CS Recon Scout Fails Miserably

[Josh Muller]

so, having said what i just said, it is quite possible to say that the manifacturers opinion on weather not it was meant to be a log splitter is of importance in regards to the tang to ricasso junction geometry. cold steel (or whoever made it) might say that they designed the tang that with the intent of the knife only being able to withstand minimal force between blade to handle, as the square geometry is dangerous for much more.

however, with a little impropmtu modification (rounding out the tang to ricasso junction corners), that thing is gold for log splitting.

 

[biogon]

biogon, i dont think that daqo'tah forge is a troll, just someone who has a steadfast opinion and the occasional slip of sarcasm.

Seth,

*grin*

No... I don't think he -really- is one in the traditional sense, either.

However, the thing is this: if you look at that train of conversation, I asked one particular question of fact and he gave me his opinion. Even when I clarified, he totally ignored what I was asking and stated his opinion again.

I've met enough people IRL like that, and I've learned that they have troll-like qualities -- disrupting what would otherwise be a fruitful and production discussion simply by being constantly irrelevant.

---

As for content....

For the sake of argument, let's look at your comparision of the RS to the SRK. While the SRK is 1/4" and the RS is 5/16", the RS is also full flat ground while the SRK is a rather low (hollow?) saber, which technically makes the SRK less resistant to lateral and vertical stress, no?

A combination of the flare from the hollow and the large area of full stock thickness might potentially make it a better knife for prying.

(Robustness here of course doesn't apply in THIS case as the break was at the tang/handle juncture... totally irrelevant if the knife was made correctly.)

---

Something else that has bothered me. If this knife is meant for "combat" tasks, how much impact is comparable between batoning and chopping wood?

I'd guess that a typical "combat" task is chopping things up -- wood, vines -- and digging and prying and popping zip ties and leveraging ammo crates (viz the construction of any number of Busse, Becker, Swamp Rat "combat" knives).

Wouldn't there be even more force on this juncture by holding the handle and chopping something hard and prying, compared to batoning the spine?

Thoughts?

-j

 

[DaQo'tah Forge]

Mete, ...

My guess would be that the Italian dentests must be busy fixing teeth night and day from people attempting to eat that candy!

 

[TLM]

Biogon:

Wouldn't there be even more force on this juncture by holding the handle and chopping something hard and prying, compared to batoning the spine?

Very much so, when batoning basically one have to hold the knife just while starting and even then just to keep it upright, once it is stuck one can let go and just pound. When the end of the blade width is reached, and the tip is hit, it helps to push the handle down but even then usually one can't counter it totally. All in all the forces on the juncture are quite small in comparison to prying and full force whacking. Of course one can pry and bend the handle but it is not necessary for the job. When whacking if the center of inertia is used to hi, the handle does not feel much force but one can't trust to repeat it all the time it also depends on one's style.

In the northern European countries there are two different traditions, one is to use a larger whacker and a smaller everyday knife, the other is to use an axe and a small knife. Axe tends to be used in the more wooden country. Both combinations have worked for quite a while.

TLM

 

[SteelDriver]

Now I have my point of view, based on my own gut feelings when I look at the photo, notice how deep it's stuck in the wood, , notice the banged up handle, the Huge guard that must have been sticking up in the way,,,

And noticeing that Im not sure this is a "Camping" knife in the first place!....

It is my point of view that based on what I know of camping, that this knife was NEVER designed to be thought of as a camper....To me it looks like a fighter....the huge guard,,,,the handle,,,,the point,,,,all say, "Fighter" to me,,,not "Log splitter"

But I could be wrong,,,,,If you guys can find anything writen by the maker or get an email from him (or them) that says the broken knife is a camp knife, or a survival knife, or a hunting knife, or whatever....and that it's made to split wood as shown in the photo,,,,,then you got an air-tight case against this knife,,,,

But so far?.....My gut feeling still is when I look at the photo, that this knife was never designed to be used in such a manner.....

