View Full Version : Full tang or not full tang?
Blankfisherman
30-04-2004, 10:52
If there are any parts of this that are incorrect - I apologise.
Here goes
1. Full tang means the metal part of the blade in the handle goes all the way to the end of the handle. Is this for strength?
2. If strength is the main criteria why do some full tang blades have a stick tang and not the full width like woodlore knives?
3. What are the advantages/disadvantages of these variations?
Thanks for all responses.
Tom
C_Claycomb
30-04-2004, 11:38
I know that I have seen this discussed somewhere on here, but can't find it easily. Possibly we should dig up all the discussion on knife construction/design and put it as an article or something. So that it is easier to find without ploughing through the forum?
Full tang can be used to mean slightly different things by different makers, but generally means that you can see metal all the way around the handle. As on the Woodlore, the metal runs the full depth of the handle, not just being exposed at the rear. The handle is made of a couple of slabs pinned or bolted to the sides of the tang.
It could be argued that knives like the Falkniven A1 etc have a full tang, as it runs the full length of the handle to protrude at the butt to give a hammering surface. It is something of a matter of semantics.
The short answer for why some knives are made one way and some another, is that it comes down to the opinion of the maker! This topic has been debated back and forth on every forum you can think of and I don't think there has ever been a final agreement :lol:
If you look at the Kellam video of them abusing a knife :shock: with a hidden tang you would he hard put to say that it isn't strong enough!
There is MUCH more to good knife handle design than just strength. You want enough strength, in addition to ergonomics, ease of maintenance, comfort, security, and economics.
Hiding the tang in the handle means it cah't rust so easily, it means the handle stays warmer in cold weather, the wood can be sealed more easily and the handle shaped more easily by the maker. It also makes ballancing the knife easier, in most cases. With machine tools though it tends to require more work to enclose the tang than it does to slap a couple of flat slabs onto a full tang.
Blankfisherman
30-04-2004, 12:56
Thanks Chris
Being new I did not realsie this had been asked before - sorry.
It seems a shame that manufacturers do not sing from the same hymn sheet as each other!
This would save time and give less confusion.
Regards Tom
Being new I did not realsie this had been asked before - sorry.
Don't worry about it and welcome.
It seems a shame that manufacturers do not sing from the same hymn sheet as each other!
This would save time and give less confusion.
Do you not think that it would be a bit more boring though? :-)
C_Claycomb
30-04-2004, 14:17
It isn't so much getting manufacturers to sing the same tune. That would be easy :lol:
I am going to the Blade Show in Atlanta and there are over 500 exhibitors there, most are knife makers, and most of those are one man bands. I can name 3 makers I know who won't be there, there must be many hundreds more. And that is just in the US. Very hard to get all those individuals to use exactly the same words to describe something as indiviualistic as a knife :-D
There are major differences between cultures too. When a Scandinavian talks about a knife maker, or custom knife maker, they mean something different from what it mean here or in the US.
I may have got a discussion here and one on www.britishblades.com mixed up :roll: always possible :wink: So don't worry!! :lol:
If there are any parts of this that are incorrect - I apologise.
Here goes
1. Full tang means the metal part of the blade in the handle goes all the way to the end of the handle. Is this for strength?
2. If strength is the main criteria why do some full tang blades have a stick tang and not the full width like woodlore knives?
3. What are the advantages/disadvantages of these variations?
Thanks for all responses.
Tom
The variations exist because people have differnt criteria. Some want a super strong knife and put that at the top of thier list, others dont want visible metal, maybe for aesthetices or maybe because of cold weather. It's horses for courses. Generally, the full tang knife is considered stronger than the stick tang construction. But the stick tang is far from weak. A knife is as individual as the designer or maker. Terry Primos uses a rebated design, where the tang goes almost to the edge of the knife, but stops about 1/4 inch shy all round. The wooden handle slabs then get rebated to accomodate the tang. The handle slabs then get bolted on as normal - no visible steel and damned near as strong as a full tang.
See: http://www.primosknives.com/articles/mortised_tangs/mortised_tangs_1.htm
It's up to the consumer to set thier own criteria and then find a iknife that fits it (or have one made to order).
In theory, the stick tang will be more comfortable to hold in your bare hands when the temps drop below freezing. For the most part, I tend to agree with that (assuming no metal in the handle material). It is also usually much lighter than a full tang which is worth thinking about when you are carrying a full ruck. The basic design, when properly executed, is tough as nails, as evidenced by the many khukiris and parangs used for heavy chopping that have stick tangs.
