CRK fixed blade question

[dl351]

Looking at other similar knives on the market, $255 for my Shadow IV wasn't bad at all. The sheath alone I'd guess is around a $50 sheath. About $200 for the knife of such high quality isn't bad at all. Just don't hit it with a hammer. My brother in law has taken several primitive survival skills courses and I had a chat with him about pounding on knives with hammers. He said that some things "survivalists" do, such as attaching a knife to a branch to use it as a spear, are horrible ideas. If you really need to survive, your knife is your best friend and should be treated as such. That means no throwing it or pounding on it with rocks or hammers. Anything that could remotely jeopardize your knife in a survival situation is a bad idea. My brother in law likes to use a cheap Frost Mora for his knife chores and he probably knows better than a lot of people on these forums how to survive, myself included.

 

[TAH]

What I'd like to know is why can't CRKs take a blow from a hammer, but Buck knives can?

 

[Ilikesharpstuff]

Hello, I'm getting more into bladeforums recently and wanted to post a question... It has probably been discussed before but here goes... I hope I won't be black listed here or something for mentioning it... but I have always liked the CRK fixed blade designs but have been extremely hesitant to even think of getting one after seeing the infamous Noss tests. I was wondering if these two failures have ever been addressed by CRK and has the heat treating problem been fixed with more recent releases?

Before people start saying how its not a realistic test, etc etc let me say that I do understand that already. It is not a real world application of either of those knives. However, for example, if being used as a survival blade in a frozen environment, batoning with and through frozen hard would could come pretty close to the soft 2x4 and metal hammer.

Anyway, my point being... The designs seem great, but for the price point, unless the blades are more durable then the two tested by Noss, why not spend an equal or less amount of money on a knife that most likely will not have catastrophic failure if pushed a tiny bit past its intended purpose? (ie, RAT, Ontario, Busse, SwampRat, etc)

I want to mention I am not trying to bash or bring up any sore subjects... just asking this question as a potential buyer of a product. Because I do own a Sebenza and love it (after a few mods anyway)!

Thanks!

I'm not trying to start any controversy, just stating my opinion.

Are you going to be using it as a survival knife in frozen temperatures?

Very doubtful. Mr. Reeve makes some of the best knives out there, both fixed and folding, and if you don't think it will hold up, buy something else. I highly doubt that anything you will ever use the knife for will compare to beating it with a hammer. The tests, to me, are pointless. That is a test of how much abuse a knife will take from a hammer, and even those who buy knives intending to abuse them, rarely use a hammer to do so.

 

[coldsilence55]

I'm not trying to start any controversy, just stating my opinion.

Are you going to be using it as a survival knife in frozen temperatures?

Very doubtful. Mr. Reeve makes some of the best knives out there, both fixed and folding, and if you don't think it will hold up, buy something else. I highly doubt that anything you will ever use the knife for will compare to beating it with a hammer. The tests, to me, are pointless. That is a test of how much abuse a knife will take from a hammer, and even those who buy knives intending to abuse them, rarely use a hammer to do so.

Absolutely, more than very doubtful. I am fairly confident that I would never be in a situation where one would be likely to fail on me. So, yes, I much so agree these are perfectly fine for almost all applications. What I was asking was more of a general question; whether it has ever been addressed by CRK why other knives in the same, higher, lower (and much much lower) price ranges can handle the same impacts with no problem and keep on going. And that question was answered by other members saying they simply did not address it... so I'll just take that for what its worth and pretty much end of story. I'm not looking for defensive responses from people thinking I'm bashing them... simply curious about this.

 

[STAGE 2]

The Reeves could say anything, but you know what they say about wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty but only the pig enjoys it.

Sorry, but thats just a cop out and you know it. Companies like RAT and Spyderco and others wouldn't let something like this happen without any response. Thats what is meant by standing behind your product.

Jeff has stated on several occassions that the knife world is full of BS and hype and he's right. When a company says outright on their website that these knives are "virtually indestructable" only to have two break while batoning through wood, that raises eyebrows. Refusing to offer any details on why is nothing but unacceptable.

Whether people agree with the tests or dont, think they are scientific or not, or believe Noss is a moron is all beside the point. CR has made claims about their knives and charges a tidy sum based on these claims. Given the performance of other much cheaper knives that dont make any claim as to indestructability an explanation is definately deserved.

Either the knives were defective in some fashion in which case others knives might be defective as well, or they were not defective and CR is guilty of false advertising since these knives are nowhere near virtually indestructable.

 

[nyefmaker]

What I'd like to know is why can't CRKs take a blow from a hammer, but Buck knives can?