DaQo'tah Forge,

First let me say that I appreciate your contributions to the Shop Talk forum, and I respect your opinions on knife design .

However, I must point out that your gut feelings when you look at the first photo are off-target. If you actually read Nutnfancy's description of the batoning, you'll find that the technique calls for hits on the front of the blade protruding from the log while the user grasps the handle to stabilize the knife. How deep it's stuck, the size of the guard, and the condition of the handle are irrelevant.

Also worth mentioning is that the break happened at the blade/tang juncture. How then does the blade shape have anything to do with the failure here? Regardless of whether it was a lemon or bad stress riser design (or both), the knife broke because the blade-tang juncture was the weakest point on that particular knife, and enough force was applied to exceed the strength of the steel there. If the blade were any other shape common to a 7.5" outdoors knife (not some exotic profile), and the same weak point existed, that's where it would break just the same.

Out of curiosity (and not sarcasm) could you describe your preferred "Log Splitter" knife? I'm interested in the thickness, length, blade profile, and cross-section geometry. I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up looking a lot like an axe head, and that makes a lot of sense considering how efficient that shape is. But then you'd might as well carry an axe, and we've already discussed that here. For a survival knife, you'd expect a blade shape that reflects a compromise between tasks that a user might perform. Most of us would agree that the RS blade shape & size would work fine for survival, and in the absense of an axe the RS blade (not to speak of the rest of the knife) would work fine for batoning.

Thanks to Nutnfancy's followup work with his RS (and great pics, BTW), we can see that the RS is quite capable for batoning work. With any knife there is the chance of getting a lemon and maybe a broken knife, but the RS has a known design weakness in the 90 degree stress risers at the blade-tang juncture. Caveat emptor.

 

[DaQo'tah Forge]

DaQo'tah Forge,

First let me say that I appreciate your contributions to the Shop Talk forum, and I respect your opinions on knife design .

Oh stop buttering me up,,,thats Biogon's job,,,LOL

For a survival knife, you'd expect a blade shape that reflects a compromise between tasks that a user might perform.

Very true,,,I have a few old survival knives lost some place in that compost pile I like to laughinly refer to as my closet...and if I remember their design correctly, one of the things that have in common, (a thing that marks them out as "survival" type knives), is this element of being able to do a bunch of different things....

Now the truth is, that a survival knife might be able to do lots of things, but the down side is that it does everything kinda poorly. A good survival knife might have a saw cut into the spine, but its not as good a saw as my Black&Decker in the garage. It might have some a fish scaler built in, but its not as good as the one I keep in the tackle box...

So yes, I agree, a Survival knife is a study of compromise in knife design.

But this is all besides the point, the knife of this topic I don't believe is correctly called a survival knife,,,,For even the name of the knife in question congers up an image of combat.

 

[Josh Muller]

Seth,
As for content....

For the sake of argument, let's look at your comparision of the RS to the SRK. While the SRK is 1/4" and the RS is 5/16", the RS is also full flat ground while the SRK is a rather low (hollow?) saber, which technically makes the SRK less resistant to lateral and vertical stress, no?

A combination of the flare from the hollow and the large area of full stock thickness might potentially make it a better knife for prying.

we're the srk 1/4 id probably say that your right, as the difference is reletively insignificant between the two sizes, and a 1/4" low saber will actually afford you more metal then a full flatt (if its done right for the sake of strength), but

the srk is 3/16 vs. the rs' 5/16. according the coldsteel the weights are 8.2oz vs. 15 oz. thats darn near twice as much metal to be found on the rs. if the srk was a low saber flat grind, it would basically be like you continued the flat grinds angles all the way up to the spine, and youd end up with the rs.

the saber grind is better for prying, but but thats a huge difference in metal content between the two, and it would seem as though the recon scout would have the advantage just by sheer bulk. but id have to have that verified by someone who has some training/study in structural integrity in regards to geometry.

