CRK fixed blade question

Well, believe me or not, but the "said company" does make claims about their knives and what they can withstand. I really don't care if you believe me or not. I know I'm telling the truth and that's enough for me. I just don't wish to mention names because a) I don't want to bring another company into this, and b) I don't want to make people think less of an otherwise good company.
 
I've owned (and still own) knives from a number of makers across the years. One favorite is a large "bowie" handforged from O1. It is 3/8in thick. The maker, a Mastersmith, would acknowledge that this blade can fail. Randall Made Knives has acknowledged failures although few in number by their reconing. I've just purchased a CRK GB to use while diving. I don't expect it to be quite as tough as some of my handforged, carbon steel pieces. It is a compromise based on my desire for cutting ability (including rope while underwater) and corrosion resitance; most dive knives, including Randall, have such high chromium content in the steel that they don't cut really well. All cutting instruments trade one capability for another in one way or another. All this said, and after wading through this seemily never ending controversy, I'm confident that CRK has designed a knife in the the GB that balances the compromises in a way that will suit my particular desires and need. But, I don't expect it to be indestructible; no knife is and each will fail under different circumstances based on the designed compromises. The old issue bayonet would not break, it would bend...but you couldn't put an edge on it that was worth a darn. The new bayonet (M9) would sharpen quite nicely but I tore one to pieces in DS/DS cutting my HMMWV out of concertina.

I'm certain that this knife would have been down checked during testing and subsequent field use if it didn't satisfy the end users all around criteria...giving to newly minted SF Troopers would be a joke...most of our special operators don't joke.
 
dl351 said:
Well, believe me or not, but the "said company" does make claims about their knives and what they can withstand. I really don't care if you believe me or not. I know I'm telling the truth and that's enough for me. I just don't wish to mention names because a) I don't want to bring another company into this, and b) I don't want to make people think less of an otherwise good company.
Click to expand...

Then don't make the point. Either you put facts on the table or you don't. Otherwise its just unsubstantiated BS that adds nothing to the discussion. I keep hearing this argument from CRK apologists, namely, "You should believe what I tell you even though you've seen actual evidence to the contrary.". Sorry but that wouldn't fly in a courtroom and it shouldn't fly here.
 
Alright, for you, I retract my statement. Sorry, but I don't care to bring another company in for slinging fecal matter.
 
I have a 1st cousin that is kind of a "survivalist". He likes to be dropped off at point A and treks his way through the bush to point B which usually takes anywhere from 1 to 2 weeks. He carries a sebenza thats about 20yrs old and a 7" Green Beret as his only two knives. He's been doing this for somewhere around 10yrs now. He battons for firewood and has never had a problem with either knife. No failures of any kind from either. He told me once after reading all the crap posted by this "NOSS guy" that he only wished the rest of his equipment held up as well as his Chris reeve knives!
 
I think its important to realize that what defines a "virtually indestructible" knife has changed a lot over the past few years.

When the Green Beret was released, it fit that definition well: a thick stock, full tang knife that will stand up to virtually any reasonable task that even a man in the service could put it up against. I think the track record of the knife shows that it did just that and continues to.

However, in recent years the bar has been dramatically raised by the popularity of companies like Busse Combat, ESEE (RAT), Ranger, Strider, etc. and the testing and enthusiast expectations have risen quite a bit, as well.

There is nothing wrong with companies making tougher knives than ever before, as unnecessary as it may be for 90% of reasonable applications, but you still have to draw a fair comparison before complaining about one simple statement in CRK's description.

The green beret is a tough knife that will stand up to hard use, but it is not designed, tempered or intended for the kind of abuse a Busse or like knife is, and when you compare the warranties and marketing of knifes that are, it's a stark contrast.

Those kinds of companies flat out say that their blades are made to be abused, are as tough as possible, and will be replaced with no questions asked because that's just how tough they are.

It's not fair to claim that a knife should preform like those over a relative statement like "virtually indestructible". I don't think anybody was mistaken about CRK fixed blades being akin to the ultra tough demographic of blades until the stupid tests happened. It really threw CRK under the bus and was incredibly unfair.

