Buck Strider/Solution

Cliff Stamp

BANNED
Joined
Oct 5, 1998
Messages
17,562
The Buck Strider Solution weighs 330 g and is balanced 1.25" behind the front of the grip. The 3/16" ATS-34 stainless steel blade is 0.175" with a sharpened blade of 4.25" in length. The blade is 1.75" wide at maximum with a one inch high hollow grind which tapers to a very fine edge which runs from about 0.022 to 0.030" thick and ground at a very acute 12.6 +/- 1.0 degrees per side. The solution comes with a 130 g cordura/kydex sheath.

The initial edge sharpness was low, however it was a used blade and the edge was chipped along its length, not large enough to see, but readily felt with the thumbnail. While ATS-34 isn't that easy to machine, especially at 59-61 HRC, because the edge angle was quite acute and more importantly the edge is very evenly ground, one of the best seen in awhile, the edge was honed to a razor sharpness on a Sharpmaker with 5 passes on the medium and then five on the fine.

Stock work :

Push cutting 3/8" hemp the knife required 29.0 +/- 1.5 lbs. Pointing sections of hardwood dowel the Solution was able to rough off the necessary wood in only 11 +/- 1 slices. The tip tapers is 1.4" in length and the tip is 1.6" wide at back of the point. The penetration into a phonebook was quite low, only 108 +/- 4 pages on a 50 lbs push and 431 +/- 10 on a hard vertical stab.

Kitchen :

Using the Solution on trimming fats, cutting up meats and the like it did well, those kinds of tasks are just determined by the sharpness. The same goes for soft fruits and vegetables. It is however awkward for many of the precision tasks such as peeling potatoes or trimming the stalks out of apples becuase of the blade width mainly. Also because of the blade thickness it tended to fracture vegetables rather than make thin slices. However for shallow cutting it worked well and because the edge is inline with the guard, it works well on a cutting board. There is a problem with the deep checkering on the grip as it is easily contaminated with food and can be difficult to clean, it does however give a very secure grip even when lubricated with fats and oils.

Wood / brush work :

The efficient edge on the Solution makes it a very nice wood cutter, it carves readily taking deep slices out of woods and then being easily controlable to make very shallow shaping cuts. It doesn't have very much chopping ability, even when choked back full on the handle it takes quite awhile to work through even a soft piece of 2x4, it is outchopped several times over by a small hatchet. If this was going to be relied on for such work it would best be accompanied by a decent folding saw or quality small axe.

General utility :

Cutting a variety of light materials like bubble wrap, plastics, paper and fabrics, the SOlution was very efficient as these materials are too flimsy to exert any pressure on a blade so as long as it is sharp it will cut that class of material well. However on thick cardboard the blade would bind readily due to the thicker stock and sabre grind, on such materials a higher grind would be more efficient however it still outperforms blades like the Camp Tramp which while having a higher grind has a thicker edge. In general for a tactical knife it was above average for this type of work.

Steel :

The blade steel, ATS-34, is a high carbon, high alloy stainless steel, uniformly heat treated by Paul Bos to 59-61 HRC. The steel has good corrosion resistance, high abrasion resistance, high strength, however low ductility and low impact toughness. It is difficult to bend but will snap under a low flex, and will deform very little before it chips.

Geometry :

The Solution has a decently thin and very acute edge and thus cuts very well for shallow work, it compares very well for example to some of the better Spyderco folders in this regard. However the efficient cutting edge also leads to a low durablity, that combined with the brittle steel will lead to chipping readily on significant impacts and likely blowouts of the primary grind in hard impacts. It would fare much worse than the WB for example on hard/abusive cutting.

Sharpening :

As long as the Solution is restricted to light cutting it is very easy to sharpen as the high hardness resists deformation well and the steel also has a high wear resistance so little material is lost by abrasion. The acute and very even edge also allows is to be touched up with a few passes on a Sharpmaker even after long and extended useage. However if the blade is used for rough work, such as digging, cutting heavily used materials which are contaminated with dirt and debris, the edge will chip out readily and is then very difficult to resharpen as the steel is difficult to machine and thus it takes a long time to regrind the edge back into shape.

