Chris Reeve knives on (knifetests.com)

[pvicenzi]

We still haven't answered the original question. Why did the knife break? As I see it, there are 3 possible answers. These are in no particlular order:

1. The knife has a manufacturing flaw which got my QC, and the rest of them are OK.
2. The knife has a design flaw and all of them are subject to breaking.
3. The tests are not accurate.

 

[LorenzoL]

We still haven't answered the original question. Why did the knife break? As I see it, there are 3 possible answers. These are in no particlular order:

1. The knife has a manufacturing flaw which got my QC, and the rest of them are OK.
2. The knife has a design flaw and all of them are subject to breaking.
3. The tests are not accurate.

I think it could be a little bit of each:
- Producing a one-piece knife of that size must present some interesting challenges (so much so that CRK is discontinued the one-piece line at the end of 2009, apparently because the guy who has been producing the blanks in South Africa wants to retire);
- Because of the aforementioned difficulties, imperfections are more likely to occur, so more must make it past QC;
- The tests are not accurate because they amplify the effect of said imperfection by their extreme nature.

 

[ipm]

the combination sounds right.

its weird that the knives seem to fail at the start/end of the serrations.

do serrations add that much weakness?

 

[KEmSAT-Survival]

We still haven't answered the original question. Why did the knife break? As I see it, there are 3 possible answers. These are in no particlular order:

1. The knife has a manufacturing flaw which got my QC, and the rest of them are OK.
2. The knife has a design flaw and all of them are subject to breaking.
3. The tests are not accurate.

or 4:

It was beaten with a hammer.

I'll take numma fo, for two hunnid Alex.

Just about anything would fail if you beat it with a hammer long enough. About the only thing I know that seems to get better is an anvil.


Different styles of knives have different intended uses. The same test for every single knife does not offer proof of anything.

Beating a CRK folder to death with a hammer doesn't prove any toughness or strength. It just proves that you can break it by beating the crap out of it with a hammer. You can do that with a concrete block.

Some of the tests might be valid, but only for certain knives. Knives that are intended to be used in unorthodox ways: Busse, RC, KA-Bar, etc...

Punching a CRK and an RC4 through a block of wood, only to see the CRK break means a CRK isn't made to be punched through blocks of wood. Not that it's less of a knife than an RC4.

These "tests" are not valid.

But that's just my IMO. What the h*** do I know? I've just spent years in the dirt and living off the land. I've never had to punch a Mora through an Oak Tree...I guess it's less of a knife than a chainsaw.

 

[Ken44]

As I've said before...If he ever makes a vid without that mask someone let me know. I MAY be able to get through one then. I sure wouldn't base a thing on his test though, but thats just me. I can see that some would like them.

 

[syltetoy]

or 4:

It was beaten with a hammer.

I'll take numma fo, for two hunnid Alex.

Just about anything would fail if you beat it with a hammer long enough. About the only thing I know that seems to get better is an anvil.


Different styles of knives have different intended uses. The same test for every single knife does not offer proof of anything.

Beating a CRK folder to death with a hammer doesn't prove any toughness or strength. It just proves that you can break it by beating the crap out of it with a hammer. You can do that with a concrete block.

Some of the tests might be valid, but only for certain knives. Knives that are intended to be used in unorthodox ways: Busse, RC, KA-Bar, etc...

Punching a CRK and an RC4 through a block of wood, only to see the CRK break means a CRK isn't made to be punched through blocks of wood. Not that it's less of a knife than an RC4.

These "tests" are not valid.

But that's just my IMO. What the h*** do I know? I've just spent years in the dirt and living off the land. I've never had to punch a Mora through an Oak Tree...I guess it's less of a knife than a chainsaw.

Right?

That's why in the forest I use an Axe and or Cold Steel Kukri machete or Cheaper Than Dirt Rough Use Knife and a Cold Steel Finn Bear.

I would buy the Busse if I had extra cash, guess what I wouldn't buy?

 

[Kaizen1]

Noss' tests provide information that we wouldn't have otherwise. That information tells us something about the knives. I agree that the information isn't absolutely useless when considering the car crash test comparisons. But one shouldn't look at a Chris Reeve destruction test and make a buying judgment if their main concern is ergos, appearance and edge retention.

I think people need to feel that if the world came crashing down, their knife would take them through Armageddon. But the fact seems to me at least, that that's really unnecessary. Most newbies come on these forums looking for folders that open faster than light, lock up "like a vault" and can destroy invading space aliens. I know I was one of them. And yet after 3.5 years in these forums, I can really appreciate a nice slipjoint.

