-
All For Sale threads must have a pic showing the knife being sold with written date listed, your username & Bladeforums or BFC to prevent photo harvesting from elsewhere - scammers hate this one trick! The rules for The Exchange can be found here. Please read and follow them. Stop using Paypal Friends & Family and follow our best practices to prevent getting ripped off or having a bad deal.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Cliff Stamp
- Thread starter pahl
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 25, 1999
- Messages
- 1,499
Initially I didnt want to take the floor in this thread because it looks pretty unsuitable for this Forum nature. In my honest opinion it would be much more in the right place in Good, Bad and Ugly Forum...
But later I have had an idea about some comparisons. Please imagine that I would perform such test:
Man, are you really complete idiot or just playing this one?
Cliff have treated SOG X-Ray Vision the same way and some of you say Good job, we have learned a lot! Hmm...
Do you like comparison tests? No problem, but lets compare comparable things.
Bang with a hammer side-by-side $350 plus Busse knife and $50 KA-BAR with 1095 blade and you will see that cheap spring steel holds up in such test not any worse than famed INFI.
Do the same with $350 Sebenza side-by-side with below $100 Recondo and you will see that more than 3 times more expensive knife doesnt hold up any better.
Do you remember the Fellow who about two years ago have put some folder blades into vise and jumped on the handle until lock failed? Nobody said Man, what a good job and what a huge contribution! Nobody called this test scientific although the Fellow treated all knives the same way.
BTW, this test had very practical sense for your safety because it proved that you could rely on the majority of brand named folders within your plain-hand force and even your weight limits.
No comments, no personal attacks, no offence for anyone Im just admiring...
Disclaimer: all knives and manufacturers were mentioned here for illustration purposes only, with no intentions from my side to hype or to criticize them.
Edited to correct some spelling nicks.
But later I have had an idea about some comparisons. Please imagine that I would perform such test:
- Would take a known manufacturers knife, say SPYDERCO Military;
- Would plunge the tip into wood and break it pulling sideways;
- Would put the rest of the blade deeply into gap in wood (or vise) and pull sideways until handle would break;
- Make the photos of devastated knife and publish them with description how I got such scientific results.
Man, are you really complete idiot or just playing this one?
Cliff have treated SOG X-Ray Vision the same way and some of you say Good job, we have learned a lot! Hmm...
Do you like comparison tests? No problem, but lets compare comparable things.
Bang with a hammer side-by-side $350 plus Busse knife and $50 KA-BAR with 1095 blade and you will see that cheap spring steel holds up in such test not any worse than famed INFI.
Do the same with $350 Sebenza side-by-side with below $100 Recondo and you will see that more than 3 times more expensive knife doesnt hold up any better.
Do you remember the Fellow who about two years ago have put some folder blades into vise and jumped on the handle until lock failed? Nobody said Man, what a good job and what a huge contribution! Nobody called this test scientific although the Fellow treated all knives the same way.
BTW, this test had very practical sense for your safety because it proved that you could rely on the majority of brand named folders within your plain-hand force and even your weight limits.
No comments, no personal attacks, no offence for anyone Im just admiring...
Disclaimer: all knives and manufacturers were mentioned here for illustration purposes only, with no intentions from my side to hype or to criticize them.
Edited to correct some spelling nicks.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 1998
- Messages
- 1,774
Hey Rob, them Ginsu's are Da $hit man!!! They are made out of Iffy steel, its a Titanium carbon alloy with hydrogen gas injected into it.. I saw em cutting nails, and cans and such.. Its gotta be true I saw it on TV!!!!
Cliff is impeccably fair.
If it can be broke, he'll find a way to do it. If it can't, he'll give it his best shot.
And then when/if it breaks he tells you what it took to break it or what measures failed to do so.
It's then up to me to decide if I'll ever put a knife to the level of abuse Cliff does.
I'll make my choice, and you are certainly free to make another choice based on your percetion of your own ( different ) needs or requirements.
