F1

[leon-1]

I thought it was covex which is why i asked never mind. Ive had a F1 but didnt like the grind. I think i might buy a blade only and change the grind on it

You are quite correct in thinking it has the same grind as the F1, the one that I have here at this very moment hasn't changed since I got it. The grind is most definitely a convex grind and not a scandi.

 

[Shinken]

This isnt a dig just a discussion, but personally i think all grinds are easy to maintain. But the a zero ground scandi grind is by far the easiest to sharpen (untill you chip it) But then a convex is a bugger if you chip it (but less likely to chip) A secondary bevel being the easiest to get a chip out.

So i dint think it's easy to say which is the easiest to maintain as there are several factors involved.

For me personally the a zero ground scandi is the best all rounder for bushcraft, but we all have to find what works for each individual through experience..... so try all the grinds extensivly and draw own conclusions!

OOOps the lid on the worms came undone

 

[drstrange]

Thanks to everyone posting on this thread, it has been realy helpful.

I'm going for an F1.

After hearing all the evidence, I like the sound of the convex grind.
I also like the idea of a nice fat bunch of sparks that it can cast (much fun, and much depleted firesteel too).

It was a toss up between the F1 or a kit from that noce bloke over at SWC. (what a well organised site that guy has, and what a great product for anyone who knows how to handle a file, or file a handle too!)

 

[TheGreenMan]

This isnt a dig just a discussion, but personally i think all grinds are easy to maintain...

...So i dint think it's easy to say which is the easiest to maintain as there are several factors...

I bow to your greater skill, Shinken. As a relative novice, I had a go the other week at sharpening my Spyderco UKPK by hand and made a real mess of the grind (Apologies to Sal Glesser).

I don’t have the necessary skill to manually sharpen its edge bevel at the factory ground angle, and I don’t own a ‘sharpening system’ which no doubt, would make sharpening such types of grind relatively easy.

I then took the drastic step of convexing the 2/3mm cutting edge bevel on the Syderco, and I find that much easier to maintain with no more than a few stokes on the fine side of a ceramic ‘stone’. And its grind now looks handsome once more, having made a ‘pigs ear' of the flat factory grind.

...but we all have to find what works for each individual through experience..... so try all the grinds extensivly and draw own conclusions!...

I couldn’t agree with you more, Shinken.

All the best,
Paul.

 

[TheGreenMan]

Thanks to everyone posting on this thread, it has been realy helpful.

I'm going for an F1.

After hearing all the evidence, I like the sound of the convex grind.
I also like the idea of a nice fat bunch of sparks that it can cast (much fun, and much depleted firesteel too).

It was a toss up between the F1 or a kit from that noce bloke over at SWC. (what a well organised site that guy has, and what a great product for anyone who knows how to handle a file, or file a handle too!)

Hello drstrange,

The F1 is a fine choice, and I’m pretty sure you won’t regret it.

I was very worried about how to sharpen the convex grind on the blade of my F1, and I have read many times on various forums, of other owners new to Fällkniven, and convex grinds in general, expressing similar anxieties.

Below is my adaptation of various tutorials I’ve stumbled upon on the Web, I’ve posted it a few times to the Web, and below is an edited version specifically for you. It seems to me a pity to buy such a superb blade, and then as the new owner, be concerned about/not achieving a ‘shaving sharp’ edge etc.

I tried the ‘mouse mat technique’ and discovered something that I believe to be crucial to restoring the edge of an F1 to ‘shaving sharp’. It seems to me that the crux of the matter is to remove the very small flat bevel that is invisible to the naked eye (Mine at least) at the cutting edge of Fällkniven knives (I find that the size of the small bevel varies from knife to knife).

I started by looking at the edge of the blade with a strong magnifying lens, this is when I discovered the very small bevel at the cutting edge.

I placed a sheet of P220 grit abrasive paper (Either aluminium oxide cloth or silicon carbide will do – I only had silicon carbide paper at hand when I first tried this technique, but found it worked well) on the mat, and lay the F1 blade flat on top of that, and start to move the blade along the length of the sheet, blunt edge (Spine) first. As you start to move the blade along the sheet of abrasive, twist the blade slightly so that at the end of the stroke, the blade has been tipped-up slightly so that the cutting edge is at an angle of approximately 10 -15 degrees (*See URL below for an illustration of the twisting motion). Repeat this for around one minute on each side, using a fairly light to medium pressure (No white knuckle stuff, and no need to remove a lot of metal).