Grip :

The grip is made of a G10 with a very aggressive checkering which is secure even when the handle is covered in fats, oils and other lubricants. However the grip is also very abrasive for the same reason and may be problematic to some for that reason. It is also very boxy and was very uncomfortable when use of batoning as the squarish edges were very high impact points, cutting through knots was near impossible.

Sheath :

The sheath is a well made from Cordura with a tight fitting Kydex insert with a side accessory pouch. It is all held together with secure and quality stitching. This type of rig over is much more robust in terms of temperature extremes over plan Kydex, however leather generally holds up better in terms of abrasion. Care needs to be taken in watching the stitching on Cordura sheaths as it it starts to unravel it should be sealed epoxy, or repair the stitching by hand.

Overall :

Much of the promotion for this knife is centered on extreme toughness "where failure is not an option", however this knife is actually focused much more on shallow cutting ability than extreme toughness. This really isn't a sharpened prybar kind of knife. Ref :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/solution.html

-Cliff
 
I think the current production Buck Strider Solutions are flat ground now with a wide ricasso. Would make deeper cutting more effective but not sure if they chnaged the edge geometry.
 
Much of the promotion for this knife is centered on extreme toughness "where failure is not an option", however this knife is actually focused much more on shallow cutting ability than extreme toughness. This really isn't a sharpened prybar kind of knife.

Many knives end up performing very well in tasks other than those they are promoted for. For example, the Benchmade M2 Nimravus Cub was promoted as a tactical knife, with an emphasis on its ability as a self defense combat knife. I have no use for that sort of thing, but I found this knife to be an excellent general utility knife once a proper edge was applied.

The Gerber Yari is another knife billed as a tactical knife, but works very well as a general use outdoors knife. I would prefer it in M2, but the 154CM performs very well regardless.

On this knife, the edge geometery looks ideal for a light to moderate use knife. I applaud buck for not overbuilding the edge.

On a seperate note, I have used several Buck knives over the years, and the customer service has been excellent.

This type of rig over is much more robust in terms of temperature extremes over plan Kydex, however leather generally holds up better in terms of abrasion.

Yes, Leather is very resistant to abbrasion and impact damage (aside from cosmetics), however it is much easier to pierce than kydex and is far more easily damaged from enviromental damage, especially moisture.

If this is the same SOE sheath that is standard on regular Strider knives, they are a very well made unit. I examined them at several shows and was impressed witht the quality, probably the best kydex/nylon sheath I have seen.

Just like choosing a knife, choosing a sheath for your use invloves an analysis of your uses compred to the material properties of the sheaths.

Since this is a stainless steel knife it was probably designed to be used in harsh enviroments (marine, tropical, etc.) and thus the sheath is probably a good match for the knife.


It is also very boxy and was very uncomfortable when use of batoning as the squarish edges were very high impact points, cutting through knots was near impossible.

Some people value grip security over all else in handle design, especially if being used for its promoted use (tactical). Personally, comfort is very much a priority (cutting a bagel for lunch is about as high speed, low drag as I get) for me so I would avoid this type of handle.

While handles can be modified to fit the indivdual user, this is much more difficult than reshaping anb edge for your performance needs. Therefore if a knife does not fit my hand well I will not buy it.

I looked up a picture of this knife and it looks like a very attractive knife.

One small suggestion, when you write a review it would be very helpful if you posted a picture of the knife or a link to it on the maker's site. I know it is trivial to do a quick search for it, but it would be nice to have right in the review so as not to block the flow of the reader. I hope it is OK for me to offer that suggestion, if it bother you that I wrote it, please let me know and I will remove it ASAP or a moderator can do it.
 