If it can be broke, he'll find a way to do it. If it can't, he'll give it his best shot.
And then when/if it breaks he tells you what it took to break it or what measures failed to do so.
It's then up to me to decide if I'll ever put a knife to the level of abuse Cliff does.
I'll make my choice, and you are certainly free to make another choice based on your percetion of your own ( different ) needs or requirements.
I'm by knife tests, the way I am about movie ratings. If the critics say it sucks, and if the theme of the movie interests me, I,m going to see it. Nine times out of ten I'll like it. I don't do any concrete block filleting, crow bar prying or serious log splitting ( with out the "proper" tools for those jobs). I,m interested in how well does it cut the things I,m most likly to cut. How long does it hold an edge when I,m cutting those things. Is it going to snap from "routine" use, and how the finish is going to hold up. Those parameters met, I really don't give a flip if it can be driven through a steel bar, and still be able to shave with it.
Taz
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
- Joined
- Apr 28, 1999
- Messages
- 2,557
Mr. Kirk, thank you!! That sounds like a good test between those steels. I like all of those steels mentioned! D2 was my fave, but S30V, now that i have learned how to work with it and sharpen it a tad better is my fave. L6 and 1084 make some wickedly tough blades, and i want to try 52100, but i do not forge flat yet and my HT isnt as precise as that steels needs. Tests like those are very helpful because they are comparing the steels, not the other factors in a knife.
As i said before, cliff does do some good testing, but some of the other things throw it off.
the Ft lbs in a chart are fine, for a comparision, but for some people, its hard to relate how much force he is talking about. I know for me, 50 ft lbs wont seem like much because of my size and weight, but to someone else, it may seem like a lot. I think if he set a set weight, say 50 ft lbs as the cutoff for the rope cutting, it might help compare for the ave person. Say cut it off at 55 lbs and count the # of cuts it took to reach that 55 lbs. Then it would be plain to see for everyone. There will of course be a small statistical error, but it will be comparing the rope cuts across a wider range. Also, maybe limit the cuts to push cuts, and then draw cuts across X inches of the blade. Same tests, just made so that the ave layperson can get a better idea without getting a brain cramp
I hate it when that happens!!
As i said before, cliff does do some good testing, but some of the other things throw it off.
the Ft lbs in a chart are fine, for a comparision, but for some people, its hard to relate how much force he is talking about. I know for me, 50 ft lbs wont seem like much because of my size and weight, but to someone else, it may seem like a lot. I think if he set a set weight, say 50 ft lbs as the cutoff for the rope cutting, it might help compare for the ave person. Say cut it off at 55 lbs and count the # of cuts it took to reach that 55 lbs. Then it would be plain to see for everyone. There will of course be a small statistical error, but it will be comparing the rope cuts across a wider range. Also, maybe limit the cuts to push cuts, and then draw cuts across X inches of the blade. Same tests, just made so that the ave layperson can get a better idea without getting a brain cramp
I hate it when that happens!!The bottom line to my testing is they ARE subjective and based solely on what Jeff Randall likes in a blade. There is no perfect design, steel, or heat treat. Every positive has a negative, and every negative has a positive. Use what you like and don't pay any attention to what everyone else tells you. Be your own tester. The only reason magazines publish my articles is because of my experience in certain areas. Simply publishing an article doesn't make anyone a damn expert, no more than it makes cliff an expert because he can break a wonder blade.
Although this may come as a shock to some, I could really care less what Cliff does with a blade or how many reviews he writes. My biggest bitch with him has always been his tendancy to place more emphasis on the tool rather than the experience behind using it. Any forum member here could spend as much money as they want, buy the best jungle blade out there, with the perfect geometry and bulletproof design, and they would still lose when it came to actual use against some 3rd world Indian wih a 5 dollar machete - on their turf. What does all this mean? Nothing, unless you are going to live in a jungle for the rest of your life. Am I saying that tools cannot be improved on? Not at all. But the real thing that probably needs to be considered for any tool is doing your best to improve on the use of the tool more so than tweaking it to some scientific perfection.
