Survival knife ?

Since these knives are pretty much made one at the time would it be possible to have some without the fuller ?
I bet other people may also want that option

If thats the case Id rather one without the choil.. dont think thats gonna happen.. too much stop and go for Nate
 
Since these knives are pretty much made one at the time would it be possible to have some without the fuller ?
I bet other people may also want that option

I don't know much about the intricacies and details of the Carothers' production procedure, but I can not fathom that these limited production patterns are made one at a time, because the economics would not be feasible. In other words, no way in heck these knives would be offered to us at these prices if they were indeed made on a case by case basis. I do know that either Nathan or Mark (perhaps at time Jo too) go through each knife in the finalization step and before shipped out, but I always assumed that these come in limited batches and not a unique one at a time.
 
I'll take a stab at elaborating on construction, but with huge assistance of a piece from the web, which bolstered my own understanding of the machining process that brings to life these CPK knives we all love.

To begin with, I have no idea what process cuts the blanks (patterns) from the steel.Knives in general have gone from a cut-by-maker process, waterjet process, manual machining, who knows what other steps in between these, to a CNC machine process. I have no idea which process Nathan uses but imagine it's CNC.

Once the blanks (yes, this has gotta be batch origin) are created, I would imagine Nathan is using whatever CNC makes the most sense for the shop. I found something online that goes way beyond the quality of what further I would otherwise have written here, had I not found it, which is below:

It has to do with "Computer Numerical Controlled" machines.

"There are manual machines and CNC machines. On manual machines everything is
done by hand, from tool changes to tool position and adjustments. The CNC
machines are run with a program to machine a part. A programmer writes a
program using letters and numbers. The machine reads those figures and
coordinates to perform certain called-for operations such as
(turn/mill/drill/tap/grind/etc) able to hold close tolerances repeatedly. A CNC
machine operator basically puts an unfinished part in the machine, runs the part
and monitors tolerances to be held, makes necessary adjustments either to the
tools, the part or possibly the program so that the finished product conforms to
the customer requirements. "

In this case, Nathan's shop is the customer.

The above explanation makes it perhaps more understood that a lower price point can be achieved through automation, which is just common sense. The more that can be automated, the lower the pricepoint, but only in theory.
Some knife designs might require different degrees of machining. But for the purposes of this very short explanation, the CNC is all about removal of material and creation of the " basic" raw knife. I have a feeling that Nathan has some secret sauce to get more from the automation process than others, ie, more - or more efficient - steps/stops than others have been able to achieve. It's conceivable that CNC is used for attaching and shaping the handle material. I have no idea, any more than I do about the beveling. The one thing I do know is that it would, after bevel and some finishing, have a hand ground edge put on it.

And people wonder why I collect his knives. I personally think he may take the next leap from how it's done today, to how it is done in the future. And I have no idea what "it" could be, I just feel it.

Please feel free to add to or correct my errors in fact, if any.
 
Last edited:
I don't make one of anything. Well, usually. There is a Light Chopper variation at Dave Brown's with no fuller and the bolo shape straightened out for sheath production and a few one offs here and there. But generally speaking we get a design dialed in and then make multiples of it. I should do a WIP at some point to show our process. Some things are easier than folks might expect (milling bevels isn't that difficult) and some things you might not even think about are much more difficult than you might expect (setting up to mill bevels is a motherfucker involving compound angles, fixtures, stop setup and measurements and code so long it won't fit in the control and has to be drip fed). Removing the choil would impact four setups (side one, side two, belly trim out and final trimout, basically everything but the bevels) but removing the fuller would simply be skipping a few tools and shouldn't require any new code at all. It would be easy. But without modifying the blade thickness to compensate it would add weight to the blade and move the balance center out into the blade. It's unnecessary weight that serves no purpose and I'm not real keen on that.
 