Daniel L said:
I think the current production Buck Strider Solutions are flat ground now with a wide ricasso. Would make deeper cutting more effective but not sure if they chnaged the edge geometry.
The original 888s and BG-42 limited editions were fully flat ground with the heel of the blade dulled just before the choil. Later on, this section of the blade was sharpened and Buck switched to their "Edge 2000" meaning a more acute edge angle. The latest Solutions are sabre ground; hollow about two thirds up the blade then full thickness spine. The thickness behind the edge was reduced considerably with the new grind. I can measure mine (original ATS-34 run) if anyone is interested.

knifetester said:
If this is the same SOE sheath that is standard on regular Strider knives, they are a very well made unit. I examined them at several shows and was impressed witht the quality, probably the best kydex/nylon sheath I have seen.
Only the original run of ATS-34 Solutions came with genuine SOE nylon sheaths. Buck switched to a generic nylon sheath for the BG-42 Solutions and all subsequent runs. The SOE ones had OD edge bindings and an SOE tag on the back, while the generic ones have black edges and fewer stitch lines and reinforcements.

Cliff,

I think you would find the older version of the 888 to be more durable bind less but lose shallow cutting performance. I've owned both versions and I prefer the original flat grind but with a convex edge that blends into the primary grind. I do not find the handle particularly boxy; I had a Busse NO-E that felt just as squarish and a SJ that had much sharper corners. One advantage of the handle shape (also found on some Strider models) is that it's well suited to a reverse grip. I also like the Strider thumb serrations as they work well with gloves and do not collect buildup like narrower serrations.

The Solution is a nice design, though on the heavy side for a knife of this length. I would like to see Buck skeletonize the tang; this would be easy to do since the knife profiles are laser-cut anyways. Using masonry bits I drilled enough holes in the tang to lighten it by 2 oz., and I'm sure Buck could achieve better than this at the manufacturing level.
 
IS there a difference in the heat treat between the Buck/Strider and the Custom Striders, or does Bos use the same heat treat on all of them?

I ask just out of curiousity since I am unlikely to buy this knife.

Thanks,
KT
 
knifetester said:
Many knives end up performing very well in tasks other than those they are promoted for.
Yes, this is excellent when the scope of work is extended, but is problematic if the scope of work is actually different completely. Use this knife for "extreme tough" conditions and you will blow up the edge, it is ground like a high performance skinner.

I applaud buck for not overbuilding the edge.
Buck is up there with Spyderco with edge profiles ever since they did the Edge 2000 switch a few years back.

Some people value grip security over all else in handle design, especially if being used for its promoted use (tactical).
Yes, however I don't think these are necessarily in conflict though, sure an aggressive checkering promotes security while lowering ergonomics but square corners don't help either, ok they stop the knife from rotating in hand, but they don't need to be that boxy.

Most times shortcuts are made in the name of money not performance. Reeve for example has noted they don't run oval grips on the one piece line simply because it would cost too much. Oval grips would not only greatly increase ergonomics they would also boost security as they would prevent rolling.

On the Solution some parts of the grip are extremely problematic. For example after cutting the dowel the serrations along the spine cut into my hand so deeply that 16 hours later the next day you could still readily see the imprint they left between my thumb and forefinger.

The last time I recally anything being that bad was on the TOPS Steel Eagle which the spine serrations tore into my hand so bad I had to put on a glove because my skin was starting to tear.

... it would be very helpful if you posted a picture of the knife or a link to it on the maker's site.
Yes, I usually do this, it is in the webpage which I just finished html'ing from the above :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/solution.html

The knife is currently being used by my brother, I told him to take it easy with it for a few weeks so I can get some EDC feedback, sharpening issues and so on.

knifetester said:
IS there a difference in the heat treat between the Buck/Strider and the Custom Striders, or does Bos use the same heat treat on all of them?
I asked this to Bos directly on the Buck forum, they are held to the same standard.