Yes, a 5 dollar machete will eat a Busse's lunch (and damn near all others) when it comes to general jungle work, BUT the Busse will kick its ass when you start into the heavier work and areas where breaking a blade is a possibility. (I am willing to prove that if Cliff so desires) Again, fit the tool for the job. Not picking on Busse here because I like their blades, but it seems to be one that always comes up when Cliff is involved in a thread.
Someone else posted to buy a knife and use if for what you bought it for. I agree. If Cliff wants to keep breaking knives in search of the perfect blade then so be it, meantime I'm going to keep cutting with what works for me in actual everyday use and continue writing my reviews based on that. Nothing more.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Taz :
Not a lot. However you can simply compare it as Ray noted. If one knife requires 100 lbs and another 50, it doesn't take much to realize that means one has twice the efficiency as the other. In regards to feel, blunting is strongly nonlinear, and thus any subjective measurement is extremely difficult to use in a repeatable manner except in a very general sense (a little, a lot, a huge amount). Even trying to use a scale to read the force isn't trivial because of the influence that the way in which the rope is cut effects the force. By the way ft.lbs is a torque, not a force.
You can't compare edge retention in this manner as you are ignoring the effect of the geometry. You can factor out this effect if you consider the change in force. So for example cut until an additional 20 lbs of force is needed. And yes, this I do, as well as looking at the sharpness in other manners like cutting light thread, poly, as well as shaving and paper cutting as secondary determinations. Loss of paper slicing ability is I think a sensible general stopping point as the knife can't be used for any fine task at this point and you are mashing the rope as much as you are cutting it.
Along this general line, and the other argument ("that was a stupid test I could have told you that would happen"), not everyone has the same level of understanding that you do. Obviously a lot of work done is going to be elementary to people with the necessary experience and understanding, they would then skip all that parts as known knowledge. A lot of the test I do are obvious to me, I do them on suggestion because they are not to others. In regards to apples vs apples, again, the understanding of the design principles isn't univeral, a lot can be learned by comparing blades of vastly different designs. To some the designs may not even appear to be significantly different. Use a parang and a machete on wood and what happens. It is obvious to someone with experience and knowledge, but not to someone else and for them it is a valuable learning tool, either directly or from someone else. So again, skip the parts you find obvious.
In regards to variables, yes it would be ideal if I could have test knives made up to my specifics, but I can't so I work with what I can. On occasion, as Ray noted again, I do work with knives of very tight controls. I have another batch coming later this year, or early the next. And yes, in the strictest sense nothing can be ignored. For example the temperature on the day I do the cutting will effect the results somewhat, as would for example the height I am about the center of the earth. When making these statements ("XXX has no effect") they are generally taken to mean - within a level of significance (for knives this would be say 10% as it is very hard to notice anything smaller than this so its functional advantage isn't significant). Specifically in regards to the friction, I have looked at this various times with polishes as well as lubricants. It is small, and I have only seen real significane if the coating is very rough, and the material being cut very binding (use the double powder coat that Busse uses on thick cardboard for example). And even then it is easily swamped out by the other elements (mainly geometry) so I would consider it dead last and ignore it. My brother however mirror polishes everything to improve the cutting performance.
In regards to the angle on the Recondo, yes I asked Ron about that. It was brought up several times later in the thread. It was never answered, if it was, I would have brought it down to the expected angle so I could see the expected performance. I didn't thin it down for personal use because there were too many other problems with the knife and I would have to do too much work to make it usable to where I would pick it over something I already had.
I have only asked for a replacement once that I can recall. This was with the second TUSK. I asked for a replacement there because I specifically asked McClung could it do what I intended to do (pry chips out of wood), before I did it. When I finish a review and the maker/manufacturer is online I drop them an email with the link. If the break is surprising I ask them if it was the expected behavior. Most of the time (lately) I get asked to do a review and yes this includes breaking the knife eventually, so we just discuss the results, breaks included. Many still offer replacements as thanks even though they were test knives, which I refuse, they send out anyway, and I give them to friends.
