Off Topic Thick vs Thin Knife...

Thick/Thin

  • Total voters
    110
Dean51 said:
Thin.
I have a Benchmade 586 with M390, it's a reasonably good slicer. It's .100 thick at the spine and .015 behind the edge. That is about as thick as I will tolerate on a folding knife. My D2 Barlow is 63 thick at the spine and .015 behind the edge. With out a doubt it will out slice that benchmade.

I carry a 3” Widgy or a Nite Ize on my key ring.

I won't sacrifice cutting ability, just to have a knife I can use as a pry bar.
This is just my opinion, that works for my uses.
Click to expand...
So what are you implying, that Zero Tolerance markets their .16" m390 to people who would do such a thing?
 
Channeling my Bill Burr simpleton voice, "dur, right tool for the right job!" Yeah, as long as it cuts.
 
Yonose said:
So what are you implying, that Zero Tolerance markets their .16" m390 to people who would do such a thing?
Click to expand...

I was not implying anything about Zero Tolerance's marketing but now the you bring it up. :)
This is what I am saying. You don't have to give up anything.
My two M390 Combo's that weighs less, cut better and pry better than the the ZT 0801BRZ

3" TI Widgy, .271 oz + benchmade 586, 3.85 = Total weight 4.121 oz
3" Ti Widgy, .271 oz + Ritter Mini-RSK Mk1, 2.68 oz = Total weight 3.08 oz
ZT 0801BRZ = Total weight 5.85 oz
 
Thin for the kitchen, meat prep, skinning, butchering, etc.

Medium thick (1/8 to 3/16) for camp knives, wood processing, and bushcraft type use)
 
I lean towards thicker these days. About 10 years ago I was using a wood splitter and a half-split twisted piece of birch got stuck on the wedge. I had to pull it off by hand and when I did the partial split closed down on my finger. There I am with 20lbs of wood clamped to my finger and I'm way out in the woods, I pulled until I felt skin tearing but it wouldn't let me go. Only tool I had was my SOG Trident, I had that blade bent at about 45º and thought for sure it would snap but I was desperate (hurt like stink). It didn't snap, I got my poor finger free. But it was too close for comfort, I don't want to worry my knife will snap when I need it so my EDC is now a stouter BK14.......that, and the other reason is in 2012 the lock failed on that Trident and it closed on me so I now have a nice scar on my index finger. SOG replaced the broken lock and I eBayed it.....I like fixed blades now.
 
Dean51 said:
I was not implying anything about Zero Tolerance's marketing but now the you bring it up. :)
This is what I am saying. You don't have to give up anything.
My two M390 Combo's that weighs less, cut better and pry better than the the ZT 0801BRZ
I
3" TI Widgy, .271 oz + benchmade 586, 3.85 = Total weight 4.121 oz
3" Ti Widgy, .271 oz + Ritter Mini-RSK Mk1, 2.68 oz = Total weight 3.08 oz
ZT 0801BRZ = Total weight 5.85 oz
Click to expand...
That's brilliant, never realized that portable pry-bar existed! 4" may not be long enough for many or even most applications(blade alone a ZT' are same length but include a handle)--never once used one as such, just playing daddy's advocate! However I have to thank you for that as once mine arrives I will feel a lot better flying commercial Airlines! (Now I just need a discrete, compact and affordable under-the jacket parachute!) For out in the wilderness though I don't think there's a better edc prybar/knife than the ranger rd9.
 
I voted for thin. The magic of Victorinox SAK's is that the blade is so thin that they still cut even when the edge is dull as a butterknife.
I might be wrong but it seems to me anyway that a thin blade is easier to sharpen.
Ultimately having a knife that cuts is most important as pretty much anything else can be improvised.
With all that said, I carry a Barlow with a wharnecliff main and a caplifter/screwdriver. I find the screwdriver can handle minor prying tasks.
 
Thin. If my thin knife can't handle the job, the job requires a different tool.
:D
 
I prefer my knives right down the middle, hefty enough of a blade to handle some light chopping or prying if needed but thin enough to cut well. If I need a super thin blade I'll use a razor blade.
 
Thick...I can slice reasonably well with a well sharpened thick blade, but a thin blade won't chop/baton effectively. Plus I like something built like a tank that I can beat on and not worry about.
 
I picked in the middle because sometimes I want the lateral stiffness that comes from a thicker spine, so the cut isn't steered by a bendy blade. For slicing, thin wins, but sometimes a little more steel allows me to better follow a line through the media being cut. I make small cuts in a lot of wood, and a stiffer blade gives better control there.
 
Which one would you consider thin?

Blade_comp.JPG



I prefer knives with a thin edge and either a thin-stock blade or a wide blade to compensate for the thickness (alternatively hollow grind).
 
