The Woodsman Pilot: The First Becker: Machax

Machax

Where to start... The Machax is my favorite blade. That is probably why I feel the need to dedicate an individual post to it. It's Ethan's first design and really the only one to have this many unique versions from the four manufacturers of Becker knives.

It all started here: with Ethan's love of kukris and a CASE WWII survival machete/bolo.

Photo thanks to TTAK David Anderson.

Click HERE to read David's 5 from the grinder with Ethan.

Ethan loves kukris, but never liked the small handles and the stick tang. He once talked about a friend of his who served in Vietnam. He said that he had sent a kukri with him and one day when he was using the blade, it went boomeranging from the handle. He knew then that full tang was the way to go. One of his other favorite blades was the CASE bolo that came from a survival kit in a plane. He has said he used and abused that blade for over 15 years and it still holds up. The Becker handle design is very heavily influenced by the handle on the CASE bolo.

The very early Machax had wood handles and large brass pins (just like the CASE bolo).

Some of the wooden handle versions I've seen have the stamp on the handle.

Here you can see some of the progression:

Many, many, many prototypes:

This is one of my favorites, I don't think it would be a good performer, but it looks so amazing!

I recently talked with Ethan about the methods he used to create the original when he started making them in batches for sale. He told me this is the most wrong way to make a knife, but back then he had no idea how else to do it. First the 4140 metal stock was stamped out at a automobile machine shop. Then the stock was taken to another machine shop and a surface grinder was used to put the flat grinds on. He said this was a terrible way of grinding the primary bevel. He said it didn't really grind the metal off, rather it ripped it off. This process would leave behind bad grind lines where the metal was pulled off. The photos below are an example of what he is talking about (you can also see the same grind lines in the wood handled version in the second photo from the top). Few were sold like the one below, Ethan either changed his grinding method or took the grind lines off with another grinder. Next, the stock was put on a CNC router which would cut around everything but the edge. The next step was heat treat and coating. Handles would be put on last and needed hand fitting due to the nature of the zytel used at this time (estalok was later). It was a long process which involved many stops at different machine shops. He said that at the time the Machax was considered to be very expensive, but the amount of work that went into it justified it.

The real Cincinnati Machax came with either a nylon sheath from Eagle (the same people who made the Becker Patrol Pack) or a leather sheath made by Garry Brommeland. The sheaths also came with a genius method of attachment. It had two button down straps on the back so it could be used on a belt or on MOLLE webbing. The paracord wrap-around method to hold the knife in place is also something really unique about these sheaths.

The Machax came in three different finishes in the Cincinnati days. The first finish was the black phosphate. The next two I'm not 100% sure the order of but I have very good reason to believe the proper order is: the polished hard chrome followed by the less polished hard chrome with a slight hint of a copper wash to it.

Photo thanks to Worthpoint

The Warrior Machax was a fighting blade and had a sharpened clip edge. It came in both the black and polished hard chrome finish. The black ones from what i've seen always had a less drastic clip. Both can be seen in the photos below.

Thanks to Ethan, here are some original ads and reviews. You may need to click on the photos to make them large enough to read.

This part is probably a bit redundant if you have read my original document on the Cincinnati, Blackjack, Camillus, and Kabar Beckers. I wanted to compare the four different versions, for now just the KaBar and Cincinnati. The Cincinnati version of the Machax is probably the best version. I say probably because the KaBar is so good it very may well be the best. It's very very very hard to say. My first Machax was the KaBar, so maybe I'm biassed. For years and years all I heard was that the Cincinnati is the best. I really think it's a bit over-hyped. I'm not 100% sure where Ethan currently sides on this, but I do believe he is of the opinion that the KaBar is the best version. After all, if he thought the Cincinnati was the best, he would have had KaBar make that one, right?

Ethan told me he marked this up on an old Cincinnati and sent it over to KaBar to give them an outline for how he wanted the new Machax to be.

When I finally got my first Cincinnati I really did think it was the best. However, what makes the KaBar great is its weight to performance ratio. Same with the bk9, that blade is famous because it performs way above its class and is light enough not to wear your arm out. I will admit the bk4 is less popular than the bk9 because the bk4 comes with a learning curve. You really have to master your snap cuts (which Ethan preaches every time I see him). The balance is better on the bk4 when compared to the bk9 and it's a fact that curved edges cut better. The bk9 was my first Becker and I absolutely love it. However, doing small blade chores with the bk9 is unpleasant: doable, but unpleasant. The bk9 is a big blade, the Machax is a tool.

One of the highest (and rarest) compliments I can pay to a large blade is when it can act like a small blade. Yes, yes I know every big blade can work in place of a small blade, but I'm not talking about a work in a pinch situation. What I mean is that the Machax (in my hands) can truly accomplish the same things I can do with my bk16. Doing small blade tasks with a large blade is often very difficult and produces bad results. With my Machax I can do small blade tasks just almost as easy as if I had a bk16. Of course, I do have a lot of practice with it, but still I've never picked up another blade that can be used so well and easily for multiple tasks. I apologize if I'm not making any since. I hope you don't think I'm insinuating that this is the best blade for everyone, but it is the best blade for me.

Here is my final conclusion: I love both, but I think I love the KaBar more. The stock is much thinner on the KaBar, so: 1) It's lighter and 2) It's got more slice. However, I have a fool-proof method for which one to use. I pick either Cincinnati or Kabar based off of what I'm going out into the woods to accomplish. Lots of chopping? Splitting wood? I'll go with the Cincinnati. Traveling light? Doing some crafting? I'll grab the KaBar. Trust me: I'll be happy and fine with either blade.

Alright moving on: let's talk about the Blackjack and Camillus versions. They were both bad, like really bad. The Blackjack version had the grind so low the geometry and balance was way off. It was basically only useful as a froe. The Camillus looked like the geometry was spot on, but that was not the case. The weight was way too forward, the .25" stock made sure of that. The flat saber grind was also not ground thin enough, making the edge way too obtuse. I hate to pick on my favorite blade design, but the Camillus Brute was a better blade than the Camillus Machax (and I HATE the brute). The Brute suffered from the exact same problems, too much forward weight, too thick, and an obtuse grind angle. An indestructible blade makes for one horrible knife. If the user is smart he will understand the limits of himself and the limits of the blade. If you know those limits, your knife will never fail on you.

Here is the Blackjack Machax:

Here is the standard Blackjack Machax leather sheath:

Here is that oddball Machax from Blackjack. It's the only one I've ever see like this. It's marked and has some sort of silver paint coating on it. It also has an odd grind height. It's not quite high enough to be a Cincinnati, not quite low enough to be a standard Blackjack. It's also what people think to be practice marked under the handles. So the consensus was either: it's a pre-production blade that they were trying to see if they could mark the coating, (makes since because they had trouble with marking the blades and couldn't mark any of the grey powder coated "sterile" ones) or it's an end-of-days knife at the Blackjack factory and the bank people were just trying to mark it and sell it. The first theory is a bit more believable to me.

The Camillus Machax, as talked about above, was really terrible. It came from Camillus with an ambidextrous kydex sheath. I've also seen it come with the green nylon sheath for a bk9.