In regards to the comment about me doing this to get free knives, what I do is the worst way to get knives, consider the maker responce to this thread and others as an obvious example.
-Cliff
Not a lot. However you can simply compare it as Ray noted. If one knife requires 100 lbs and another 50, it doesn't take much to realize that means one has twice the efficiency as the other. In regards to feel, blunting is strongly nonlinear, and thus any subjective measurement is extremely difficult to use in a repeatable manner except in a very general sense (a little, a lot, a huge amount). Even trying to use a scale to read the force isn't trivial because of the influence that the way in which the rope is cut effects the force. By the way ft.lbs is a torque, not a force.
You can't compare edge retention in this manner as you are ignoring the effect of the geometry. You can factor out this effect if you consider the change in force. So for example cut until an additional 20 lbs of force is needed. And yes, this I do, as well as looking at the sharpness in other manners like cutting light thread, poly, as well as shaving and paper cutting as secondary determinations. Loss of paper slicing ability is I think a sensible general stopping point as the knife can't be used for any fine task at this point and you are mashing the rope as much as you are cutting it.
Along this general line, and the other argument ("that was a stupid test I could have told you that would happen"), not everyone has the same level of understanding that you do. Obviously a lot of work done is going to be elementary to people with the necessary experience and understanding, they would then skip all that parts as known knowledge. A lot of the test I do are obvious to me, I do them on suggestion because they are not to others. In regards to apples vs apples, again, the understanding of the design principles isn't univeral, a lot can be learned by comparing blades of vastly different designs. To some the designs may not even appear to be significantly different. Use a parang and a machete on wood and what happens. It is obvious to someone with experience and knowledge, but not to someone else and for them it is a valuable learning tool, either directly or from someone else. So again, skip the parts you find obvious.
In regards to variables, yes it would be ideal if I could have test knives made up to my specifics, but I can't so I work with what I can. On occasion, as Ray noted again, I do work with knives of very tight controls. I have another batch coming later this year, or early the next. And yes, in the strictest sense nothing can be ignored. For example the temperature on the day I do the cutting will effect the results somewhat, as would for example the height I am about the center of the earth. When making these statements ("XXX has no effect") they are generally taken to mean - within a level of significance (for knives this would be say 10% as it is very hard to notice anything smaller than this so its functional advantage isn't significant). Specifically in regards to the friction, I have looked at this various times with polishes as well as lubricants. It is small, and I have only seen real significane if the coating is very rough, and the material being cut very binding (use the double powder coat that Busse uses on thick cardboard for example). And even then it is easily swamped out by the other elements (mainly geometry) so I would consider it dead last and ignore it. My brother however mirror polishes everything to improve the cutting performance.
In regards to the angle on the Recondo, yes I asked Ron about that. It was brought up several times later in the thread. It was never answered, if it was, I would have brought it down to the expected angle so I could see the expected performance. I didn't thin it down for personal use because there were too many other problems with the knife and I would have to do too much work to make it usable to where I would pick it over something I already had.
I have only asked for a replacement once that I can recall. This was with the second TUSK. I asked for a replacement there because I specifically asked McClung could it do what I intended to do (pry chips out of wood), before I did it. When I finish a review and the maker/manufacturer is online I drop them an email with the link. If the break is surprising I ask them if it was the expected behavior. Most of the time (lately) I get asked to do a review and yes this includes breaking the knife eventually, so we just discuss the results, breaks included. Many still offer replacements as thanks even though they were test knives, which I refuse, they send out anyway, and I give them to friends.
In regards to the comment about me doing this to get free knives, what I do is the worst way to get knives, consider the maker responce to this thread and others as an obvious example.
-Cliff
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2001
- Messages
- 32,359
Cliff Stamp
Some people like him, some people don't.
Some people trust him, some people don't.
Some people respect his opinons, some people don't.