When I think about machining, I only understand the kind of basics the article provided, but it made me realize I had at least gotten my foundation right. But the bevel kept me wondering. I was thinking about how it looked, how any bevel would look - while I should have been thinking with a programmer's mind, which I do not possess. Great to know, makes perfect sense to me now. The machine cuts, but that it's really the code that does the work, so much more than the machine.
 
When I think about machining, I only understand the kind of basics the article provided, but it made me realize I had at least gotten my foundation right. But the bevel kept me wondering. I was thinking about how it looked, how any bevel would look - while I should have been thinking with a programmer's mind, which I do not possess. Great to know, makes perfect sense to me now. The machine cuts, but that it's really the code that does the work, so much more than the machine.


We have a number of machine tools here at the shop that are used in knife production, but most importantly are three CNC vertical machining centers. Industrial machine tools of this nature are cumbersome and expensive and not generally used by knifemakers to the extent that we do. Our smallest mill is a Romi D400 "minimill" that weighs several tons. We wouldn't be setup to do this for knife production except we already had this infrastructure for other machine shop work.

One problem with CNC is it generally requires a good CAD model from which to apply tool paths and ultimately create GGode to program the mills. Otherwise manual programing is limited to relatively simple geometry. This means that your geometry is largely limited to what you are able to model in CAD, and CAD is not a great environment for the creative process. So, many "CAD knives" look like CAD knives. And, since you can't feel what you see on the screen there are a lot of ergonomic sins committed by midtec makers designing in CAD. It's almost unavoidable.

To avoid this we design and create variations outside of CAD to dial in a design before moving into CAD. Then we prototype and tweak that until it's how I want it. It's a lengthy process and doing it to the extend that we do is a luxury that most don't have. Edit: This is the reason why there are almost no straight lines and constant radius arcs in our designs. They're traced from hand work and refined with NURBS.

We're all limited to our tools, to some extent. That's true of those who forge, those who grind, machinists and CNC gurus. There are two common limitations I see in a lot of other people's work that I try to avoid. One is limiting one's self to straight forward and simple setups. Experience as a production and prototype machinist and thinking outside of the box allows cuts and machining strategies that some might not consider. The other big limit I see people running into is the geometry they form in the computer. Years of working inside the modeling program as a plastic product design consultant gave me a familiarity and competency in the CAD tool that I think is pretty uncommon in the industry.

So, I think the things that make us different are the specialized manufacturing technologies, an art and engineering background and deep experience in machining, manufacturing and product development and R&D. I try to use these tools not as a short cut or to simplify the process, but to expand the capabilities and reduce the limitation of the approach I choose to work with. Sometimes we're beating our heads against a wall, but I feel that sometimes we move beyond the "norm".
 
Last edited:
Nathan, that second paragraph got right to what my thoughts are on so much of mid tech. It explained away ALOT.
 
I am keen on you building it the way you think it should be-Your designs have not disappointed me yet! Fuller ON!!!
I don't make one of anything. Well, usually. There is a Light Chopper variation at Dave Brown's with no fuller and the bolo shape straightened out for sheath production and a few one offs here and there. But generally speaking we get a design dialed in and then make multiples of it. I should do a WIP at some point to show our process. Some things are easier than folks might expect (milling bevels isn't that difficult) and some things you might not even think about are much more difficult than you might expect (setting up to mill bevels is a motherfucker involving compound angles, fixtures, stop setup and measurements and code so long it won't fit in the control and has to be drip fed). Removing the choil would impact four setups (side one, side two, belly trim out and final trimout, basically everything but the bevels) but removing the fuller would simply be skipping a few tools and shouldn't require any new code at all. It would be easy. But without modifying the blade thickness to compensate it would add weight to the blade and move the balance center out into the blade. It's unnecessary weight that serves no purpose and I'm not real keen on that.
 
