A Tale of Two SD Knives

[Bolster]

Looking at the Yojimbo and the Chinook together is a study in contrasts. Both highly regarded SD knives, but developed from what appear to be radically different philosophies, resulting in radically different designs. Care to fill me in on how two purpose-designed SD knives could be so different?

[Sumdumguy]

Surprisingly, these both have similar stabbing wounds, despite getting there completely differently.

The Yo2 uses the ramp to force the blade downard on a thrust. The Chi4 has a similar downward motion on thrusts, just caused by a steep bellied edge, slightly behind the tip.

Same destination, different paths.

The Wharnie will do far more damage on slashes, though. There's no chance of that evil tip glancing off the target.

[Bolster]

Surprisingly, these both have similar stabbing wounds, despite getting there completely differently.

Certainly reach and penetration different, though? More or less another inch of blade on the Chinook?

[Sumdumguy]

Surprisingly, these both have similar stabbing wounds, despite getting there completely differently.

Certainly reach and penetration different, though? More or less another inch of blade on the Chinook?

Yes, that's true. There's always give and take. I don't really think about that particular attribute too much. The only instance I'm using a blade for defense, reach isn't going to be a factor and honestly, I'd say the speed of the shorter one would outweigh the lesser penetration.

Being able to get in a good 6 jabs before they realize what's happened, can have a dramatic effect on the duration of an altercation. The less time you're engaged, the less time that something can potentially go wrong.

[James Y]

Not to be too morbid, but it’s not uncommon for a short blade (let’s say 3”) to actually penetrate deeper than the blade’s length, due to tissue compression.

Jim

[Bemo]

I think I heard/read somewhere that Jesse James killed someone with a 2" blade. Contrast that with Nicholas Cage that had a rod basically sent through his brain and lived. Penetration is important, but not sure more important than the target itself.

[Freediver]

I think I heard/read somewhere that Jesse James killed someone with a 2" blade. Contrast that with Nicholas Cage that had a rod basically sent through his brain and lived. Penetration is important, but not sure more important than the target itself.

You mean Phineas Gage?

[Naperville]

The Chinook is good looking. The blade is almost 3.9 inches long.

I prefer the Yojimbo.

[Rp5]

Contrast that with Nicholas Cage that had a rod basically sent through his brain and lived.

You mean Phineas Gage?

I think either one works.

[Bolster]

So, I've read up a bit on the thinking behind the Yojimbo, the force it can apply to the tip, the premium put on disabling in order to stop the assault, and I've bought into the philosophy behind the MBC approach. Seems reasonable and well thought out. Then I look at the well-regarded Chinook, which is entirely different, and I don't know the thinking that went into its design...a deep bellied blade for SD? I'm looking for the context that makes sense of the Chinook (I own one, a C3, uncarried, because I don't understand it).

[Rp5]

So the Chinook came up in the Ayoob topic because I thought the profile was very similar. The response was that the Chinook is a tank compared to the Ayoob (which has better ergos.)

Per Knifecenter, that heavy construction was an initial design element. "As one of the foremost modern authorities on the martial use of the Bowie Knife, Keating wanted to distill the quintessential qualities of the classic American Bowie into an all-purpose cutting tool suitable for everyday carry... Despite their improvements, the Chinook 2 and 3 were still heavy for folding knives and did not fully realize Keating's dreams of a light, exceedingly fast folding Bowie. The reason for their weight was to support the "back cuts"—inverted, clawing strokes with the tip of the blade—that Keating used in his Bowie Knife system. To withstand the rigors of these tactics, the knife needed an exceedingly strong lock. While the stout back lock used in the original versions definitely met this challenge, it also required the knife to be rather heavy."

So I guess if you're looking for the thinking behind the Chinook, you're looking for certain elements of Bowie knife fighting.

Edit: Yeah, so after about 10 minutes of watching Back Cut youtube videos, it makes a lot of sense why the Chinook is designed so differently. The inverted back cut really does turn the Chinook into a claw designed to tear into something, as opposed to a slash with a flat edge.

[The Deacon]

Spyderco has made quite a few "SD" knives both FB and folding. The Civilian and it's smaller siblings, Chinook, S.P.O.T., Gunting, Street Bowie, Karambit, Ronin, P'kal, Yojimbo and ARK come to mind, and I'm sure I've missed a bunch. Few have been anything like each other.

[archangel]

Plus several collab knives, like the Szabo Folder, Tighe Stick, Battlestation, (and maybe more) that all have an upswept blade, or in case of the Battlestation tanto blade with upswept tip. I really don't know too much about each collab partners, but I think I remember that they/some have a tactical/SD background? Correct me if I'm wrong.