If the handle material of the knife should break, the full tang (not stick) will be more readily useable which is something that would be desirable in a survival knife design. The liklihood of the handle material breaking depends on many factors, but especially how well it was made and how you intend to use (or abuse) it.
The mortised tang is a wonderful compromise. You get the advantage of a full handle to grip without having to touch metal and yet beneath is a very wide tang that, if the scales were to fail, you could wrap with duct tape or a rag and still have a very serviceable blade.
The top knife (Roselli) has a partial tang or partial stick tang. The second knife down (Marbles) has a through-tang or full stick tang. The third knife down (Allan Blade) has a mortised tang and the bottom blade (Nick Wheeler/Jamie Knowlden) has a full tang. Note also that the tang tapers from just behind the ricasso to the pommel. This is called a tapered tang.
http://www4.gvsu.edu/triert/images5/tangs1b.jpg
bushwacker bob
02-05-2004, 00:28
full tang, full tang ole biscuit barrel :lol:
full tang, full tang ole biscuit barrel :lol:
LOL, reading that I had a "oh, oh, oh, I know, I know...." moment.
I just had to look that script up Bob....
Well here at Luton it's a three-cornered contest between, from left
to right, Alan Jones (Sensible Party), Tarquin Fintimlinbinwhinbimlim
Bus Stop Poontang Poontang Ole Biscuit-Barrel (Silly Party), and
Kevin Phillips Bong, who is running on the Slightly Silly ticket.
And here's the result.
Man that takes me back. I miss Python.
I have bend tested maybe 20 or so (of my own) knives in the last 2 years to check the integrity,........ not by any means scientific or conclusive!..its an ongoing process.
Its common to bend test a blade by placing a scaffold pole or similar over the handle down to the ricasso area (and the lower third of the blade is held in a vice)...Done this way, its rare any stresses are put on the handle and ricasso construction. ....Therefore, I moved the pole back to expose the lower three inches of a handle and bend to show the handle/ricasso integrity.
I found that the area just in front of the handle, the ricasso area, was a potential weakness and is often overlooked during the heat treatment process.
By weakness, I mean the steel is so soft that it bends and not spring back.
Some knives were edge quenched (a common practice especialy if a hamon is wanted)....where the hardness stops at or near the blade side of the ricasso (hamon lines usualy fade out in the ricasso by design).
This can leave the tang in a softer or even annealed state causing loss of rigidty and strength ,especialy if the tang is a thin construction (I call thin anything less than 1/4 inch!!).
Handle material may add rigidity to the tang, but the weakness may be just in front of the handle.
Including the ricasso and tang in the hardening process will add strength and rigidity...., then temper back to a usable hardness.
Tangs with soldered guards can also be a weakness if not careful...Soldering a guard at the tang/ricasso junction can sometimes soften the steel too much (anneal) if its overheated......Using a low temp solder like TIX helps.
Leaving as much steel in the ricasso area will obviously increase strength, everything else being equal (blade and tang tapering away from the ricasso so the ricasso is thickest part of the steel).
So, regardless of what sort of tang construction you have (full, hidden etc)...If the heat treatment of the area in front of the handle is questionable, then that is likely to be where the weakness will show.
kevin.
bushwacker bob
02-05-2004, 15:25
showing our age Martyn:!: :wink:
The General
02-05-2004, 18:05
If there are any parts of this that are incorrect - I apologise.
Here goes
1. Full tang means the metal part of the blade in the handle goes all the way to the end of the handle. Is this for strength?
Very much so!
2. If strength is the main criteria why do some full tang blades have a stick tang and not the full width like woodlore knives?
It keeps the steel hidden from exposure to rust. In a smaller knife the chance of failure is less based upon the Fulcrum principle.
3. What are the advantages/disadvantages of these variations?
Full tang= strength and more balance for a longer blade. Lets rust get at exposed sections, which may get under the handles.
Rat tale or hidden tang will not be as strong, but in a smaller blade this may help balance the blade and as prying is less likley, not as likely to break anyway.
Thanks for all responses.
Tom
Excuse my ignorance, but would someone please explain what the ricasso area is?
Thanks
TS
Excuse my ignorance, but would someone please explain what the ricasso area is?
Thanks
TS
Oh dear, Bagman is gonna hate me for dragging this old thread up, but here's your answer TS...
http://www.britishblades.com/forums/showthread.php?t=982
:wink:
showing our age Martyn:!: :wink:
Indeed. :wink: :-D
Oh dear, Bagman is gonna hate me for dragging this old thread up, but here's your answer TS...
http://www.britishblades.com/forums/showthread.php?t=982
:wink:
That was TOO funny! :uu:
The irony is that I have had knives since being 6 years old, I was raised in Sheffield by a family of cutlery grinders (James Dixon & Son) and I teach axe and knife to my Scouts; and this was one item of terminology that I had never heard of!
