Why is the B.R. Canadian Special so thick?

redsquid2

redsquid2

Free-Range Cheese Baby
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
Joined
Aug 31, 2011
Messages
3,117
The BRKT Web site lists it as .170" thick. What is it used for? Why is it so thick?
 
redsquid2 said:
The BRKT Web site lists it as .170" thick. What is it used for? Why is it so thick?
Click to expand...

Because the tacticool idiots have taken over the world, and all knives need to be capable of opening armored cars by using a handy rock for a baton.

Edit to add: Sorry, I was just in General. I should know better than to open a thread there.
 
Not sure as to why they chose that thickness but it cuts like the devil anyway. Great knife!

6.jpg
 
I think yablanowitz' explanation makes sense. Coolness and whatever is popular.

CanadianSpecial-Black_Canvas.jpg
 
Most BR knives are very thick and that's one of the reasons I've gone off them.....
 
My BRKT aurora is the same thickness. I've noticed that .17 seems to be the standard thickness for their 4" knives (expect for GK/Bravo). Keep in mind that it's convex ground. The CS's secondary purpose is a camp knife so there's wood processing in their somewhere.

a_midnight_elder_309_95_ksf.jpg
 
I can't really answer why they chose 0.170" thick, but my schrade little finger (USA) is just about the same thickness in a smaller blade and it is my favorite fixed blade knife of the ones I have now (the Lady Killer is probably going to take that spot now that I have it though). That Bark River Canadian special is on my "wish list" along with one of their golocks.

Ed J
 
Doing google searches, I got the impression it is a favorite all-around do-everything knife, even moreso than the Northstar. I guess the forward weight and convex grind make it capable of chopping, while the wide bevel makes it also a skinner.

Still, a heftier knife than I would personally need.

I did a little batoning over the weekend with my 3.5" puukko, not even 1/8" thick, and it did fine.

7707963416_6288636cee_b.jpg
 
While a good knife, it is too thick for me, and with thick blocky scales it is not balanced for chopping IMO. But thick for battoning seems to be the MO. Although I've never had problems with any of my 3/32" long blades. I think it is the over built "survival" mindset that the blade has to appear indestructible, as others have mentioned.
 
In case you don't know, the original design is from Grohman knives and is considered a design classic both within and outside the knife industry. The bark river bastardization is a crime.
 
brownshoe said:
In case you don't know, the original design is from Grohman knives and is considered a design classic both within and outside the knife industry. The bark river bastardization is a crime.
Click to expand...

Cannot argue against that.:)
 
While I like BR quite a bit, I do agree they are too thick to be great slicers. Sure they cut as they still get very sharp, but they are unwieldy for food prep and carving. They do work well for wood prep but I do that for pure fun, not function :)
 
brownshoe said:
In case you don't know, the original design is from Grohman knives and is considered a design classic both within and outside the knife industry. The bark river bastardization is a crime.
Click to expand...

So post a picture so we can see the significant differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top