He is human, he has opinions,(don't we all?) he spends the time to write his opinions in this forum.
If your really set on trashing or praising him, do a poll. Just kidding that's really a bad idea, nevermind.
Some people like him, some people don't.
Some people trust him, some people don't.
Some people respect his opinons, some people don't.
He is human, he has opinions,(don't we all?) he spends the time to write his opinions in this forum.
If your really set on trashing or praising him, do a poll. Just kidding that's really a bad idea, nevermind.
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 29,205
This is not a GB&U topic as far as I am concerned. Though it was getting into personalities it was also discussing the pertinence of his testing procedures. Oh well, what the heck does my opinion mean in the grand scheme of things anyhow.
Cougar Allen
Buccaneer (ret.)
- Joined
- Oct 9, 1998
- Messages
- 75,838
I've given a standing invitation to Double-Edge Dave and all the other moderators to move anything that gets too ugly for their forums here if they want. I figure it's better than closing the thread ... we don't mind a little ugliness here in TGB&U. We're used to it....
KnifeBomber
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2000
- Messages
- 745
Ron@SOG,
I find your conclusions to be exactly on the mark. Scientific, Cliff is not. As a reward for your steadfastness in fighting the isanity that seems to grip some people, I'm going to go out and buy a SOG. Keep the fight going! You are absolutely correct.
I find your conclusions to be exactly on the mark. Scientific, Cliff is not. As a reward for your steadfastness in fighting the isanity that seems to grip some people, I'm going to go out and buy a SOG. Keep the fight going! You are absolutely correct.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2000
- Messages
- 3,769
Hey Ryan,
Seriously ... thanks.
Might I then suggest something in the expensive category ...
Seriously ... thanks.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 1999
- Messages
- 3,036
I have resisted posting in this thread, but something very much needs to be said. I really don't care what Cliff does to his and others' knives. I do care about what Cliff does to the dialog on these forums. His manner towards companies (other than Busse) and custom makers (other than the few he favors) is frankly arrogant, rude and often intellectually dishonest. On numerous occasions I have endeavored to contribute some of my personal experience and knowledge to the discourse on knife steels and blade and edge geometry only to find myself confronted with quotes out of context, gibberish that is irrelevant to the points I've tried to make, and the not infrequent accusation of being basically dishonest, as Cliff seems to think all knifemakers are by labelling everything we say as "hype".
The result of this attack dog style of behavior is that you see few if any of the more experienced knifemakers posting here. That means that the range and type of knowledge that is to be learned on the Review forum is largely confined to a few, often biased, views of those who have seldom used knives in the manner for which they are designed, which btw includes those sometimes extreme circumstances that will compromise lesser blades. It denies the community access to a broader range of understanding and experience that comes from many years of building knives and communicating with those who use them in challenging day-to-day circumstances.
There is little to be learned of a knife's qualities in a few hours after it was last sharpened. There is less to be learned from extreme abuse. Knives must be judged by their extended performance and from the kind of reasonable abuse that is incidental to real world uses. They should also be judged by qualities like fit and finish, materials, overall design, blade geometry (in addition to edge geometry), handle security, comfort, leverage, and efficiency during the use of the knife in its primary range of applications. Every knifemaker I know does extensive testing, but even more important to his base of knowledge is the continuous feedback he gets from customers who will, after a period of use, provide comments on the knife's performance like "the knife was ok, but here's what I'd change" or "I was using your machete to cut weeds and hit a fireplug which chipped the edge a little" or "the rear pinky hook rubbed and became uncomfortable after several hours of hard cutting" or...
