CS Recon Scout Fails Miserably

Status
Not open for further replies.
(still want to know wether or not you mean (in your use of the word) by "combat knife" that the rs is a fighting knife, or a knife meant to be taken into a combat zone (to be used for more then physical altercations) .)


i was thinking about it in the car as i drove to work today, and i came up with the description of what i dont like about what youve said so far, wich was escapeing me in my previous posts

opinion does not negate material science. if the material has the ability to take a certain actions stress level by way of its geometry and crystaline structure, the maker can say whatever he wants. he can say that his knife is as fragile as glass, or that its as soft as gold, and it wont make any difference. the geometry, steel, and heat treatment will ultimately determine what the knife is capable of.



DaQo'tah Forge, and i mean no disrespect by this as it is intended to be a completely serious question, is english your first language? again, i stress that that isnt meant to be rude or meant to hassle you about anything, its an honest question.
 
Clint Simpson said:
BTW, Cold Steel never states that it is a ?cheap combat knife.? The ad implies that it is a value and/or a bargain. I also take it to mean that the Recon Scout is affordable.
Affordable and cheap can mean that same thing but I doubt, in current usage, they do in this case.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected....I know I meant to say cheap as in not very much money,,,as in Affordable....but to be totally correct, the word affordable is better used.

To be more correct then I need to say that the maker in his ad states that this knife is an affordable combat knife.
 
Clint Simpson said:
In that regard, what are your thoughts on survival knives?
Click to expand...


Now this invation to post seems like it will only get others to pick apart my words again,,,,(sounds like fun to me, why not?...but just remember guys,,,Im not whineing,,,Im just answering a question asked of me,,,)


On another topic I asked this question and got a few good answers, as well as thought about this for a while too.

lets say you got a bunch of knives in front of you,,,all made by the same guy,,,,all share many things in common as you would expect,,,,yet each is carefully given it's own name by the maker...
And lets say that the maker is an expert in knives, that he really knows his stuff, and that the names he gives his blades are not by accident, nor just to hype the knife in the market.

so,,,you look at the knives and read the names under each knife,,,,HUNTING KNIFE..........SKINNING KNIFE........FILLET KNIFE.........CAMP KNIFE......SURVIVAL KNIFE........COMBAT KNIFE.....BUTTER KNIFE.

OK,,,now you have to admit,,,that if pressed, and if you are very lucky,,,,,you could use the butter knife to kill, skin, and eat a bear with ....Humans if pushed against the wall are capable of very clever MacGyverness in a pinch.

However, lets say you are looking at the knives before you and you start to see all the important differences between them ...what are they?

Well,,,,,thats a question we cant really answer, because our knife maker is just imaginary,,,but I think there would be real differences to be found should such a situation happen....

a Hunting knife would be a tool to use while on the hunt,,,,a tool meant for the field useage with game...it does not have to be somethings,,,and it has to be other things,,

I skinning Knife is a knife to use while skinning a game animal,,,,it's design should assist in that job,,,it does not have to worry about being capable of other jobs,,

The .FILLET KNIFE is used with cleaning fish,,,its design should be one where it does not have to worry about other jobs,,,

the Camp knife is used in the camp,,,the term "camp" and "camping" give us the context of a planned trip into the wilderness,,,,thus the camp knife has a bit wider design capability, but it does not have to worry about doing all things because of the fuller context of being taken along on a "planned" trip into the wilderness.

The Survival knife is meant to be used in survival situations,,,,the context is that of a very much unplanned trip into the wilderness. the design capabilities have a very wide horizon,,,,the survival knife does not have to worry about doing any one thing all that well, but it must have the ability to be easily adapted to unforeseen situations,,,,the survival knife does not have to worry about being an every day carry knife .

The Combat knife is used in combat,,,it is used against people in combat situations, and it's design should reflect the job that it is called upon to do,,,It does not have to worry about doing other things, its a bit pointless to call a combat knife a "great combat knife" just because it has a cork screw in the handle...LOL

The butter knife,,,,,is designed to spread butter,,,,it don't have to worry about cleaning a dead elk in the woods,,,,nor a fish in a boat,,,,


now as for an Army Field knife?.....well,,,thats another story...LOL
 
With those analogies one would need three knives on a hunt, four while fishing and six during combat.

There is no maker in the world who thinks this way!!

At least no VIABLE one..............

This bullshiit is getting old...........................
 
I have witnessed a knife shear in a similar way in good weather. The user presses the blade hard to the log to ensure that when it is hit there is neither give nor bounce back. Problem people forget is that in doing this the blade is heavily stressed and the shock peaks just ahead of the persons hand, often with an owch! Familiar? Add to this cold weather, possibly even a flaw, the causes usually associated with failure compile until the risk becomes uncomfortably high. Look at the angle of shear, it split from bottom to top.

Reflect on this failure. All knives have a failure point and all knife manufacturers experience some %, however small, of failure. It underlines the need to get to know the knife, and how to use a knife, before your life depends on it.
 
okay, so i think i got my answer in a very round about way.


