are these good 'knives'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just one more thought, and I will shut-up...

With regard to Noss4's controversial destruction test, I must say that I appreciate the information. Critics point out that it is not a true knife test. To this I would agree. It is a destruction test which primarily tests the durability of a knife which is beaten to failure.

Now, most of us would never treat our beloved knives the way ol' Noss4 does in these tests. But It is good to see just how far you can push your knife.

For example, if I were a Green Beret I'd like to know just how far I can push my knife in the field given the extreme circumstances that those brave men encounter on our behalf. It is not difficult to envision circumstances where a navy seal would indeed find himself in a position where he had to chop through a cinder brick wall or use his knife as a crowbar to pry open a door... If so, it is vital that he knows his tool can do the job. It is in this light that I view the destruction testing. (exit soapbox);):D

Now, I'd love to see some additional tests with regard to edge retention on cutting materials like rope, cardboard, etc...
 
Yesterday I cut down an unwanted 4"+ diameter pine tree with my full convex zero edge AK47. Then I batoned the remaining stump about 24" straight down the middle. The edge looks perfect, not one ding, it still shaves and it slices through ~3/4" branches like butter.

The factory grind won't do as well but it will certainly chop through that tree and still scrape/shave off hairs.

Some Busses need more help than others, a Boney Active Duty is pretty good out of the box. An FBM CG can see a huge gain in performance by changing the edge geometry and still remain very durable.

Any product with serious quality control will use destructive testing to make sure they will survive conditions more severe than their intended usage. Busse does this in house but rarely shares the results. Noss does this in his garage. While his tests are impressive they lack any type of control. I don't think his tests are worthless, they do a decent job of showing the relative strength of the knives and what I've seen from my own Busses agrees with his results.
 
Hey NOSS4,

I was wondering when you would check-in. Try not to take this stuff personally. Like anything in life, some people will like it, some will not. As I stated earlier, I do appreciate your tests. Keep up the good work!
 
Speaking from my experience...

I use a Busse American Kensei 47 instead of a traditional wakizashi for tameshigiri. It's unorthodox and Budo traditionalists disapprove, but I just want a short sword that I will never have to worry about edge failure when cutting through igusa and straw type mats, bamboo stalks, axe and shovel handles, and lumber.

Katamonogiri (cutting hard materials) is tricky with traditional weapons, because the edges tend to be somewhat brittle. Edge chipping is problematic, even with one of my favorites - a Crane katana from Bugei Trading Company. This is a fine sword but it requires edge maintenance after heavy cutting and sometimes can require a bit of work to return it to optimal cutting condition. And if it was twisted or pulled wrong when removing it from a piece of hardwood that it has become lodged in, it might break altogether.

My AK can cut any of the aforementioned materials without requiring anything more than an edge polishing. Dale Seago once cut through a copper pipe with an AK with no edge damage (I wish I could find his review...).

I don't expect the need to sharpen my AK will arise anytime soon, and at the rate I'm going I may not ever need to sharpen it. After all, I try to avoid chopping bricks and concrete and metal pipes.

So for my purposes Busse is the best on the market.
 
kdstrick said:
With regard to Noss4's controversial destruction test, I must say that I appreciate the information.
Click to expand...

It can't be called testing. Testing implies measurement. He just beats on things until they break. How can you quantify that?

Don't get suckered.

noss4 said:
Funny Ken44 you had this to say after I abused the battle mistress.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.
 
kdstrick: No problem. I haven't been on here much lately. Trying to limit my computer/internet time. So I can get things done.
 
rbmcmjr said:
It can't be called testing. Testing implies measurement. He just beats on things until they break. How can you quantify that?
Click to expand...

sigh...

Dictionary.com Unabridged
test
–noun
1. the means by which the presence, quality, or genuineness of anything is determined; a means of trial.

I'll reiterate my point that noss's tests are to show how much it takes for a blade to be broken by hand.

either a)
I'll never have to use a knife in a manner that will break it ever ever ever so theres no point in even seeing where it will break in hand held use - I will just assume that under normal use it will never break and hold complete belief in whatever manufacturer made the knife
or b) I may use it in a multitude of fashions, some of wich may end up breaking the knife, so I'd like to know at what level of stress it will break so I can avoid putting it through that much stress.

it's not meant to show edge retention. it's not meant to show comparitive analysis between individual blades across geometry categories. it's not meant to show how well the knife sustains extended light duty tasks like wood carving.

it's meant to see when they break in hand held use, and thats it.

[edit] I'm not speaking for noss, this is just how I look at his videos.
 
Last edited:
It can't be called testing. Testing implies measurement. He just beats on things until they break. How can you quantify that?

Don't get suckered.
Click to expand...

Please read my post above. These tests, although they lack true scientific control, are valid in a 'real-word' sense.

Either the knife handles the abuse... or it does not.
 
I've gotten a few that could use the edge touched a bit. For the most part, they come plenty sharp.

For a real factory, laser sharp edge, check out any of the Competition Grade blades. It'll cut ya' if ya' just look at it too long. I've used my Sarquatch and was thrilled/scarred at how well it cut green hardwood.

Jerry did real good :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
 
noss4 said:
Funny Ken44 you had this to say after I tested the battle mistress.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5258323&postcount=157
Click to expand...

No, what's Funny is you in those silly mask
rofl.gif

And the fact you wasted precious "testing" time to find that link:D

That link was the first Vid of yours I watched. Then I realized the Mask was not for protection or you wouldn't wear it just to peel an apple...guess you could get juice in an eye:rolleyes:

I'm not watching any grown man in a mask unless he is willing to tell others why the mask. The insulting PM's you sent to a member here didn't help with my view's of you either.

I realize many here like your vids, and I mean them no disrespect...but I'm not one of them.

