Chris Reeve Destrution Test On Youtube?

[greater]

There are different types of toughness and they should be described by those who market.

For a wilderness survival knife I would prefer to sacrifice edge retention for impact resistance and flexibility. It might even be better to use a lower grade steel like AUS6a or 420 or L series steel. These are just a few examples. Another issue is proper heat treat for to match the uses of the tool.

I get the impression a less than proper heat treat is a big culprit in the type of failures Noss exhibits in his testing. From what I saw proper heat treat can make a steel that is not really the best for it's given application still perform quite well at it as demonstrated when Noss tested an S30V Strider. S30V is not exactly the dream child of flexibility and non-brittleness but apparently the right heat treat can go a long way.

If a maker can't get the heat treat right to make the latest popular super steel right for the job then at least use a more forgiving steel to make a good tool rather than a poor tool sporting the latest fad super steel

 

[AF]

In my life I've encountered certain people who never admit they're wrong or even concede the slightest point to the opposing argument. These people are arrogant, abrasive and irritating.

 

[greater]

I was once dazzled by the claims of the latest super steel manufacturers but now I have come to realize that although many steels can be properly heat treated to do a decent to average job for a task the steel is not really optimized for, it is more economical and/or better to use a steel that has natural properties suited to the intended application.

 

[Karda]

Ironically, every single one of your posts here, and even better, your other entire thread was devoted to Noss the person, with commentary on the people who may find his tests useful.

Me thinks thou doth protest too much.

I don't believe i just read that, wait!, yes i can considering its source.
some people.

Oh, and it's just better to use the proper tool for a given situation.
But sometimes you just can't please everybody, OTOH, some people you can never please.

 

[STAGE 2]

I don't believe i just read that, wait!, yes i can considering it source.
some people.

Why. I've been debating these tests on the merits this entire time. You folks are the ones who are talking about his character and insisting that he not be able to post these things here.

Hell, I'm still trying to figure out why you are putting so much time towards something you have personally labled as worthless.

 

[Lycosa]

BF---The Leading Edge of knife discussion!

 

[Joshua J.]

I don't believe i just read that, wait!, yes i can considering its source.
some people.

Oh, and it's just better to use the proper tool for a given situation.
But sometimes you just can't please everybody, OTOH, some people you can never please.

But what if...
You don't have the right tool.
Your knife gets run over.
Or dropped from three stories onto cement.
Or lent to someone who has no clue.

"What if" is what this whole thing hinges on for me. If I wasn't getting any information that could be practically applied I'd be right there with you saying the whole thing is pointless.

 

[theonew]

Wow, not even the scientists can agree on what tough is I guess its like that famous quote about pornography, "you know it when you see it" If so many are concerned with the makers lets take a look at some quotes from them about these tests and see if their hysteria matches what we've seen in this thread.

Good question.....the KaBar warranty comes with all the BECKERs....As a practical matter as long as the knife doesn't come back with hammer marks on the spine, vice marks on the blade flats or pipe marks on the handles Tooge will give you a pass...In other words as long as there is no sign of INTENTIONAL Vandal-like behavior they are gonna fix it......If you buy one for a Test to destruction and leave tracks (Tooge has a microscope and an engineering degree AND is real knifenut) you will probably buy yourself a new one......KaBar has a good record on this score....They want you to be happy.......You can thank the now BF banned C. Stamp for the nullification of the old, simple, you break it, we fix it warranty.....Basically I promote the idea of blade testing unto destruction (I have done my fair share) but, if I deliberately break a blade I expect to pay for my fun....

All Best...

ethan

Actually, we are getting about 30 to 40 degrees flex on the 1095 on the overall length of the knife. In other words, if you hold the tip in the vice and then flex the blade it will flex about 30 to 40 degrees before snapping. If you chuck it up in the vice mid-way up the blade then you won't get as much flex since you're not working over the whole length of the knife. Where this blade appears to have broken was through the thumb grippers on the spine since they are natural stress risers. Everything that Noss did in his test were expected results since Shon does flex and break tests on every batch of knives that he heat treats. All in all, I think Noss did an excellent job on the knife and the knife did an excellent job on him... and we thank him for the test

Apparently you haven't seen Noss4's tests before!

The odds of anything surviving this mad man's hands are non-existent! :thumbup:

Besides that, we have requested that the remains be returned to Ohio for proper burial. . . All of the crew here at Busse Combat will gather together to drink one last one in honor of Noss4's FBM. . . We will then give her a proper sending off which involves loading her into the Busse Combat 6 pounder civil war cannon and blowing her remains into the back 40!. . . :thumbup:

Jerry

.