DaQo'tah Forge beleives that combat knife = fighting knife, and "army feild knife" = combat knife by commonly used terminology.

seriously, it makes a huge difference to use terms that people are familiar with, and use then in a way that they are familiar with. very few people on these boards would say "i was drunk, and this guy kept pushing me. i tend to have a really short temper when im drunk, so we did combat. now, when im drunk, i also tend to not think very far ahead, so as we were ingaged in combat, i decided that it would be a good idea to pull out my knife"

people use the word fight. the use of the word combat to describe a physical altercation is archaic, its used to describe what people do with swords and armor, generaly in a past tense (medievel etc), as in "hand to hand combat" not just "combat". you really, really do need to put a qualifier in front of that word to have it make sense in a sentence and not get confused by todays usage.

now, your correct that your using the term properly according to websters, but the word has 2 distinct meanings that can to some extent be used interchangably, but have very different connotations and meanings.


seriously, no one uses the term "army feild knife". it is, again, an archaic term. it has been replaced with the term "combat knife", likewise "combat weapon" means its something you use as a weapon, fighting knife means you use it in a fight.


just to throw it in there again, if you beleive (if i have read your use of terms correctly (army feild knife = something used in the feild of combat (ei - combat knife in common current day usage), combat knife = fighting knife) that a knife designed to be a fighter is not to be expected to be capable of performing the tasks of a survival knife or a camp knife, thats fine. a sheffeild dagger should not be expected to split logs, nor should a crkt bear claw.

HOWEVER. a 5/16" thick survival knife put up against a 5/16" "fighting knife" that has a similar edge thickness (its not zero ground (like a puuko)), there is no reason why it should fail faster then the survival knife. style doesnt play anything into it, the geometry is way to thick for a properly heat treated knife with a decent steel to fail at that task. that is going with material science, the repeatable nearly always infalable laws of material science over the opinion of the maker, wich could be anything from "its not a 5/16" survival knife or fighting knife, its a butter knife. dont use it for anything but butter or it will break" to "my knife was designed to break apart concrete. it will last 12 human lifetimes. it was made of meteorites. you cannot break it, even with a vise and a car pulling on it. it is unbreakable" - wich would be unbeilable, and rediculous.
 
Tim-Gabz said:
....causes usually associated with failure compile until the risk becomes uncomfortably high. Look at the angle of shear, it split from bottom to top.

Reflect on this failure. All knives have a failure point and all knife manufacturers experience some %, however small, of failure. It underlines the need to get to know the knife, and how to use a knife, before your life depends on it.
Click to expand...

Now here is a post I fully agree with,,,,
 
I have witnessed a knife shear in a similar way in good weather. The user presses the blade hard to the log to ensure that when it is hit there is neither give nor bounce back. Problem people forget is that in doing this the blade is heavily stressed and the shock peaks just ahead of the persons hand, often with an owch! Familiar? Add to this cold weather, possibly even a flaw, the causes usually associated with failure compile until the risk becomes uncomfortably high. Look at the angle of shear, it split from bottom to top.
Click to expand...

?????

TLM
 
seems reasonable... it honestly looks like it broke at the dead corner of the bottom tang junction, wich is one of the more likely places for a flaw to develope do to the sharp corner.

seems like the general concencus is that a knife built as the recon scout is shouldnt have broken in this task (regardless of what its named or advertised as), but considering the gemoetry of the tang junction, its possible for such an overbuilt knife to break during it because of the possibility of a flaw forming at that junction.

kinda like the crown vic police interceptors and their "explosive gas tanks", set in the back kinda like a pinto. its fairly rare for such an accident to happen (hit from rear causes massive explosion) percentage wise, but if the car is gonna randomly explode, thats probably going to be why and where it happens first. likewise on this knife, im sure percentage wise its very rare for such a break to happen, but if the knife is going to break, thats probably wear and why its going to break. kind of a possible flaw multiplier built into the blade. all it does is make flaws more possible, and present flaws worse.


this thread has gone on this long on tangent arguments though, specifically wether or not a knife built like this should be able to take this kind of action, and wether or not a name can decide the ability of a knife over its material.


id be interested in hearing more about the knife you speak of though, general geometry, what knife it was, wether the tang junctions were similar, general info.
 
:D

I have an SRK and a Trail master bowie, both in Carbon V. I've chopped but haven't broken anything.

In practice, my 12" HI Khukuri is about 150% more efficient than the Trailmaster bowie. 'Nuff said. The Khuk comes with me while the TM stays home. I have a Spyderco Moran on my pack harness for finer work.

Oh, and even those cheap Swedish Mora knives (good steel!) are tough enough to baton with. I think buddy just got a bad CS blade.
 
As promised, here's the update: Cold Steel DID replace the broken Recon Scout. No explanation or other paperwork was included with the replacement sent to my friend Bruce. They were fully aware how the breakage occurred. Good to see they stand by their knives. Thanks for the posts to this ongoing saga of a thread... Nutnfancy out.
 
So, The "Makers" representative has spoken and DoQ Tah can now rest easy because the "Maker" knew why it broke and we also know that the "Maker" will stand behind his work.
 
Thats what I would have wanted....

When a knife fails, the owner should allow the maker to know of this.
The maker should be informed and allowed to replace the failed knife...