There is a mountain of information on why and how knives perform well that is denied to members of these forums simply because the people who have that information are unwilling (reasonably) to subject themselves to personal attacks, couched in the guise of "scientific objectivity", but which is in fact almost entirely annecdotal and inevitably surrounded in a context of disrespect to those of use who are dedicated to the art and science of the handcrafted knife. If any harbor a sense that we are in this for the money, let me quickly disabuse you of that illusion. I am a fairly successful knifemaker, yet I make just slightly more than minimum wage and work very long hours, having left a comfortable six digit income so I could pursue my passion for knives and their making. Everything about knifemaking is a struggle, and in that struggle for survival we are made to learn quickly what is needed to construct a useful knife. What we have learned is freely shared with other knifemakers and all others who ask, but it is almost never shared on the Review forum because the price of doing so is just too high. That's unfortunate, but that's the choice many have made by allowing the rude and abusive behavior that characterizes Cliff's interactions with knifemakers and knife companies on these forums. I spend at least 2 hours every day of the week answering emails and posting on threads about what I know of making and using knives. None of that is in a forum where Cliff is present. If I wanted to interact with his kind of behavior I would go back to being paid a very large salary to do so.
End of rant...
The result of this attack dog style of behavior is that you see few if any of the more experienced knifemakers posting here. That means that the range and type of knowledge that is to be learned on the Review forum is largely confined to a few, often biased, views of those who have seldom used knives in the manner for which they are designed, which btw includes those sometimes extreme circumstances that will compromise lesser blades. It denies the community access to a broader range of understanding and experience that comes from many years of building knives and communicating with those who use them in challenging day-to-day circumstances.
There is little to be learned of a knife's qualities in a few hours after it was last sharpened. There is less to be learned from extreme abuse. Knives must be judged by their extended performance and from the kind of reasonable abuse that is incidental to real world uses. They should also be judged by qualities like fit and finish, materials, overall design, blade geometry (in addition to edge geometry), handle security, comfort, leverage, and efficiency during the use of the knife in its primary range of applications. Every knifemaker I know does extensive testing, but even more important to his base of knowledge is the continuous feedback he gets from customers who will, after a period of use, provide comments on the knife's performance like "the knife was ok, but here's what I'd change" or "I was using your machete to cut weeds and hit a fireplug which chipped the edge a little" or "the rear pinky hook rubbed and became uncomfortable after several hours of hard cutting" or...
There is a mountain of information on why and how knives perform well that is denied to members of these forums simply because the people who have that information are unwilling (reasonably) to subject themselves to personal attacks, couched in the guise of "scientific objectivity", but which is in fact almost entirely annecdotal and inevitably surrounded in a context of disrespect to those of use who are dedicated to the art and science of the handcrafted knife. If any harbor a sense that we are in this for the money, let me quickly disabuse you of that illusion. I am a fairly successful knifemaker, yet I make just slightly more than minimum wage and work very long hours, having left a comfortable six digit income so I could pursue my passion for knives and their making. Everything about knifemaking is a struggle, and in that struggle for survival we are made to learn quickly what is needed to construct a useful knife. What we have learned is freely shared with other knifemakers and all others who ask, but it is almost never shared on the Review forum because the price of doing so is just too high. That's unfortunate, but that's the choice many have made by allowing the rude and abusive behavior that characterizes Cliff's interactions with knifemakers and knife companies on these forums. I spend at least 2 hours every day of the week answering emails and posting on threads about what I know of making and using knives. None of that is in a forum where Cliff is present. If I wanted to interact with his kind of behavior I would go back to being paid a very large salary to do so.
End of rant...
- Joined
- May 9, 2000
- Messages
- 29,205
Thank you Jerry for those comments. I have read many of Cliff's posts but had not really noticed what you have just pointed out. That could be because I do not spend much time reading the review forum.
It upsets me that makers do not want to add their comments on the performance of knives to reviews because they feel that Cliff is likely to ambush them with a bunch of pseudoscience and accusations that they are just trying to hype their own knives. The input of knifemakers is a large part of what makes BF a great source of information and anything that keeps them from participating is, in my opinion, bad for this forum.
Jerry, not wanting to search through a bunch of threads, are you able to supply a couple of links to threads where Cliff displays this behavior? I really would like to read some of these comments made by Cliff.
