t1mpani said:
The concrete block tests and the "if I'm ever attacked by a piece of concrete" crew ...
Who must lead some hostile lives if that is the only viewpoint they have concerning knife use. It is usually not applied consistently as in general are all arguments of that type. You don't see a lot of "if I am ever attacked by a fuzz stick for example". It is mainly used to critize intentional use of a knife to check performance, especially in a comparative sense.
Yes, the concrete blocks can sort of simulate an accidental hit to a rock or the ground, but first and foremost this is a test designed to exceed normal use, to speed up wear and tear and see how the knives stand up.
Darrel Ralph was the first I noted who posted about it publically on the forums, this was back in 2000, he refered to it as abuse testing specifically. Fikes also does some concrete (and steel drum) impacts in his video, which has been out for awhile. Ray Kirk suggest it to me as a result of another review someone else has written about poor performance on an Marbles knife, his bowie and the Strider WB were the first time I used it intentionally as a means of comparison. It was done live at Blade by Swamp Rat a few years back and has become a default way of critizing their knives and of course this ignores all the cutting testing they have also done live, and have illustrated by video's on the website, cutting large bundles of ropes, 2x4, etc. . Some of these makers are clear it is a check of accidental high stress impacts, others tend to imply it is more of a general durability check.
Chopping into concrete blocks, cutting up dozens of feet of rope or cardboard, saltwater spray tests...these are all the same thing. Putting the knives through MORE than they'll ever likely need to do, to see how they stand up. And what is true in extremes will generally be true outside of them. If knife A doesn't chip/crack/deform/fail as badly or quickly as knife B in extreme tests, then knife A will also stand up to normal use better than knife B.
Generally, Ralph did testing of this type (extreme rate), he cut sandpaper for example to check edge retention. Wilson does a lot of it cutting heavy ropes which are in general more abraisve than the media the knives are actually meant for, hunters and fillet blades. It takes care though to correlate the information, for example a knife can handle impacts into concrete well but come apart on heavy wood chopping, the opposite can be seen as well as these are fairly different in how they strain an edge. Specifically concrete contains rocks which are hard enough to directly deform the edge while wood chopping tends to induce damage by torsional strain failures usually.
But this "I must validate my preferences by attempting to discredit everything else" bit gets rather tiresome.
Such arguements when viewed objectively actually support the viewpoint they are trying to oppose. Generally arguements not based on logic and facts are used because logic and facts don't support the arguement.
-Cliff