Thanks to all (especially those friends from BritishBlades)!
:-D
Its common to bend test a blade by placing a scaffold pole or similar over the handle down to the ricasso area
sorry coutel, but common???
i'm all for hard work knife testing, but testing within normal operating parameters. it is a knife after all.
chris, going back to that little IJ puukko that was tested according to mors kochanski's test, the blade survived, but the handle was apparently broken beyond reasonable repair. but it is possible to make a stick tang knife that will survive completely intact.
some info here http://outdoors-magazine.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=607 including some rather unflattering pics of your's truly. there were some interesting tests caried out on bark river knives over at a couple of places on knife forums. i can't remember the exact threads. one of the guys managed to destroy a mortise tang knife, but the handle remained intact! amazing stuff.
as for the original question, i think chris covered most of it. the various terms are often used interchangeably, even when they mean different things.
cheers, and.
Its common to bend test a blade by placing a scaffold pole or similar over the handle down to the ricasso area
sorry coutel, but common???
I always carry a scaffold pole with me just in case I need to test my knife :-D
Great test Sargey!
Its common to bend test a blade by placing a scaffold pole or similar over the handle down to the ricasso area
sorry coutel, but common???
i'm all for hard work knife testing, but testing within normal operating parameters. it is a knife after all.
I think Kev means common amongst custom cutlerty makers. While it might not be that common outside of CONUS, it's certainly common amongst ABS members as it's part of the ABS journeyman tests.
Its common to bend test a blade by placing a scaffold pole or similar over the handle down to the ricasso area
sorry coutel, but common???
i'm all for hard work knife testing, but testing within normal operating parameters. it is a knife after all.
In which circumstances would you need to hammer a knife into a tree?
:shock: :-)
C_Claycomb
05-05-2004, 08:37
Off the top of my head I can't think of why one would hammer a knife into a tree. However I have heard of two different occassions when people have hammered knives into cliff faces during climbs and used them for hand holds/anchor points.
[
sorry coutel, but common???
i'm all for hard work knife testing, but testing within normal operating parameters. it is a knife after all.
.
No need top be sorry!
'Common' refers to knife makers destruct testing their own knives.....to test the integrity of their hardening and tempering...It gives an idea of flexibilty (return to near true) against not flexing and the degree of breaking. Not scientific, but maybe a bit more scientific than hammering a knife into a tree and jumping up and down on it!!!
Its also a 'common' test for American Bladesmith standards.
The plus side is that IF I can make a knife that will pass the integrity tests I ask in my workshop, then it will probably stand up to your abuse of hammering them in trees and using them as steps. :lol:
Mike Stewart
05-05-2004, 13:57
Gentlemen,
If I could just make a quick point,
The ABS test on knives is for hand forged blades and is the standard of THEIR organisation. There are other Hand forged Associations that are totally opposed to the views of the ABS. One is the Oshoken Society that maintains that you should not be able to bend the blade no matter what you use to try to bent it with. These are both American associations and are opposed on a lot of things.
I guess my point is that all these tests are highly subjective.
I have noticed that on all forums you have very different folks that also have different critera for testing. Here I see a lot of carving, batoning, making fuzz sticks etc. You will find other places that will be cutting free handing manila rope- cutting half filled beer/soda cans in half with blinding speed,-- hacking manufactured 2x4s in half and shaving of arm-leg-and body hair.
All of these tests are valid for the folks who do them. The mixed results they get just show that certian knives are better for certian tasks than others. If you know what you want your knife to do--you are way ahead of the game.
Just my two cents,
Mike.......
Gentlemen,
If I could just make a quick point,
The ABS test on knives is for hand forged blades and is the standard of THEIR organisation. There are other Hand forged Associations that are totally opposed to the views of the ABS. One is the Oshoken Society that maintains that you should not be able to bend the blade no matter what you use to try to bent it with. These are both American associations and are opposed on a lot of things.
I guess my point is that all these tests are highly subjective.
I agree. In fact, I dont think that the manner that the ABS bend test is conducted is conclusive to proving it is a good blade, and I dont think its meant to be....It is more a test of what the smith can do with a piece of steel after its shown to be able to chop, cut and shave without edge damage.
