Cold Steel tests the Sebenza against their Cold Steel Code 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
shinyedges said:
How exactly would force exerted on the lock bar not help?:confused:
Click to expand...

In theory this should help, in reality I believe that the force applied to the handle is simply too strong for a piece of elastic band to make a significant difference. Should the lock perform as it did? No, I believe that it probably shouldn't let go so easily in the second test with the brand new sebenza that has not been spine-whacked. Do I care? No, not really.
 
Again, I think the main problem is that most of you didn't watch or didn't understand the video. Andrew Demko knows the Sebenza stands up to reasonable usage and maybe beyond, he knows that the tests are abuse, he knows that it's partly the nature of the design that a frame lock is more likely to fail in these tests. These are tests Cold Steel does on all their knives to ensure they live up to the image they present. Like it or not is your preference, but to call foul and insinuate wrong doing or question the character of Andrew Demko because your favorite high end (to reserve any negatively connotated terms) knife failed those tests is just silly, petty, and in bad taste.

I've had both, sold both. The Code 4 is stronger, the 21 is more finely made. I'd like to get a Code 4 again, but I'm waiting to see if the XHP models lower price. I'll buy a Chris Reeve when they make a large Sebenza without the blocky butt, or an Umnumzaan without the weird thumb stud/blade stop and I have the money to blow.
 
These tests insure that they will never get my money. whether their product is better or not means less to me than integrity.
 
flytyer said:
These tests insure that they will never get my money. whether their product is better or not means less to me than integrity.
Click to expand...
I am just curious...
I hear what you are saying a lot on the forums, and it confuses me.

What is CS supposed to do instead? Just sit back quietly and let another company pump out a less safe knife for 4 times the price as one of their models, and let them state that their knife "sets the standard by which all other folding knives should be compared" (paraphrase)? Why shouldn't they do comparative videos or advertising? CRK basically invited it with their statement. It is done in nearly every industry. They are just taking a page from the "Pepsi Challenge" and presenting information to the public and letting them make an educated buying decision based on their findings.

I've heard some in the knife community make statements like, "we should be above such things." That's a very convenient position to take if you are a consumer or collector, but not if your company's life blood is derived from the marketplace. It is very competitive, so let them compete how they see fit.

Buy a Sebenza. Buy a CS. Its your choice. But to say imply that CS or its agents have less integrity because they are touting their products just seems disingenuous to me. Can you explain to me how they have less integrity than a company that tells its customers that their $400 knife has a "bank vault feel" when it clearly does not?
 
Last edited:
They are doing more than just "touting" their product. They are attempting to discredit other brands. These videos appear to be more about the weakness of others rather than the strength of their knife. If they were truly acting with integrity, they would just do this test without the attempted defamation of the competition. In other words, would let their knife speak for itself. Does CS offer other comparison tests such as edge retention, amount of abuse to develop play, etc? If not, why?
 
Corskin said:
They are doing more than just "touting" their product. They are attempting to discredit other brands. These videos appear to be more about the weakness of others rather than the strength of their knife. If they were truly acting with integrity, they would just do this test without the attempted defamation of the competition. In other words, would let their knife speak for itself. Does CS offer other comparison tests such as edge retention, amount of abuse to develop play, etc? If not, why?
Click to expand...

CS has done exactly what you are suggesting with their "Proof" videos since the 1980s. They did show what their products would do, NEVER mention another competitor by name or model in the videos, and were still called out by naysayers as "attempting to discredit other brands." CS did show edge retention and performance, toughness and lock strength, etc. Now, they have upped the ante by showing off the superiority of their locks vs. other brands / models.

Will they do comparative videos re. edge holding, cutting, etc.? I don't know, maybe. But I know such videos would be met with at least an equal, and I bet a great deal more, venom from those that either get their feeling hurt by their brand not being up to snuff, or just hate CS no matter what they do.
 
DngrRuss1 said:
I am just curious...
I hear what you are saying a lot on the forums, and it confuses me.

What is CS supposed to do instead? Just sit back quietly and let another company pump out a less safe knife for 4 times the price as one of their models, and let them state that their knife "sets the standard by which all other folding knives should be compared" (paraphrase)? Why shouldn't they do comparative videos or advertising? CRK basically invited it with their statement. It is done in nearly every industry. They are just taking a page from the "Pepsi Challenge" and presenting information to the public and letting them make an educated buying decision based on their findings.

