You can only have ONE with you

A Busse Heavy Heart with Snakeskin or a Fusion Battle Mistress.

One of those two would always be with me afield.

.
 
allenC said:
I've never been in any forest where there wasn't plenty of firewood and logs already on the ground.
Click to expand...

Firewood and logs on the ground! Nice place for a hike! In the rainy forests of my area there are fallen trees but we still have to cut and split for dry wood.

For such a situation (one tool for a while) i wouldn't be capricious: an axe or a strong 8 inches blade would put my mind at rest about my future.

dantzk.
 
As far as those who question my "only ONE" stipulation, I was thinking of something like Paulsen's book Hatchet where the plane sinks and you might only have what was on your belt already. It could also happen if your pack was lost down a ravine or a waterfall. It really is just my way to force everyone to identify their most critical edged tool.

With reference to the Mountain Men, they are what got me into knives many years ago in the first place. I've read everything on them I can find and I don't think it would be cut and dried in favor of an axe. Many traveled without an axe; none were without a large fixed blade knife, often two. I think in balance the large knife would win among them (and among their Indian contemporaries too).
 
Years ago Kris Janowski wrote an article (American Survival Guide I think) and said he`d have to pick the Busse Steel Heart 2 for a sheath knife and the Benchmade AFCK as a folder if he could only have one of each.

If it was me and I could only have one, it`d be the Busse. INFI steel is not meant to be stainless....but it usually is VERY rust resistant.His blades are thick enough to stand up to batoning all day long. The cryo-temper means they keep an edge longer and are easier to sharpen.(I know, it sounds contradictory but trust me it`s not. I just don`t want to hijack the thread explaining it.) Because the blade isthicker it hasenough weight to chop like a longer blade, but since the grindgoes all the way to the spine it has niceedge geometry and doesn`t feel like you`re chopping with a brick. The blade is wide from edge to spine so you can choke up on the point to do any fine workor hold it by the handle and the spine to use like a drawknife. The handle scales are damn near indestructacle, but even if They cracked and came off (worst case scenario)...the handle is a full tang. By that I mean the tang is the same size and shape as the handle, not shaped like a chopstick or some peice of threaded rod. The knife is large enough to do some digging with if I had to as well. And if I ever did make it back to what passes for civilization.....Busse would probably buy me a beer.That`s how he rolls.
 
;)
XMP said:
As far as those who question my "only ONE" stipulation, I was thinking of something like Paulsen's book Hatchet where the plane sinks and you might only have what was on your belt already. It could also happen if your pack was lost down a ravine or a waterfall. It really is just my way to force everyone to identify their most critical edged tool.

With reference to the Mountain Men, they are what got me into knives many years ago in the first place. I've read everything on them I can find and I don't think it would be cut and dried in favor of an axe. Many traveled without an axe; none were without a large fixed blade knife, often two. I think in balance the large knife would win among them (and among their Indian contemporaries too).
Click to expand...

Never read the book but if you want to go that way then I definately would go with the howling rat. If I were to pick one tool and it was an axe, then it wouldn't fit on my belt.
 
tknife said:
No self respecting member here would ever be stuck with only one knife! :D
If I was in a heavily forested area, I'd probably choose my GB hunters axe. It's easy to choke up and use for all kinds of tasks. Anywhere else, I'd choose the knife in my sig. :thumbup:

As a side though, I bet you could get by even in that situation without needing to chop even one single time.
Click to expand...

Funny. I began to think about your first statement (not that I have any self respect) and began checking myself, my man-bag, and my car to find out exactly how many blades I do have around me everyday. While counting the one's that I knew about, I found my old SwissChamp in my desk at work and lo and behold, in my glove compartment, an Endura I thought was gone forever.

It was almost like getting two new knives. I've been playing with them all morning...remembering why I bought them in the first place. I'm going to start "hiding" more blades.
 
runningboar said:
Easy pickins run out? Are your legs broke?

Sure an axe cuts meat so does a Buick, we are not talking about cutting meat we are talking about preparing meat to be cut. Chris

Well maybe not a Buick. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't dis' Buicks, man. Why, when it's running, my wife's Century may be the finest whitetail hunting implement ever invented. They seem drawn to it. Also does a fine job on squirrels and possum...does a better job on birds on the wing than a Benelli.

