What determines the feasibility of a Scandi grind??

[dbcad]

The question started popping up in my head when I took out the then less than sharp Bushcraft a couple of weeks ago and was able to make it insanely sharp once again with minimal effort. :) Capped it with 25 or so very light strokes on the SM UF stones. I'm not scared to use it because I know it will become very sharp again with minimal effort :) The Bushcraft is once again the sharpest edge I have :D

I started to question why this type of grind isn't used on more knives?? One positive of the Scandi grind is the ease with which the edge is refurbished and I'm trying to determine what the pitfalls of a Scandi grind might be.

What came to mind are these points:

1) The cross sectional area gets so thin near the edge that the edge is less durable??

2) The blade material needed to make the scandi grind and edge sustainable would have to be extremely tough.

3) Manufacturing cost because of the gigantic 3/8" flat edge bevel that is put on both sides of the blade and goes down to zero :D

I can't help but think there are more factors I'm not realizing in trying to understand why the scandi grind isn't used more often. I know I'm an edge nut when I start asking these questions :rolleyes: The edges I've been able to obtain on all of my :spyder: 's are immensely gratifying :D The little fox, a non :spyder: , with it's hollow grind in 440b or c is also very enjoyable :D Just curious why a scandi grind isn't chosen more often. It seems to be a very attractive way to make the both sides meet in the middle.

One more off the wall thought, why not a hollow grind that meets at Zero. Now I know I'm an edge nut :D

[bada61265]

i think you have to look beyond the edge to see what works well for other blade shapes vs the scandi. ffg and saber ground blades will probubly make better slicers. depending on material being cut. for bush craft i prefer a convex to those but havnt tried a scandi yet either. there are pros and cons to all blade grinds. the only one i really cant find much to fault is convex. what scares me away from scandi is if the blade edge got a significant ding in it it would take forever to grind down the 3/8" flats to remove that ding. with a hollow ground or flat ground blade these take some work but cant be anywhere near the work a reprofile would take on the scandi. so to me that might be a knock against it. the thickness of the blade so close to the edge would make it more difficult to slice with. a hollow ground shape meets less resistance till its into the material probubly 2 times as deep as the scandi at a minimum. i think you could throw out comparisons all day and just end up with the fact that some blade shapes will work better at some tasks than others. the scandi as you pointed out sharpens up real nice. not having tried one ill just take that as a given and say i can sharpen any grind real nice. it might be interesting to see a folder or a longer fixed blade come with a scandi grind. i dont think the lack is because of cost, the blade material for a scandi grind knife is on average not as hard as many other styles of blades, for instance have you seen any scandi knives using zdp 189 or even s30v i will say i have seen one that was in D2. heard it was just a major pita to sharpen such a hard blade material in a scandi. so i think scandi because of the grind and sharpening is going to be usually found in the softer knife steels. which seems to be the case when ive looked at them.I was going to buy a trapper blade blank and build one, still might, but id choose the o1 over the d2. so overall i think blade steel for a scandi doesnt require any of the high end steels in fact probubly a high hardness steel would make the knife too hard to keep sharp vs other types of grinds which have much smaller areas to grind down to return a sharp edge.
so looking at your points,

no the scandi is thick near the edge. and doesnt get thin till it is at the edge.

while blade material is important as in any blade, i think scandi requirements are lower on the hardness and probubly anything from 1075 to o1 for easier sharpening. shure add in toughness too, but the edge has got to be forgiving in a scandi due to there being so much full width blade stock so near the edge.

i dont see a scandi as being overly expensive to manufacture. no complex grinding its all flat.

[dbcad]

Trying to get the point of your reply Bada21265. What I've been able to get is:

One good ding, which I've done with another knife, and it will ruin your day, a lot of material would have to be removed to properly repair it with a Scandi grind.

It's not as good a slicer as other grinds which I also agree with, though the Bushcraft seems to do well with wood and is a great steak slicer. There is a lot of needed thick behind the edge bevel that gets in the way.

Other grinds are more effective for the same task. I partially agree because the Bushcraft seems to really like whittling wood and does so more easily than other knives I have.

I posted the thread looking for answers to questions I couldn't find myself. Still looking for the huge fatal flaw that prevents the scandi grind from being used more frequently :) Sometimes I'm just a little thick :)

Please forgive me in my quest to better understand these sharp, hard, pointy things. I could be a little more succinct by just asking What crtieria warrant the use of a scandi grind?

[Evil D]

How is a scandi different than a hollow grind? The fact that there is no final edge bevel? I'm just trying to make sure i understand this right...a scandi grind goes all the way to the final edge instead of going down to an edge bevel, right?

This to me seems like a very delicate, very thin edge.