Many newbs come to these forums looking for a fixed blade that that's sharper than Stephen Hawking and tough enough to make Superman take knife disarmament classes. And yet after years of participating on EDC-type forums, we inevitably see people drooling over damascus blades. A while there's nothing wrong with damascus, I don't think it is the best route to go for "tough" use.

One thing folks may want to consider about Noss' testing. Like cutting competitions, one can design their knife to specifically address the test at hand. I could easily take a 2 inch thick bar of CPM 3V for example, sharpen on side and paracord wrap the bottom half and send it in to compare it to the "other" knives.

 

[T.K.C.]

All he does is destroy a knife. He does things with knives that no one does with knives! How can you take those ridiculous tests seriously????!!! Please!!

 

[nyefmaker]

Perhaps it's the tester hitting a certain manufacturer's blades harder than others or at a bad angle. These cross-forum discussions always end the way they begin -- badly.

I strongly believe he is hitting them at an angle. I have watched the video several times, thats what I see. Plus the fact that he only tested the serrated models and hit them at that same bad angle, where did both break ??? The serrations. I have MANY CRK and this test in no way made me feel like I can not trust a CRK in a life threatening situation. I have not seen any tests where he picks on a plain edge blade.
The fact that he hides his face tells you something, and its not for protection. In one video, he is digging a hole with a knife, why do you need full face protection ?? I just dont care for the guy and the wacky way he intentially destroys knives just to have someone look at him. If I were the companies, I would not replace the knives after he destroys them as he voids every word in the warrenty whith his tests, yet in the end, he gets a new knife.....what a joke !!!

 

[Madnumforce]

or 4:

It was beaten with a hammer.

I'll take numma fo, for two hunnid Alex.

Just about anything would fail if you beat it with a hammer long enough. About the only thing I know that seems to get better is an anvil.


Different styles of knives have different intended uses. The same test for every single knife does not offer proof of anything.

Beating a CRK folder to death with a hammer doesn't prove any toughness or strength. It just proves that you can break it by beating the crap out of it with a hammer. You can do that with a concrete block.

Some of the tests might be valid, but only for certain knives. Knives that are intended to be used in unorthodox ways: Busse, RC, KA-Bar, etc...

Punching a CRK and an RC4 through a block of wood, only to see the CRK break means a CRK isn't made to be punched through blocks of wood. Not that it's less of a knife than an RC4.

These "tests" are not valid.

But that's just my IMO. What the h*** do I know? I've just spent years in the dirt and living off the land. I've never had to punch a Mora through an Oak Tree...I guess it's less of a knife than a chainsaw.

The tests he made were all within the same conditions of stress etc... Most of the knives went through the hammering trough wood test without big failure. As well thin than heavy blades, as well long than short blades. The thing is that hammering is not a realistic use, but it's a good test for toughness. A knife should go through, without taking an angle, without extreme denting or chipping , without breaking. Both the CRK didn't. Maybe that's they are not designed to be hammered, maybe that's serrations weaken the blade, maybe that wearing a mask is the problem, but it sure shows the tested CRK (are they both lemons? two defectuous new out of the box knives of such a famous manufacturer should both fell in the hands of the man that precisely intended to destroy them? That's not a very sensible theory) are less tough than most knives on the market. I never handled one, some say they are tremendous cutters, and maybe here is the whole and only purpose of this knife focused on edge retention and cutting ability. They handle batonning, that's enough. But however, they aren't as tough as other knives. About the angle taken to hammer, it's a false debate, all the other knives took the exact same kind of punishment without problem.

Oh, speaking about edge retention, i realised today what INFI really is. Where i work, there are many roe deer legs used to make rifle stands. After having sharpened my CGFBM, i tried to cut one. It went all the way through the skin, bone and the two tendons, and there wasn't even a reflexion on the edge showing it dulled. But just today, i brought my Tramontina machete i convexed and sharpened, and tried the same test for fun. The bone wasn't totally cut, and both tendons were intact. There was a one millimeter deep dent on the edge, and the whole hitting area was dulled. Now i really respect my Busse...

 

[OrdnanceBubbaUSMC]

It's not about the hammer or specifics of each test. It's the fact that the knives are not made correctly. Maybe if they were skinners with 3 inch blades....but not large fixed blades designed for military and what not.

You can not guarantee that your knife will not impact a stone in the outdoors or concrete in urban areas.

I saw many knives tips break off when I was in Iraq while the owner was doing nothing too major...chips in blades, handles loose by small jarring impacts (not to the handle).

