Bushcraft knife

[snag68]

Whilst sorting myself out a new rifle I stumbled across this little fella. It's a bushcraft knife in the 'Woodlore' style.

Made in sheffield from tool steel with a leather sheath and fire steel for under £100.

http://jls-wednesbury.org/id52.html

Submitted for your info..

Dazz

 

[Shinken]

Looks interesting but i havent heard of the makers, has anyone else? It would also be nice if the photo showed the palm swell

 

[Justin Time]

It's the first knife on this page of the maker's website A Wright & Son Ltd. so the jls price is a good discount. I suspect one of our members has close connections with wrights.

 

[addyb]

Here, I've got a stupid question. Personally, I blame this on my coffee having not kicked in it. What's the deal with bushcraft blades not being hardened as much as other fixed blades? From what I've seen, most of them seem to be hardened in between 57 and 59 on the Rockwell scale.

Anyone wanna take a stab at this one?

 

[leon-1]

Here, I've got a stupid question. Personally, I blame this on my coffee having not kicked in it. What's the deal with bushcraft blades not being hardened as much as other fixed blades? From what I've seen, most of them seem to be hardened in between 57 and 59 on the Rockwell scale.

Anyone wanna take a stab at this one?

Martyn or one of the other guys from BB would probably be better placed to say, but I think it depends on the type of steel used also, high carbon seem to be hardened to the RC 57-59 sort of level, a lot of stainless go upto RC 61.

I think it is partly down to making the knife too brittle if it is tempered too a higher level, stainless will take a bit more abuse and hence it can be hardened to a slightly higher degree.

I think this is also the reason for PT type blades where the spine is hardened to a softer level than the edge of the blade.

If the blade is too soft it will roll and constantly require resharpening, but if it is too hard then it could chip when batoning for instance.

 

[Shinken]

I think its worth mentioning that although the edge on some stainless may be less brittle at high Hrc, stainless blades wont be as tough and wont bend as much without breaking ...... me's thinks

 

[scottishwolf]

looks like a bloody good deal mate, now, all I need to do is leave loads of hints around the house for 'santa' lol....

 

[sam_acw]

Possibly a bushcraft knife needs to be easier to sharpen and a bit more forgiving of rough treatment?

 

[dwardo]

Nice knife but a 100 notes over in british blades will get you a custom to your design so if anyones thinkin about it give the guys over there a shout first

 

[fast celt]

I own one of these A Wright & Son Ltd. Bushcraft Knifes. I bought it at the Chatworth Country fair for £110 with a Fallkiven DC3 sharpening stone in with the price. So far I'm really happy with it performance it as being used and abused and still just as good as new. All it takes is to sharpen it after use and wipe blade with a oily rag (edible oil). The knife is little on the heavy side but I personally like this as it seems to give me more control over the blade. But other have found it hard to use if they are more used to light blade.

 

[Martyn]

Martyn or one of the other guys from BB would probably be better placed to say, but I think it depends on the type of steel used also, high carbon seem to be hardened to the RC 57-59 sort of level, a lot of stainless go upto RC 61.

It's not really to do with the steel in the way you suggest leon, but the choice of steel is a factor. Carbon steel can be hardened to high rockwell's too - carbon steel files for example are exceptionally hard.

The lower rockwell means the knife will be tougher, in that it'll be more flexible, it wont snap or chip as easily as harder blades and It'll be easier to field sharpen. Many people prefer this in an outdoor working knife.

By it's nature, stainless steel tends to be harder, togher to sharpen and more brittle, no matter what rockwell, so you might as well harden it up to a higher rockwell and benefit from the good edge retention that a high rockwell offers.

Hard isnt always the case, some specialised stainless steel alloys, such as crucible s30v, are actually very tough and resist chipping well. But in general, stainless steels are more brittle and can have a tendancy to chip, while carbon remains the king in terms of toughness.

Carbon steel is preferred by many for an outdoor knife, because of it's ability to be tempered to give a compromise between hard and tough that suits the job at hand well. Carbon steel can be tempered down to a springy toughness, that can be sharpened easily and displays very sharp edges when maintained properly.

It's all about compromise. You cant have both tough and hard. If you make a knife tougher (more springy), you reduce it's hardness and so pay the price in reduced edge retention. If you make a knife hard, you pay the price with lack of toughness, making the knife harder to sharpen, more likely to chip and possibly even snap.

It's all down to what you prefer. There is no right or wrong. Personally I like carbon steel blades with a low-ish rockwell for hard use outdoor tools, but I accept that maintainace will be high.

On the other hand, for folding knives for general domestic use, I prefer a stainless blade with a high rockwell.

All about personal choice.

In an ideal world, we would have a stainless steel that can be tempered down to springy toghness, but retains a super hard edge that resists wear well, yet can be sharpened easily. It wont happen because it defies the laws of physics, but the hunt continues to perfect alloys and heat treatment processes that bring us closer to the ideal.

 

[Shinken]

Very well put martyn!

 

[addyb]

Thanks, Martyn.