Something else that has bothered me. If this knife is meant for "combat" tasks, how much impact is comparable between batoning and chopping wood?

I'd guess that a typical "combat" task is chopping things up -- wood, vines -- and digging and prying and popping zip ties and leveraging ammo crates (viz the construction of any number of Busse, Becker, Swamp Rat "combat" knives).

from what ive read here and else where on the use of knives in combat, and from what i understand happens in combat, if your in the city a lot of what your gonna be doing is opening crates, rations, and packages and the likes. but, being in the city, you need to be able to cut wires, break open locks, pry open windows when necessary.

in survival most of what your going to be doing is wood work, vegetation, and skinning if you can actually catch something. any hard impact's your going to have are on rocks and bone, but most of the time if your in a survival situation it wont be intentional.

so for me, a combat knife really needs to be stronger then a survival knife, though a survival knife should be basically indestructable. if im in the woods scared, hungry, lost, and tired, and my knife failes *miserably* i might be able to get into a state of mind that would get me out using only my bare hands.

if i come to a locked gate in the city during combat, and ive got 6 guys on my tail with galil's and grenades, that knife better hold up when i try to break the lock with it. no ifs ands or buts.

but again, this is all just speculation and reasoning from what ive seen read and heard.

Wouldn't there be even more force on this juncture by holding the handle and chopping something hard and prying, compared to batoning the spine?

Thoughts?

-j

definitely seems that way. aga9in id have to ask cliff on that one, as he has training in the subject (material science in generaly (sort of has training, it crosses over well)), and lives in a winter wonderland where tree's abound

 

[Josh Muller]

But this is all besides the point, the knife of this topic I don't believe is correctly called a survival knife,,,,For even the name of the knife in question congers up an image of combat.

this is one of the reasons why this thread continues on,

name means nothing. outer aperance (style) means nothing. if it wher called "only combat knife uses only" it would mean nothing. what matters is the knife itself, and how it stacks up to the criteria of a "survivial knife".

ie. the trinity of blades - geometry, heat treat, steel.

without giving your personal criteria for what makes a good survivial knife, we have absolutely no idea why you feel that this knife is better suited for combat, and not suited for use as a survival knife.

so, asking again, what do you think is a good design for a knife that is dedicated to log splitting?

same question to that of a "survival knife"

 

[Josh Muller]

man, with micarta handles those two knives are really nice looking....

 

[DaQo'tah Forge]

, we have absolutely no idea why you feel that this knife is better suited for combat, and not suited for use as a survival knife.

Oh, I have no idea why the maker of this blade decided to make a "combat" knife.....thats a good question him however...

Perhaps the maker knew of an important difference between what he calls his "Survival " knife and this "combat" knife?..

All I see for sure is that in the ad the the seller puts out about this knife, (as posted here on this topic) that ad really does push the idea that it is a cheap "Combat" knife.

Actually on another Forum topic I am going over the question of what makes a Good Survival knife and what makes a good Camp knife or Combat knife. .

 

[Josh Muller]

Oh, I have no idea why the maker of this blade decided to make a "combat" knife.....thats a good question him however...
.

okay... so to recap on what i said in response to that statement earlier,

I have kept saying that the only person who has any right to answer that question is the maker....

Now I have my point of view, based on my own gut feelings when I look at the photo, notice how deep it's stuck in the wood, , notice the banged up handle, the Huge guard that must have been sticking up in the way,,,

And noticeing that Im not sure this is a "Camping" knife in the first place!....

