Highest cutting performance per ounce

[bobnikon]

Interesting thread, but the title should definitely be length to weight ratio, as this is not strictly a measure of cutting performance.

A safety razor blade is .035 oz at 1.69" = 48.29
I am not going to break down a mile of cardboard, prune a bush, or dress a dear with it.
So for straight length to weight ratio, it is amazing, but many of the other factors that contribute the cutting performance of a knife/blade are lacking.

[bobnikon]

I think the word "performance" in the thread title is a misnomer as the graph simply equates to the longest edge length per ounce. It does not take into account blade geometry or blade stock thickness.
....

After a little more thought, weight actually DOES take into account stock thickness, though abstractly.
Thicker blades weigh more.
Blades with thicker geometry will weigh more.
All of the "winners" have thinner blades.

or stock length, or both, or handle composition, or...

[Evil D]

I think there might be a real non opinionated answer to this question, if we could test how much force could be applied through a knife to make a cut, and then compare results with what is then the lightest knife that also has the highest cutting force, that's your highest cutting performance per ounce knife.

This would come down to how well you can hold a knife, otherwise the winner would most likely just be a G10 Bug because it's the lightest knife Spyderco makes, but since it's barely a 2 finger knife you can only hold onto it so well and that'll limit how much force you can transfer through it.

So my guess is it would be something as small as possible that you can get the most grip on, maybe an Urban or UKPK or Dragonfly, something that gives as close to a full grip as possible while staying as small and light as possible.

But this will still vary between each person's hand strength, so you'd need a sample size of people to all do the same tests on the same knives and then average out the results.

But even then, force applied to the knife is only part of what cutting performance is, so you'd have to somehow measure slicing ability.

It gets real convoluted real fast 🫪

[cjk]

Interesting thread, but the title should definitely be length to weight ratio, as this is not strictly a measure of cutting performance.

A safety razor blade is .035 oz at 1.69" = 48.29
I am not going to break down a mile of cardboard, prune a bush, or dress a dear with it.
So for straight length to weight ratio, it is amazing, but many of the other factors that contribute the cutting performance of a knife/blade are lacking.

I sincerely hope you aren't dressing any "dears".

I doubt most people would use a safety razor blade without a handle. The handle would weigh something. Plus a safety razor blade isn't a folding knife.

[cjk]

I think there might be a real non opinionated answer to this question, if we could test how much force could be applied through a knife to make a cut, and then compare results with what is then the lightest knife that also has the highest cutting force, that's your highest cutting performance per ounce knife.

This would come down to how well you can hold a knife, otherwise the winner would most likely just be a G10 Bug because it's the lightest knife Spyderco makes, but since it's barely a 2 finger knife you can only hold onto it so well and that'll limit how much force you can transfer through it.

So my guess is it would be something as small as possible that you can get the most grip on, maybe an Urban or UKPK or Dragonfly, something that gives as close to a full grip as possible while staying as small and light as possible.

But this will still vary between each person's hand strength, so you'd need a sample size of people to all do the same tests on the same knives and then average out the results.

But even then, force applied to the knife is only part of what cutting performance is, so you'd have to somehow measure slicing ability.

It gets real convoluted real fast 🫪

And then there's the actual sharpness of knives being tested.
This is more of an academic exercise to see where it goes.
Even though the K390 Ladybug is near the top, I haven't been convinced to actually buy one. I'd prefer to have a K390 Dragonfly.
I kinda expected the K390 Stretch 2 XL to be the "winner" or at least near the top, because it's really really surprising how light it is for how much blade it has.
I agree that it gets convoluted real fast.

[Evil D]

I think there might be a real non opinionated answer to this question, if we could test how much force could be applied through a knife to make a cut, and then compare results with what is then the lightest knife that also has the highest cutting force, that's your highest cutting performance per ounce knife.

This would come down to how well you can hold a knife, otherwise the winner would most likely just be a G10 Bug because it's the lightest knife Spyderco makes, but since it's barely a 2 finger knife you can only hold onto it so well and that'll limit how much force you can transfer through it.

So my guess is it would be something as small as possible that you can get the most grip on, maybe an Urban or UKPK or Dragonfly, something that gives as close to a full grip as possible while staying as small and light as possible.

