Chris Reeve Green Beret Video Desrtuction Test Completed

[DaveH]

I trust real world tests that are repeatable.

That's fine. But other then the two tests we have, cliff's and Noss', we have no evidence whatsoever if the knife is good or bad.

Because people claim, infer, guess a knife is good doesn't make it good.

To me even if these tests seem like utter crap, which I don't agree with, they're still better indicator of performance then a bunch of words.

 

[wccl]

You have an interesting idea of knives meant for cutting. If the GB was indeed meant for cutting it wouldn't be looking like it does. Why would you need a .22" stock for cutting... saber ground no less? Noss reported the edge quickly degrading...why is that a feature favorable to a knife designed for cutting? Steel that is run at approx. 55 Rc????
I have a 7" knife that was designed for cutting: it is made from approx. 1/8" stock from high carbon stainless steel at approx. 64Rc with a single bevel at 19 deg to zero edge. THAT is a knife meant for cutting. The GB wasn't.

Face it, advertisement, steel hardness, design: all indicate that the GB was meant to double as a make-shift prybar.

I agree with you. That is exactly the point. Some people here claim that this knife was used by Noss not as intended. That it was abused. That the primary function of the knife is for cutting.

 

[Evil Eye Earl]

You are correct. Lets add to my list of tools for a Green Beret a cheep hammer, a wet stone cutting saw. Very soon out Green Berets will need to pull trailers with the gear some of which can be replaced by a good strong (really strong, not claimed strong) knife. When you are sitting in your garage, you can easy choose the right tool for the right job, but in the field you cannot carry every tool for every possible situation, so a good knife can replace some of the tools you may need to some degree.

Do you read any warning labels.
Destruction is flawed from the get go ...donot strike "any" metal with a higher than 40 HRC ....there is a reason for this warning.
It can happen at any time.
He could have used razor blades for the same destruction and spent less money.....no "real" knowledge of any of the knives destroyed is learned.

 

[wccl]

Do you read any warning labels.
Destruction is flawed from the get go ...donot strike "any" metal with a higher than 40 HRC ....there is a reason for this warning.
It can happen at any time.
He could have used razor blades for the same destruction and spent less money.....no "real" knowledge of any of the knives destroyed is learned.

Yes, I have this razor blade that said Green Beret strong knife.

 

[Evil Eye Earl]

Yes, I have this razor blade that said Green Beret strong knife.

yep...figgers.

 

[Bors]

Do you read any warning labels.
Destruction is flawed from the get go ...donot strike "any" metal with a higher than 40 HRC ....there is a reason for this warning.

Yes and the reason is the hammer is made in China.

My cold chisels are harder than 40 and I beat on them all the time, I use a good hammer that did not come with a warning label.......

It can happen at any time.
He could have used razor blades for the same destruction and spent less money.....no "real" knowledge of any of the knives destroyed is learned.

Plenty is of informatioin is provided for those willing to look......

 

[Evil Eye Earl]

Yes and the reason is the hammer is made in China.

My cold chisels are harder than 40 and I beat on them all the time, I use a good hammer that did not come with a warning label.......




Plenty is of informatioin is provided for those willing to look......

So which end of your chisels do you strike with your good hammer?
I have looked for useful information .....kinda boring

 

[Bors]

So which end of your chisels do you strike with your cheap hammer?

The round flat end with my made in "USA" hammer........

I have looked for useful information .....kinda boring

Give it time......

 

[Evil Eye Earl]

The round flat end with my made in "USA" hammer........
Give it time......

The soft (below 40 HRC) that you have to redress when it flattens out.
Good on the USA tools:thumbup:
I will give them credit for wearing safety equipment .:thumbup:
I have seen several accidents ,loss of eye sight,bleeding lips and chins
from slivers of metal from the first blow on hardened steel.
Maybe for the use of hockey and paintball masks?

 

[Bors]

The soft (below 40 HRC) that you have to redress when it flattens out.
Good on the USA tools:thumbup:
I will give them credit for wearing safety equipment .:thumbup:
I have seen several accidents ,loss of eye sight,bleeding lips and chins
from slivers of metal from the first blow on hardened steel.
Maybe for the use of hockey and paintball masks?