Forward balance could make it perform better in chopping tasks. Probably a good thing in a survival blade.
Personally I'm not to concerned about saving a few ounces (fuller)
 
Nathan, this being a Survival Knife, any chance I could see some orange G10 scales? I don't like the idea of being able to lose a knife in the woods. I've been processing a deer before and laid down my earth tone knife and it took me a minute to find it. Also, I just like orange. :D
 
Forward balance could make it perform better in chopping tasks. Probably a good thing in a survival blade.
Personally I'm not to concerned about saving a few ounces (fuller)

I understand why you think that, because there is a strong correlation and it is largely true, but there is more to it than simply being tip heavy. What it boils down to is having mass towards the ends of the knife to maximize its moment of inertia which is the ability to resist changes in rotation. To visualize what I'm trying to describe: a knife being used as a chopper is being swung until it impacts and then (unless the point of impact was at the COP) the blade begins to rotate and this rotation often represents lost energy, or impact energy that isn't going into the cut, and weight at the ends of the piece reduce this. I don't know if what I'm saying is understandable, but it is true and one counter intuitive effect of it is a weighted pommel increases chopping performance in much the same way as a weightier tip, because the mass on the ends of a blade help it resist changes in rotation which prevents the cut from being deflected. So a knife with a neutral balance, but weight towards its ends, can still be an effective chopper. I'm going into this because I want to dispel the myth that a knife has to be tip heavy to be an effective chopper. It tends to be true, but it's not a rule.

So, to maximize the effective chopping power of a knife of a given length and weight you want to distribute the weight towards the ends if possible. This is one reason why bolos and kukri are shaped the way they are. As knife designers Lorien and I have to look at ways to optimize a knife that is going to see many different uses, but one thing that is clear is that a neutral balance and light weight are nice properties in a knife that are largely at odds with being a chopper, but distributing weight to the ends of the piece helps with that. And one tool we have to distribute weight is a fuller. By going with thicker stock and removing weight from the center of the blade but leaving the tip solid we are essentially distributing weight towards the tip. Similar efforts with the design and skeletonizing of the tang give us some tools to help us distribute weight in a design. Ultimately a design always represents compromises for various uses, but when we're finished with it, it is a deliberately tuned package.
 
Nathan your extremely thoughtful and very knowledgeable responses, devoid of any arrogance and derisiveness, is very much appreciated. Not only we are buying some wonderfully designed and executed top notch blades from You (and yours) at great values, but those of us who hand around in here learn so much from your input which if paid attention to, is an invaluable lesson onto itself. I thank you for being so much more transparent and forthcoming with information and knowledge than many others in your field.
 
I understand why you think that, because there is a strong correlation and it is largely true, but there is more to it than simply being tip heavy. What it boils down to is having mass towards the ends of the knife to maximize its moment of inertia which is the ability to resist changes in rotation. To visualize what I'm trying to describe: a knife being used as a chopper is being swung until it impacts and then (unless the point of impact was at the COP) the blade begins to rotate and this rotation often represents lost energy, or impact energy that isn't going into the cut, and weight at the ends of the piece reduce this. I don't know if what I'm saying is understandable, but it is true and one counter intuitive effect of it is a weighted pommel increases chopping performance in much the same way as a weightier tip, because the mass on the ends of a blade help it resist changes in rotation which prevents the cut from being deflected. So a knife with a neutral balance, but weight towards its ends, can still be an effective chopper. I'm going into this because I want to dispel the myth that a knife has to be tip heavy to be an effective chopper. It tends to be true, but it's not a rule.

So, to maximize the effective chopping power of a knife of a given length and weight you want to distribute the weight towards the ends if possible. This is one reason why bolos and kukri are shaped the way they are. As knife designers Lorien and I have to look at ways to optimize a knife that is going to see many different uses, but one thing that is clear is that a neutral balance and light weight are nice properties in a knife that are largely at odds with being a chopper, but distributing weight to the ends of the piece helps with that. And one tool we have to distribute weight is a fuller. By going with thicker stock and removing weight from the center of the blade but leaving the tip solid we are essentially distributing weight towards the tip. Similar efforts with the design and skeletonizing of the tang give us some tools to help us distribute weight in a design. Ultimately a design always represents compromises for various uses, but when we're finished with it, it is a deliberately tuned package.