Different Steel, the one that broke was A2 Tool Steel. BUCK uses other steels. I like BUCK knives as well. I never really had any problems with their knives. I do feel their older knives were better made than the newer ones though. I do know I will not pound on my frontiersman with a hammer, thats just common sense..........If your in a survival situation in the woods, odds are your not going to have a hammer laying around. If you had to pound on the spine of a knife with something for some reason ( I still cant think of any ), your more inclined to use a thick branch and I am sure the A2 could take it..............I still strongly feel the only reason for the breakage is that the blade was serrated. It broke right in the middle of the serrations. The serrations weaken the blade in that area and the grooves cut for the serrations basically create a fisher and pretty much point to where it will break. Thats why I sold my project II, I did not like the serrations, I have never found the useful on any knife and have never felt like I needed them. Someday when funds alow, I will gladly get a plain project I & II. No one mentions the serrations and I am surprised !

 

[blade2klean]

Before you begin saying what is acceptable and unacceptable about a company why don't you do a bit of research. CRK did respond to the original thread with the satement below.


What a lot of words and opinions! I look at the size of this thread, with the number of participants and viewings, and am humbled by CRK’s respected place in the market.

Those who know CRK know that we do not rush to comment on these volatile threads. We wait and let everyone have their say, all the opinions be stated, and allow the acrimony and criticisms run their course.

The Yarborough was designed for U S Army Special Forces with a great deal of care and with cognizance of the exceptional men by whom it would be used. The specifics given were simply that it had to be a 7” blade with a full tang and that the knife needed to accomplish the range of tasks an SF soldier may encounter in the execution of his duties. We have no knowledge of the testing process other than “rigorous evaluation criteria” – such information is not available to us. We have since learned from the Special Forces men we have come to know that CPMS30V passed all requirements relating to use in extreme climate conditions and terrain, from warm marine environments to desert; a critical feature is that the knife is light enough to be carried (vital – as the knife is combined with the multitude of other equipment a soldier requires to work self-sustained in an area where support is days or even weeks away); the serrations performed admirably when used to cut free the webbing/rigging used for airborne equipment drops; the knife is robust enough to do serious work and ergonomically sound for their unique purposes and situations, especially when used with a gloved hand. Special Forces are not loud mouthed about what they do, but they are not afraid to speak up if there is a problem with their equipment.

The Green Beret knife is identical to the Yarborough, except for the engraving. We have never had a Green Beret or Yarborough returned because it had broken or for any other performance or design reason. As an aside, in the 24 year history of the company and tens of thousands of fixed blade knives we’ve made, we have had +/- a dozen one piece knives returned for breakage – one had a flaw in the metal; in the early years, we had about 6 returned because the cutting edge had been ground too thin; the rest were being used abusively - used as a pry bar, thrown extensively against a tree, levered with a pipe, etc. All were replaced at no charge, even though our warranty says, “This guarantee does not cover natural materials, incorrect applications, neglect or abuse.”

We do know that some SF men do not use their Yarborough knives and keep them for heirlooms – we have no idea which knives they use. We do know that some SF men keep their Yarboroughs for heirlooms and have purchased Green Berets to use instead. We do know that SF men use their Yarboroughs – SF men are not loud talkers, especially while still in the service – exactly why they are known as The Quiet Professionals. It was a few years before we heard any feedback from them as to how the Yarborough performed in the field (or sandbox, as the case may be) and all comments have been positive. We have received several Yarboroughs back for refurbish – a quick count gives three in the past six months – we consider that no more or no less than any other CRK model. Most recently, we had a Yarborough returned to be refurbished – the soldier had cut a live electrical cable with it. There was a decent size chunk of the cutting edge melted and a long gouge along the hollow grind. We chose to replace the knife. Two or three years ago, we were approached by the team mate of an SF soldier who had been killed in Afghanistan when his vehicle was blown up by an IED. He had retrieved the Yarborough of the soldier and wanted us to refurbish it for presentation to his family. We did this, even though the temper of the knife had been completely ruined by the ensuing fire. We wrote a letter saying as much, and both the knife and letter were presented to the soldier’s widow and young son at a ceremony at Ft. Bragg.

We constantly receive positive comments on the performance of the Green Beret – from military and non-military customers. We have no ability to estimate how many are being used in the Middle East right now – I only know we get several calls each month to the effect of “I’m deploying (or my son/nephew/brother-in-law) soon, how quickly can you supply a Green Beret......?”

I can understand Noss’s concept in wanting to find “the toughest strongest blades and separate what I was reading with actual hard use” (Noss’s post #322). The series of destruction tests compare how long different knives will survive being abused – this has no bearing on what the different knives were designed for or how the design features will respond to the abuse. The tests are not wrong; they are simply not the “final answer” as many of the contributors to the thread interpret.

Noss has returned the knife to us to examine. At first evaluation, there is nothing wrong with knife. The heat treatment (tested right in spec at 56Rc); the naked eye shows no irregularities in the grain structure; the knife has been forwarded to Crucible for expert analysis but we do not expect any different result.

Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.

Anne Reeve
For Chris Reeve, Bill Harsey, Dave Fujii and the Team at CRK

 

[coldsilence55]

I can understand Noss’s concept in wanting to find “the toughest strongest blades and separate what I was reading with actual hard use” (Noss’s post #322). The series of destruction tests compare how long different knives will survive being abused – this has no bearing on what the different knives were designed for or how the design features will respond to the abuse. The tests are not wrong; they are simply not the “final answer” as many of the contributors to the thread interpret.

Noss has returned the knife to us to examine. At first evaluation, there is nothing wrong with knife. The heat treatment (tested right in spec at 56Rc); the naked eye shows no irregularities in the grain structure; the knife has been forwarded to Crucible for expert analysis but we do not expect any different result.

Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.

Anne Reeve
For Chris Reeve, Bill Harsey, Dave Fujii and the Team at CRK

Thank you, thats what I was looking for

 

[TAH]

When a company says outright on their website that these knives are "virtually indestructable" only to have two break while batoning through wood, that raises eyebrows.

Through wood...using a HAMMER.

They don't say their knives are indestructable. Virtually means nearly. I'd say CRK's description is accurate.

 

[TAH]

Different Steel, the one that broke was A2 Tool Steel. BUCK uses other steels. I like BUCK knives as well. I never really had any problems with their knives. I do feel their older knives were better made than the newer ones though. I do know I will not pound on my frontiersman with a hammer, thats just common sense..........If your in a survival situation in the woods, odds are your not going to have a hammer laying around. If you had to pound on the spine of a knife with something for some reason ( I still cant think of any ), your more inclined to use a thick branch and I am sure the A2 could take it..............I still strongly feel the only reason for the breakage is that the blade was serrated. It broke right in the middle of the serrations. The serrations weaken the blade in that area and the grooves cut for the serrations basically create a fisher and pretty much point to where it will break. Thats why I sold my project II, I did not like the serrations, I have never found the useful on any knife and have never felt like I needed them. Someday when funds alow, I will gladly get a plain project I & II. No one mentions the serrations and I am surprised !

nm,

I wasn't being serious. Even Buck doesn't recommend this. :thumbup:

 

[Watchmaker]

Thank you, thats what I was looking for

Get a basic membership, then you can search for yourself.

 

[nyefmaker]

Before you begin saying what is acceptable and unacceptable about a company why don't you do a bit of research. CRK did respond to the original thread with the satement below.


What a lot of words and opinions! I look at the size of this thread, with the number of participants and viewings, and am humbled by CRK’s respected place in the market.

Those who know CRK know that we do not rush to comment on these volatile threads. We wait and let everyone have their say, all the opinions be stated, and allow the acrimony and criticisms run their course.

The Yarborough was designed for U S Army Special Forces with a great deal of care and with cognizance of the exceptional men by whom it would be used. The specifics given were simply that it had to be a 7” blade with a full tang and that the knife needed to accomplish the range of tasks an SF soldier may encounter in the execution of his duties. We have no knowledge of the testing process other than “rigorous evaluation criteria” – such information is not available to us. We have since learned from the Special Forces men we have come to know that CPMS30V passed all requirements relating to use in extreme climate conditions and terrain, from warm marine environments to desert; a critical feature is that the knife is light enough to be carried (vital – as the knife is combined with the multitude of other equipment a soldier requires to work self-sustained in an area where support is days or even weeks away); the serrations performed admirably when used to cut free the webbing/rigging used for airborne equipment drops; the knife is robust enough to do serious work and ergonomically sound for their unique purposes and situations, especially when used with a gloved hand. Special Forces are not loud mouthed about what they do, but they are not afraid to speak up if there is a problem with their equipment.

The Green Beret knife is identical to the Yarborough, except for the engraving. We have never had a Green Beret or Yarborough returned because it had broken or for any other performance or design reason. As an aside, in the 24 year history of the company and tens of thousands of fixed blade knives we’ve made, we have had +/- a dozen one piece knives returned for breakage – one had a flaw in the metal; in the early years, we had about 6 returned because the cutting edge had been ground too thin; the rest were being used abusively - used as a pry bar, thrown extensively against a tree, levered with a pipe, etc. All were replaced at no charge, even though our warranty says, “This guarantee does not cover natural materials, incorrect applications, neglect or abuse.”