I wish they had a Boone and Crockett category for roadkill.
 
SpookyPistolero said:
PB080003.jpg


It's the sharpest blade I've ever handled (now) and I don't enjoy trusting a folder to stand up to all the possible abuses it might have to. An axe would be nice, but it just won't cut it for the smaller stuff.
Click to expand...

It's beautiful...what is it?

Never mind. Just saw your earlier reply to same question.
 
XMP said:
As far as those who question my "only ONE" stipulation, I was thinking of something like Paulsen's book Hatchet where the plane sinks and you might only have what was on your belt already. It could also happen if your pack was lost down a ravine or a waterfall. It really is just my way to force everyone to identify their most critical edged tool.

With reference to the Mountain Men, they are what got me into knives many years ago in the first place. I've read everything on them I can find and I don't think it would be cut and dried in favor of an axe. Many traveled without an axe; none were without a large fixed blade knife, often two. I think in balance the large knife would win among them (and among their Indian contemporaries too).
Click to expand...
In that case you should have worded the question something like:
"You are on a chartered flight on a hunting trip and are carrying some of your gear (including a knife). The plane hits a flock of geese and goes down, sinking into a lake on northern British Columbia. You just get out and swim to shore leaving all your other gear in the aircraft. No one else survived the crash. What gear do you have on you when you wade onto the beach? What knife do you have? It's two hours to dusk and it's going to be a cold night; how will you start a fire and make shelter? What other gear is in your pockets (remember, no backpack, just you and your clothes (soaking wet BTW).

Now there's a scenario.
 
XMP said:
From my perspective tools on these two ends of the spectrum excell at some things and [almost] fail at others [YMMV:) ]. That is why I think midsized fixed blades offer the greatest utility. Out of my current toy collection;) I would probably choose a Busse SFNO. It is big enough to chop. Tough enough to pound and pry. But still handy enough, even if not ideal, to do bushcraft and food prep.
Click to expand...

+1

I think this is a good choice in this scenerio. The 7" blade at .220" thick is a good all around knife and you could carry it on your side fairly easily. It may not chop as well as some larger blades but will get the job done if necessary (and it would not be like you didn't have the time). It is my numero uno knife right now until I find something more versatile.

Just my .02 cents.
 
I would cheat, of course... given the current criteria:

When I go into the woods I wear my Gossman knife- variation of Scott's Tusker- 6.5"X 3/16X 1 3/4 no choil O1 steel, sheath is leather with firesteel loop, Light My Fire Army model- sheath is wrapped with para that retains the steel and traps a Cold Steel Bird and Trout with the little plastic blade cover. It will soon have a DMT CC hone glued to the back(GREAT tip I just saw) . This is what I wear in the woods.

What I wear daily is a NWA Sportsman in O1, 6" 3/16 O1 in leather sheath(I did not think to ask Nick for a loop...). It is lighter/smaller but a very capable knife. My son wears his NWA Skinner 4" 3/16 O1. I would not feel bad about trusting any of these blades. I will try to come back with pics.

2Door
 
A pair of ice-skates. Hey, it was good enough for Tom Hanks.

I would choose a multi-tool, but more than likely I would have my Ka-bar on my belt and a folder in my pocket.
 
Randall Model 18

with hollow handle filled with flint, hooks, sinkers, swivel, fire starters.

I would then wrap the handle with fishing line, brass wire, hootchie cord and electrical tape............

I would get rid of the supplied sharpening stone and replace it with a small Swiss Army knife (tinker model) and glue a flat diamond hone to the back of the sheath.............is this cheating
 
Dog Man said:
The mountain men of the 1800s, who were experts in your scenario, would have chosen an axe, if they could only have one edged tool. I'll vote with them.
Click to expand...
There are a few things to consider when using the mountainmen of the 1800's as examples of survival experts...

1) They were not merely surviving until rescued or surviving until they could hike back to civilization.
They were pioneering and homesteading with no intentions of ever "going back".
They were building a place where they could raise a family.