Look again through the glass and you will see that you have removed the small bevel and the profile of the blade is now a single continuous convex curve from the spine to the cutting edge.

Now swap to the next grade of paper which should be P400, and repeat the procedure in the above paragraph, but for a few minutes longer, and using a lighter pressure. When finished, the blade has a slightly higher polish than the original factory polish.

Then get a Fällkniven DC3 or DC4, and on the ceramic side NOT the diamond side, hold the blade at an angle of 10 to 15 degrees and slide it (This time, cutting edge forward), diagonally along the length of the ceramic, maybe less than 10 times on each side. It should now shave hair off your forearm.

I have found that once the small bevel has been removed all that is needed to maintain the ‘shaving sharp’ edge are a few light stokes on the ceramic side of the DC3/DC4 as described above. The only reason I would ever use the papers again is in the unlikely event that I had chipped the cutting edge.

I’m not pretending that the above technique is the only way to sharpen a convex grind, but it works for me, it’s a fast way to get a ‘shaving sharp’ blade, it’s hassle-free and low maintenance, and, doesn’t remove too much metal.

* http://www.mhcable.com/~yocraft/sosak/convex.htm

Have fun and good luck!

Best regards,
Paul.

PS: When you eventually buy the Steve Cox ‘bushcraft’ blade kit, you won’t be disappointed, it’s a very fine blade too!

 

[drstrange]

Thanks for the tips Greenman.

The thing that tipped the balance for me was some information on the benefits of convex grind over scandi or the dreaded hollow grind (I bought a hollow-grind knife at the start of my kit ignorace days and screwed it up by putting a scandi grind on it, the edge folded and buckled on fist cut, twit!)

I do like scandi edge tho, and I would probably have bought the ground kit from SWC knives if I hadn't of learned the following about convex:

Apparrently, most blades up until only a couple of hundred years ago were convex, but with the industrial revolution and mass-production techniques the hollow grind became popular because of the stamping process used to cut and shape the blade at the same time. Apparently this cannot effectively be done with a convex blade for various technical reasons involving compression, and structural properties.

Scandi is a good slicing edge apparently, but convex is a good pushing and slicing edge, even tho a scandi is marginally better at slicing, but apparently it is nowwhere near as good at push cutting:

Apparrantly (I have to keep using this world because I ain't speaking from experience and am no expert) because of the convex shape, when pushing into wood, the curve offers less contact in the cut and 'teases' the cleave open allowing for the fibres to be prised open and tense in contact with the cutting edge depending on the granular direction (just like holding material taut for easier cutting), making for an easier cut. Whereas, with a Scandi, the blade surface is in more contact and doesn't cleave as well, so the cutting edge can compact the material that it is trying to cut. I would imagine that is why a scandi blade needs to be realy sharp and polished all of the time to be effective.

Also apparrently the molecular support offered to the edge of a convex blade is more effctive at retaining sharpness than that of a scandi.

Having shared these theories, I am well aware that the proof is in the pudding, and I am a convex virgin, no blade expert, and I'm sure that a can of worms is about to be opened. I'm sorry bt this is what I heard about the grind, It isn't my opinion, I'll have to use the knife to see how well it performs and test the theory myself.

 

[TheGreenMan]

Thanks for the tips Greenman.

The thing that tipped the balance for me was some information on the benefits of convex grind over scandi or the dreaded hollow grind (I bought a hollow-grind knife at the start of my kit ignorace days and screwed it up by putting a scandi grind on it, the edge folded and buckled on fist cut, twit!)

I do like scandi edge tho, and I would probably have bought the ground kit from SWC knives if I hadn't of learned the following about convex:

Apparrently, most blades up until only a couple of hundred years ago were convex, but with the industrial revolution and mass-production techniques the hollow grind became popular because of the stamping process used to cut and shape the blade at the same time. Apparently this cannot effectively be done with a convex blade for various technical reasons involving compression, and structural properties.

Scandi is a good slicing edge apparently, but convex is a good pushing and slicing edge, even tho a scandi is marginally better at slicing, but apparently it is nowwhere near as good at push cutting:

Apparrantly (I have to keep using this world because I ain't speaking from experience and am no expert) because of the convex shape, when pushing into wood, the curve offers less contact in the cut and 'teases' the cleave open allowing for the fibres to be prised open and tense in contact with the cutting edge depending on the granular direction (just like holding material taut for easier cutting), making for an easier cut. Whereas, with a Scandi, the blade surface is in more contact and doesn't cleave as well, so the cutting edge can compact the material that it is trying to cut. I would imagine that is why a scandi blade needs to be realy sharp and polished all of the time to be effective.