We should be thankful that someone gives us that extra bit of information. In the end it makes sense that the Chris Reeves knives are the way the are in a few ways...

They are more suited to older gentleman with extra cash and buddies who like to look at each others knives. When they do have to cut something, it slices like crazy and seems just as sharp as when it was brand new. So for them it walks the walk and looks beautiful while doing it. "Man this thing is made of super hard steel, it's the best of stainless steels and tool steels all put together...this is what real professionals use."

I think most people have always known they ain't really nothing special...just collectors knives that can do decent work in real life.

Think of this....would you rather have the Green Beret knife made of 1095 by RAT Cutlery or one of the CRK models?

 

[KEmSAT-Survival]

It's not about the hammer or specifics of each test. It's the fact that the knives are not made correctly. Maybe if they were skinners with 3 inch blades....but not large fixed blades designed for military and what not.

Why do you believe they are not made correctly? Simply because somebody breaks one or two by beating on them with a hammer does not make them sub-par. It simply means it isn't made to be beat on with a hammer and somebody didn't learn their lesson the first time.

You can not guarantee that your knife will not impact a stone in the outdoors or concrete in urban areas.

The 7 P's: Previous Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.

I can't guarantee that I'll be breathing in the next five minutes.

But I can guarantee that if you're careful with your knife and exercise a little situational awareness, you will greatly reduce the likelihood of these situations occuring.

I saw many knives tips break off when I was in Iraq while the owner was doing nothing too major...chips in blades, handles loose by small jarring impacts (not to the handle).

I'm not understanding what this has to do with the subject. Care to elaborate? (sometimes I'm a little slow on the upchuck )

We should be thankful that someone gives us that extra bit of information.

I was already aware that it is a bad idea to beat on a knife with a hammer, or to try to use it in ways other than intended.
What information have we been given that we should be so thankful for? Don't use a folder as a prybar? Don't try to ram a Gerber through a concrete block? Don't use a CRK Sebenza for a railway spike?

In the end it makes sense that the Chris Reeves knives are the way the are in a few ways...

They are more suited to older gentleman with extra cash and buddies who like to look at each others knives. When they do have to cut something, it slices like crazy and seems just as sharp as when it was brand new. So for them it walks the walk and looks beautiful while doing it. "Man this thing is made of super hard steel, it's the best of stainless steels and tool steels all put together...this is what real professionals use."

I think most people have always known they ain't really nothing special...just collectors knives that can do decent work in real life.

I urge you to reconsider that line of thinking. There are many people who EDC these knives and use them for many different things.

...Just not as nails, prybars, or concrete saws.

Think of this....would you rather have the Green Beret knife made of 1095 by RAT Cutlery or one of the CRK models?

The Busse Battle Mistress, The TOPS Armageddon, and the Scrap Yard Dogfather would be my first choices. In folders it would be something by SAK, Benchmade, Al Mar or Spyderco.

What's a Green Beret Knife? (I'm not being a smart @$$, I genuinely don't know what it is )

I can tell you that I really dig several of CRK's fixed blade designs. But if you are referring to the folders I'd say I would not choose any of them, simply because I have no use for them to warrant spending on them what they are sold for. Not because they are "overpriced" like some people suggest, but because I'm a cheap b@$tard (aka: Poor White Trash).

 

[Madnumforce]

I notice something strange. The Green Beret is made of CPM S30V, and the hardness mentionned is 55-57HRC. But when i look at Crucible Service S30V data sheet (here), i notice that even with the mildest quenching and the higher tempering, the steel hardly reach 56-57HRC, it's always over, up to 64HRC. And the tempering temperature needed cannot be decently applied to a knife blade, or at least i never heard or read so. We have to come to two different conclusion: the information given of CR website are not correct, which is not very serious for such a famous knifemaker; or the heat treatment is wrong.

And it's not very good neither for the Project 1. On the site is mentioned A2 steel, and 55-57 HRC. When looking at the data sheet (here), we see the steel is not at all in his optimal range, which would be reached around 59-60HRC (1175°F quench, 500°F temper, which is much more usual for a knife). This, and the fact the blade is not taken from a laminated strip close to final thickness, but instead of it, machined out of a much thicker billet, thus less laminated and having fibers less oriented and coherent, is certainly the weakness of the Project 1... But there is still a problem, given the hardness range of the blade, and the steel it's made of, it should have almost lost its quench, and be very tough and impact resistant, but it shatter like glass in Noss test. It really looks like there is something wrong in this all.

 

[D R E]

Think of this....would you rather have the Green Beret knife made of 1095 by RAT Cutlery or one of the CRK models?