In a survival situation the object is to either wait for rescue if rescue is likely, or hike out on your own back to civilization...not homestead.


2) They usually did not carry everything they owned on their back.
They often used mules and horses to carry heavy provisions.
And they would travel back to trading posts and forts for additional supplies as needed, or trade with the natives when possible.


3) When choosing their blades, they often chose knives that would work well for fighting other humans...hostile natives and such.
This was especially important considering that the firearms of the time were typically muzzle-loaders and the natives seldom had firearms of their own.

Today "hostile natives" are not much of a problem...and the ones that do exists have modern rifles and pistols.
So it's probably safe to leave the 12" bowie knife at home.;)


4) The mountainmen of old were also rather limited in their choice of edged tools...there just wasn't that much of a selection around.

I suspect that the mountainmen of old would have appreciated the modern multi-tool very much.
They probably would have been astounded that you can have so many useful tools in such a small easy-to-carry package.


5) The land was young and forest were deeper in those days.
These days, in the "lower 48", it's difficult to walk ten miles in a straight line without encountering some form or civilization (a road, a fence, a farm, a housing subdivision, a hiking trail, power transmission lines, railroad tracks, etc...).
The moutainmen of old could travel for days without encountering another person or even signs of civilization.
Sadly, that's very rare these days.


6) The mountainmen also would carefully CHOOSE where they would make their homes.
They would choose an area with freshwater, available timber, and plenty of game.

In a survival situation you don't get to choose your terrain and location.


7) Many mountainmen did not survive...plenty of them died.
They lived an incredibly harsh existance and I would dare say the majority did not live long enough to die of "old age".
 
allenC said:
There are a few things to consider when using the mountainmen of the 1800's as examples of survival experts...

1) They were not merely surviving until rescued or surviving until they could hike back to civilization.
They were pioneering and homesteading with no intentions of ever "going back".
They were building a place where they could raise a family.

In a survival situation the object is to either wait for rescue if rescue is likely, or hike out on your own back to civilization...not homestead.


2) They usually did not carry everything they owned on their back.
They often used mules and horses to carry heavy provisions.
And they would travel back to trading posts and forts for additional supplies as needed, or trade with the natives when possible.


3) When choosing their blades, they often chose knives that would work well for fighting other humans...hostile natives and such.
This was especially important considering that the firearms of the time were typically muzzle-loaders and the natives seldom had firearms of their own.

Today "hostile natives" are not much of a problem...and the ones that do exists have modern rifles and pistols.
So it's probably safe to leave the 12" bowie knife at home.;)


4) The mountainmen of old were also rather limited in their choice of edged tools...there just wasn't that much of a selection around.

I suspect that the mountainmen of old would have appreciated the modern multi-tool very much.
They probably would have been astounded that you can have so many useful tools in such a small easy-to-carry package.


5) The land was young and forest were deeper in those days.
These days, in the "lower 48", it's difficult to walk ten miles in a straight line without encountering some form or civilization (a road, a fence, a farm, a housing subdivision, a hiking trail, power transmission lines, railroad tracks, etc...).
The moutainmen of old could travel for days without encountering another person or even signs of civilization.
Sadly, that's very rare these days.


6) The mountainmen also would carefully CHOOSE where they would make their homes.
They would choose an area with freshwater, available timber, and plenty of game.

In a survival situation you don't get to choose your terrain and location.


7) Many mountainmen did not survive...plenty of them died.
They lived an incredibly harsh existance and I would dare say the majority did not live long enough to die of "old age".
Click to expand...
All good points, except the original scenario:
XMP said:
So here is my scenario/question: you are in a long term survival/bush-living situation. Imagine Robinson Crusoe or Paulsen's Hatchet story in a North American woodland setting. You aren't going to be rescued in 48 hours; in fact, it may be months or never. You'll need to construct shelter, prepare firewood, start fires, trap, fish, and do whatever else it takes to thrive in this situation. In other words it is a longterm, but unplanned wilderness living situation.
Click to expand...
Sounds pretty close to mountain man circumstances, and makes most of the answers in this thread, frankly, silly.

But, hey, wander on over to my valley with your multitool, and I'll lend you my ax :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top