Chris Reeve Destrution Test On Youtube?

Status
Not open for further replies.
TOMBSTONE

TOMBSTONE

Joined
Oct 31, 1998
Messages
3,034
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmWJOAJB5I

There is a video of a CRK destruction test for the project one I recently saw.This interested me due to my recent puchase of a smaller one piece.I'm not sure what to think,any opinions on this video and test? Any idea what would cause the failure? Are our One piece CRK's reliable for in the field use??
Thanks
 
If that's the Noss4 test, it has already generated a least two long contentious threads. In contrast to any testing, we could go by years of successful use by happy customers, military and civilian, and a company with a reputation for excellent customer service.

Use your recent purchase in good health! :D
 
Do you plan on using your knife to chisel your way through a mountain, or to pry a car door open? If not, then don't worry, your CRK knife is plenty strong and up to any task. Knives are cutting tools, if you need an axe, hammer, chisel or pry bar then use one of those, but if you want an excellent cutting tool that can slice and chop, hold a good edge, and won't rust easily, then your CRK is plenty of knife.
 
I'm with esav and coolhand. The tests prove nothing except that the knife is destructible, and that goes for any tool.
Look at it this way; if you decide to run over a car with a tank, it doesn't matter whether it's a Kia or an Aston Martin; you're still going to end up with a metal pancake.
 
TOMBSTONE said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmWJOAJB5I

There is a video of a CRK destruction test for the project one I recently saw.This interested me due to my recent puchase of a smaller one piece.I'm not sure what to think,any opinions on this video and test? Any idea what would cause the failure? Are our One piece CRK's reliable for in the field use??
Thanks
Click to expand...

If you will be using you knife this way you should get Busse. Why this happen - because this steel is for cutting. Thanks to noss4 you may know what expect from different knives.

Noss4 test shows that this may happen to this knives, if you consider also similar Strider failure with same steel - it is clear that CPM S30V should not be used for this kind of jobs.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
trimcut123 said:
But the Project had A2 tool steel , not s30v...
Click to expand...

Sorry, Esav mention other long thread which was about CPM S30V. Well, then this is another CR which did not stand noss4 test long enough... So probably this is not a steel matter only then.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
That guys a dumbass. Spends all that money on those knives, just to break them.:rolleyes:
 
jeepin said:
That guys a dumbass. Spends all that money on those knives, just to break them.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think he provides extremely valuable information on what different "tough" knives are really capable. This is crash test which is not as important for knives as it is important for cars. However it is good to know who does real or who does false claims in their marketing.

I do not think he payed for all those knives, I think some of them were send to him by people who really want to know truth.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
I tried to do a search before posting this but did not find those links of this previously discussed test.Could someone post the links? Also, I know these knives are primarly cutting tools and have a long history of legendary use,but these are "survival" knives. Batoning the knife may be a normal use,although normally done with a piece of wood.
I don't plan on hitting it with a five pound sledge,but I was suprised to see it snap like that with A2 steel,seemed brittle.Shouldn't it have dented or deformed the spine instead? The S30v steel would not have suprised me,but this one did.My question is was there a heat treat problem you would suspect? A steel defect? As thick and sturdy as these are built,do you think that should have occurred so quickly or not at all? I will use and enjoy my knife, but this test interests me since I own a CRK A2 one piece.
 
nozh2002 said:
Why this happen - because this steel is for cutting. Thanks to noss4 you may know what expect from different knives.
Click to expand...


From dictionary.com (my use of bold type for contextual reference):

knife
   /naɪf/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [nahyf] Show IPA Pronunciation
noun, plural knives  /naɪvz/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [nahyvz]
–noun
1. an instrument for cutting, consisting essentially of a thin, sharp-edged, metal blade fitted with a handle.
2. a knifelike weapon; dagger or short sword.
3. any blade for cutting, as in a tool or machine.




...maybe noss4 testing is meant to test for something other than knives?
 
Vassili, of all people, you should know better. You set up meticulously thorough sharpening scenarios with different steels. That is a legitimate test format.

What Noss4 does is smash away at metal with no measurements of force involved or control procedures. That is childish, but also ultimately as destructive to reputations as anything Cliff Stamp indulged in.
 
