Chris Reeve Green Beret

t1mpani said:
Nail hit squarely on head, Sir! My argument has always been that they won't fair well against certain other knives in hard use tasks, AND that a testimonial from military personnel is hardly worthy "proof" to the contrary. Some know what they're talking about, many don't, all have opinions.
Click to expand...

I agree. My brother was mostly into folding assisted knives or a couple of fixed blades that he could get at the military px store, you know, whatever was on hand. After he came home he was asking me for recommendations for good auto knives with long blades... most of the really good ones I could recommend didn't have blades as long as he wanted and most that did were the cheap kind that I wouldn't recommend to anyone. It took some convincing on my part for him to settle on something like with a smaller but better-made blade.

All that said I know only the very basics of guns and he could likely school me in that subject any day of the week.
 
The CR GB looks very nice to me, but I would also question the steel choice. I have not used or abused one so I can't comment on whether it actually works or not. I have a good job and surely make more than the average soldier, but the CR GB is well above my price range. If I was a soldier I would want the absolute toughest knife I could find and I think a Kabar, Becker or ESEE would be affordable but would do the job.

It would be interesting to see someone do more realistic tests on the GB to see how it works. Maybe it will break if you clamp it in a vise and bend it, but what about if you are prying open a door or window? What about the amount of chopping that a solder might have to do in Iraq? I wouldn't mind testing one myself but I'm not going to buy one for that.
 
Like I said, the edge on my S30V Pacifica exhibited degradation (blunting, wear) at an accelerated rate when compared to my Gerber LMF, and both had been sharpened at fifteen degrees per side with a 20 degree micro bevel (because that is my go-to geometry on all but the largest fixed blades) so it really couldn't have been more fair. My purpose hadn't been to compare them at all---I was carving points onto a whole mess of wooden stakes (made from white oak branches that had fallen down during a storm) as they were to be used in the attainment of fire-making merit badges at a big scout jamboree here locally (I'm not involved with them other than my neighbor has a couple of sons who were scouts at the time and I agreed to be an adult at the event). Anyway, it sounded like a fun excuse to use my new knife for something so I set to work with the pile of wood--snap cutting long pieces into shorter pieces and then slicing off tangents at one end to make a spike. About 25-30 stakes in I noticed the edge beginning to skate more than a little bit and looked at it--major rippling in front of the serrations and shiny, dull sections of edge out towards the point. I really wasn't in the mood to start re-sharpening so I went to the toolbox of my truck and got the old LMF out; beaten and bruised as it is I always keep my knives sharp. When I got to the requisite 48 sharpened stakes I got curious, and just started carving and slicing away at the wood, not into any particular shape but just to cut it. After an additional ten or fifteen minutes of this treatment, the edge started to glide instead of slice but upon examination showed no areas of rippling or blunting (I'd thought that perhaps this was unusually hard oak, but no) it had just kind of gotten uniformly dull and shiny. I wasn't measuring inches of wood processed, but I'd say the knife did easily half-again as much cutting as the CRK did, maybe even twice. I've never been able to get a firm answer on whether those old LMFs were AUS-6 or 440A (apparently many knife manufacturers were claiming to use American steels in the '80s but were actually using Japanese steels) but whichever it is, it's not a knife that I'd ever considered to be one of my top performers, it was just a decent old fixed blade with a comfy handle that I'd relegated to living in my truck.
I'm not an attacker of S30V (or S35VN for that matter) and I think that--done properly--it exhibits very good edge retention and corrosion resistance. I also happen to know, first hand, that when run at a hardness significantly lower than the 58-61 HRC range that Crucible themselves recommend, you end up with less than impressive performance. A friend who just looks at his knives in their cases now owns that beauty--and a beautiful design it is! Very few people make cleaner, better looking designs than CRK, and my Sebenza would be one of the last knives I'd part with.
 
I have a John W. Smith Custom Evolution in S30V that John did the heat treat on. I can compare this knife to a Sebenza in S30 that I carried for two years. The JWS at 58-59 HRC had no chipping in HARD use, kept the original edge for years(ceramic stropping is the only sharpening used) and resisted any corrosion. It is a superb knife. The Sebenza got sold....not because of the heat treat, but because of the lock engagement geometry that permits pushing the lockbar to the opposite side...I found it unacceptable and was told that is was within factory spec at the time. Still have the JWS.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
A few things - someone posted the picture of 2 broken Green Berets - 1st of all, Cliff Stamp didn't break those. I'm pretty sure those pictures were taken from the single test that everyone likes too quote when they bash the GB. The bottom knife has been altered so much that in no longer even has serrations. You can't expect a knife made out of a steel like S30V or S90V to be tougher than 5160, A2 or other comparable steels. In my testing A2 is demonstrably tougher than 3V as well, even though many people use 3V for hard use knives.