IMO, that is the best statement ever made on the subject of the Chris Reeve Knifetests debate. Everything is a compromise in life and knives are no exception. Yes, I would rather have a 1095 Green Beret than the CPM S30V model because I prefer toughness over stain resistance.

The problem with the destruction test involves more the marketing side of the house than the actual performance of the knife. When you manufacture a product that doesn’t meet or exceed its marketed performance characteristics or end-user perceived performance, you will lose all the way around. If the Green Beret was marketed as a finely crafted and manufactured cutting tool (Which it definitely is), there would be little uproar when it breaks from a sledgehammer blow.

Too much marketing emphasis was placed on its tremendous strength and whether that was honest or not doesn’t matter at this point. The perception would indicate that the Green Beret or the one piece line is not the best option if the customer feels it should have the strength of a ¼” Busse blade.

If the Ka-Bar Company marketed their USMC knife as the ultimate in hard use tools, we would all fall down laughing. They don’t because the USMC knife is NOT the ultimate. It is marketed more toward the nostalgic history and they sure do a great job at quality control. At the end of the day, it is still just a 60 yr old design to be manufactured cheaply and quickly for the war effort. The fact that it has lasted this long attests to its general appeal to the masses as an inexpensive field knife. Lose it – no tears other than for nostalgia reasons. Need another quickly, type in the name Ka-Bar on Google and see what happens 

I like Harsey’s designs and CRK’s manufacturing is top notch. Use the right tool for the right job and you won’t be disappointed.

 

[yerscattergun]

Noss and Lynn Thompson are the royalty of the knife world. :thumbup:

Noss, when are you going to test a Trailmaster?

 

[scraphogg]

Noss and Lynn Thompson are the royalty of the knife world. :thumbup:

Noss, when are you going to test a Trailmaster?

its good you have heros, now if you just had some common sense about what knives do and were made for.

 

[yerscattergun]

its good you have heros, now if you just had some common sense about what knives do and were made for.

:d:d

 

[Kaizen1]

If we concede that hitting a knife with a hammer doesn't mean anything whatsoever, would that mean if we hit a knife very lightly once and it snaps in half, that would also mean nothing? If that's too extreme of a scenario, at what point to we consider that it's no longer telling of the toughness of a knife? When a hammer hits a knife with X number of pounds per pressure? How do we determine a standard? Presumably it will be contrasted against comparable knives. What if all other knives take an average of 100 whacks with the hammer before failure at X lbs/pressure and the knife model in question consistently takes only 1 whack at .25/X pounds of pressure to fail?

 

[OrdnanceBubbaUSMC]

Not being made correctly is kinda explained by me saying "maybe if they were 3inch skinners"...why have a very thick 7 inch long blade? You see a lot of people saying knives are for cutting, knives are for slashing, they are not pry-bars or axes, etc. That's true....make it slimmer if you want to make sure that is all it's used for and don't associate it with military names or terms.

The CRK Green Beret is beautiful but it is not really too good at anything. Even though the S30V steel will hold it's edge long, it doesn't have a great blade shape and grind to work with. If it seems to be pretty weak at cutting and thrusting because of the bad blade profile....what is it's purpose?

Lets keep brittle, overly hardened S30V in folding knives. Seems like the perfect place for it right? My Spyderco Paramilitary and Native were awesome, made the most of the steel.

I mentioned fellow Marines knives chipping, breaking tips, etc. because it is sad the knife we usually buy in ignorance is the one whose brand name is given glory or looks the coolest.

Screw it anyway because they should always have a tool belt on their person or a tool box within reach right?

All together I don't think the Green Beret "Yarborough" is a piece of crap. If you had to use it in confrontation there are worse knives. For $300 though?? That is ridiculous.

What is a "Quiet Professional"? what do they do with knives?? Sneak up and pierce the lungs through the back of unfriendly scouts and guards? That don't take $300....a file and a screwdriver can do that.

Has anybody here that has been in foreign conflicts seen more than one or two people with a CRK knife in a combat zone?

 

[Tostig]

Like I said earlier if it was another, less adored brand that failed there would be nowhere near the gnashing of teeth !



I think what ordinancebubbaUSMC is tryin to convey ( if I may ) is that you can swing a lot of dead cats without ever hitting a soldier that actually uses some of these Tactical knives. Not saying there arent a handful here and there but overwhelmingly your average soldier uses what he/she can get a good price on at the PX and not some
300$ + "super knife".

Many of the knives noss tested passed with flying colors ! and a few did not..