-Cliff
 
The newer versions of the Solution have a smoother G10 texture as well as rounded edges for more comfort. Some of the new grinds still came with the old handle.

The solution is awarded to the High Shooter at the USMC MWTC Sniper School. They abuse the hell out of them up there in the mountains and love them. Digging and prying are no problem. The edge is weaker than the earlier version, but much more efficient in cutting/ skinning.

They are also available with a Kydex sheath that fits a 6004 holster. This is the method in which our local SWAT team carries them.

The sheath is made by Multi-Fab Inc. in Washington State, the sheath design was from Strider and SOE built them originally. The SOE sheath was slightly better IMO, but more expensive and they had their hands full with government contract work so we farmed it out.

Blade Rc at 59-61 as stated above.

-Josh
 
They are also available with a Kydex sheath that fits a 6004 holster. This is the method in which our local SWAT team carries them.

Josh,
Do you have a picture of what this set up looks like? I looked up a 6004 hoslter and it looks like it goes on your leg instead of you belt, is that right? Do you put the knife on your leg too, or does it go above the gun on the belt?

Also, what do swat team officers use their knives for in a typical day? I assume it can be used for a weapon in a worst case scenario, or to keep some one from taking your gun in a struggle, but what are the utility type tasks?

I can see cutting window screens and aluminum siding for example, and prying open locks or gates, opening lts of ammo boxes for range practice, etc., is that right?

I really have no idea beyond what I have seen in the movies (and I figure that is not accurate) and would love some first hand information about how Swat guys really use their knives and what makes Strider an ideal choice. I know lots of LEO/Military types choose Strider over other knives even though they cost a lot more, so there must be lots of reasons, I would be interested in hearing what they are.

What are the differences between the custom Strider and Buck version if the steel and heat treat are the same? Does Strider use different grinds on their customs?

Thanks for your time, fascinating stuff.
 
J Rummerfield said:
The solution is awarded to the High Shooter at the USMC MWTC Sniper School. They abuse the hell out of them up there in the mountains and love them. Digging and prying are no problem.
Which knives have they had problems digging and prying with or in general for what they do? What is the benchmark for the Solution comparisons?

Prying with the main blade body should be fine, easily supports 200 lbs, as it is 3/16" and only sabre ground. However the tip in hard woods may be a concern, and digging in rocky soil will chew up an edge this acute and thin out of non-ductile steel.

-Cliff
 
Yes, this is excellent when the scope of work is extended, but is problematic if the scope of work is actually different completely
.


That is a valid concern of course.
It also illustrates why a consumer must do his own research and evaluations when buying knives, as leaving things to makers claims leaves far too much to chance.

The user though will be in a superior position to determine what his needs are naturally. Having never been a solider, it would be hard for me to determine how "good" a knife is for a solider's use having no real idea what soliders use their knives for.

I can make guesses, but I would be willing to bet that with all the MOS classifications in the US Military, there would be no concensus. What may be great for an Seabee might be terrible for an MP. What an infantryman might consider ideal might be far different than what a person on a tank crew, a pilot, submariner or person on a PSD might want. There might even be mission specific requirements.
 
I agree the buyer should do some research, however I don't think there should be any chance issue with performance statements, anything used as promotion to sell a product should be supported fully without question by the maker/manufacturer.

Makers and manufacturers should also be more rigid in claims made by dealers and even users who vastly overpromote their wares. It is not like you can hold the users responsible, but when they see it they should address it, few will though.

Specific to this knife it is good to see the handle issues addressed though I still think it odd to promote what is essentially a skinning knife profile on this hard a stainless steel as a heavy use tactical.

Well maybe I am wrong about the edge, I'll check the point this evening in some wood digging and after a few week rotation for EDC with Pat I will know on the edge one way or the other.

It is hard to get him to carry anything lately though as he has fallen in love with a Boker Applegate dagger, and CRKT small tanto, M60, he was completely unimpressed with the Gerber SIlver Trident which I kind of like for that style of knife.