But this will still vary between each person's hand strength, so you'd need a sample size of people to all do the same tests on the same knives and then average out the results.

But even then, force applied to the knife is only part of what cutting performance is, so you'd have to somehow measure slicing ability.

It gets real convoluted real fast 🫪

And then there's the actual sharpness of knives being tested.
This is more of an academic exercise to see where it goes.
Even though the K390 Ladybug is near the top, I haven't been convinced to actually buy one. I'd prefer to have a K390 Dragonfly.
I kinda expected the K390 Stretch 2 XL to be the "winner" or at least near the top, because it's really really surprising how light it is for how much blade it has.
I agree that it gets convoluted real fast.

It just keeps creating more questions than answers too.

Are we slicing or push cutting? Because if we're push cutting then your edge length may not matter, so a Stretch would just be heavier than necessary and it would lose out to a shorter blade lighter knife.

The Ladybugs have an amazing cutting power for being so small, but I'm pretty sure most people would agree that a Dragonfly is easier to hold securely so maybe the extra weight is acceptable for more control and cutting power.

If we really did a test like this, they'd all have to be sharpened as similarly as possible to remove those variables. But even then you'd still have to consider blade grind geometry. One knife might be the winner in applied force and grip and weight but suffer from a thicker blade grind and not slice as well. To eliminate this variable you'd have to do blade regrinds or something to even out slicing ability.

[Drubieg]

Next time you’re cutting something take a look at the edge. If you’re using more than an inch of it post a picture

Only when I slice apples. But I slice alot of apples

[cjk]

....
It just keeps creating more questions than answers too.
....

I might add that all of this was inspired by the serrated Magnacut UKPK Salt finally coming out.
So then there's teeth.

[vivi]

Next time you’re cutting something take a look at the edge. If you’re using more than an inch of it post a picture

Strange comment. Almost all my knife usage involves more than an inch of blade, aside from trimming threads and cutting the tape on packages.

That's pocket knife usage specifically. Woods fixed blades and work knives that holds even more true.

[JARHEAD]

Let’s not forget the Caly!
It is a root element to a lot of Spyderco knives!

[JARHEAD]

Next time you’re cutting something take a look at the edge. If you’re using more than an inch of it post a picture

Cut cardboard effiently with a long edge? Slice a breadloaf? Whittle a pointy stick? ... just the first three examples that immediately came to mind...

Also: Even in tasks where one only uses an inch of the edge: If that inch starts to dull, on a longer edge there are several more left to work with...

YES!

[JARHEAD]

Interesting thread, but the title should definitely be length to weight ratio, as this is not strictly a measure of cutting performance.

A safety razor blade is .035 oz at 1.69" = 48.29
I am not going to break down a mile of cardboard, prune a bush, or dress a dear with it.
So for straight length to weight ratio, it is amazing, but many of the other factors that contribute the cutting performance of a knife/blade are lacking.

I sincerely hope you aren't dressing any "dears".

I doubt most people would use a safety razor blade without a handle. The handle would weigh something. Plus a safety razor blade isn't a folding knife.

I think he’s talking about a razor knife. Think Home Depot.

[Cletus]

I think the UKPK is my favorite in this regard. I keep one in my pocket daily and it has replaced everything else. It has a great cutting edge and the knife is thin and light. It even kicked the DF out of my pocket!

Gasp!

[Cletus]

I wish for a UKPK Wharncliffe in MagnaMax.

[bobnikon]

Interesting thread, but the title should definitely be length to weight ratio, as this is not strictly a measure of cutting performance.

A safety razor blade is .035 oz at 1.69" = 48.29
I am not going to break down a mile of cardboard, prune a bush, or dress a dear with it.
So for straight length to weight ratio, it is amazing, but many of the other factors that contribute the cutting performance of a knife/blade are lacking.

I sincerely hope you aren't dressing any "dears".

I doubt most people would use a safety razor blade without a handle. The handle would weigh something. Plus a safety razor blade isn't a folding knife.