I've heard some in the knife community make statements like, "we should be above such things." That's a very convenient position to take if you are a consumer or collector, but not if your company's life blood is derived from the marketplace. It is very competitive, so let them compete how they see fit.

Buy a Sebenza. Buy a CS. Its your choice. But to say imply that CS or its agents have less integrity because they are touting their products just seems disingenuous to me. Can you explain to me how they have less integrity than a company that tells its customers that their $400 knife has a "bank vault feel" when it clearly does not?
Click to expand...


You keep on mentioning this "less than safe knife"

Do you have any proof to this?

Citations man..Show us some proof of this.
 
Last edited:
DngrRuss1 said:
Can you show me where I used the term "less than safe"? That just doesn't sound like me.
Click to expand...

I bolded my quote of yours to such a statement...Less than safe- My mistake..It's "less safe"
 
I will give you..It's less safe than say..A butter knife
 
DngrRuss1 said:
explain to me how they have less integrity than a company that tells its customers that their $400 knife has a "bank vault feel" when it clearly does not?
Click to expand...

Actually, how it 'feels' is subjective. You can rationalize all you like but in the end you're only sharing an opinion. To me and many other CRK owners it does have a certain sound and feel as the lock engages, hence the comparison. While I've no concerns about the safety and security of the lock up I never take it or any other locking knife for granted either. I EDC a FB for anything that requires 'hard use'.
How secure it actually is is another topic altogether.
I've used CS folders(Voyagers) off and on for well over 20 years with no complaints. I've also used Sebenzas over the last 18 years or so with no complaints. The only difference being that the true crap work goes to the easily replaceable and inexpensive CS knives while the standard every day cut and carve tasks go to the Sebenza.
I give less than half a shit about either individual company or their claims and use my knives as I see fit.
 
Last edited:
Then I guess I don't understand your question.

To say something is "less than safe" is to actually say it is "unsafe". If I have ever referred to any knife on BF as unsafe, I would have explained why in the same or subsequent posts.

As for the subject at hand, the current crop of videos and the Proof videos kinda prove my points. If you choose not to believe them there is nothing I can do to change your mind.
 
The ZT300 (another Ti-framelock) did a lot better than the Sebenza. It's just way more overbuilt. These tests are all about strength and toughness. The Sebenza is not built for that, and most folders aren't. As Demko said, failing these tests - Cold Steel tests - doesn't make it a bad knife. All it means is, it failed Cold Steel's tests.
 
DngrRuss1 said:
Then I guess I don't understand your question.

To say something is "less than safe" is to actually say it is "unsafe". If I have ever referred to any knife on BF as unsafe, I would have explained why in the same or subsequent posts.

As for the subject at hand, the current crop of videos and the Proof videos kinda prove my points. If you choose not to believe them there is nothing I can do to change your mind.
Click to expand...


You have no proof that it is less safe..The video doesn't prove this..It only proves that the knife can collapse in the closing direction if it is not used properly..How exactly do you replicate this cutting motion to get it to collapse while using as intended?

You will not change my mind as I have common sense- I am going over this in my mind how I could actually use this knife and have an issue with the locking mechanism...I cannot and have not ever had this issue in the ~20yrs of carrying a Sebenza of ANY flavor. As a matter of fact- I would even say that I couldn't replicate this with Strider, Hinderer or any other well known brand of framelock using them as they are intended..Do you plan on using tools in a manner in which they are not intended?
 
Guys, lets not forget what brought us to this forum, which in most cases is the appreciation for the work of mr Reeve. I don't see this topic going in the right direction. What happened, happened. If someone is disappointed, he's got his reasons. Sebenza is not the perfect knife for everyone and let it be that way.
Cheers and take it easy
 
bhyde said:
It would be nice to see a neutral third party test- But, the reality is, it probably wouldn't make a difference. It's not a secret that Sebenzas and likely, most framelocks don't do spinewhacks..It's just a reality..Just a good way to weaken the locking mechanism..You may be able to draw any conclusions you like from this.

As far as room for improvement..Absolutely..There is room in any design for improvement as any design can be brought to failure.
Click to expand...

I gotta tell you Bill, every time I see a video of someone spinewhackin a blade, especially as hard as they did in the video, it makes the hair on my neck stand up..
Maybe this video isn't such a bad thing though. If by some chance CRK decided to re-analyze their lock, and if they do find a small improvement they can make, than it's all good. I say small because I don't think there are any big changes to be had in the frame lock design; then it might just make an already great knife, made by a great company, In the U.S.A :D, even better...