They are weak, fragile knives. The worst performers in the tests. If one wants a tough knife then look some where else than CRK.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
Vassili, of all people, you should know better. You set up meticulously thorough sharpening scenarios with different steels. That is a legitimate test format.

What Noss4 does is smash away at metal with no measurements of force involved or control procedures. That is childish, but also ultimately as destructive to reputations as anything Cliff Stamp indulged in.
Click to expand...

Childless like many of the top hard use makers test their blades ?
Busse, Scrap yard, Swamp rat. What I do is also very good for company's reputation if their knife performs very well in the tests. If a maker makes a quality product then they have no fear in my tests.
 
Esav Benyamin: There is measurement your to blind to see it.

If A knife breaks hammering into wood and another knife survives being hammered through Steel. What knife is tough and what knife is not ? It's very simple math here.
 
Last edited:
I wonder why it is I almost always seem to find myself falling somewhere in the middle when these kinds of dust-ups break out on the forums. :confused:

On the one hand, there's the fact that one of the reasons for choosing A2 instead of other common tool steels is its toughness. Plus I don't have any problem with Noss or anyone else doing whatever they want to with their own knives or knives given to them for the purpose, even when it isn't something I would personally do.

So IMO there is something interesting to be learned here, even though I'm not exactly sure what it might be, or what I'll ever do with the information.

On the other hand, a knife is a knife after all, and to me that means its main function is cutting materials that are softer and not as tough as steel. Some are tougher than others, to be sure, and many are marketed as being tough, although that relative term is often left undefined. And maybe that's where the real problem lies.
 
It's not very scientific.

1) You're not hitting exactly the same spot every time.
2) You're not hitting with the exact same amount of force each time, which in this case would be a measure in pounds per square inch.

Find a table top mounted pneumatic impact press (I forget what the exact name of such a tool is, but they do exist), vice down each knife at exactly the same spot by measuring each knife for that very spot, and then proceed to apply some destruction.

Until then, you're just some guy with a hammer that puts vids up on the internet. Anyone can do this; it's just that you made a name for yourself first.
 
Last edited:
Matthew Gregory said:
From dictionary.com (my use of bold type for contextual reference):

knife
   /naɪf/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [nahyf] Show IPA Pronunciation
noun, plural knives  /naɪvz/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [nahyvz]
–noun
1. an instrument for cutting, consisting essentially of a thin, sharp-edged, metal blade fitted with a handle.
2. a knifelike weapon; dagger or short sword.
3. any blade for cutting, as in a tool or machine.




...maybe noss4 testing is meant to test for something other than knives?
Click to expand...

Thank I get smarter and smarter - now I know what knife mean!

However there is certain trend in knife industry marketing - Tough, Survival, Indestructible knives. Knives wich may be used for chopping batoning etc. So if Grean Beret is knife for cutting only - it should be mentioned somehow - not to use it in survival situation - only for cutting. Same for that project - cutting only.

Because due to positioning of those products on the market people acually expect them to do chopping, batoning and other thisngs. And there are knives which may stand thos tasks easy - see Noss4 tests.

Now his tests are formal, all knives are put in same situations and exposes their properties. Fact that it destroys them - because this is crash test, destruction test, test to see at which point knives will fail and what to expect from them.

This is more valuable then edge retention, because if someone bet their life in survival situation on one ot that survival knife - he should know what to expect based on real experience not some marketing drones writings!

I am pretty sure that Noss4 tests will save someone life, if at least one life will be saved - then it is way more valuable then all other tests around.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
Looks to me like he was applying lateral pressure on the handle while pounding it through the board. Still it is strnge that the blade should fail. I fhtat knife had had to be used to baton shelter poles in arctic conditions someone would have wound up very cold.
 
noss4 said:
Esav Benyamin: There is measurement your to blind to see it.

If A knife breaks hammering into wood and another knife survives being hammered through Steel. What knife is tough and what knife is not ? It's very simple math here.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not the one who is blind. Your math is so simple, it's worthless: real math is numbers. Where are yours? harkamus in post # 17 answered you perfectly:

1) You're not hitting exactly the same spot every time.
2) You're not hitting with the exact same amount of force each time, which in this case would be a measure in pounds per square inch.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between testing to destruction and simply destroying. What you are doing is simply destroying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top