Also apparrently the molecular support offered to the edge of a convex blade is more effctive at retaining sharpness than that of a scandi.

Having shared these theories, I am well aware that the proof is in the pudding, and I am a convex virgin, no blade expert, and I'm sure that a can of worms is about to be opened. I'm sorry bt this is what I heard about the grind, It isn't my opinion, I'll have to use the knife to see how well it performs and test the theory myself.

Astonishingly good post, drstrange!

Nice to see someone ‘doing their homework’.

All the best,
Paul.

 

[Hoodoo]

Scandi is a good slicing edge apparently, but convex is a good pushing and slicing edge, even tho a scandi is marginally better at slicing, but apparently it is nowwhere near as good at push cutting:

Not sure where you came up with that information. Scandi's are exceptional for pushcutting. That is why they are preferred for woodcarving. Convex ground edges penetrate well on pushcuts but lack the fine control that you get from a scandi grind. However, this is a trivial difference with it comes to knives for the bush.

 

[drstrange]

Not sure where you came up with that information. Scandi's are exceptional for pushcutting. That is why they are preferred for woodcarving. Convex ground edges penetrate well on pushcuts but lack the fine control that you get from a scandi grind. However, this is a trivial difference with it comes to knives for the bush.

Look, I'm no expert, tis just something I found out that could be right, could be wrong, opinions vary considerably about knives, as i have found out trying to ascertain the comparative values of each grind, as I said, it wasn't my opinion, and I'd test it when I got the knife.

Because you are "not sure where I came up with that information" all I can say is that I didn't make it up.

Also, is your answer definitive? Is what you say the bottom line on the matter, end of, period, the truth with a capital T?

 

[TheGreenMan]

...Scandi's are exceptional for pushcutting. That is why they are preferred for woodcarving. Convex ground edges penetrate well on pushcuts but lack the fine control that you get from a scandi grind. However, this is a trivial difference with it comes to knives for the bush.

Hello Hoodoo,

Nice distinction, and resolution in the last line.

By the way, can you provide a link to the Hoodoo Hone, I looked at it somewhere, a long time ago, I've tried finding it again, (Even on your site) but I can't?.

Best regards,
Paul.

 

[TheGreenMan]

Look, I'm no expert, tis just something I found out that could be right, could be wrong, opinions vary considerably about knives, as i have found out trying to ascertain the comparative values of each grind, as I said, it wasn't my opinion, and I'd test it when I got the knife.

Because you are "not sure where I came up with that information" all I can say is that I didn't make it up.

Also, is your answer definitive? Is what you say the bottom line on the matter, end of, period, the truth with a capital T?

Hey drstrange,

No need to get upset, the matter of knives and grinds does seem to be a contensious one, but Hoodoo knows what he’s talking about, and anything he says is well worth pondering on. Check out his Web site – a great deal of interesting information.

Try not to get sucked into controversy - ‘Different strokes for different folks’, and keep an open mind, and as you already know, do your research and then try it out for yourself. No need to get ‘tense’. Look, listen, and learn (I’ve learned a lot from you).

Best regards,
Paul.

 

[Hoodoo]

Hello Hoodoo,

Nice distinction, and resolution in the last line.

By the way, can you provide a link to the Hoodoo Hone, I looked at it somewhere, a long time ago, I've tried finding it again, (Even on your site) but I can't?.

Best regards,
Paul.

Hi Paul,
I don't have a link handy at the moment but have you tried searching this site? There should be lots of info here on that hone.

 

[drstrange]

Hey drstrange,

No need to get upset, the matter of knives and grinds does seem to be a contensious one, but Hoodoo knows what he’s talking about, and anything he says is well worth pondering on. Check out his Web site – a great deal of interesting information.

Try not to get sucked into controversy - ‘Different strokes for different folks’, and keep an open mind, and as you already know, do your research and then try it out for yourself. No need to get ‘tense’. Look, listen, and learn (I’ve learned a lot from you).

Best regards,
Paul.

I appreciate that. Every 48 posts or so I get the nark. It's a flaw in my character that I am trying to overcome, but I can't remove a post (unless realy quickly) after I have posted it, or edit out the nasty bits because I'll get in trub trub again for editing.