Actually my chisel is also harder than 40. I use an air impact chisel most of the time. The end tends to chip rather than flatten out.

I wear safety glasses and ear plugs anyway. All you have to do is look at my old welding safety glasses (I wore them under my hood) and you will under stand.

Already had one trip to the doc to dig splatter out of my eye (I was wearing a hood and a my safety glasses) poop happens even when your protected.

It's hard to keep your eye still when someone is using a scalpel to pick out the metal......

 

[a2d2]

Yes and the reason is the hammer is made in China.

My cold chisels are harder than 40 and I beat on them all the time, I use a good hammer that did not come with a warning label.......

estwing hammers are usa made, and they warn not to strike any hardened steel with them. your chisels likely have softer steel at the striking end.

 

[Evil Eye Earl]

Oh I understand...have had a few splatters roll down my shirt in my ears (you can taste the metal)and else where ...while welding and cutting I have set myself on fire by having an unseen shop rag catch on fire and ignite my pants....didn't take me long to find it LOL.
The thing about splatter and slag it's non magnetic and it has to be picked out of your eye.
Grinding wheels with metal brushes break off and have a curl like a fish hook on them
if you get one in the eye donot pull it out (get to a doctor ASAP)as it will rip the insides of your eyebll and drain out the fluid in it.
Stay safe my man and may these guys doing these "test's" do the same.I'm outta here.

 

[ehhh]

My recollection of doing the charpy test in college does give me the experience to argue that. In a charpy test a precisely sized and prepared standard specimen is hit by a large hammer swung from the same height going the same speed with the same energy every time. The measurement you make is how far the pendulum/hammer swings up after breaking the specimen (end result is total energy absorbed by the specimen = toughness). The other observations that are part of the test is to observe the fracture mode and measure specimen temperature. The specimens used have dimensional and finish tolerances comparable to high quality knives.

From the tests I did years ago, the measurements we got for toughness from this ASTM caliber testing machine varied wildly. So wildly we could not even come up with any reliable measure of toughness from 7 or 8 test runs of these meticulously prepared specimens. The lab Professor didn't even reduce our grade due to our failure to achieve any good toughness data, because our results were typical. The only thing we could determine was a rough idea of the transitional temperature (the temperature a steel goes from ductile to brittle mode fracture), which was determined by observing the fracture mode at different specimen temperatures.

If anyone else here has done any charpy testing, maybe they can offer an opinion of how difficult it is to get consistent and good toughness testing results using any of the standard tests. There is also much disagreement about how useful toughness as a measurement is.

So from remembering the results of my Charpy testing, which is probably a little more precise and consistent than Noss's test, I will say that yes I can argue your point.

May I ask what is involved in charpy testing? I was under the impression that there is a notch. And I'd also like to know if the testing is repeated with the same piece with about the same force until breakage occurs. There is no standard notch, and the knife is repeatedly hit until it breaks. I'd imagine charpy testing is different, but I've never done it.

In any case, I'd say his testing generally agrees with what other people find (toughness of carbon vs stainless, incredibly tough INFI), so I would not agree that all of his testing just happened by chance.
Also if I consider that S30V has more variability when it comes to the breaking point, I think I'd stick with the steels that have less variable results, such as the Battle Mistress which took a whole lot of hits.

 

[stabman]

To all the whiners:
If you do NOT agree with the methodology or the results, do your own tests. Find a nice, repeatable method, and show the results of the tests on various knives.
Noss's tests show knives being put through similar tests, and performing differently; a good source of buyer info.
Does it show everything? Nope, but it gives the prospective buyer some data to work with.
If you don't like the data, or think it is incorrect and doing a disservice to the knife community, then PLEASE, show us all the results of your tests.
Or at LEAST some personal anecdote showing your experience being different.
But, all I've seen is "whah whah whah, these tests suck", with nothing to offer in their place other than arrogance, platitudes, and snide remarks.
REALLY helpful to the rest of us, I'm sure.

 

[Torm]

I trust real world tests that are repeatable.