-Cliff
 
anything used as promotion to sell a product should be supported fully without question by the maker/manufacturer.

Yes, that is the essence of a warranty. If a maker, through its acts or words promotes (makes a statement of fact) a product as being suitable for a certain use, and that promotion is a material reason (part of the basis for the bargain) for the purchase, then the maker is liable under awarranty theory if it can not perform as stated. This would be a form of express warranty.

However, care must be taken to distinguish words of warranty from "puffery" or statements of opinion which do not usually give rise to warranty liability unless the seller is aware of the particular use the knife will be used for and opines that it will perform in a certain fashion or is suitable for use. This would be an implied warranty of fitness for a particular use under most state's verions of the UCC. (All that I am aware of)

However, I am not a lawyer, so perhaps there is one here that could provide more insight into warranty.

Another issue is that Buck is the maker of this knife, not Strider. So statements of performance made by Strider for their knives may not be imputable to Buck. On the other hand, they could be as adoptive addmissions or on an agency theory, etc.

Again, I am not a lawyer and that would be an issue of law for someone qualified to speak on.

Specific to this knife it is good to see the handle issues addressed though I still think it odd to promote what is essentially a skinning knife profile on this hard a stainless steel as a heavy use tactical.

I think it depends on what your definition of tactical is (and I have no qualifications to speak about tacticalness).
As to each of the concerns though, I would guess:
Hard Stainless Steel: Needed for use in extreme enviromental conditions to avoid chemical dulling of the edge, weakening of the tang from corrosion,etc. However carbon steel knives were used for this for centuries quite well, just rinsed after use in salt water. See old Fillet knives for example.

Hardness: Adds strength so the blade does not deform under prying directing energy to the thing being pried. Of course, if the blade snaps while prying it is not good either. Also adds wear resisteance for edge holding.

As for the very acute profile of the edge and grind, if I was ever to have to use a knife for serious tactical work, I would want it very sharp.

I would want a handle that fit my hand well though.

Just speculation here, again I know nothing about tactical situations and am probably too old to learn now. However, I am always interested in hearing how knives perform in various situations, so if there is anyone with real world hard use experince I would love to hear what it involves, what the stresses are that are placed on a knife, etc.
 
knifetester said:
Yes, that is the essence of a warranty. If a maker, through its acts or words promotes (makes a statement of fact) a product as being suitable for a certain use, and that promotion is a material reason (part of the basis for the bargain) for the purchase, then the maker is liable under awarranty theory if it can not perform as stated. This would be a form of express warranty.

However, care must be taken to distinguish words of warranty from "puffery" or statements of opinion which do not usually give rise to warranty liability unless the seller is aware of the particular use the knife will be used for and opines that it will perform in a certain fashion or is suitable for use. This would be an implied warranty of fitness for a particular use under most state's verions of the UCC. (All that I am aware of)

However, I am not a lawyer, so perhaps there is one here that could provide more insight into warranty.
. . .

I think it depends on what your definition of tactical is (and I have no qualifications to speak about tacticalness).

...

What is merely "puffery" under UCC 2-313 is a matter of court decision(s) in each jurisdiction. Generally, statements like "great knife," "best tactical knife," "the operator's choice," or "would survive nuclear attack" would be "puffery," rather than warrenty. The more concrete and specific the language, the closer you get to warranty. The words "warranty" or "guarantee" are not required under UCC 2-313 to create a warranty.

I suppose "tacticalness' sounds more "tactical" than "tacticality" -- which sounds like it comes from a musical. ("Tacticality, tacticality, my oh my oh tacticality.")
 
knifetester said:
Hard Stainless Steel: Needed for use in extreme enviromental conditions to avoid chemical dulling of the edge, weakening of the tang from corrosion,etc. However carbon steel knives were used for this for centuries quite well, just rinsed after use in salt water. See old Fillet knives for example.

