I've never really understood why if Moras are great for bushcraft a more robust knife would still be better. Why is that?
qjs

I guess thick give a nice more durable feel to it? I like the thin blades, because thin blades simply cuts better...

I have a Mora Carbon Triflex, which can get a very sharp edge using a Fallkniven DC4 and is very useful for certain Bushcraft tasks except really for chopping tasks.

I also have a couple of Hultafors Heavy Duty Craftsmens Knifes and have been impressed especially when they are available for less than £7 each. Cheap enough to even abuse them and not worry even though they will stand up to a surprising amount of abuse. Combine one with a Bacho Laplander and there really isn't much that can't be handled in the wilderness, which gives a lightweight solution for around £25.

Even Colin Recommends them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyqGjwOZuxs

The Triflex is a really great knife!

And is being discontinued along with the Force.

For those who don't want to pay more for the coated black of the Bushcraft Black, you can buy the Companion HD which has the same blade (3.2mm, 3/4 tang, sharpened spine) as the black without the coating and it has a handle shape that matches the basic Companion and Robust knives.

I have lots of Moras - stainless, carbon, 2000 ... but the Robust is my favorite so far. The thicker blade has a great feel to it. Simple as that.

I have a Mora 611 (with a lower handguard) and the robust. The robust doesn't cut as well, but seems like it would be better overall for general use.

They are cheap and light enough where you can carry one on your person in another in your pack, and I trust the consistency of the steel better than I do the chinese produced knives. Not that things like the BG can't be good, just that you never know from one knife to the next.