A blade that can bend and stays bent is IMO too soft, and would be a failure of what I am trying to achieve. I want strength coupled with some flexing/springing before total failure.
Thats why I moved the leverage up the handle, as the handle integrity was not usualy tested (by me anyway!).
I am interested in the Oshoken Society tests/organisation mentioned. I tried an internet search but couldnt find any thing. Do you have any links?
The comment about 'not bending no matter what is used to bend it' is interesting.
Surely if sufficient force is applied, then steel will eventualy either bend, flex of snap (or is there something else?).
If the steel did not show any signs of bending or flexing, then I would expect that eventual failure (snapping?) would be sudden and dramatic.....There has to be a point of failure..unless its kryptonite :-)
Anyway...I am digressing.....The comment was originaly about tang designs and strength..and I was only suggesting that the tang (or blade) is only going to be as strong as the weakest link.....and in my 'backroom' testing, I found the weak link was sometimes the ricasso just in front of the handle....so changed my methods to improve this. :o\:
I found the weak link was often the ricasso just in front of the handle....so changed my methods to improve this. :o\:
That's interesting kev, you mentioned this before. I cant remember reading how you resolved it though. What did you change to strengthen the blade at this point. Also, just for clarity, do you mean the point at wghich the tang joins the blade, or where the plunge is? The meat of the (usually thick) ricasso itself surely isn't the weak point?
Mike Stewart
06-05-2004, 04:05
I have never seen a well made blade break through the ricasso. I have seen many blades break at the junction of the ricasso and the tang. This would be at the front of the handle of a hidden tang knife. This is usually a design problem. The step down from the full height of the ricasso to the width of the tang that went through the guard and handle was too dramatic or too sharp cornered. Either condition can lead to a broken knife.
On my hidden tang models I usually have a three inch tang in the handle on a sporting knife. Longer and wider on a big blade chopper.
Proper construction and design are the indicators of strength. All knives , if made properly , are plenty strong for any knid of hand held use.
Please remember that a japanese full length Katana only has a four inch tang. I have never heard of one of those breaking.
Mike.........
I found the weak link was often the ricasso just in front of the handle....so changed my methods to improve this. :o\:
That's interesting kev, you mentioned this before. I cant remember reading how you resolved it though. What did you change to strengthen the blade at this point. Also, just for clarity, do you mean the point at wghich the tang joins the blade, or where the plunge is? The meat of the (usually thick) ricasso itself surely isn't the weak point?
Ricasso can be a weak point at the handle junction especialy if its a hidden tang where shoulders could be a weakness...either too soft (annealed) or too hard (fracture).
And its only really going to show as a problem under extreme abuse/testing where leverage is applied on the handle....Is it going to be a problem under normal use?.....doubt it.
Simple to correct...awarness, design and heat treatment.
... Placing the leverage point for a bend test at or below the ricasso is cheating :lol:
:oT:
... the Oshoken Society that maintains that you should not be able to bend the blade no matter what you use to try to bent it with.
Give me a lever and a place to stand...
And I'll bend or break any blade with alacrity.
Assuming the vice holds up, that is!
Mike Stewart
06-05-2004, 15:47
Peter,
I am wholheartedly against destruction testing ,but I do agree with you that , if you want to break a knife it is more than possible.
I was just relaying the Oshoken Society position. Those guys hand forge their blades. I do not. All of my blades are stock removal.
I think that any normal hand held test of knives is valid. The test should be tailored to the purpose the knife was designed for and you can push that envelope a bit but to hold a knife to a criteria that far exceeds it's design ,is fun to do and can be eye opening for what you actually can accomplish, it can also be misleading. In other words, folks who read a test to destruction might just remember the destruction and not all of the positively accomplished tasks that the knife performed. I have seen this happen a number of times in my 25+ years in this industry.
I'll give you a quick example. If you are testing a folding knife and go through a whole bunch of cutting tests that the knife accomplishes well and then put a breaker bar(pipe) on the handle with the blade in a vise you will break out the pivot pin. If that is photographed and shown, that may imprint the potential customer with only that portion of the test. He or She may think that the knife is inferior in some way and not buy the knife. The validity of the test won't be questioned by a lot of folks because they saw it on a forum or in a book. People have a tendancy of believing what the see and read.
Now, there may be an exception.... If a maker claims that His or Her knife will do something , it is valid to duplicate that test. To be fair, you must duplicate the task exactlly as the maker claims.
At Bark River we like to work with our customers and develop knives that they want and need. We are very open about what we make-why we make it that way- and how they would like to see it improved. We are very comfortable with that position and enjoy the interaction.