In my personal opinion, upswept blades are more intimidating than wharnies. And what better than scaring the aggressor off before anyone is hurt? Might be that this is naive thinking though. Thank God I have never yet been in such a situation, and hope I never will be.

[Sumdumguy]

Intimidation is a dangerous(and frankly, stupid) game. You've given away the element of surprise and the bad guy now has a "game plan".

A gun, would be a better choice for "intimidation", because if it doesn't work, you can engage from a distance. With a knife, if they arent phased by it, you have to get personal. Which opens the door to all kinds of opportunities for you to lose.

Always fight to win.

[archangel]

Nice, thanks. Anyway.......

I'm sure there are good reasons for designing a SD knife with a wharnie blade, probably just as many as there are for an upswept pointy blade with a belly.

[VooDooChild]

Theres a few things to keep in mind. The bowie knife has a long history as a "fighting" knife but it was also a general use outdoors knife as well. So a lot of self defense knives based on a clip point blade still have that outdoor utility as part of the design. Also the backslash is part of the bowie design and something that was meant to be part of the chinook design.

We have all been wharncliffe crazy for a while but theres stuff theyre not good for. Skinning and processing game, food prep or anything on a cutting board, etc. Didnt the wharncliffe design originally come from a sword? If so it was always meant to be more of a weapon than a tool.

Small and big knives can all be dangerous depending on the scenario. But... a larger knife can certainly penetrate more.

The self defense philosophy I believe in the most is that stabbing does more damage. Basically all Im saying is that I would never want to give up the ability to stab on any knife that I thought I might have to use for self defense. I know there are plenty of people that can do impressive stuff with a karambit, but I have never trained in using one, and I will choose any design that can stab every time.

I remember reading once that a whole lot of knife fatalities were actually from kitcken knives. Thats probably just a numbers game because they are almost always available. But, from a design standpoint that makes sense as well. Is the person who is about to have to defend themselves in their home reaching for the bread knife, the santoku, or the chefs knife?

[Oloung1]

So, I've read up a bit on the thinking behind the Yojimbo, the force it can apply to the tip, the premium put on disabling in order to stop the assault, and I've bought into the philosophy behind the MBC approach. Seems reasonable and well thought out. Then I look at the well-regarded Chinook, which is entirely different, and I don't know the thinking that went into its design...a deep bellied blade for SD? I'm looking for the context that makes sense of the Chinook (I own one, a C3, uncarried, because I don't understand it).

If you haven't had a chance to watch Janich's most recent video, it's definitely worth it. He gets into the mechanics of blade versus edge stopping power. Even for people not interested in the self defense aspects, he does an excellent job summarizing the history of the wharncliffe. And for people not interested in wharnie's, it's a still great knife knut video. I fall into both of those categories :D

PeaceInOurTime's thread that contains the video: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=88357

[JRinFL]

As VooDooChild said, the Chinook comes from the Bowie school of knife combatives. Keating is longtime proponent of Bowie fighting skills. He and Bagwell are big on the back cut which is really only doable with a Bowie. This just from my reading over the years as I am in no way a fighter.

On the broader view, in the long history of the sword the blade profile has gradually progressed from a broad blade for cutting to a very narrow blade for thrusting/stabbing. That seems important and relevant, I think.

[TenGrainBread]

I was reading an old article Fred Perrin wrote about his La Griffe design and one thing he mentioned about the design intention is that an advantage of a short blade is that it is less likely to kill your opponent. I suppose there's a risk with a shorter blade of it not being long enough to be a "fight-stopper", but on the other hand, killing someone should probably be avoided if possible.

[JohnAPA]

As VooDooChild said, the Chinook comes from the Bowie school of knife combatives. Keating is longtime proponent of Bowie fighting skills. He and Bagwell are big on the back cut which is really only doable with a Bowie. This just from my reading over the years as I am in no way a fighter.

On the broader view, in the long history of the sword the blade profile has gradually progressed from a broad blade for cutting to a very narrow blade for thrusting/stabbing. That seems important and relevant, I think.

Yes, Keating advocates Bowie techniques, to which the curved blade is suited. He also advocates reverse grip, edge-out fighting and the curved blade is well-suited to hooking and trapping. Also, the curved blade makes for a nasty "picket fence" back-cut as stated.

The Wharncliffe blade shines in Janich's Filipino grip structural targeting: forearm (flexor tendons), biceps, triceps, and the money shot -- quadraceps. Michael designed the Yojimbo from the "ground up" to fit his system.

Neither Keating nor Janich use "stabbing" (more accurately "thrusting) as a cornerstone of any technique, although it does have secondary applications (apple on a stick comes to mind).