It upsets me that makers do not want to add their comments on the performance of knives to reviews because they feel that Cliff is likely to ambush them with a bunch of pseudoscience and accusations that they are just trying to hype their own knives. The input of knifemakers is a large part of what makes BF a great source of information and anything that keeps them from participating is, in my opinion, bad for this forum.
Jerry, not wanting to search through a bunch of threads, are you able to supply a couple of links to threads where Cliff displays this behavior? I really would like to read some of these comments made by Cliff.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2000
- Messages
- 4,492
Jerry,
Bravo! Very well put and I am sure that you have shed a considerable amount of light on a subject that is unfortunately true. Some of the best insight I have had into the performance of a blade has come from private emails with maker's and/or their customers. Anyone willing to put their name on a blade should certainly be willing to back up the design choices with real world testing.
Example: I am in the market right now for a brush clearing blade. I will be using this blade exclusively to clear green brush, 1"-4" saplings and limbing. Certain design parameters are to be incorporated into this knife to make it perform optimally at the assigned task. Oh, I am sure that if I had the knife built exactly to my specs it would probably work OK. But I know that I am alot better off submitting the design ideas to an experienced maker and let him tweak it here and there so that it will work even better. This is an often overlooked service that you are buying when you choose to go the custom route.
It is all to easy to evaluate a blade and criticize a maker for not doing this or that. But does the reviewer have any idea as to what it takes to design and develope a nearly perfect design? When you start throwing variables in like edge geometry, steel type, Rockwell ratings and intended use just to name a few, you are looking at literally hundreds of possible combinations. Some will excel at certain tasks, other will not fare as well. It is the nature of the beast. As Jeff Randall stated, "for every plus there is a minus". No knife is ideal for every task.
The main focus of Cliff's testing seems to be directed towards blades with ultimate toughness levels and heavy choppers. This is fine and dandy as long as you are indeed comparing similar knives within their design limitations and price range. Don't take my thin bladed brush blade and run it against a Battle Mistress doing heavy chopping into hardwood or stabbing and point strength tests. To then turn around and post a poor review of the knife is truly unfair as it makes the bladesmith look unqualified for no reason at all.
The key to doing successful and meaningful reviews is to test comparable knives within their design element using real world, practical tests and actual use. That is something I can relate to and would like to read about.
Bravo! Very well put and I am sure that you have shed a considerable amount of light on a subject that is unfortunately true. Some of the best insight I have had into the performance of a blade has come from private emails with maker's and/or their customers. Anyone willing to put their name on a blade should certainly be willing to back up the design choices with real world testing.
Example: I am in the market right now for a brush clearing blade. I will be using this blade exclusively to clear green brush, 1"-4" saplings and limbing. Certain design parameters are to be incorporated into this knife to make it perform optimally at the assigned task. Oh, I am sure that if I had the knife built exactly to my specs it would probably work OK. But I know that I am alot better off submitting the design ideas to an experienced maker and let him tweak it here and there so that it will work even better. This is an often overlooked service that you are buying when you choose to go the custom route.
It is all to easy to evaluate a blade and criticize a maker for not doing this or that. But does the reviewer have any idea as to what it takes to design and develope a nearly perfect design? When you start throwing variables in like edge geometry, steel type, Rockwell ratings and intended use just to name a few, you are looking at literally hundreds of possible combinations. Some will excel at certain tasks, other will not fare as well. It is the nature of the beast. As Jeff Randall stated, "for every plus there is a minus". No knife is ideal for every task.
The main focus of Cliff's testing seems to be directed towards blades with ultimate toughness levels and heavy choppers. This is fine and dandy as long as you are indeed comparing similar knives within their design limitations and price range. Don't take my thin bladed brush blade and run it against a Battle Mistress doing heavy chopping into hardwood or stabbing and point strength tests. To then turn around and post a poor review of the knife is truly unfair as it makes the bladesmith look unqualified for no reason at all.
The key to doing successful and meaningful reviews is to test comparable knives within their design element using real world, practical tests and actual use. That is something I can relate to and would like to read about.