say, more of a wedge/brute. Will it work? I'm sure it does just fine...but I'm guessing that you'll pull something else out when it comes time to carve details or peel an apple.

Remember, the question is not whether or not it's the best....but whether or not a scandi grind is too delicate an edge to do baton work.


If I could fold up a GB Forest Ax and carry it in my pocket, I'd much rather have that! ...and it would do a better job than any of the above. ;)
 
Even before reading your argument I would say scandi vs ffg since the profile of a scandi edge better matches that of an axe. Now that said, I think using a true scandi ground blade with no 2nd bevel, batoning might be kinda hard on the edge vs that of a saber grind with a secondary bevel.

+1 informative thread.
 
Scandi's don't have a secondary bevel (except as an 'oops'). A scandi is a zero-bevel grind. If it has a micro-bevel, it is a saber grind.

FWIW

Dan
 
Im in agreeance, not to say we havent seen "scandi's" (or at least marketed as such) with that secondary bevel.
 
Personally if I packed both types and all things beyond grind were equal I would use the one nearest to my hand. I think over time my scandi knives get a bit convexed from the sandpaper hand sharpening and leather strop.
 
There are no hand sharpened true scandi beveled blades. There is a little convex there. I prefer my pseudo saber micro bevel on my pseudo scandi primary bevel for batoning. :) That being said, if the technique is good the strength comes from the width of the blade. The sharpness?? It could be the edge of a ffg is in contact with the wood longer than the scandi due to the splitting nature of the grind. IMO the scandi is better than the ffg due to its ability to take a little more lateral stress.
 
I prefer saber-ground for batoning, but given the choice from OP I would have said scandi.
I prefer FFG for slicing ability and delicate work; never though of it for high strength and extra toughness - unless you're comparing to hollow. :)
Looks like, from the above, it's perfectly suitable for hard use, too. Nice!
 
Scandi's don't have a secondary bevel (except as an 'oops'). A scandi is a zero-bevel grind. If it has a micro-bevel, it is a saber grind.

FWIW

Dan

The "Scandi Forum" mod at British Blades, where Scandiism is at its height, tried to explain that Nordic knives hardly ever were made that way; almost all have a secondary bevel, hollow grind, or convex grand. But an idea can have great power.
 
I prefer a scandi grind
I find after the intial penetration of the cutting edge
The splitting is done by the shoulders of the scandi not the blade edge
I find that this very rarely binds and if it does the extraction is easier
 
The "Scandi Forum" mod at British Blades, where Scandiism is at its height, tried to explain that Nordic knives hardly ever were made that way; almost all have a secondary bevel, hollow grind, or convex grand. But an idea can have great power.

I have Rosilli, Enzo, Hell, and Mora blades are all zero grinds
Is it possible that their tradition of grinding predates the 'Scandi Forum' opinion?
 
I'm not saying the Scandi-grind is the only grind to baton with...I just want to put some evidence out on the table for those that are skeptical, unfamiliar, or even saying the Scandi grind is "too thin" or "too delicate" or "too keen" and cannot be used for batoning. It's baffling to me, but every once in a while I'll see someone post this on the forums.

YMMV

Daniel Koster
KosterKnives.com

Too thin? I've always argued that Scandi grinds are too thick. It doesn't surprise me that they would baton better, they would act better as a wedge than a flat grind. As for lasting longer, it's possible to choose the steel and hardness to maximize a thinner flat grind (or scandi) that would allow you to retain a thin edge without giving up much at all in strength and/or toughness.
 
Scandi's don't have a secondary bevel (except as an 'oops'). A scandi is a zero-bevel grind. If it has a micro-bevel, it is a saber grind.

FWIW

Dan

Am I understanding the flow of the discussion correctly in that we're discussing *edge* not blade grind?

If we're discussing edge, I don't want to de-rail the thread, but who can sharpen a Scandi grind BY HAND in the field or without a belt sander and keep it's perfect zero-bevel grind?

Unless machine ground/sharpened EVERY edge is going to have a more convex shape to it because humans lack the immovable perfection that a machine has in spades.
 
.... As for lasting longer, it's possible to choose the steel and hardness to maximize a thinner flat grind (or scandi) that would allow you to retain a thin edge without giving up much at all in strength and/or toughness.

Exactly. I think there are far too many other variables at play to simply say that one grind is better than the other for something like battoning.

But as others have mentioned, I've become a a big fan of convex-ground saber grinds for all of the above reasons and more.
 
If we are going to get down-n-dirty about micro-bevels....even my zero-bevel scandi-ground knives all have a slight convex "nano"-bevel to them because I strop them as the final step. This has been proven by others smarter than me (with fancier scientific equipment) over and over again. A stropped edge is a convex edge...even if stropped on a wheel!

Furthermore, it's about the sharpening method - and this is true whether it's a zero-bevel scandi or a convex grind (which is also a zero-bevel edge ;)) - if you sharpen the entire bevel (or most all of it) then you are creating a zero-bevel edge. If you put a secondary bevel on it, then it is not a zero-bevel edge.

There are certainly plenty of knives out there in the Scandinavian tradition that have an obtuse primary grind as well as a secondary bevel. When I made the comment quoted above I was referring to the intended sharpening method. If you put on a secondary bevel and then sharpen that alone, then what you really have is a saber grind....even if you market it as a scandi grind...or even if hundreds/thousands of nordic knives and their buyers are using it - past/present/future.

I just sharpened my scandi folder yesterday on a DMT bench stone on the fine grit side. I laid it down flat on the entire bevel and pushed it edge first until it developed a burr. I flipped sides to make sure the edge was even and uniform. Then I stropped it. That, is the difference. Is it convex somewhere along there? You betcha. ;) But the sharpening method remains the same.



But, this discussion was not intended to be about the actual atomic-level of the edge, but rather about what's "behind the edge".

Like I said above...it's baffling to me to hear someone say that a scandi grind is a delicate edge and shouldn't be used for batoning/etc.

Often those comments are based on "other factors" and human error....not on science/facts. This thread, I hope, will help put some of that to rest.

Dan
 
Back
Top