I own several of the knives mentioned hear. There will always be the debate between the large and small knife crowds; to each his own as I’m comfortable with either choice. With good techniques a small blade can do a lot of larger knife chores, but there’s no denying that knowing how to properly use a large blade makes most tasks much faster and more efficient. The disadvantages are of course size and weight. My only issue with large knives is the comfort for all-day carry doing several different tasks. Even if I do pack a large knife, they often are carried in my pack and not always on my person.
With that said, I’ve found the Recon Scout a better chopper than the Hoodlum (I have the first batch of TOPS production before Buck picked up the main contract). The Hoodlum is excellent at smaller, green vegetation, but really sucks on anything seasoned or large. Chopping big stuff is not what it’s designed for. For a large knife though, the Hoodlum is very handy and can do small-knife chores very well, even cleaning hand-sized bream.
I don’t care for Cold Steel’s rubber handles, but that’s just me. It’s really not much of a concern even with my distaste as I often use gloves when doing heavy-duty chores. You really can’t go wrong between the two, but my preference would be the Hoodlum as it just seems to be a better slicer, great at chopping smaller limbs/branches (for shelter building) and can be used on small knife jobs more effectively; plus I always carry a Bahco or Silky saw, so chopping is less needed. Both blades will baton just fine and not a concern. In the spring when there’s a lot more leafy vegetation, I like the reach of the Hoodlum and it just seems lighter or at least more nimble in the hand when needing to clear a camping site or bushwhacking a trail through briars. It’s a close margin as they are both great blades and I would admit the Recon Scout would be much more comfortable on the belt if carried (shorter in length would be my reasoning)…weight between the two is almost identical; after-market sheaths would be the only difference.
Already mentioned are several other great blades, ESEE, Ranger Knives, TOPS, Ka Bar/Becker (and a few dozen moderately priced customs). As I already alluded to I like big blades, but there’s a point where they just add more weight and not necessarily provide better chopping ability. I’m not in the camp of a single “do-all” knife, but if you’re not planning on chopping anything larger than an inch or two in diameter or you don’t need to process a lot of firewood, a decent sized blade can be a very versatile tool.
My system continues to evolve and change. I’m more apt to pack my Blind Horse Knives machete, my Skookum Bush Tool or simple Mora, SAK (or Multitool), folding saw (Bahco/Kershaw or Silky) and my EDC folder. Depending on my activities, I might pack a tomahawk or small axe, but that usually when I have planned activities that will really need the weight and efficiency of a decent axe.
Even with a big blade, don’t forego the quick access of a smaller fixed blade knife. Even a neck knife is easy to always have on your person and often easier to handle and use than a pocket folder. One of my favorites is Fallkniven’s little WM-1. People often refer to efficiency when discussing large knives and while I agree, efficiency shouldn’t exclude carry-comfort, weight, deftness or access. A smaller belt knife will also be more often carried if the sheath/system isn’t cumbersome or restrictive.
Let us know what you decide on!
ROCK6