if i may, it's bushcraft and survival. two. survivalists work with what they have. boyscouts are prepared.
just being fair.
Mm. I suppose you've got a point there, choice versus necessity. I see the two terms used in parallel a lot though, which is why I considered them synonyms. I suppose the bushcrafters advocate an axe and 4" knife?
yeah. i would actually consider them antonyms. a boyscout who ends up a survivalist obviously wasn't a very good boyscout.
- Probably a "somewhat" fair and reasonable remark, but I would still lean towards a survivalist and Boyscout being more in line with a synonym than an antonym. Both would "Try" to be prepared by making a "reasonable" effort to have the right gear for "anticipated" situations. And they would both know how to survive in many situations. But, I tend to agree - at the moment a Boyscout comes into a survival situation and finds he didn't have certain gear he should have "planned" on having, he becomes more of a survivalist than a Boyscout (as stated by Mag).
A survivalist (and Bushcrafter) would generally be "prepared" where it counts most (in the head and with knowledge) - at least as much and likely even more so than a Boy Scout.
And even though a survivalist practices making do without, they tend to try to have the essentials. A Boyscout would likely plan to have "more gear" more often (in theory).
But, in reality, both would as likely be as similarly "geared" when a "Non"-planned survival situation could possibly arrise.
"Planned" survival is a debatable term and potentially an oxymoron.
"Preparedness" is a relative term.
The reality is that most people (Boyscouts or survivalists) don't carry a fixed 4" blade on their person day in and day out - Let alone an axe (or Dogfather <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />).
This has been discussed before, but most "survival" situations are based on something happening that was unexpected. In those situations, it is more about what you have on you or available to you at that time.
As many World class fixed blades as I have, I still have to contend that a good folder is about the best I can manage about 98% of the time for EDC. Granted most of that 98% of the time is around my community, work, local roads, etc. where a survival situation would be unlikely except for a car wreck or something similarly city related.
If I am LUCKY, I might have one of my larger 3.5" - 4.0" folders. But, that is probably only 10% - 20% of the time.
If and when I head out into the woods more than the local community trails, I tend to pack up the "REAL" gear. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" />
With the exception of plane travel, visits to certain government buildings, gym and lounging around the house/sleeping, I always carry my 3" SAK Executive and (for the last year or so) my chopped down/modified Kershaw/Ken Onion Leek. I LOVE how this little modified Leek turned out. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" /> The original Leek is an awesome knife, but it sort of falls in no-man's land for size for my uses. The basic Leek is smaller than I prefer for a larger folder - rear pocket carry (see below) and too large for front pocket carry. The original Leek is about 4.125" closed with a 2.875" blade. My chopped down/modified Leek is about 3.25" closed (3 finger grip) with about a 2.25" blade which is about as large as I like to carry in front pocket of dress pants or most other front pockets for that matter. But, it is a very handy size and shape whether I have one of my larger knives or not. I carry the SAK more for the other tools (scissors, tweezors, phillips, flat-head, etc.). I don't really care for the blades on the SAK's. They function for some things, but the blade on my SAK is no comparison for use compared to the blade on my modified Leek.
Here is my EDC Gear (minimal compared to Andy Naylor <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> ):
I don't always carry my Flash memory stick. But, I have needed it a lot lately. It is on a quick clip for easy removal.
Those little memory sticks are amazing. 8 gigs about the size of my little finger-nail. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> Most of the size is USB connector and metal and silicon protective casing to make it harder to loose and easier to handle.
At night if out walking or similar, I will add my Fenix L1D. I keep one in my car as well. When I get some more funds, I will probably pick up a couple more of these awesome lights to have in every car, nightstand, kitchen drawer, etc.