Hardness: Adds strength so the blade does not deform under prying directing energy to the thing being pried. Of course, if the blade snaps while prying it is not good either. Also adds wear resisteance for edge holding.

As for the very acute profile of the edge and grind, if I was ever to have to use a knife for serious tactical work, I would want it very sharp.

I would want a handle that fit my hand well though.
If you want corrosion resistance, I would go with the Mission Beta-Ti. The primary edge profile is acute enough for solid cutting ability on woods and such and the serrations are very fluid and cut extremely well on cord, ropes and such. The toughness and flexibility are extremely high, and the corrosion resistance basically renders it immune.

ATS-34 and other similar materials have decent surface corrosion resistance, as in they resist getting slightly wet ok, but leave them in salt water and they pit badly, faring much worse than tool steels like INFI which will take a patina rather than the deep pits that ATS-34 and D2 and other semi-stainless materials will take. The only advantage ATS-34 has is that it is harder and thus the edge will resist rolling and denting better.

Edge roll isn't really a factor as the Mission serrations will radically out cut an ATS-34 plain edge, even one left with an aggressive finish, and assuming the plain edge part is used for rough and aggressive work, the Ti will require less work to repair, especially if you whack both into something hard like a nail or rock which is likely to cause a primary blow out on the hollow ground Solution.

Mission is a lot more expensive though. If I had to use stainless I would go with one of the more tougher and ductile ones and if you wanted higher edge retention get an inch of wavy serrations, or teach the guys how to rough sharpen with a coarse hone. I really don't think brittle steels and the word tactical go together.

As for holding Buck responsible for Strider, no I don't think you can go second party like that, all you can ask is that they be clear what the knife can do and if they do see a dealer or user radically over hyping the product to step in and reconfirm what they support.

As this knife can be used to pry based on the above comments, how far will it bend before it will break? Is this really acute edge supposed to stand up to rock contacts when digging?

-Cliff
 
knifetester said:
Some people value grip security over all else in handle design, especially if being used for its promoted use (tactical).

Cliff Stamp said:
Yes, however I don't think these are necessarily in conflict though, sure an aggressive checkering promotes security while lowering ergonomics but square corners don't help either, ok they stop the knife from rotating in hand, but they don't need to be that boxy.

I agree with knifetester, but also agree with Cliff. It's easily possible to make a very secure handle that is also comfortable for use. I see a lot of dismissing of what I just think of as lazy handle design, as being a security-over-comfort thing, but these dismissals come too easily. I do understand some sacrifice of comfort for security in a "tactical". My guess is, in many cases, good looks had a higher priority in the handle design than anyone wants to admit, and use comfort is thrown out partly for it, not just for security.
 
I think you can make an arguement that in terms of ultimate security you have to give up some comfort in extended use, any checkering for example tends to do this exactly, really prominent guards also have ergonomic issues as they lower grip versatility.

However ergonomic shaping in general tends to increase security not decrease it. It is not like a flat boxy handle with square corners leads itself to high grip retention, it is just really easy to make so yeah like Joe I think there are a lot of short cuts being taken with handles.

I was just doing some 2x4 digging with the Solution and trying to keep a grip on the knife was very difficult as a flat handle just doesn't fit well in the hand, and it doesn't take many impacts off of the edges for you to tend to relax the grip when you shouldn't.

Try using this knife and then get something from Ray Kirk who puts a lot of time into grips and do some hard chopping, batoning and stabbing and see if you still think the Solution has a sensible handle design.

If you just took one of Kirks handles and really aggressively checkered it you would have an insanely secure grip which would still be comfortable. If the handle fills the hand checkering isn't as abrasive as you get contacts over a large region and not just focused at isolated spots.

-Cliff
 
I actually agree with both Cliff and Joe, as they provide a more complete picure than my simplistic statement.

I prefer security that comes from the shape of the handle with a minimum abbrasiveness from the material (no deep checkering ala CRK one piece).