All the best,
Mike........
[quote="Mike Stewart"]Peter,
I am wholheartedly against destruction testing ,but I do agree with you that , if you want to break a knife it is more than possible.
quote]
As a small time knife maker, who forges my own knives , make my own damascus and does all my own heat treatment...occasional testing to destruction is absolutely necessary....
When the steel snaps it gives the opportunity to look at the grain growth , make assessments and make changes to my thermal cycles and heat treatment if I feel its necessary. ..
It could be argued than an 'owner/non knife maker' is seeing what punishment the knife can take before total failure, but a maker is testing for more 'scientific'? reasons.
Kevin.
Mike Stewart
07-05-2004, 00:29
Kevin,
We do test our own blades and I assume other makers do also. It is good to hear that you do too. This is more than normal for a maker.
When reviewers do this without saying -up front- that their intent is to destruct test the knife it is a bit out of line ,in my opinion.
If a knife fails in hand held -common tasks then the reviewer is on his own to say or not say what happened. This is not the same case as purposely breaking something and acting like the item failed to do the task for which it was designed.
In the past I have actually asked reviewers (two) to purposely break one of my knives. Since I told them to do it ,I was more than willing to have them publish the results. They , in fact , did so. Both Gentlemen showed how much abuse it took to break the knife. It was a very positive review. It was also done at my request. Both men were creative in how they did it and the public reaction to the tests were great.
All the best,
Mike.......
When reviewers do this without saying -up front- that their intent is to destruct test the knife it is a bit out of line ,in my opinion.
If a knife fails in hand held -common tasks then the reviewer is on his own to say or not say what happened. This is not the same case as purposely breaking something and acting like the item failed to do the task for which it was designed.
Point taken.
As a maker - albeit even smaller-time than Kevin :-) - I do want to know just how much it takes to utterly destroy a blade. I *like* NDT techniques, but I can't really afford the equipment needed to perform them! I think Kevin has probably destroyed more blades than I've made.
I think I know that sort of tests you are getting at - and I wouldn't, for example, expect a Woodlore knife to cut through breezeblocks or metal firedoors; I would expect it to cut, split and carve wood until the cows come home without suffering. Horses for courses, as ever.
I think that destruction testing is as much about improving ones skills as a knife maker as being a realistic test for suitability for use. It is very easy indeed to make a knife that will never ever bend. Just don't bother to temper it.
It is also important to remember that the ABS test includes a cutting test as well as a bend test. Toughness and hardness are two desirable but mutually contradictory properties in a steel blade. The skill is to find the best compromise for the intended use and extract the maximum possible performance from the material. There are a whole range of techniques which can be used to achieve this aim, many of them requiring conciderable skill on the part of the maker. Bend testing is just one way to evaluate how well you've done.
IMO destruction testing is an essential part of developing the skills of a kife maker, without it you just don't know where the limits are so you cant push them back.
I do agree though that it is not nessicarily a particularly useful indicator of how well a kife will perform in the field.
been away for a couple of days and i'm still catching up.
coutel, the bar, yes in that context i see what you mean. like many guys, i'm a bit wary of the fashion towards sacrificing performance in favour of robustness, and mis-marketing robustness as performance.
the hammering a knife into a tree thing is an ongoing investigation into a couple of questions.
A: the fact that every survival book has a grain of something stupid. it's a test specified in mors kochanski's bushcraft. i still don't really know if it's stupid or not.
B: if you try it the handle will break before the blade does, can it be done with a stick tang?
if you try it with a thick tactical knife, it's all but impossible to hammer the knife that far into a tree. if you use a really thin slicer, it won't support the weight. so it's really quite a subtley complex test.
the real world application of hammering on the pommel comes from a couple of jobs, a few simple bits of wood work, cutting holes in snare pegs and so on. and a quick and dirty way of splitting wood for firewood.
what i think i can say with a reasonable level of confidence, if it's good, it's good, if it's pants, it's pants. :roll: :-D there are no absolutes. you could say stick tangs are too weak, i can show you Jean-Marc's oak and copper handled puukko. you could say semi tangs are too weak, i could show you some semi tang katanas as mike mentioned. you could say hollow handled survival knives are too weak, i can show you my modified chris reeves sable, and that knife has had more than it's fair share of battering :oops:
cheers, and.
there is a video of a puukko undergoing the mors kochanski test on this site
I cant find it at the moment though
The vid links are in this thread:
http://www.bushcraftuk.co.uk/community/viewtopic.php?t=1154