Secondly, the Green Beret is made out of S35VN. No matter what it was originally made of, or what the knives that Cliff tested were made of, the ones that people can purchase right now are made of S35VN. I have had several blades made of S30V chip when they shouldn't have, but have never had those problems with S35VN. I can't say whether it's because S35VN is tougher or because the fact that it machines easier means that when sharpening makers do not get the edge as hot ruining the temper, but I have consistently had better results out of S35VN in the toughness department.

I can also attest the the Green Beret's sturdiness and usefulness. I haven't ever put mine in a vice and bent it to 90 degrees, but I have chopped a lot with it. The factory edge has stayed keener longer than almost any other similarly built fixed blade I have owned. Even the steels that people are touting as tougher will show edge deformation quicker than this knife. It can be used as a prybar as well - everyone is forgetting that the knife is almost 1/4" thick. When someone uses a knife to pry they do not use it in the same manner that someone would bend it in a vise, getting as much mechanical leverage as possible to put the most amount of stress on the knife.

I like Cliff and do give credence to his tests, but he is biased. Given the vast amount of information we have available, I don't see how anybody else doesn't find it absurd to test a knife like the Green Beret against a knife like the Battle Mistress and expect similar results. Two knives with different geometries made out of steels that lie on different end of the spectrum? I could run tests that favored the wear resistant and corrosion resistant S35VN and show it to be superior to many steels that you could bend in a vise and "prove" to be tougher than S35VN. We are all familiar with the properties. However, most of the people that are blasting the GB have never even used it, and are blindly following reviews from Noss and Cliff Stamp.

When you use it like a normal person would, the GB is going to excel at many things, but not necessarily be impressive compared to a knife designed for that function. It has great rust resistance, great edge stability, and it's hard to beat when it comes to how easy it is to hold on to. I know from experience that the vast majority of people, whether they're a soldier, knife collector, or what have you could effectively use the GB to accomplish a wide variety of chores, and would never experience a failure. I don't know why so many people that have never even handled one bash it. It can't chop as good as a camp chopper? It doesn't bend as well as rubber? If Cliff Stamp and Noss cannot predict things like that, they shouldn't be testing knives anyway. If they knew better and went through with running tests that put the knife at a disadvantage and then published the results, they're biased. I missed the head to head tests where the GB was put up against the Ka-Bar, SRK and Ontario Bayonet.

The things I dislike about the GB: I wish the sheath was designed more compact. I do not like serrations. My biggest complaint is the lack of a thumb ramp - I like modern knives to have good ergonomics, and there isn't a way to get a good thumb purchase on the GB. I also wish I would have purchased the 5" instead of the 7". The factory edge would barely shave hair, but it has kept that level of sharpness long past the time when every other survival knife I own has lost theirs. I carried the GB for hikes, camping, hunting, and several other activities, and it not only still has the factory edge, but the Gunkote has stood up well. I have chopped lots of 2-5" trees, and expected most of the coating to be scratched off, but it hasn't. About a month ago I got a knife from J.A. Baker, and it's sharper, and made from ATS 34. I have been carrying it exclusively on hikes, but I have to sharpen it almost every time it goes out. Again, I'm not sure if it's because of the steel or the edge being heated during sharpening, but the GB is a rare knife made from higher grade stainless that resists edge deformation (rolling & chipping) straight from the factory. It's not my favorite knife, but it has always impressed me as a general use knife that the army would carry, and the cheaper substitutes like the Ka-Bar and SRK have not. They do about what I expected, and the GB has routinely exceeded my expectations (which may have been artificially lowered by reviews like the one Cliff Stamp did). I don't expect it to chop as efficiently as an axe or cut like a razor though - no general use military knife does that.
 
Its all about value for money, you can get a scrapyard for less then half the price and have a knife with superior performance.
 
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strider_Knives ...

"Strider Knives has designed a new bayonet it hopes to market to the US military. The blade is CPM S30V and it features a tang extending all the way to the latch plate for increased strength. Strider designed the bayonet for Zero Tolerance Knives, which will release it as the ZT Bayonet D9."
 
number41 said:
Its all about value for money, you can get a scrapyard for less then half the price and have a knife with superior performance.
Click to expand...

Who pays for the knives issued to those completing the Q course? DoD? And if they pay do they pay full value or a discount made possible by civilian sales of the GB?

Could it be that the cost is partially (or fully) offset by Green Beret sales to civilians, as Strider did with the original MARSOC SMF?

If this is the case then the value for money question becomes tricky. I'm not a US Citizen and I wouldn't mind a portion of the money I pay for a GB going to a knife presented to US SF soldiers completing the Q course.
 
Last edited:
No idea here---I would both hope and expect that they receive a discount.

As to the bayonet, I'm afraid that "hoping" to market to the us military is not ever going to be turned into reality. In this case, one of its problems (in addition to the fact that, again, they chose an application that this alloy is not right for) is that
they do not understand that you don't WANT a bayonet to have good cutting geometry and be sharp because if you ever actually use it as a bayonet it will slice into a rib and get lodged there instead of gliding past it--bayonets were intentionally dull even when knives/swords had a much more prominent place on the battlefield. Worse yet, this design incorporates a choil, making absolutely sure it would get lodged in a stab. Mind you, since DOD is doing everything they can to completely eliminate bayonet training, actually producing a bayonet with correct geometry and out of a proper material likely wouldn't get them any farther. The truth is that their sales of this "bayonet" will be to guys who want to stick it on their private AR rifle to make it look cool.