We do know that some SF men do not use their Yarborough knives and keep them for heirlooms – we have no idea which knives they use. We do know that some SF men keep their Yarboroughs for heirlooms and have purchased Green Berets to use instead. We do know that SF men use their Yarboroughs – SF men are not loud talkers, especially while still in the service – exactly why they are known as The Quiet Professionals. It was a few years before we heard any feedback from them as to how the Yarborough performed in the field (or sandbox, as the case may be) and all comments have been positive. We have received several Yarboroughs back for refurbish – a quick count gives three in the past six months – we consider that no more or no less than any other CRK model. Most recently, we had a Yarborough returned to be refurbished – the soldier had cut a live electrical cable with it. There was a decent size chunk of the cutting edge melted and a long gouge along the hollow grind. We chose to replace the knife. Two or three years ago, we were approached by the team mate of an SF soldier who had been killed in Afghanistan when his vehicle was blown up by an IED. He had retrieved the Yarborough of the soldier and wanted us to refurbish it for presentation to his family. We did this, even though the temper of the knife had been completely ruined by the ensuing fire. We wrote a letter saying as much, and both the knife and letter were presented to the soldier’s widow and young son at a ceremony at Ft. Bragg.

We constantly receive positive comments on the performance of the Green Beret – from military and non-military customers. We have no ability to estimate how many are being used in the Middle East right now – I only know we get several calls each month to the effect of “I’m deploying (or my son/nephew/brother-in-law) soon, how quickly can you supply a Green Beret......?”

I can understand Noss’s concept in wanting to find “the toughest strongest blades and separate what I was reading with actual hard use” (Noss’s post #322). The series of destruction tests compare how long different knives will survive being abused – this has no bearing on what the different knives were designed for or how the design features will respond to the abuse. The tests are not wrong; they are simply not the “final answer” as many of the contributors to the thread interpret.

Noss has returned the knife to us to examine. At first evaluation, there is nothing wrong with knife. The heat treatment (tested right in spec at 56Rc); the naked eye shows no irregularities in the grain structure; the knife has been forwarded to Crucible for expert analysis but we do not expect any different result.

Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.

Anne Reeve
For Chris Reeve, Bill Harsey, Dave Fujii and the Team at CRK

I hope this makes everyone happy. Thanks for posting it.

 

[blade2klean]

I was afraid a lynching would take place if I didn't.

 

[nyefmaker]

I was afraid a lynching would take place if I didn't.

I did have the rope ready

 

[STAGE 2]

Through wood...using a HAMMER.

That shouldn't make a difference. A properly HT'd knife should be able to handle it with no problems for several reasons, not the least of which as the OP pointed out, wood, especially in wintertime, can be very very hard.

They don't say their knives are indestructable. Virtually means nearly. I'd say CRK's description is accurate.

Simple question. Should a knife that is advertised as "virtually indestructable" outlast a knife that makes no such claims at more than half the cost?

 

[dl351]

I think some here are missing some information. I know for a fact that some of these "high performing" cheapo knives are not as hard as the CRK knives. That means that they are spring tempered, which means they are less brittle and more resistant to sharp impacts. The drawback is that they don't hold an edge as well. I'm not saying all of the less expensive knives fit this, but most of the really cheap ones do.

Oh, and Stage 2, a hammer makes a big difference. Even a (properly) differentially heat treated Swamp Rat M6 broke because it was beat on with a pipe wrench. It's been discussed here on BF in the past. Metal against metal is always bad when it comes to knives.

 

[missin_hobo]

Let's see if this Busse can survive the sawed-in-half destruction test.......nope.

 

[STAGE 2]

I think some here are missing some information. I know for a fact that some of these "high performing" cheapo knives are not as hard as the CRK knives. That means that they are spring tempered, which means they are less brittle and more resistant to sharp impacts. The drawback is that they don't hold an edge as well. I'm not saying all of the less expensive knives fit this, but most of the really cheap ones do.

Very true. However there are some quality knives that are as hard or harder then the CRK knives that performed much much better. Take RAT for instance. Their RC-4 is hardened to 57 compared to the 55-57 CRK states. Its regular old 1095 and is .177" compared to the 1/4" tool steel the CRK. By the numbers, there isn't any reason why the CRK should perform worse than the RAT. Yet it did.

Oh, and Stage 2, a hammer makes a big difference. Even a (properly) differentially heat treated Swamp Rat M6 broke because it was beat on with a pipe wrench. It's been discussed here on BF in the past. Metal against metal is always bad when it comes to knives.

No one is saying that batoning with a hammer is ideal or even advisable. The question is whether or not a knife intended for soldiers/survivalists and marketed as "virtually indestructable" should be able to withstand being hammered into wood. If the answer is no, then the marketing is a lie. If the answer is yes then the product is defective.

 

[dl351]

I agree, by the numbers the CRK should have performed better, but it didn't. That doesn't bother me though. Heck, maybe all this hoohah will keep the secondary market prices temporarily lower so I can buy one or two more! I doubt that will be the case though.

 

[pvicenzi]

My watch is advertised as shock resistant. I wonder what will happen if I hit it with a hammer?