I guess that's why Mora Clippers are hardened to what, 57 or 58 as opposed to their carbon which is hardened a bit highter. I mean, any harder than 57 or so with a stainless and you'd be looking at a knife that would be really difficult to sharpen in the field.

You're also right on the money about steel being a compromise and how wonderful a stainless blade that does it all would be. Too bad it's impossible!

Anyway, I don't want to turn this thread into another stainless vs carbon argument, but thank's a lot for answering my question.

Adam

 

[Martyn]

Or, to put it another way, the whole reason you would choose carbon steel over stainless, is because it can be tempered to low-ish rockwell spring!

If you want a hard knife (eg rc 61), you could have one made from carbon if you want, but why would you? You loose all the benefits of carbon steel if you harden it that high. You'd just have a hard knife, with poor toughness, that chips and rusts.

If hardness is your priority, then a stainless alloy is better, because the alloying elements mean that many stainless steels exhibit better toughness at high rockwells, plus you benefit from the stain resisting chrome component.

 

[Martyn]

I guess that's why Mora Clippers are hardened to what, 57 or 58 as opposed to their carbon which is hardened a bit highter. I mean, any harder than 57 or so with a stainless and you'd be looking at a knife that would be really difficult to sharpen in the field.

Wear resistance depends both on the alloy and the hardness.

It's unusual to have low rockwell stainless blades like the clipper. You basically end up with a knife with poor toughness, doesnt hold it's edge well and needs sharpening often. The only benefit I can see is rust resistance and ease of sharpening in the field. By choosing stainless over carbon and having a low rockwell, in the clipper, they seem to have traded off toughness for rust resistance. A poor tradeoff in my opinion. But the knife is pitched at a particular market and that may have been the driving decision to make an easy to sharpen knife that resists rust.

It's not all black and white though, these are generall principles and the newer and more complex steel alloys blur the boundaries significantly.

 

[Martyn]

or...

tough = soft
hard = brittle

Pretty much everything comes back to this. Do you want a tough knife, or a hard knife?

 

[Hoodoo]

If you want a hard knife (eg rc 61), you could have one made from carbon if you want, but why would you? You loose all the benefits of carbon steel if you harden it that high. You'd just have a hard knife, with poor toughness, that chips and rusts.

What about D2?

 

[Martyn]

What about D2?

What about it?

A hybrid steel, if there is such a thing. A stain resistant carbon tool steel, with some chrome content but not as much as a full blown stainless steel. Designed to offer the engineering world a tough carbon steel, with limited stain resistant properties. Best of both worlds? Or maybe master of neither?

I have a knife I made myself from a cast dendritic D2 blank and I hate it. I've never, ever managed to get a decent edge on the thing. If I ever do, I would think it would hold for an aeon, but I cant be bothered with it. I dare say others will love it, though you dont see many knives made from it. I know of a few, ...kabar springs to mind, but on the whole it's not really a popular knife steel.

I'm just offering a simplistic explanation of general principles Terry, there are lots of steels out there which alter your perspective, not to mention things like differential heat treatment or clay hardening. There's also a multitude of carbon steels out there to further baffle the consumer, 1080, O1, 5160, A2, 1095 etc, all subtley different, but if the heat treatment is off, then the choice of steel becomes much of a muchness.

With knives, I think heat treatment and choice of steel is really a matter of personal taste. Unlike swords and axes etc, where the tight remit pretty much dictates the choice of materials, the broad remit of short bladed knives allow the end user to pick pretty much whatever steel they like.

 

[addyb]

D2 is considered "semi-stainless" correct? I believe the alloy has a 12% chromium content and that that 13% is the industry standard for stainless. Mind you, I've never used D2 so I'm basically TOA.

Personally, I've found that my Clipper, being 12c27 has excellent edge retention, but that might be due to Sandvik's use of very pure steel with fine carbides. Cliff Stamp did an excellent review of the Mora 2000 in 12c27 which can be found here.

One aspect of my Clipper that I've never liked is how easy the blade chips. I was fooling around with my firesteel the other day, and decided to use the edge bevel instead of the spine which I had squared off with a file. Now I'm going to have to take my Clipper to a rough grit stone and really shave it down to get rid of that chip. In fact, the last time I battoned with my Clipper I had an even larger chip taken out of the blade. I had been thinking of buying a Clipper in carbon to see how it holds up but sadly, the only store in Nanaimo here that carried Frosts knives no longer carries them. I think I'm stuck with it.

If anyone has an unwanted carbon Mora laying around, I'd be more than happy to take it off their hands.

Adam

 

[Martyn]

Well, to go back to your question Adam, I find 57 to 59 Rc to be a good working hardness, that gives a nice tough blade, that resists chipping well and is soft enough to sharpen easily. Granted, to keep it in top form, you need to touch it up often, but I prefer that to a knife that requires little attention, but when it does need work, it needs a lot of work. I find that the little and often sharpening that goes hand in hand with a softer blade, means I keep my knife sharp as a razor most of the time.

Regarding Mr Stamps review, potentially a good review, ruined by all the silly pseudo-science nonesense. Have you ever wondered how he manages to say with such accuracy how many grams of force are required to slice something? Of course I'm not suggesting he makes it up - not me, never!