Nellem said:
Who pays for the knives issued to those completing the Q course? DoD? And if they pay do they pay full value or a discount made possible by civilian sales of the GB?

Could it be that the cost is partially (or fully) offset by Green Beret sales to civilians, as Strider did with the original MARSOC SMF?

If this is the case then the value for money question becomes tricky. I'm not a US Citizen and I wouldn't mind a portion of the money I pay for a GB going to a knife presented to US SF soldiers completing the Q course.
Click to expand...
 
I wonder how long the venerated Randall Model 1, with it's handles epoxied to the 440c stick tang, would last in Cliff Stamp's test, and would many here be so quick to condemn the knife, designer, and manufacturer?

dkb45 said:
I DO NOT understand ths obsession with making large fixed blades with S30V. It is well documented that it does not have the impact resistance as many other steels, primarily from the abundance of large carbides. It can also chip up a storm with a real thin edge, but I keep seeing very thin knives made of it. It makes me think that it is used because it sounds cool, and a lot of customers know nothing of metallurgy.
Click to expand...

number41 said:
I would never buy a knife made in s30v for hard use, its definitely not a tough steel.
Click to expand...

dkb45 said:
S30V is great for a pocket knife, and can be just fine for a smaller fixed blade, but it not a steel designed to be used as a large fixed blade.
Click to expand...


You guys do know that the Green Beret and Pacific are no longer made from S30V, right?

To clarify, they aren't, they're now made from S35VN, which performs very differently.
 
True, but it's still run at a hardness well below the hardness range (58-61) that Crucible recommends, which sort of negates the purpose of having a carbon content that is so high. I do think S35VN is a mildly superior choice compared to S30V, but there are still notably better choices they could have made. A (relatively) low carbon spring steel like 5160 or 1065 is never going to be a magnificent performer in terms of abrasive edge holding and a high carbon stainless is never going to be a magnificent performer in terms of ductility/toughness. You don't turn an alloy into a different alloy by tempering it differently.

The reason I've been focusing my comments on the S30V version is that was the version of CR stainless fixed blade that I've tried. My Sebenza is S35VN, but those are run harder.
 
MatthewSB,

I was thinking of the Randall Model 1 when I wrote an earlier post about knives that performed the combat job very well in the past with lower spec steel.
 
Nellem said:
MatthewSB,

I was thinking of the Randall Model 1 when I wrote an earlier post about knives that performed the combat job very well in the past with lower spec steel.
Click to expand...

Super quick off-topic if I may, Nellem you mention you aren't a U.S. citizen and I notice you're in Cape Town. What are knife laws in South Africa like?
 
Actually, a Randall #1 in stainless will (and has) generally be 440b vs 440c, it's the smaller, stainless hunters that get the abrasion resistant steel and the larger knives that get the tougher stuff...which is exactly the way it should be. 440b is a superior choice to S35VN for a "rugged" knife.
 
I paid way more for my Ferrari, and it us supposedly a high performance machine, yet it was still totaled after I ran it into a brick wall at high speeds. Might as well have gotten a geo metro
 
t1mpani said:
Actually, a Randall #1 in stainless will (and has) generally be 440b vs 440c, it's the smaller, stainless hunters that get the abrasion resistant steel and the larger knives that get the tougher stuff...which is exactly the way it should be. 440b is a superior choice to S35VN for a "rugged" knife.
Click to expand...

Superior how?

With a proper edge (not too thin) both will cut stuff and both will withstand batoning when done properly (not allowing the target to contact the handle and create a shear).

Either will snap in half when hit with a big hammer.

Both will last forever when used and maintained with respect.

I've abused my S35vn bravo 1 and, after polishing out the kydex scratches, it looks brand new. I'm really not sure how anything could be measurably "superior"? There's a point of diminishing returns where things are about as good as it's going to get. I can't tell the difference between properly heat treated and ground 154cm, cpm154, S35Vn, 440, etc. The key here is that they must be properly ground and heat treated.
 
RedLynx said:
Super quick off-topic if I may, Nellem you mention you aren't a U.S. citizen and I notice you're in Cape Town. What are knife laws in South Africa like?
Click to expand...

There has been threats from our Gov to impose much more stringent limitations (based on UK legislation) but thus far nothing hectic materialized. The last draft I saw of an updated dangerous weapons act was just plain stupid. We can do pretty much anything here at present but it doesn't mean Gov is not trying to come up with plans to make life difficult. Our Gov completely screwed up our gun laws and hopefully that taught them a lesson. It is one thing to make laws but a very different thing to enforce them with a police force that can't be trusted to adhere to laws themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top