Apologies to Hoodoo who I am sure knows his stuff. I don't know much about the subject, was just posting stuff I'd heard.

 

[TheGreenMan]

Hi Paul,
I don't have a link handy at the moment but have you tried searching this site? There should be lots of info here on that hone.

Hi Hoodoo,

I was thinking that you, ‘Hoodoo’ were the inventor of the Hoodoo Hone, apologies if you’re not <chuckle>.

I just Googled and found this (Which is the article I remember reading some time ago):

http://bill-hay.com/Convex/Convex.htm

Thought it would be of interest for ‘drstrange’ et al (Including myself), when ‘in the field’ with a dinked convex.

Best regards (+respect),
Paul.

 

[TheGreenMan]

...Every 48 posts or so I get the nark. It's a flaw in my character that I am trying to overcome...

Me too <chuckle>

All the best to you
Paul.

 

[drstrange]

Hi Hoodoo,

I was thinking that you, ‘Hoodoo’ were the inventor of the Hoodoo Hone, apologies if you’re not <chuckle>.

.

Does this mean that Hoodoo doesn't know jack about knives after all?? and to think I just let him off a flaming for daring to question my authority on all things sharp and shiny!!
ONLY JOKING

 

[Hoodoo]

Apologies to Hoodoo who I am sure knows his stuff. I don't know much about the subject, was just posting stuff I'd heard.

No problem. Scandinavians have a long tradition of woodcarving and have always favored a flat, sabre style grind for woodcarving, although I think they are traditionally somewhat hollow ground because they were ground out on a very large wheel. So they are nearly flat. They then become flattened over time from sharpening on a flat stone. Now days, it's easy to find Scandi knives that come with a flat sabre grind.

The large flat of the Scandi grind is great for long planing push cuts, as it flows smoothly and evenly through the woods and stays straight in the cut. Convex grinds tend to want to meander a bit more. Both are very good for wood, because of the lack of a secondary bevel. A secondary bevel on a knife edge acts as a small wedge, making it more difficult to force through dense material like seasoned wood. Remove the secondary bevel, and you get much better ease of penetration. This is less noticeable on green wood, but very noticeable on seasoned hardwood.

 

[drstrange]

No problem. Scandinavians have a long tradition of woodcarving and have always favored a flat, sabre style grind for woodcarving, although I think they are traditionally somewhat hollow ground because they were ground out on a very large wheel. So they are nearly flat. They then become flattened over time from sharpening on a flat stone. Now days, it's easy to find Scandi knives that come with a flat sabre grind.

The large flat of the Scandi grind is great for long planing push cuts, as it flows smoothly and evenly through the woods and stays straight in the cut. Convex grinds tend to want to meander a bit more. Both are very good for wood, because of the lack of a secondary bevel. A secondary bevel on a knife edge acts as a small wedge, making it more difficult to force through dense material like seasoned wood. Remove the secondary bevel, and you get much better ease of penetration. This is less noticeable on green wood, but very noticeable on seasoned hardwood.

So are there any benefits to a convex grind in your opinion? (I am getting the F1, I've agreed to it and I want to try it, If I don't get on with it I'll sell it on)

 

[Hoodoo]

So are there any benefits to a convex grind in your opinion? (I am getting the F1, I've agreed to it and I want to try it, If I don't get on with it I'll sell it on)

I don't own an F1 but by most folks' accounts, it's an excellent knife for bushcraft. The only Falkniven I own is an A1. Well made and tough. Excellent steel.

 

[British Red]

Hi Hoodoo,

I was thinking that you, ‘Hoodoo’ were the inventor of the Hoodoo Hone, apologies if you’re not <chuckle>.

I just Googled and found this (Which is the article I remember reading some time ago):

http://bill-hay.com/Convex/Convex.htm

Thought it would be of interest for ‘drstrange’ et al (Including myself), when ‘in the field’ with a dinked convex.

Best regards (+respect),
Paul.

Yep, he is

For anyone (who like me) didn't know who to listen to when they started on the long and unending journey of bushy knowhow, two names are legend when it comes to sharps.."Hoodoo" and "Old Jimbo" (esp axes with Old Jimbo). Not makers or designers or whatever. Just sheer out and out "I know my Sh** and don't brag about it know how". Check out the Hoodoo hone on the £5 sharpening kit sticky (my first stumbling attempts that Hoodoo was kind enough to improve massively on).

Oh Hoodoo (and Jimmbo) - before you go all self deprecating on me - I call em like I see em

Red