It is my point of view that based on what I know of camping, that this knife was NEVER designed to be thought of as a camper....To me it looks like a fighter....the huge guard,,,,the handle,,,,the point,,,,all say, "Fighter" to me,,,not "Log splitter"

But I could be wrong,,,,,If you guys can find anything writen by the maker or get an email from him (or them) that says the broken knife is a camp knife, or a survival knife, or a hunting knife, or whatever....and that it's made to split wood as shown in the photo,,,,,then you got an air-tight case against this knife,,,,

when you look for something that is capable of handleing a certain task, there are a set of criteria that must be met first in order acheive the given task without failure.

in the case of a log splitter,
-the knife must have an edge that is capable of initiating a cut into wood
-must not be so brittle that it shatters upon impact with a soft heavy object
-must not be so brittle that it shatters, breaks, or chips excessively upon contact with a rock or other imbedded objects
-must be long enough to accomidate a log hitting it and a hand holding it while splitting the log
-must have a proper heat treatment and geometry to handle the sudden shocks that occur when hitting it with another soft object *wood will give way before steel does, hence a soft object compared to the knife*

if it has all of these traits, the knife should be able to successfully split logs all day long without failure.

it has absolutely nothing to do with what the knife looks like, or what the manifacturer calls it, or what the manifacturer originally designed the knife to do. if it has all of the traits required of a knife to accomplish log splitting, it is a suitable log splitter. he can say that he only designed the knife to spread butter - and anything else is abuse, and it wont matter, because it meets the criteria of a log splitter.

in the case of the recon scout, it is a 5/16" thick fully flat ground knife using carbon v steel. carbon v is known to be a decent high carbon steel that is capable of taking abuse without immediate failure. it is long enough to accomidate a person holding the handle, and hitting the tip with a log to force it into another log in order to split it. the tip is not so thin that it will be immediately damaged by a log or heavy sudden force on it.

by all standards and criteria or the end users - this knife, the recon scout, should be able to split logs all day without failure (unless it hits a very large rock in the process). it does not matter in any way shape or form to the end user what the maker of the knife designed the knife to do, because it fits all the criteria of a log splitter.


now, as far as the makers warranty for replacing their blades, then what they state is the designated use is very very important. but not to the end user, unless the warranty comes into play.

if a fighter fits the criteria of a camp knife, it should be able to handle being used as a camp knife. if a boyscout knife fits the criteria of a fighter, then it should be able to handle the task of a fighter. if the knife is called the "little miss pony muffin cutting feather knife" and fits the criteria of a deer skinner, it should be able to handle that task.

it is true that in some instances it is unacceptable to use certain knives for other tasks - such as a 68rc m2 blade meant solely for the purpose of skinning, that is 1/16" thin (for an example, im aware that it would rust like crazy). were you to use that in any activity that created sudden shocks or impact to the blade, it would most likely shatter and cause you grevious injury. so, in that case, a skinner is not a camp knife, nor is it a fighter. but thats because it doesnt fit the criteria of a camp knife or a fighter - not because the maker says he didnt design it to be one.

Actually on another Forum topic I am going over the question of what makes a Good Survival knife and what makes a good Camp knife or Combat knife. .

if you would be willing to give any more information on what forum thats located in, it would be much appreciated. as it stands, none of the questions that were asked regarding why you hold your opinions have been aswered here. having your own opinion is fine, but without backing them up with a logical progressing of facts or theory, there is no reason to state them.

 

[Josh Muller]

if what you meant by that comment was "i have no idea what criteria the maker of that blade feels is required of a combat knife", that okay. niether do it. i dont know who actually made the knife, so i have no way of asking him.

so its just us in this forum. and the question still stands, what do you think makes a good log splitter, and what do you think makes a good survival knife.

and, if the criteria for the two match up (geometry, steel, heat treatment), why can they not cross over and be expected to perform, and not fail?

 

[raker]

I don't think he knows what would make a good knife for anything besides cutting hay strings, casttrating animals, and slicing some cheese once in a while. And he probably made a knife for each task because he hasn't figured out that a knife can be used for multipurposes.

Oh Well, there are plenty left that try to learn and can think that frequent these forums. We tried.