These two are from another source and come from Justin of Ranger Knives:

"Didn't watch it all but did see some of it. I don't put much stock in his "testing" bu glad I could at least help him get a bit of a work out trying to destroy the blade!"

"S7 is a TOUGH steel. That is why I used it in the Entry tool. IT is near imposible to break. Little too spendy for me to make the RD line out of (don't have Busse's buying power) but a custom RD in S7 would hold up similar the the Swamp Rat in SR77 and or the Busse Combat Blade."

Regarding that last quote from Justin, let me just say he is spot on. A young knifemaker friend made a machete out of S7 and one day we tried to break it. We never pounded it through a cinder block or metal but we did baton it through some thick, 6 - 7 inch diameter, old, knotty wood using a 4 - 5 foot pry bar that must have weighed around 8 pounds. Full on hard swings and not only did the blade remain intact it was still surprisingly sharp. We ended up giving up before breaking it

Both the knowledge and the steel to make an extremely tough knife are readily available. It's not a mystery. It does cost a bit more but for a Project I at $350, it doesn't seem like too much to ask.

 

[vjb.knife]

I never liked those one piece knives but none the less that is a stupid fu#$ing test. If you baton in the field do you use a sledge hammer? If so you desrve to break every knife you own. That would not happen if you use a piece of wood. This proves only one thing - the guy doing the test has more money than brains.

 

[hardheart]

He did use a piece of wood first. Either people aren't watching the videos, or just conveniently forgetting everything that goes on in them. Considering it is a destruction test, I guess he had just enough brains to do what he set out to.

 

[nozh2002]

He did use a piece of wood first. Either people aren't watching the videos, or just conveniently forgetting everything that goes on in them. Considering it is a destruction test, I guess he had just enough brains to do what he set out to.

This is exactely what happen. I guess Noss should not call it Destruction test but "Survival" test or better "Outdoor" test. Even with transcript and direct point to video where all this happen, people just do not bother to check and see what did happen to this knife.

To me Noss did not break this knife, he conduct his test very carefully when it fail (everybody can see for yourself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmWJOAJB5I 8th minute). He did not even get to destruction test in this case, but doing regular testing. I very well can imagine batoning with stone and I am very sure that in the field batoning will not be as careful as Noss did in that particular test when CR failed. I can imagint that if you rush to cut something in emergency situation batoning will be very violent instead.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Joshua J.]

It should be said once again, that improper batoning will break the knife no matter what you use.
http://www.barkriverknives.com/docs/batoning.pdf

If the knife had fractured at the impact point then you could say hammer was the cause, but as is almost all knives break near the handle, thus it is the tension from batoning that breaks it. The hammer will give a greater shock, but if you could baton with a pool noodle you'd get the same result.

 

[nozh2002]

It should be said once again, that improper batoning will break the knife no matter what you use.
http://www.barkriverknives.com/docs/batoning.pdf

If the knife had fractured at the impact point then you could say hammer was the cause, but as is almost all knives break near the handle, thus it is the tension from batoning that breaks it. The hammer will give a greater shock, but if you could baton with a pool noodle you'd get the same result.

An as I already reply - Noss4 actually did proper batoning according to this document.

If you do not bother to check this document on page 5 you may see proper way to batoning and if you do not bother to check Noss4 test video 8th minute on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmWJOAJB5I
You may see clearly that the way he batoning CR knife is in accordance to this document.

As I already noted before at post #249.

Well if you read that article to see what is right way to baton and watch Noss4 video to check how he actually baton 2x4 - it is absolutely clear that he doing this right way - exactly as it is on page 5 of that article.

So you do not need to go limb - just compare this article with video - it is simple, even it take some effort it is minimal, I did it in few minutes.

Thanks, Vassili.

I think we will have much less posts here if everybody will pay attention to the subject and check test itself, those batoning document and other posts.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Elen]

It should be said once again, that improper batoning will break the knife no matter what you use.
http://www.barkriverknives.com/docs/batoning.pdf

If the knife had fractured at the impact point then you could say hammer was the cause, but as is almost all knives break near the handle, thus it is the tension from batoning that breaks it. The hammer will give a greater shock, but if you could baton with a pool noodle you'd get the same result.