True, I understand the favoured method is a split handle toothbrush, using dental floss to wrap the handle to keep the blade in place. Then you can go about shiving and dressing the dears

[Wartstein]

Next time you’re cutting something take a look at the edge. If you’re using more than an inch of it post a picture

Strange comment. Almost all my knife usage involves more than an inch of blade, aside from trimming threads and cutting the tape on packages.

That's pocket knife usage specifically. Woods fixed blades and work knives that holds even more true.

Agreed.

And even if one could potentially do a task without using "more than an inch [of the edge]":
- Having and actually using more edge makes executing many cutting tasks more efficient or convenient, cause it allows more of a "drawing" instead of a "pressing downwards" motion (an example would be cardboard cutting)
- Or a long edge can sometimes do a cut in one, continuous motion, while a short one might require some back and forth.

Also, even if just an inch gets used in certain tasks, with a long edge one can decide which section/"inch" of the edge is ideal for that:
For example:
- Precise carving: Close to the handle
- Cutting on a board: Far from the handle (for better clearance of the hand and better cutting angle)

[kobold]

For your consideration: the Native Chief Magnacur LW SE. Thanks to the prolonged serrated edge length it could outcut many shorter and PE blades of equal length. And it is pretty lightweight.

[aicolainen]

I wish for a UKPK Wharncliffe in MagnaMax.

There's no shortage of models I want to see in a wharncliffe configuration, but weirdly I don't think I've ever considered the UKPK as a candidate. Now that you've opened my eyes to that possibility, it's such an obvious and interesting option.
Really hope that could be in the cards one day, and maybe the Metro too. I'd take WC versions in any steel, but MM would be icing on the cake.

As for existing models, I too have a special connection with the WC DF2 in k390 (also without a clip).
Sometimes (most times?) cutting performance/weight can't be identified just by putting numbers in a table.
The magic trick of this specific DF2 is that it's the smallest and lightest thing I've found that excels at the cutting tasks I need to perform at work. And it isn't just big enough to work well, it's exactly at the sweet spot. Both smaller and bigger would be a disadvantage.

That's just one use case though. For backpacking/hiking I want more edge and more belly to achieve the required cutting performance.
The Salt 2 FFG LC200N has been a staple. I also have the Catcherman sprint, and while its stats are fantastic, the Salt more often than not wins out due to versatility. It handles better, carries better and works better for precision tasks (IMO).
Catcherman is a more narrow use case, but great when I want a longer blade.
Also been holding out for a S2XL Salt w/ FFG, partly because I want the lightest possible salt configuration (though I also think FFG will have better cutting performance in my use). Surprised this variant isn't a thing yet.

Looking forward to the Charisma for sure. Kind of merging the Catcherman and Salt 2 into one knife.

I wouldn't be surprised if @Bolster has something to add to this discussion

[abbazaba]

BHQ PM2 LW in M4 may very well end up being my answer.

[aicolainen]

Next time you’re cutting something take a look at the edge. If you’re using more than an inch of it post a picture

Strange comment. Almost all my knife usage involves more than an inch of blade, aside from trimming threads and cutting the tape on packages.

That's pocket knife usage specifically. Woods fixed blades and work knives that holds even more true.

Agreed.

And even if one could potentially do a task without using "more than an inch [of the edge]":
- Having and actually using more edge makes executing many cutting tasks more efficient or convenient, cause it allows more of a "drawing" instead of a "pressing downwards" motion (an example would be cardboard cutting)
- Or a long edge can sometimes do a cut in one, continuous motion, while a short one might require some back and forth.

Also, even if just an inch gets used in certain tasks, with a long edge one can decide which section/"inch" of the edge is ideal for that:
For example:
- Precise carving: Close to the handle
- Cutting on a board: Far from the handle (for better clearance of the hand and better cutting angle)

I'm sure Zhyla can defend this statement himself, but in the meantime I have no problem understanding his take - and still being in agreement with you and vivi at the same time.
There's an ideal length for everything. Just like I've found the DF2 WC to be my perfect work knife.
A longer blade would just get in the way, in essence adding more weight for less cutting performance in that role = lesser cutting performance pr. unit of weight.

His statement could also be poking fun at the huge demographic of knife enthusiasts that essentially just use their knives to cut open the box that their next knife purchase arrives in.

In either case, more blade length is just worse cutting performance to weight ratio :)