I didn't say that you couldn't get a scandi sharp unless it was a zero edge, or if that's how it was read, I didn't mean it that way. I have tried my own scandis with and without stone ground micro bevels and the ones without such secondary bevels out-cut those that did. Both could still shave and slice paper and all those other tests for sharpenss. They just didn't cut wood the same way. I strop everything.
What I really meant though was that I have seen a heck of a lot of scandis which were sharpened badly because keeping the bevel flat was difficult and what you end up with is a short, thick, secondary bevel, or convex which is a long way removed from the micro bevels that we were just talking about.
I am with Hoohoo on the food prep. When I have been on canoe trips in Sweden and Norway, prime "bushcraft" country, knives get used most for food prep, whith fire wood prep being the number two function. If a Scandi is used, it works best if it is very thin, like the Mora, but given same stock thickness, a flat grind will still cut food better.
My apologies mate, I misunderstood


I don't necessarily prefer thin blades, though on principle I don't like anything thicker than 3mm. My 'do everything' blade is my Scandi-ground Bernie Garland knife, in 3mm with a 19 degree bevel, but my Enzo's still a great knife in 3.5mm with a 15 degree bevel. I must admit to really liking the high grinds on Finnish knives. To be honest, I've never had a knife thicker than 2mm with a grind bigger than 20 degrees, so I've never really had a problem with scandis as far as food preparation goes; certainly nothing serious enough to warrant choosing a different grind.
Pete