Actually, over a year back, I believed that might be true - that any knife would break if batoned in that "improper" way. It made sense to me, as I had not tried to intentionally destroy knives. But others disagreed with me (including some makers) and I then tried it. For over a year, I've been regularly batoning some of my knives "improperly" in various ways. Sometimes it's been tip higher than handle, creating the "fulcrum" referenced in that pdf. Sometimes the other way round. Sometimes the baton was wood, sometimes it was a hammer or a rock. Knives used have ranged from a relatively cheap Ka-Bar Large TDI to Fällkniven F1 to Ranger Knives RD9 and various Busse knives (including a rather thin Game Warden). Batoned through frozen wood, knotty wood, wood with a twisty grain, seasoned wood, wood dirty with sand and small rock, pretty much everything. Batoned in freezing temperatures and in warm summer temps. And not one single blade failure. Not one knife broke because of improper batoning. Not one. So that theory is plainly false. You could baton my RD9, for example, with a wooden baton, through wood, 24 hours a day and seven days a week, the "improper" way, and you would not get the blade to fail. It just cannot be done. The theory is incorrect. Whoever wrote that pdf would find it out for themselves if they tried that test with a knife that's actually very tough.

On the other hand, there is truth to the theory in that some knives can be broken by batoning them carelessly. Some, like some Moras. Sure, I could get one of the short hidden tang Moras to fail by batoning it hard enough. But that isn't because batoning the "wrong" way does that to any knife. It's because some knives are not as tough as others. That's just how it is.

 

[Phil Elmore]

Some cars will keep running if you purposely mistreat them, too. This does not mean a car that breaks down if you intentionally abuse it isn't a "good" car -- it simply means it does not have the threshold for foolish abuse that another vehicle might.

 

[Lycosa]

Respecting Blades, with the Eastern perspective, Man, I have a hard time watching those knife tests!!
I realize the importance of the test, though.

 

[Joshua J.]

Part of my point on batoning is that if it is done correctly, any knife should be able to do it. I actually have to disagree with Vassili on whether or not Noss was doing it correctly. If it were done correctly the knife would not have broken, as the handle takes no stress when using proper technique. I guess that opens the possibility that it was simply vibrations from the hammer that shattered the knife, but it would have to be pretty darn brittle to do that.

 

[nozh2002]

Respecting Blades, with the Eastern perspective, Man, I have a hard time watching those knife tests!!
I realize the importance of the test, though.

Well, as I sad video #3 8th minute. There is not abuse there at all, no intention to break, I would say gentle and respectful testing.

There is some image of "mad knife destroyer who enojoing breaking knives and do this for entertaining" erected here, mostly because of wrong naming "Destruction tests" and some very good imagination.

But if you actually see this - from peeling apple and slicing apple, I see no abuse or other terrible thing many think about. But rather realistic and careful testing with respect to knife. It is "Outdoor" testing really.

Please, just have a brief look! Everybody - just have a look and see for yourself - keep you imagination on leash and see really what happened.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Elen]

Some cars will keep running if you purposely mistreat them, too. This does not mean a car that breaks down if you intentionally abuse it isn't a "good" car -- it simply means it does not have the threshold for foolish abuse that another vehicle might.

Exactly true, Sharp Phil. On the other hand, a car that can take "foolish abuse" is the superior choice for those who need or wish to subject their car for such abuse - perhaps for those who have need to go off-round, such as military vehicles would. It isn't the superior choice for everyone, obviously not - it will likely be too heavy, expensive and not that fuel efficient for just driving to the mall and back. But, if the car that can't take "foolish abuse" is marketed as being a tough, off-road vehicle and designed so that its road performance and comforts suffer but off-road abilities and ruggedness would seem to increase, it would be a bad car if it then turned out lacking in the durability against "abuse" department.

Indeed you can baton with a lockless SAK (I have), if you're careful. But sometimes, something a bit stronger would be useful. That's why knives like the Project I are made, thick and supposedly strong to do things that knives that cut better cannot so easily do. And that's why it's rather important to know how durable these thick knives actually are. It would be less than fun to think your off-road vehicle can survive a bumpy ride when in fact it will start falling apart at the first sign of wilderness, to exaggerate the point intentionally.

 

[Phil Elmore]

Unfortunately, this presumes that all cars of the same make and model will be able to withstand the same gross abuse, contrary to the owner manual's recommendations, to the same degree. Basing your purchase on this type of destructive abuse, which is neither consistently reproducible nor within the scope of the car's requirements, is foolish.

I don't purchase a stapler based on which stapler can be hammered through a concrete wall. I purchase a stapler based on its ability to staple paper in the context of an office environment.