 

[Josh Muller]

i understand the idea that some blades are heavily purpose built, and as such arent good for other specialized tasks, but in this case i dont see how that applies to what he's saying, since the blade fits the criteria of a camp knife, survival knife, and combat knife so well (from my perspective). wich is to say that given its steel, and its geometry, it should be able to take the abuseive tasks of all 3 without massive failure.


i am interested in knowing in what specific cases a knife would fail as a camp knife when designed to be a fighter (given that it has a good steel and heat treatment), and in what cases a combat knife would fail as a camp knife. but more importantly, why it would fail (being of one catagory and not the other.)


if you want to say that a fairebane sykes dager would make a crappy log splitter, thats fine, because the thing doesnt have a strong geometry, or a good cutting edge. it is also double sided, and is known to be fragile upong heavy lateral stress. so by criteria, it wouldnt make a good camp knife or log splitter (not becuase the maker says its not a good camp knife/log splitter).

im just very, very curious as to how someone could say that the rs would fail as a camp knife/log splitter, because it was built by the maker to be a fighter - given the steel and geometry of the knife. (not actually how someone can say it, but the logic behind it)

 

[Josh Muller]

scratch what i said about giving information about the other thread. i dont want to drag other threads into this one, or vice versa.

 

[ras]

Combat Knives by Allen Elishewitz

 

[DaQo'tah Forge]

i understand the idea that some blades are heavily purpose built, and as such arent good for other specialized tasks,

Yes, The way that ad for the broken knife points out that it is a "Combat" knife might be in agreement with your views.

i am interested in knowing in what specific cases a knife would fail as a camp knife when designed to be a fighter

Thats is a very good question to ask...

Here is my answer:
Ed Fowler once wrote (I think it was in an article in BLADE Mag.) that a hunting knife only "needs" to be and inch and a half long in order to do the job. Now by this he meant that the human hand has the ability to use the available tools on hand, to do the work needed, even if the tools are nothing more that a inch and a half long blade. Humans are clever.

So I guess any type of knife could be pressed into service and used to most any type of cutting job. I myself once used a big Rambo style bowie knife to fillet a fish out...so I imagine you could most likely dress out a moose with a box cutter, if thats all you got.

Given this FACT, let me move to your question...

Now as for the main difference between what is called a "combat" knife, and the mental image I have of such a blade, as compared to the "Camp" knife....I believe the best example I could give is found - http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329668

Now when I think of a camp knife, (a knife used around the camp), the knife in that link is about the same image that I am thinking of....

Notice the things that mark it out as a little different than the image of a true Combat knife most people have.

Note no guard hanging down,,,this is very important, for the guard found on most combat knives is totally in the way at the camp table, a guard keeps the knife away from the dinner plate...so as this knife has no guard, I would say that the maker of this knife knows a thing or two about cooking and eating in the field.

Next,,,the Full Tang. Very important,,,,this knife is called by the maker a Survival/camp knife. The use of a full tang here gives the maker the confidence that no matter what, this knife will not break,,,(Or it should not, even if misused)

Handle scales "pinned"...There is a reason knives at cutting competitions are required to show a pin in the handle, and the maker of this knife also clearly never wants the handle to accidentally pop off the tang in the field.

5160 steel.....the forgiving steel. easy to sharpen in the field,,,and not very hard so it will not snap in the woods,,,the trade off of 5160 is that it does not get them super hard, super sharp edges found on combat knives, but then, a camp knife does not need to be all that sharp, (for if your steak is that tough, you better tenderize it some more...LOL)

There,,,,thats what I think makes a good camp knife, and this also points out why a camp knife fits a need in our lives that a combat knife is illsuited for.

 

[Quiet Storm]

i am interested in knowing in what specific cases a knife would fail as a camp knife when designed to be a fighterke a good camp knife or log splitter (not becuase the maker says its not a good camp knife/log splitter).

1) Tip strength
IMO a fighting knife has to have a fine tip (due to a thinner blade and the back edge) that is naturally more prone to breakage than a 1/4" thick drop point blade's.
I expect a big camp knife to withstand medium to heavy prying and digging while I wouldn't even try to pry something rather flimsy like a soda can open with a pure-bred fighter.