The bottom line is that a CRK fixed blade isn't suited for attacking concrete, steel, or heavy batoning with a steel hammer, and if you want a knife like that, you should buy one. Just don't think ill of CRK because of it. Their fixed blades are of remarkable quality and will stand up to hard use for years, they just aren't made for abuse.
 
J85909266 said:
I think its important to realize that what defines a "virtually indestructible" knife has changed a lot over the past few years.

When the Green Beret was released, it fit that definition well: a thick stock, full tang knife that will stand up to virtually any reasonable task that even a man in the service could put it up against. I think the track record of the knife shows that it did just that and continues to.

However, in recent years the bar has been dramatically raised by the popularity of companies like Busse Combat, ESEE (RAT), Ranger, Strider, etc. and the testing and enthusiast expectations have risen quite a bit, as well.

There is nothing wrong with companies making tougher knives than ever before, as unnecessary as it may be for 90% of reasonable applications, but you still have to draw a fair comparison before complaining about one simple statement in CRK's description.

The green beret is a tough knife that will stand up to hard use, but it is not designed, tempered or intended for the kind of abuse a Busse or like knife is, and when you compare the warranties and marketing of knifes that are, it's a stark contrast.

Those kinds of companies flat out say that their blades are made to be abused, are as tough as possible, and will be replaced with no questions asked because that's just how tough they are.

It's not fair to claim that a knife should preform like those over a relative statement like "virtually indestructible". I don't think anybody was mistaken about CRK fixed blades being akin to the ultra tough demographic of blades until the stupid tests happened. It really threw CRK under the bus and was incredibly unfair.

The bottom line is that a CRK fixed blade isn't suited for attacking concrete, steel, or heavy batoning with a steel hammer, and if you want a knife like that, you should buy one. Just don't think ill of CRK because of it. Their fixed blades are of remarkable quality and will stand up to hard use for years, they just aren't made for abuse.
Click to expand...

Great post! :thumbup:
 
J85909266/Joe--Very good post--I've been having similar thoughts. It seems to have become all the rage as of late to see how much abuse things can take, as compared to how well they perform their intended task--which for a knife means primarily cutting normal materials--which normally doesn't include cinderblock, steel tubing, etc.

And times have changed as to what people expect of products. 25+ years ago, a 1911 that was relatively reliable and shot sub-6" groups was pretty 'acceptable.' Nowadays, people can drive to any shop and buy off the shelf a 1911 that others could have only dreamed of, or spent lots of $$ at top smith to get. Many think a 1911 that won't shoot sub 1.5" 25 yd groups is crap (the fact they can't hold/shoot a group anywhere near that is irrelevant).

Similar idea with knives. But don't worry, in the future, somebody else will come out with a knife that outperforms everything currently available (and we'll be lucky to have it).

Well thought out and well articulated post.

BOSS
 
i posted when the before mentioned video was released let me put it this way i dont own a busse but i own two chris reeve fixed blades the 7 inch and 5 inch green beret the problem with his test is this. steel in a nut shell. is this some will break before it bends. some will bend before it breaks. some will bend then break. no tester i have ever seen 1:not give his identity 2:and test the knife how it was intended to be used. i have never had an argument with a steel plate or a cinder block or a 2x4 that would require me to use a knife to attack them. that said i have had no problems with any of my chris reeves in my opinion he is one of the finest makers around fair priced for good quality uses the best material and his blade ergonomics are great it fits in the hand like it was made for the hand. i also wanted to add that most makers ues s30v and 154cm because the customer wants it its like adding rimms to your car it increases the price but really dont add that much more function and any maker who is honest will addmit that. after all 154cm has been around since the 60s of early 70s. ats 34 was the first super steel then bg 42 then 154cm then s30v. the more exotic the steel the higher the knife cost 440c is still listed in the top 10 and they still find carbon swords with somewhat of an edge on them after hundreds of years. i also recieved 5 infraction points for insulting him which i did not but getting my point accross priceless.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top