Then again, I don't think their sales were hurting before the video, and they certainly won't be after people see the video.

ALLHSS said:
Again, I think the main problem is that most of you didn't watch or didn't understand the video. Andrew Demko knows the Sebenza stands up to reasonable usage and maybe beyond, he knows that the tests are abuse, he knows that it's partly the nature of the design that a frame lock is more likely to fail in these tests. These are tests Cold Steel does on all their knives to ensure they live up to the image they present. Like it or not is your preference, but to call foul and insinuate wrong doing or question the character of Andrew Demko because your favorite high end (to reserve any negatively connotated terms) knife failed those tests is just silly, petty, and in bad taste.

I've had both, sold both. The Code 4 is stronger, the 21 is more finely made. I'd like to get a Code 4 again, but I'm waiting to see if the XHP models lower price. I'll buy a Chris Reeve when they make a large Sebenza without the blocky butt, or an Umnumzaan without the weird thumb stud/blade stop and I have the money to blow.
Click to expand...

I agree, there is no reason to trash talk about Andrew Demko. He has proven he can design, and has a good understanding of how things work.
You could also tell, he was not enjoying himself in that video, and I'm sure would rather it was never done. It's not like they had one of the kids that sweeps floors doing the test.
As ridiculous as the tests were, and as off the wall as CS's marketing is, I highly doubt there was any deliberate failure involved. There is to much credibility to risk, if they did do this, and that is not good advertising...
 
I have not read through this lengthy thread, so it was probably already pointed out, and this is just my first impression....

Given the spine whack test setup, where only the back end of the knife is fixed at a set torque equal for both knives, a reasonable conclusion might be that the aluminum handle material is more slippery than the titanium handle material (or whatever friction properties may play a role) and will thus break loose from the fixing point more easily, thus it is a case of comparing apples to oranges...
 
Turns out the Triad is a fail, when tested impartially, by a real world user.

My point being.......you can tell any story you want! Cold Steel can cook it any way they want.

Triad Lock Failure (with blood). Any knife is obviously less-than-safe with Tri-ad lock!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7WoEJwE2UsU
 
Last edited:
Terrakot said:
Just for discussion, I'm not claiming that this is a main reason.
Look at these 2 pictures with positions of knives after hit. I guess Code 4 (pic 1) wasn't fixed in proper way and it's allows to compensate the power of hit. Otherwise, Sebenza (pic 2) was fixed rigidly and kinetic energy was taken harder.

https://flic.kr/p/BzPYYj

https://flic.kr/p/AMZUdV
Click to expand...

The test is set up exactly the same for both knives, with 30lbs of torque set at the bolt/pivot holding the bottom of the knife. A 30lb (IIRC) weight is at the end of the lever, and it is what swings the spines of each blade into a fixed steel plate, angle, or whatever it is. If the pivot of the knife fails first (below the 30lbs of torque holding the knife to the lever) then the handle will stay exactly where it was. If the blade pivot does not fail, then all of that force has to go somewhere, thus it overcomes the 30lbs of torque on the handle bolt and rotates the entire knife forward.

Personally, I have no interest in one company over the other. There's no question that CRK makes great knives, and Cold Steel caters to a slightly different market/class of product. Saying that, I feel compelled to also add: Frame Locks are NOT designed to rely on hand pressure to keep them engaged under normal operation. There is a certain "formula" that works, and you'll see it on 99% of frame locks, with very little deviation. Now, there are small differences in engagement (early vs. late lock up, flat bevel vs. a radius on the blade tang, 7 degrees vs. 7.5, 8, etc...) but the basic concept of how a frame lock functions, or is designed, is essentially the same across the board.

Now, while I don't think that a triad "back lock" is really a similar comparison to a frame lock or liner lock, there are plenty of other documented tests of frame locks enduring spine whacks, weight hangs, over strikes, etc...
If properly designed, manufactured, and assembled, I don't see why any frame lock should be able to close under such a low amount of straight downward force. The video alleged 45lbs of force, but as easily as the knife appeared to disengage, I'd wager that it wouldn't have held half of that.

Now, all that said, is this video alone enough evidence to say anything of real importance concerning CRK knives, one way or the other? Of course not. It certainly is enough to spark some discussion, however... ;)
I would be interested in having a little bit more info from Mr. Demko on what he thinks happened, as well as another independent test or two...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top