Really not a fan of hollow grind for cutting anything as tall or taller than the blade. FFG or Convex do so much better for slicing food or cardboard (for example) where the hollow wedges up. As such I don't buy the 'hollow is the best of both worlds' argument. I have a feeling that it's the worst of all worlds. Not strong enough for hard outdoors work and wedges up slicing anything thick. I think I'd be happy putting up a well made FFG/Convex fixie against a good hollow grind blade of the same thickness either in the kitchen or processing wood outdoors. I believe I know which would involve less effort in general and be safer to work with.

The following is just my own extremely cynical musing but I've often wondered whether the current popularity of hollow grind is just a way to make overly massive and overly thick tacti-cool blades actually be able to cut anything. :D (ducks for cover)
 
miso2 said:
Which one would you consider thin?

Blade_comp.JPG



I prefer knives with a thin edge and either a thin-stock blade or a wide blade to compensate for the thickness (alternatively hollow grind).
Click to expand...
The Pm2's I have are listed as .14" thick, though I haven't checked my caliper. Which model is .12"? Or does blade stock mean something different?
 
Pomsbz said:
Really not a fan of hollow grind for cutting anything as tall or taller than the blade. FFG or Convex do so much better for slicing food or cardboard (for example) where the hollow wedges up. As such I don't buy the 'hollow is the best of both worlds' argument. I have a feeling that it's the worst of all worlds. Not strong enough for hard outdoors work and wedges up slicing anything thick. I think I'd be happy putting up a well made FFG/Convex fixie against a good hollow grind blade of the same thickness either in the kitchen or processing wood outdoors. I believe I know which would involve less effort in general and be safer to work with.

The following is just my own extremely cynical musing but I've often wondered whether the current popularity of hollow grind is just a way to make overly massive and overly thick tacti-cool blades actually be able to cut anything. :D (ducks for cover)
Click to expand...
Buck 119s and 120s from the 60s and 70s were hollow ground, not sure why
 
Yonose said:
Buck 119s and 120s from the 60s and 70s were hollow ground, not sure why
Click to expand...
It's also an easy way to mass manufacture. I saw recently that their stockman's used to be FFG though now they are hollow.
 
A thicker blade can be a disadvantage in a survival situation. Performing knife tasks with a thick geometry will cost much more precious energy than doing the same with a knife actually designed for knife tasks.
 
Pomsbz said:
Really not a fan of hollow grind for cutting anything as tall or taller than the blade. FFG or Convex do so much better for slicing food or cardboard (for example) where the hollow wedges up. As such I don't buy the 'hollow is the best of both worlds' argument. I have a feeling that it's the worst of all worlds. Not strong enough for hard outdoors work and wedges up slicing anything thick. I think I'd be happy putting up a well made FFG/Convex fixie against a good hollow grind blade of the same thickness either in the kitchen or processing wood outdoors. I believe I know which would involve less effort in general and be safer to work with.

The following is just my own extremely cynical musing but I've often wondered whether the current popularity of hollow grind is just a way to make overly massive and overly thick tacti-cool blades actually be able to cut anything. :D (ducks for cover)
Click to expand...

Hollow grinds don't really "wedge" in most mediums... While in cardboard they are not at their best, thick cardboard being a tricky material, they still don't "wedge" all that severely even in that, although you have to be careful of the occasional acceleration...: A comparably thick convex would be a little more predictable, but that would be about it.

As for burying itself in thick materials while chopping deep into wood, the effect of the Hollow Grind's "wedging" action is beneficial if the Sabre Hollow Grind is set low enough and the blade is heavy and thick enough: The "wedging" sends wood chips flying just like a thick axe, but with the added versatility of fine cutting... In fact for chopping wood, most Sabre Hollow Grinds are not heavy enough and sabre ground low enough to get that benefit...

Overlooked is that, over decades of wear, hollow grinds stay the exact same thickness at the edge, while all other grinds lose geometry acuteness and thicken behind the edge on every single sharpening: Other grinds need really wide blades, or really wafer thin edges, to minimize this geometry change over time...


Pomsbz said:
I've often wondered whether the current popularity of hollow grind is just a way to make overly massive
Click to expand...

I suppose you are only talking about folders here, but if you include in this fixed blades, then I can only say you have got to be kidding...

Look at the factory fixed blade makers that offer mostly, or almost exclusively, convex or flat grinds: Blackjack, old and new, Fallkniven, Bark River, Busse, Esee, TOPS, Ontario, most large non-Tanto Cold Steels, and a slew of others I forget...

About the only notable exception in "newer makers" is SOG...

Now look at factory makers that offer almost exclusively hollow grinds on their fixed blades: Buck, Randall.

Current popularity? No doubt about it: Hollow Grinds are just the latest flash in the pan...

Gaston
 
steff27 said:
A thicker blade can be a disadvantage in a survival situation. Performing knife tasks with a thick geometry will cost much more precious energy than doing the same with a knife actually designed for knife tasks.
Click to expand...


I think thicker would be better in an emergency when you totally depend upon the blade holding out. Carry two knives???

By thick, I mean in the .12"-.18" range. Not necessarily .25"+
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top