I believe that a maker of a knife should have a policy where they replace knives "No questions asked"...even if they might think that the knife was used in a risky manner. The "Dont Ask" replacement policy puts this knife company ahead in the game with other knife makers...
 
I have asked the guy at the Knife Forums, kovacsgy, about the Recon Scout failure. He is, as far as I remeber, a metallurgist, and contributed some very high level discussions concerning the steel questions.

Today he replied. Interestingly enough, he claims that batoning, etc., although is normal for such a strong knife, should not be applied if the temperature is below the freezing point of water!
I find this very exciting: Nutnfancy is absolutely correct (since he is a survival expert) that batoning is a normal use for such a strong knife, however, a toughness is compromised very much at the extremely low temperature (he himself had doubts about the possibility of very low temperature influence on the blade) .

Here is what Gyorgy Kovacs wrote:

Excuse me the late answer, but my work keeps me very busy this months.

This RS 'failure' is a very interesting topic, but I think, this particular case is probably an anti-advertisement. The knife on the photo was broken at the weakest point, and I assume that by SERIOUSLY unproper use.

Every high carbon steel needs very careful use below the freezing point of water, and you can see that there is snow everywhere on the picture. Any prying and heavy side-loading is forbidden at such circumstances. Hammering the blade with a wooden baton can be taken without any extra care.

As you can see, the tang was broken off, exactly at the meeting of the tang and the ricasso. The 'rainbow-shape' arc of the breakage can be also seen very nicely, that shows that the breakage was started at the 90 degree corners between the tang and the ricasso, which are the main stress raisers of the handle. This fact suggests that the knife was broken NOT BY batoning the back of the blade, but by the flexing of the handle in side direction. That is unproper use, especially at low temperature.

I would not be too surprised, if the handle had been kicked some times... There is no knife that could handle such loadings. Even full tang blades can be broken that way easily, only the breaking point should be different - it can be above the ricasso, and not below.

So, I would not pay too much attention for such 'interesting experiences', since the picture given to this tale is too good, and shows what happened in the reality.

--------------------
Gyorgy Kovacs

Steel and knife nut
Click to expand...

Link to the the thread at the Knife Forums

NL-2 Odin vs. Cold Steel Recon Scout


Franco
 
If that was the case all of my knives would have long since broken. Lots of knives have been evaluated far below the freezing point of water. Hell it is warm here when it is just at the freezing point of water.

-Cliff
 
Nutnfancy said:
As promised, here's the update: Cold Steel DID replace the broken Recon Scout. No explanation or other paperwork was included with the replacement sent to my friend Bruce. They were fully aware how the breakage occurred. Good to see they stand by their knives. Thanks for the posts to this ongoing saga of a thread... Nutnfancy out.
Click to expand...

Great end to the story! :D

This all boils down to:
1. There can always be a blade that slips thru QC or is tempered too hard.
2. Test your gear before you depend on it!

I learned a lot from this thread, as tedious as it was... :p
 
He's a great guy with consderable expertise, and he says: "hammering the blade with a wooden baton can be taken without any extra care." He distinguishes batoning with wood vs. prying. Now this may be a language problem, but it seems you have misunderstood what he says pretty clearly. Note his conclusion on why it failed - not batoning per se.
 
Nutnfancy said:
As promised, here's the update: Cold Steel DID replace the broken Recon Scout. No explanation or other paperwork was included with the replacement sent to my friend Bruce. They were fully aware how the breakage occurred. Good to see they stand by their knives. Thanks for the posts to this ongoing saga of a thread... Nutnfancy out.
Click to expand...


Well thats good to hear. After all it was a new knife still under warranty I wouldn't settle for anything less. I only hope that if my early 80s TM ever breaks they would also replace it, i'll have to wait if and when that ever happens...
 
Nutnfancy said:
...Cold Steel DID replace the broken Recon Scout.... Good to see they stand by their knives. ...
Click to expand...
YES, YES, YES! I love it when things work out.

This reflects a similar experience with a 4" voyager of mine.

I was a young, eager Marine and new to knives. I didn't understand the limits of zytel handles. The knife wasn't "really" broke, but I had lost confidence in the knife due to VERY heavy use in a wargame. (USMC CAX, btw I was in a support role; no hand to hand;) ) I feared I over stressed the lock and it had developed "flex"

Afterwards, I only used it for light jobs before I realized THAT DEFEATED THE PURPOSE OF HAVING THE THING IN THE FIRST PLACE!

So I sent it in.

A month later a brand new one shows up. Once it was broken in, I learned there was nothing wrong with the first one. Zytel flexes rather than bends. :rolleyes:

Been buying Cold Steel ever since, and will continue for the foreseeable future. They proved their loyalty to me so I will be loyal to them.

Their warranty may be on the thin side, but they deliver when it counts. I've always preferred to be promised small and delivered big than the other way around. (As can happen with electronics.)

Besides I’ve never trusted warrantees. Who needs a perfect warranty on an imperfect product.

Sorry for not posting this earlier as it may have been relevant to the arguments but I didn't want to enlarge an already heated topic.

Oh, and thanks for not forgetting about us poor souls waiting for an answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top