How To Which manufacturer builds full tang daggers that are long?

S

svacua

Joined
Dec 12, 2023
Messages
6
I have tried so many different options and none of them match what I am looking for -- a full tang dagger with a blade length between 33cm and 50cm (12 inches to 20 inches)
Here is what I have found and why they are not viable.

1. Eikhorn Solingen M7. : blade only 6 inches

2. Swiss M57 bayonet : no longer in production. Only collectors, traders and used now. (blade not long enough)

3. Busse combat : a good 16 inch blade. Is a weird company in Finland. Wants a ridiculous $800, (likely handcrafted-to-order)

What are my options besides these?
 
Svord Hog Beater
eyJidWNrZXQiOiAiZmlsZXMua25pZmVjZW50ZXIuY29tIiwia2V5IjogImtuaWZlY2VudGVyL3N2b3JkL2ltYWdlcy9TVk9IQi5qcGciLCJlZGl0cyI6IHsicmVzaXplIjogeyJ3aWR0aCI6IDc2MCwiaGVpZ2h0IjogNDE1LCJmaXQiOiAiY29udGFpbiIsImJhY2tncm91bmQiOiB7InIiOiAyNTUsImciOiAyNTUsImIiOiAyNTUsImFscGhhIjogMX19fX0=

Specifications​

  • Blade Length: 11-1/4"
  • Overall Length: 17"
  • Blade Thickness: 3.5 mm to 5 mm (exact specs may vary)
  • Steel Material: Swedish l-6
  • Full Tang Construction
  • Leather Sheath with Vertical-Carry Belt Loop
  • Weight without Sheath: 23.7 ounces (672 grams)
  • RC Hardness: 58
  • Weight with Sheath: 32.3 ounces (916 grams)
  • Handcrafted in New Zealand
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the shout out gooeytek gooeytek . I really enjoy making daggers! I currently have a blank in stock that I could make into a dagger like the one above with a blade any length up to 16". It is 8670, about .200". Bear in mind the full length version will be a pure thruster as it has a narrow taper. This one above however, was from the same blank, with 7" cut off to accommodate the customer's request for a 9" blade.


1702582559309.png
1702583021111.png
1702582681787.png
1702582237634.png
1702582265466.png


The blank is full tang, with some skeletonization for lightness and 21.75" overall length.

1702582862261.png
 
Castle Keep, if you're rich https://www.castlekeep.co.uk/#menu

Rondel Dagger- 15th century
finely detailed silver fittings and a 13” blade
img-8277-1.jpg


Celtic leaf bladed Sword​

20 inch fullered, leaf-shaped blade with a bronze guard, pommel and grip ring.​

A matching scabbard can be offered in calfskin, stitched over wood and bronze fittings.
img_1053.jpg
 
David Mary said:
Thank you for the shout out gooeytek gooeytek . I really enjoy making daggers! I currently have a blank in stock that I could make into a dagger like the one above with a blade any length up to 16". It is 8670, about .200". Bear in mind the full length version will be a pure thruster as it has a narrow taper. This one above however, was from the same blank, with 7" cut off to accommodate the customer's request for a 9" blade.


View attachment 2423543
View attachment 2423561
View attachment 2423544
View attachment 2423532
View attachment 2423533


The blank is full tang, with some skeletonization for lightness and 21.75" overall length.

View attachment 2423552
Click to expand...
The blade is certainly close to my original idea. After some contemplation, I realize I can go much shorter than 13 inches on the blade. 9 inches is likely sufficient.

The new issue that has come up is the length of the handle. All of the examples given so far (including the overpriced castlekeeps) are single-handed. I need a much sturdier, grippier handle long enough to accommodate two hands.

Ideal : a truly cylindrical handle with micro-perforated grips seen on baseball bats. The physical principle is that the handle's rotation orientation should be agnostic to the orientation of the blade's edges.

https://imgur.com/k3vQ4Ck
.
.
https://imgur.com/ndWHzjE
.
.
https://imgur.com/3L5TWhL
 
Two hands? You're venturing into sword territory. Also, your price expectations seem unrealistic. I didn't bother to look at Castle Keep; but if you think $800 is ridiculous (especially for a Busse of that size) you are ill- informed.
 
svacua said:
The blade is certainly close to my original idea. After some contemplation, I realize I can go much shorter than 13 inches on the blade. 9 inches is likely sufficient.
Click to expand...

A simple matter. For example, I thinned out the handle tang on the same blank design, and made a Micarta frame for it and oak scales. This is the finished knife, with full 16" blade. No longer full tang. Also not something I would pry with even if it were.

IMG_3983.JPG
IMG_3984.JPG

svacua said:
Ideal : a truly cylindrical handle with micro-perforated grips seen on baseball bats. The physical principle is that the handle's rotation orientation should be agnostic to the orientation of the blade's edges.
Click to expand...

I question the wisdom of a cylindrical handle on a bladed implement. An oval cross section permits indexing for edge alignment by feel and is more than neutral enough to allow versatile point orientation.
 
David Mary said:
A simple matter. For example, I thinned out the handle tang on the same blank design, and made a Micarta frame for it and oak scales. This is the finished knife, with full 16" blade. No longer full tang.

I question the wisdom of a cylindrical handle on a bladed implement. An oval cross section permits indexing for edge alignment by feel and is more than neutral enough to allow versatile point orientation.
Click to expand...
Imagine you are tasked with taking a shovel and stabbing it into the side of a stack of filled sandbags. Your body will go into a natural position to do that. There is not enough inertia in a single human arm to get the force you need, so you naturally incorporate both hands and then integrate your own body weight into it. If the shovel's cylindrical handle were short enough, you might even hold it flush against your body for support. There is just not enough mass in the human arm to promote damage on the receiving end outside of nicks and cuts.
 
I thought we were talking about a double edged piercing and slashing knife blade with a symmetrical profile. I don't make shovels.
 
In all seriousness, though, let me see if I understand you:

svacua said:
Imagine you are tasked with taking a shovel and stabbing it into the side of a stack of filled sandbags. Your body will go into a natural position to do that. There is not enough inertia in a single human arm to get the force you need, so you naturally incorporate both hands and then integrate your own body weight into it. If the shovel's cylindrical handle were short enough, you might even hold it flush against your body for support.
Click to expand...

Sandbags, as an analogy for a body? ...Okay then. As an argument for full tang? On account of the fact that the thrust of a blade into a resisting target may produce high lateral strain? Conceded, though partial tangs may prove stronger than you think. But I don't see how it could be an argument for cylindrical vs. oval handle cross section.

svacua said:
There is just not enough mass in the human arm to promote damage on the receiving end outside of nicks and cuts.
Click to expand...

If we are talking about piercing a body, like, say, that of a hog or other animal, it has less to do with the mass in one's arm, and more to do with how the point geometry multiplies the force exerted in the thrust. If we are talking about slashing, a round handle cross section is fine on something like a falchion or kukri where the mass distribution of the blade facilitates effortless edge alignment, but I wouldn't want a symmetrical blade that has a cylindrical handle cross section. Some mass (in the blade) is desirable for chopping, but thrusting is all about point geometry. Regardless, I don't know how the question of mass in the arm has anything to do with either the handle cross section, or full vs. partial tang.
 
atar dot com Jim Hrisoulas he has been slowing down. This one is mine, from about 20 years ago. He has a few pieces left.Screenshot 2018-05-13 at 01.25.39 - Display 1.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top