2) Chopping
Fighters need to feel light in one's hand, but you need a heavy, forward-heavy blade to chop efficiently.

3) Hammering
You can't pound tent stakes into the ground with the spine of a double-edged knife.

 

[Peoria46]

A great thread, even though it sometimes wanders into territory populated by other "no wins" : Ruger versus S&W revolvers, 45 ACP versus 9mm, Glock versus The World, Win 94 versus Marlin 336.

 

[Josh Muller]

Yes, The way that ad for the broken knife points out that it is a "Combat" knife might be in agreement with your views.

not at all, the rs is a 5/16" thick (massive for production knives), very very lightly tappered tip, full tang (thick and tall tang goes to end of handle. remove kraton and apply micarta, you have an extremely solid reliable handle style - as seen in swamp rats), carbon v knife. what cold steel calls there knives means absolutely nothing to me. the only thing that matters is the knife, and what it is capable of. combat in todays world = you're basically never gonna use you knife in a fight. your going to abuse the hell out of it, but its not designed for the sole purpose of physical altercations, because they are more then likely never going happen with the knife.

advertisements have no bearing on how i judge a knifes ability to take abuse, or its intended use, how similar things have performed in the past does.

Note no guard hanging down,,,this is very important, for the guard found on most combat knives is totally in the way at the camp table, a guard keeps the knife away from the dinner plate...so as this knife has no guard, I would say that the maker of this knife knows a thing or two about cooking and eating in the field.

hacksaw off the gaurd of the rs and you have the same situation as on that camp knife. you arent harming the durability of the knife or the knife handle by doing so. the gaurd in no way effects the strength of the knife, and can easily be modified to fit your preference in use.

Next,,,the Full Tang. Very important,,,,this knife is called by the maker a Survival/camp knife. The use of a full tang here gives the maker the confidence that no matter what, this knife will not break,,,(Or it should not, even if misused)

swamp rat stakes their name in the same type of tang as seen on the rs. it is a full tang - just not the style that is visible all around the handle. all of swamp rats full tangs are done in the exact same way as the rs's, only with radiused junction points. radious the junction points, and you have a tang that should not break, just the same as the style that is visible all the way around the handle outside of the handle material.

Handle scales "pinned"...There is a reason knives at cutting competitions are required to show a pin in the handle, and the maker of this knife also clearly never wants the handle to accidentally pop off the tang in the field.

if you dont like the kraton, remove it and put micarta. there is a hole in the back end of it that allows for screws/bults/pins, and honeslty, the recon scout would perform just fine with a good paracord wrap, so the handle material makes no difference whatsoever in the performance of the knife and its ability to take abuse, in fighting, combat, or survival. i do not consider a shattered handle of a knife (that has a full tang like the rs's) to be a failure of the knife, it is a failure of the handle material (not the handle). the knife is perfectly usable with a bare tang.

5160 steel.....the forgiving steel. easy to sharpen in the field,,,and not very hard so it will not snap in the woods,,,the trade off of 5160 is that it does not get them super hard, super sharp edges found on combat knives, but then, a camp knife does not need to be all that sharp, (for if your steak is that tough, you better tenderize it some more...LOL)

much of what you just stated can be said about carbon v.

There,,,,thats what I think makes a good camp knife, and this also points out why a camp knife fits a need in our lives that a combat knife is illsuited for.

according to what you just said makes a good camp knife, the recon scout (with slight modifications - nothing that will change the geometry of knife only the fittings) is a good camp knife. there is no reason for it to have failed because it was designed for "combat" because the basic make up of the knife is that of a camp knife (by your terms), wich shouldnt have failed doing camp chores.






quiet storm - you are correct. i used a term that i didnt mean to to describe the style when i shouldnt have. a dedicated fighter will inherently be less strong then a combat knife, and i meant to use the word combat.