[bada61265]

id agree its a woods knife and works well on wood working tasks. but then try slicing an apple without the slice breaking into pieces. i think you probubly already realize there in your own words that its a bushcraft knife and the scandi grind is more suited to that type of use, that said you could still edc it and it would still cut other things. im not shure what the point of your questions are. obviously you think there should be more offerings in scandi grinds, im shure if people wanted them for whatever reasons, in other knife forms then there would be a market for them and they would be available.
Pretty much all your questions, or points about scandi bushcraft knives are wrong in my opinion. you cant ask a question thats wrong on its face and get a right answer. ill go threw it with you.

1) The cross sectional area gets so thin near the edge that the edge is less durable??
the cross section of any knife edge should be zero. because its an edge. scandi blades like your bushcraft have a 3/8 wide taper down to that edge. thats from the blades full width. thats a pretty sharp and fast drop down from full blade width to the edge compared to most any other grind. for woodcraft its a very durable grind. more meat near the edge.

2) The blade material needed to make the scandi grind and edge sustainable would have to be extremely tough.
here again im not shure i get where your going. as my other post must not of been clear enough then i missed your point. yea the steel in your bushcraft knife is tough. no not as tough as some steels. the design of the blade gives it some added strength at the edge. a knife not made for bushcrafting probubly wouldnt need so much blade width that close to the edge, hence you have other grinds.

3) Manufacturing cost because of the gigantic 3/8" flat edge bevel that is put on both sides of the blade and goes down to zero
here again you assume its more expensive to grind a 3/8" flat on a flat piece of steel than it is to grind a flat taper on a ffg blade or do a saber or hollow grind on a blade. if i threw caution to the wind id say its a much less costly process to make your 3/8" flats. want to talk pricey then a convex blade thats got to be hand ground on the sides down to the edge will be the most costly imo.

so basically your points are not valid because this isnt a complex blade shape to make or is it especially exotic steel nor is it less durable.

what you need to wrap your head around is that you have to get beyond the edge to see why other grinds might be favored over the scandi grind. the biggest flaw imo of that grind to take over prominence is its not a good slicer due to its thickness. its going to act like a fat wedge threw material, which is fine for wood cutting. but blade drag on other materials like cardboard could make it a tiring blade shape to work with compared to a thin ffg blade. so theres and example of why someone whos looking for a edc for work and slices allot of cardboard would really like a scandi knife.

[bada61265]

ill add that you can do what you want , i mean the thing will cut pretty much anything any other similarly sized blade will cut. if you feel its capable of out cutting other grinds in other daily tasks then by all means do a review and put it on youtube. i dont think based on responses that theres much help for you on your questions. you want someone to come and say yep, scandi grind is the best, all knives should be scandi grind . please dont hold your breath on that one.

[bada61265]

How is a scandi different than a hollow grind? The fact that there is no final edge bevel? I'm just trying to make sure i understand this right...a scandi grind goes all the way to the final edge instead of going down to an edge bevel, right?

This to me seems like a very delicate, very thin edge.

its actually not, that why its a good bushcraft blade shape/grind. the whole 3/8 flat tapers down to the edge. makes it pretty tough overall. also like ive tried to point out isnt the best shape for many common tasks. so nuff said, convex rocks. :D

[dbcad]

I've read your replies bada. You shouldn't assume that I think scandi is the best grind there is. I'm only looking for the reasons why it is not used more often. I do concur with many of your opinions.

The edge with a scandi has less cross sectional surface area and is weaker. A scandi gound blade needs to sharpen easily. A scandi grind is not as versatile as other grinds.

I was just looking for reasons why this type of grind isn't used more often and I've found and realized some. I appreciate the feedback but please don't assume I was advocating one grind or style over another. That's not my way :) It was just a question and an affection for the Bushcraft that prompted the thread.

[Chris_H]

• Urban vs rural/outback
• EDC vs bushcraft
• Skill vs experience

I think scandi grinds aren't used more because they excel at very specific tasks, but are less than ideal for others. Mix that with what most people use their knives for, plus the variety of skill and experiences with edged tools; it leaves scandi grinds in niche applications.

[Donut]

I've read that one of the requirements that the UK Bushcraft people made was for it to be scandi grind to be easily field sharpenable. I have been thinking that they would either have to take a pocket stone with them or have to use a found stone to sharpen.

A lot of times I see people using a convex grind for bushcraft, and in my mind if you need to sharpen convex in the field I would guess that you would be out of luck. Maybe you can carry a flexible strop to the field with you and do a little bit of sharpening.

dbcad, easy to bring back to super sharp is something that you might be seeing from the type of steel used on this knife. I believe it is the only Spyderco currently using O1.