db and possum, personal arguments are inappropriate.
You're right Esav. I should police my own behavior so I don't waste the moderator's time. Apologies. Guess I'm just getting a little perplexed with this forum lately. It seems when anyone posts anything beyond "I cut some stuff. It worked good.", there's a host of guys ready to pounce and tear it down.
Unlike your posts? I already gave him my idea on testing in my first post you quoted, how about you do the same.
Though I didn't get much constructive from your post, you're right that I should do more too. So I'll give some of my perspective on it, and hope you'll follow suit. Sound fair?
When I see a knife reviewed, I like to hear about both the good and the bad. Or, not necessarily even bad stuff; just where certain compromises mean there are other blades that would do better. (Warning! This means you may have to use the knife for some things it wasn't really designed for, which draws flak.) It's useful because sometimes a knife will surprise us, doing admirably at a task we didn't expect it to. And even if it performs less than ideally, it's great to be reminded of just why we'd choose a different blade for that task, and shown just how big the difference can be. I'd want to see them compared against another widely popular blade as a baseline, or compared against either very low end or very high end knives (or both), to put the results into perspective.
While it's great to know that a knife can get a certain task done, without a frame of reference questions will remain. For example, a while back a maker shared some personal testing of a knife he just finished. He seemed to think the knife did pretty well. But from the info he gave, I was tempted to repeat his tests using a cheap Chinese knife. I could have produced the same results. Now, maybe his knife really was tough, but without a lot of details we'd never know it.
Which brings us to another thing. We need enough details so the tests can be repeated in person. This seems to bring folks out of the woodwork decrying pseudo science. I guess taking note of details makes it look like you're trying to be too scientific. But, let's say you baton it through some wood without damage. Great. I've split some woods that could be easily done with a soup can lid. I've also encountered some that would challenge the best blade. Which kind are we talking about? Etc.
Edges-
Lots of folks are interested in edge holding from extended cutting of various materials. Which is all well and good. I'm personally more interested in knowing how thin I can take the edge without it crumbling under harder cutting. And what grit level various materials will respond best to. And how much damage I can expect when it accidentally contacts something it shouldn't. (Again, this is another hot button topic. I can't in good faith request others to share something I tread lightly on myself, but it would still be good to know.) What good is an edge that will last sufficiently long on twine/rope, but folds over the first time I try whittling some hard-as-bone Osage Orange? (as happened recently) Or cuts open heavy paper seed sacks with applomb, but needs serious sharpening anyway to remove a chip after it accidentally bumps the side of the seed wagon? (as also happened recently) These are just examples- run with the concept.
I think this is where I'd love to see controlled comparisons paired with anecdotal/qualitative comparisons. You can show me how knife A repeatedly takes X pounds of force to cut through something, while the thicker edge of knife B takes Y more. And then apply that to real world use. For example, my arm gets tired after 20 minutes of heavy whittling whittling with knife B, so I switch to the thinner one and can keep going comfortably for much longer.
My interests in handle ergonomics can take many forms. Which one still feels comfortable after extended use? Which one is more secure for sudden short-term dynamic use? Is there a nice blend of the two?
I don't think it would hurt to revisit the basics of blade shape. A while back someone posted a picture of like a dozen of their outdoor knives. All were drop points. What makes one profile shape handier for certain tasks? What is it giving up compared to another? Etc.
I have a feeling Vivi is more interested in smaller knives & folders, but if there's big chopping knives involved, I have a number of other questions regarding edges, durability, and one that I rarely see addressed in detail- dynamic balance.
'Suppose I've rambled enough for now. Don't know if this will be helpful or not, but I'm givin' it a shot.
-the possum