This is one of the best discussions i have ever seen on any knife forum anywhere. I for one never really thought about what a complex relationship there is (given something simple like a knife) between strength of material (especially if it's zone-hardened), weight, thickness, & width of the blade, saber vs. full flat vs. convex grinds, cost, and function performing simple tasks like prying, penetrating, splitting, etc. Remarkable how different these two very similar knives are turning out to be, and the strength of everyone's preferences so far as each attribute of the knife is concerned... I wouldn't want to be Dan, lol. But seriously, there's a helluvalot more that goes into knife design (that has major effects on performance & purpose) than i ever really considered. And i think about knives all the time! Crazy. Thanks everyone for all the simple yet astute observations from experience - very, very interesting!!! The only thing that is clear is that i have to have one of each - a fatter, flat TT for slicing and splitting,etc, and a saber, through-hardened one for prying & slashing, etc...
I still find myself hoping for 1/3" Thickness on the new model - it seems like a little more blade weight would be a good thing (it seems it would assist chopping, where you are creating a notch, and binding is less of an issue). Without making the blade wider or thicker (3/8"???), the saber-grind should enhance chopping power, right? And it still won't be a wrist-breaker, by any means. Plus enhanced lateral strength? I'm thinking the saber grind might be a smart move! The only drawback seems to be that it would bind more splitting or slicing hard materials, with the added loss of blade-coating (which many people remove). Does that seem accurate? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