If wearing shorts, jeans, dockers or similar, I will pretty much always add a larger folder to rear pocket carry. My current go to larger folder is my Benchmade McHenry & Williams 710 in M2 steel. I have made many modifications to the grip/scales, removed the top guard/ramp and smoothed the scales under the clip for easier pocket deployment. AWESOME knife and awesome function in every way!!! And now it fits my hand like a glove <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" />
You can see the modified grip/scales here:
And the removed guard/ramp and smoothed scales under the clip here:
My Leek and 710 have both been convexed and stropped to hair popping sharp. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" />
My second go to large folder is probably my Al Mar SERE 2000. I have removed the top guard/thumb ramp on it as well, but I intend to do more modifying to the handle/scales and smooth the G10 under the clip on my SERE 2000 some day. The SERE 2000 is a TANK of a knife and Silky smooth, but large and heavy for a folder. I can slim it some.
But, the 710 is slimmer, lighter, longer blade, SUPER fast open and close, also silky smooth, feels a tad nicer in my hand and is still sufficiently tough/well built for my uses. Nevertheless, the SERE 2000 is awesome as well.
Removed guard/ramp closer view - I haven't rounded the G10 over yet - still a work in progress.:
Top 2 EDC large folders compared:
I also like my Benchmade RUKUS and probably carry it 3rd behind the two above. But, the RUKUS is HUGE. I have been working on reducing it's handle size and forming it to my hand. It is still in progress as well. I bought the RUKUS at a good price on Ebay, but I bought a serrated edge and I don't really like serrated edges. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> Not sure what I was thinking. I will probably buy another some day without serrations, switch out the blades to put the non-serrated (preferrably non-coated) blade on my modified handle. Then sell the serrated one.
I have 2-4 other very worthy 3.5" - 4.0" bladed folders that are very worthy and get some carry time. But, the modified 710 has become the main go to for large folder and the modified/chopped Leek is true EDC now.
---------
I haven't posted a long post with lots of pics in a while. And this whole post is quite a tangent (of a tangent of a tangent) from the original subject.
Went from thin blades, to Nessies, to survivalist vs. Boyscouts, to "true" EDC that could be used if caught off guard relevant to survival. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> (sorry for unintended hijack)..... anyways.....
Ummm yeah.... thin blades can be O.K. / sufficient for certain applications. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />
But, I honestly don't like much less than 1/8th" / 0.125" on any fixed outdoor knife. Depends on the blade length, blade height, grind type and intended use of the knife.
Outdoors, I just like to maintain a certain level of durability. Kitchen knives at 0.08" thin have their place - in the kitchen. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
I don't really need monster thick either unless you want weight for chopping or some other reason. 0.18" - .22" tend to be plenty thick for me on even my big knives. I am not a huge fan of 0.32" thick hip anchors / prybars. I don't do any "heavy" prying with my knives. Thick/heavy are very impressive to hold/heft when you don't have to carry them. But, the added weight is only good for two things: chopping power and slowing me down. If I don't want to carry it, what's the point?
I don't personally get the appeal of a .32" ASH1 with a 6.5" blade. If I want a chopper, I will carry a DFLE or Battle Rat that weighs less and chops WAY better.
If I don't want to carry it, I can reach for many other tools more suited for any given job. Big axe, small knife, etc.
I do like the Skinny Ash though. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" /> - Good all-rounder. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbup.gif" alt="" />
6.5" long and 0.32" thick doesn't make a good chopper compared to MUCH better alternatives and negates many other values I would look for in a 6.5" blade - so <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> - 6.5" with 0.32" thick is a "So-So" prybar and generally short and heavy whacking tool... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> - to each his own.
I tend to find that if the edge profile is sufficient, even thicker 0.18" or so blades can slice cut VERY well. But, there are limitations that do add up. The grind and profile of the edge seem much more relevant to me in slicing/cutting performance than over-all thickness (to a point). Depends on what you are cutting - how much drag from material, how much material seperation, etc.
I think a Nessie with about a 4.0" - 4.5" blade would be plenty thin at .15" or so, but I would be fine with up to .18". Consider full height grind and a taller blade height.
My Bog Dog with a 4.5" blade (and mudders) is about 0.14" thick and PLENTY thin for me. I don't personally need any thinner than that.
rambling and time to stop.
.