Its all there, watch the videos for yourself. This test was done in the real world to see how much the GB could take before failing in the SAME tests as other, often cheaper, blades. There is no actual data to back any of your claims about the GB beating other competitors for the special forces, what tests were done, or what blades were tested.

 

[noss4]

The charpy impact test uses a small sample with v notch and does not use the actual model under the actual situation. I'm using the real model under the real situation.

 

[Broos]

May I ask what is involved in charpy testing? I was under the impression that there is a notch. And I'd also like to know if the testing is repeated with the same piece with about the same force until breakage occurs. There is no standard notch, and the knife is repeatedly hit until it breaks. I'd imagine charpy testing is different, but I've never done it.

In any case, I'd say his testing generally agrees with what other people find (toughness of carbon vs stainless, incredibly tough INFI), so I would not agree that all of his testing just happened by chance.
Also if I consider that S30V has more variability when it comes to the breaking point, I think I'd stick with the steels that have less variable results, such as the Battle Mistress which took a whole lot of hits.

Yes, there is a notch - and there are different charpy tests with different notches. There is also a test where the test piece is pre-cracked. The test is done to each specimen once and the intent is that the specimen breaks at the notch, and the machine has an indicator that measures how far the pendulum swings after it breaks the test pce (energy absorbed = total energy of raised pendulum less energy of pendulum after breaking the specimen). If the test piece stops the pendulum (test piece does not break all the way), your test failed because no measurement of the energy absorbed to failure can be made.

If a student went to their professor and said they had measured toughness by doing one test, the Prof would have a good chuckle (and then give them an F). But test away, Noss - you obviously have a following.

To all the whiners:
If you do NOT agree with the methodology or the results, do your own tests.
But, all I've seen is "whah whah whah, these tests suck", with nothing to offer in their place other than arrogance, platitudes, and snide remarks.
REALLY helpful to the rest of us, I'm sure.

Obviously you and a few others are taking the fact that some of us criticize this "test" as a personal affront - well, maybe we have commented because we have read one too many posts from people just assuming this knife is a bad knife and we do not think the knife is getting a fair shake (I do not own one). If you want to insist that these tests are a definitive measure that the knife is not good enough, then post away, but don't be surprised if some disagree with you. Maybe you should prove to those of us who prefer a more scientific test by doing another unscientific "test" to verify that another knife will break just like this one did (thought all you guys who insist that anyone who criticizes this test must do our own tests would like this).

I agree that seeing a video of a knife surviving this abuse is impressive. But I question that you can condemn the knife or the steel it is made out of if it fails in the fashion this one did. I did not realize what I thought was a relatively simple point that I thought needed to be made would make some folks so butt sore.

 

[Tony G]

I can’t imagine that anyone is surprised that an S30V knife failed as a hard use knife. It is really no reflection on CRK ability to make a knife.

A bigger surprise is that the Strider in S30V didn’t fail as badly.

My only hope is that CRK goes back to BG42.:thumbup:

.

 

[noss4]

Broos: I'm not condemning the steel here. The Strider did well and it's S30V. I'm not condemning Chris Reeve knives as a maker either. I just do the tests and report what happens and make the call compared to other knives I have tested.

There are always 2 sides of the coin in any test. Nobody can and will fully agree on any test. This forum is full of debate on many tests. Debate is a good thing.

Scientific tests with data are also debated as well. So a scientific testing is not always the end of question. The world is full of scientists that can not agree on tests. I'm not just talking about knife tests alone.

 

[eatingmuchface]

sorry, I didn't read every page of this thread but, me personally, I use my knives wayyyyy withing the realm that the GB broke.
as far as the testing goes, I don't really feel like talking about it now, ieveryone is going to think wha they want and I doubt I'll change it.
whatever.

but seriously, there have been times when I needed (my life wasn't at stake or anything, but I'm sure if you're a green beret it would be) a knife to be exeptionaly tough.
tougher then that GB.
I'll just leave it at that for now.


oh, and the fact that some of you think only something that has controls and all that just cracks me up.
the data is right in front of you, and it's there so you can make you're own opinions.

ahhh...
silly college grads.