- Joined
- Jul 23, 2007
- Messages
- 3,821
I'm wondering if there was any updates concerning the survival knife model ?
Any rough specs on that knife ?
Thanks
Any rough specs on that knife ?
Thanks
11.8" total length, 6.5" blade, 12.9 ounces, .220" thick, .020" edge before sharpening, 20 DPS, Delta 3V at HRC 60.5. Elements of the blade geometry are similar to the Field Knife and there are some similarities with the handle on the LC. Moderate primary grind geometry and edge thickness and a robust spine will make it a very durable knife that will cut well and have some chopping ability as well. It's not exactly light weight, but it will be the most durable knife we've produced since the Shiv (Heavy Chopper prototypes notwithstanding). We're working on prototypes now.
Can't wait to see this one!
Will these have a fuller similar to the Light Chopper, or is that unnecessary on a blade this size?
Please no fuller please.
The 90o spine would be very useful... it's a survival knife after all: maximum function
11.8" total length, 6.5" blade, 12.9 ounces, .220" thick, .020" edge before sharpening, 20 DPS, Delta 3V at HRC 60.5. Elements of the blade geometry are similar to the Field Knife and there are some similarities with the handle on the LC. Moderate primary grind geometry and edge thickness and a robust spine will make it a very durable knife that will cut well and have some chopping ability as well. It's not exactly light weight, but it will be the most durable knife we've produced since the Shiv (Heavy Chopper prototypes notwithstanding). We're working on prototypes now.
From your description Nathan, I can only say...
Come to daddy sweetness!!!
I'm in for one, and please let there be a pre-order (since I SUCK at ever getting anything in a sales thread!)
It wasn't necessarily a "must have", but given the stock thickness I felt it made sense to incorporate a fuller into this design.
I think a spine without a chamfer would be easy enough. Just want to make sure that there's chamfer where it needs to be. If one wants more, it's likely easier to apply a chamfer after the fact than it is to remove the chamfer and apply a hard angle in its place
Exactly. Smooth on the thumb ramp/jimping and 90* on the rest where your thumb won't be anyway would be awesome.
For a given a weight and amount of material a blade with a fuller is stiffer and stronger because it allows thicker stock to be used at the spine (increased section modulus). That stiffer blade will pry better, the thicker spine will tolerate batoning better. Functionally, a fuller allows less material to do more work. So when using thick stock I can either make a bolo shape, drill holes, accept un-useful weight, or cut a fuller. Be aware the grind height is driven by a selected (functional) primary grind angle, not aesthetics, so a blade with a given blade depth and stock thickness is going to have a flat on it. It makes sense to skeletonize a thick blade to remove material that isn't pulling its weight and a fuller is a part of that process.