So, do you care to tell....Why the Mask?

BTW- and don't tell me in a PM...just tell it to all here

edit- I guess all need to see this before buying a CRK one piece, NOT http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=563397
 
Last edited:
rbmcmjr, you better watch it. "ol' Noss4" will put a nasty PM in your box if you continue to question his methods. :eek: :D

Last Visible Canary said:
I'll reiterate my point that noss's tests are to show how much it takes for a blade to be broken by hand.
Click to expand...

I get your point. I'm just waiting for that knife that fails on the webbing cut or the apple peel. :D

But wait... if ol' Noss4 is not trying to show edge retention, why return to the webbing twice on that FFBM destruction? :confused:

Admittedly, the FFBM is about the only one I've watched from beginning to end. I might watch more of the destructions if there was a consistent protocol for every knife and if 'ol Noss4 would stop wearing those silly masks. With the FFBM destruction, I couldn't decide if I was watching a knife being beaten to death or a homemade horror film. Does ol' Noss4 think that Strider is going to send operatives to rub him out because he broke a knife?

If we're going to dig up old links, how about the one where ol' Noss4 announced himself to BFC? That one is a classic. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=442167

Not to be mistaken with the one in which I announced my own testing aspirations to BFC: ...edited... Oops, I can't link that one here since it goes to a W&C thread. If you'd like to see the extent of my glorious testing career, do a search under my username with the keywords "$2 crow bar". :p
 
Last edited:
hardheart said:
This is in reference to Noss4's testing. Much of the criticism leveled at it says that the items that do well in the tests aren't good cutting tools. That the only way to survive the abuse is to compromise the design and the performance expected of a knife. I don't believe it. Yes, the large choppers don't have thin spines or deep hollow grinds, but the are big choppers.

The Busses do the best in the testing, and the fans are extremely dedicated. So I would like your opinions on what the knives are meant to do, and what the limitations are in the designs.
Click to expand...

Getting back to the knives...

My overall take is that a big thick chopper is meant to chop and a small, thin slicer is meant to slice. You don't try to field dress a deer with a .32" Battle Mistress, unless you just have to. For that application, I'd much prefer one of the "bony" Active Duties.

Busse offers both big/thick and small/thin, as well as a range of medium-sized blades that function somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. But common sense should always prevail. Just because it's a Busse doesn't mean I'm going to stick my thinner knives in a tree or a vise and put my full weight on them.

Someone might, but it won't be me. See above comment about common sense.

However, as others note, edge geometry has a lot to do with the range of tasks at which the medium to large knife will excel. With good edges, the large knives can accomplish a wider range of camp chores than you might expect (food prep & fuzz sticks to batoning & chopping).
 
Last edited:
Ken44 said:
And the fact you wasted precious "testing" time to find that link:D
Click to expand...

when I know what I'm looking for my searches take about 60 seconds. search member>threads started by>ctrl+f+search term.

Guyon said:
But wait... if ol' Noss is not trying to show edge retention, why return to the webbing twice on that FFBM test? :confused:

---

If we're going to dig up old links, how about the one where ol' Noss announced himself to BFC? http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=442167
Click to expand...

using a low end video its difficult to show edge rippling, chipping and excessive blunting to the point of non-functionality. if the edge is literally squared off and rolled over from hardwoods, it's not "broken" in the sense of being in two peices, but it's broken in the sense that you can't use it anymore. without showing how the edge reacts on a given easily visible media, you won't know just how bad it is from the video footage. if it's heavily chipped, it will snag in the media.

calling him out on the mask and his first year presentation is kinda like calling people out on grammatical mistakes in an argument, it's fishing for easy targets that don't have any relevancy to the core subject in order to undermine a point without ever addressing the point in any way.

I'm not trying to say that the protocol is perfect in any way or that it couldn't be done better - just that they serve a purpose and are worth being in existence. for me the idea of "I don't ever want to see anyone break an expensive tool EVER" is just as ridiculous as using a hockey mask during the destructive tests.
 
Last Visible Canary said:
sigh...

Dictionary.com Unabridged
test
–noun
1. the means by which the presence, quality, or genuineness of anything is determined; a means of trial.

I'll reiterate my point that noss's tests are to show how much it takes for a blade to be broken by hand.
Click to expand...

Good grief.

Main Entry:de·ter·mine
Pronunciation: \di-ˈtər-mən, dē-\
Function:verb
Inflected Form(s):de·ter·mined; de·ter·min·ing
Etymology:Middle English, from Anglo-French determiner, from Latin determinare, from de- + terminare to limit, from terminus boundary, limit — more at term
Date:14th century
transitive verb
1 a: to fix conclusively or authoritatively <determine national policy> b: to decide by judicial sentence <determine a plea> c: to settle or decide by choice of alternatives or possibilities <trying to determine the best time to go> d: resolve <she determineed to do better>
2 a: to fix the form, position, or character of beforehand : ordain <two points determine a straight line> b: to bring about as a result : regulate <demand determines the price>
3 a: to fix the boundaries of b: to limit in extent or scope c: to put or set an end to : terminate <determine an estate>
4: to find out or come to a decision about by investigation, reasoning, or calculation <determine the answer to the problem> <determine a position at sea>
5: to bring about the determination of <determine the fate of a cell>
intransitive verb
1: to come to a decision
2: to come to an end or become void
synonyms see decide, discover




Note the portion highlighted in red. Investigation, reasoning, and calculation imply empirical values for comparison. It most assuredly does not imply subjective evaluations.

I'll ask again: Where is the measurement? The decibel level of his grunts? The number of uncalibrated blows? The number of degrees the silly mask deflects under impact? If it can't be reproduced it isn't science. I don't know what you could call it, but I do know what you can't.

This is probably wandering too far off topic to continue in this forum....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top