Thanks for the in depth explanations
I am seriously interested in your future large chopper. I think your HT and work in geometry and balance will especially be obvious in a large competition type chopper
 
Nathan your extremely thoughtful and very knowledgeable responses, devoid of any arrogance and derisiveness, is very much appreciated. Not only we are buying some wonderfully designed and executed top notch blades from You (and yours) at great values, but those of us who hand around in here learn so much from your input which if paid attention to, is an invaluable lesson onto itself. I thank you for being so much more transparent and forthcoming with information and knowledge than many others in your field.


Well said. And seconded.
 
Nathan your extremely thoughtful and very knowledgeable responses, devoid of any arrogance and derisiveness, is very much appreciated. Not only we are buying some wonderfully designed and executed top notch blades from You (and yours) at great values, but those of us who hand around in here learn so much from your input which if paid attention to, is an invaluable lesson onto itself. I thank you for being so much more transparent and forthcoming with information and knowledge than many others in your field.

Now apply the lesson you just learned when you evaluate your comparable blades and then share the comparison with us in the form of a thought out review when you are done!
 
I understand why you think that, because there is a strong correlation and it is largely true, but there is more to it than simply being tip heavy. What it boils down to is having mass towards the ends of the knife to maximize its moment of inertia which is the ability to resist changes in rotation. To visualize what I'm trying to describe: a knife being used as a chopper is being swung until it impacts and then (unless the point of impact was at the COP) the blade begins to rotate and this rotation often represents lost energy, or impact energy that isn't going into the cut, and weight at the ends of the piece reduce this. I don't know if what I'm saying is understandable, but it is true and one counter intuitive effect of it is a weighted pommel increases chopping performance in much the same way as a weightier tip, because the mass on the ends of a blade help it resist changes in rotation which prevents the cut from being deflected. So a knife with a neutral balance, but weight towards its ends, can still be an effective chopper. I'm going into this because I want to dispel the myth that a knife has to be tip heavy to be an effective chopper. It tends to be true, but it's not a rule.

So, to maximize the effective chopping power of a knife of a given length and weight you want to distribute the weight towards the ends if possible. This is one reason why bolos and kukri are shaped the way they are. As knife designers Lorien and I have to look at ways to optimize a knife that is going to see many different uses, but one thing that is clear is that a neutral balance and light weight are nice properties in a knife that are largely at odds with being a chopper, but distributing weight to the ends of the piece helps with that. And one tool we have to distribute weight is a fuller. By going with thicker stock and removing weight from the center of the blade but leaving the tip solid we are essentially distributing weight towards the tip. Similar efforts with the design and skeletonizing of the tang give us some tools to help us distribute weight in a design. Ultimately a design always represents compromises for various uses, but when we're finished with it, it is a deliberately tuned package.

Thank you for that insight. Had a chance to use your light chopper and came away impressed. Look forward to seeing your future designs and to owning a CPK one day.
 
Just found this thread and this knife looks to be an excellent take with me everywhere knife. Good size, heft, blade length, blade height, grind, point and I like the fuller too.
An essential, versatile tool I can pick and go with and know it will handle whatever I encounter, be it hunting, camping, 4-wheeling, traveling, etc.

Very nice, looking forward to when this knife becomes available, would love to have one and see how well this knife and I could get along.
 
received notification that protos are en route, (least I think that's what's in there). Will be filling you in with pictures and stuff within the next couple of weeks. Have some wood to split, pallets to break down, some throwing, some gardening, some trailwork- all sorts of this n that to do around here, should get a good sense of where this tool's at within the next month or two
 
Back
Top