On the other hand, I hate slippery plastic handles like on Becker line, as well as Kraton.

Edited to add: But I think handle security and comfort are maybe the single most subjective and user individual choices there is.

I can predict (with a fair degree of accuacy) whether a blade will cut well by its geometery and profile, and can predict durability by material property and reputation of heat treat, but I can only tell if a handle is comfortable for my hand. Therefore, I try to handle a knif before I buy, and if I can't I make sure the seller has a good return policy. Some people like Cold Steel square SRK handles in Kraton or Beckr swiss glass slippery handles. I don't.
 
knifetester said:
I can only tell if a handle is comfortable for my hand
The principles which govern ergonomics are massively complex compared to that which goven cutting ability. There are some general principles like no square edges, no sharp points, fill the hand, but user variability allows for huge variances. Unfortunately it is also one of the more ignored aspects.

-Cliff
 
knifetester Quote:
They are also available with a Kydex sheath that fits a 6004 holster. This is the method in which our local SWAT team carries them.



Josh,
Do you have a picture of what this set up looks like? I looked up a 6004 hoslter and it looks like it goes on your leg instead of you belt, is that right? Do you put the knife on your leg too, or does it go above the gun on the belt?

Also, what do swat team officers use their knives for in a typical day? I assume it can be used for a weapon in a worst case scenario, or to keep some one from taking your gun in a struggle, but what are the utility type tasks?

I can see cutting window screens and aluminum siding for example, and prying open locks or gates, opening lts of ammo boxes for range practice, etc., is that right?

I really have no idea beyond what I have seen in the movies (and I figure that is not accurate) and would love some first hand information about how Swat guys really use their knives and what makes Strider an ideal choice. I know lots of LEO/Military types choose Strider over other knives even though they cost a lot more, so there must be lots of reasons, I would be interested in hearing what they are.

What are the differences between the custom Strider and Buck version if the steel and heat treat are the same? Does Strider use different grinds on their customs?

Thanks for your time, fascinating stuff.
End Quote

Knifetester,

The 6004 set up for the solution places the knife on the front side of the leg panel or it can also be mounted on a duty belt via a TekLok, I can't post pictures here it seems, but Strider has some on their website I believe.

You pretty much nailed the Typical uses for the SWAT cops that have them out here. Used as a improvised breaching tool is probably the most extreme use they have put them through. Prying open manhole covers and hatches, etc. Cutting drywall was pretty common as well. But opening ammo cans and boxes and even mail are pretty common.

For prying
In deflection tests, the solution will snap at about 450 lbs.

Full Fledge Striders
(EB series closest model to Solution) are made from S30V, slightly different design features and they are hand finished by Mick or Duane, our SB line are hand finished by workers at Buck.

I hope that answered your questions.

-Josh
 
J Rummerfield said:
In deflection tests, the solution will snap at about 450 lbs.
In the Strider warrenty test you went on for some length of time about the testing you conduct, the strict requirements, the team of engineers, etc. , and of course critized the methods I use for lack of science :

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/search.php?searchid=189555

Yet you give an answer to a fairly straightforward question which is not meaningful because deflection tests are done in terms of torques not pounds, these are two related but very different concepts. It will take 450 lbs to break any knife depending on how far away you apply the force to the point at which it is constrained.

It is more than a little ironic that you make such a deal out of scientific testing procedures and then completely mixup the fundamentals of the details of said tests, especially when you were using them as some kind of arguement for "scientific" evaluations. Now normally I would not comment significant on such a mixup except to correct it, but when you set up a platform for the scientific method you really want to make sure you have it down solid.

So at what *torque* does the Solution break through the tip and main body of the blade, and how far will it bend in both cases before it takes a set? And again, which blades did the above mentioned individuals who were used to promote the Solution fail to accept. What was the Solution compared against in the evaluations? And again is the Solution I have with the acute edge and hollow grind intended for hard edge contacts such as digging?

-Cliff
 
Back
Top