Fair Tests of Folders

Lycosa said:
Years ago, Ken Warner stated that knife testing has gone too far. That was years ago and it's crazier now.
The only test my knife has to pass is cutting things. So far, not one of my knives have failed me.
rolf
Click to expand...

I remember that.

Both the knife testing and the knives have become crazy and slanted for the Walter Mitty commando fantasies. Somehow generations of farmers, ranchers, sailors and factory workers got by very well with no locks at all, just plain old slip joints. I guess common sense has been left by the wayside.
 
DocT said:
We had a small ranch and we used our knives necessarily hard. Yes, a fixed blade will usually be better, but they are almost never as portable. On a ranch, often a job will present itself that is unlooked for and the only tool you have with you is a folding knife. An expensive register Black Angus show cow stuck in the lake, wrapped in bailing wire, stuck on a fence from trying to jump it, or your self being dragged by a horse, or opening bails, and any one of a lot of things make unexpected demands on people and knives. I, for one, am glad to see these types of tests, and more (though they do serve to show what I already knew...friends don't let friends buy liner locks for work).
I expect a knife to cut. Rope, wood, cardboard, apples, pumpkins, skinning, filleting, and such tests are better.
Click to expand...

I was delighted to see your post. Yes, this is what many of us are looking for.
I prefer frame locks, but in your position, I might consider a back-lock or axis-lock...as they seem to be a stronger locking system than many other types.
I do think that you can carry a fixed blade pretty easily, although a clipped folder is a great idea. For a folder, perhaps you might consider the Spyderco TUFF, designed as a "folding fixed blade" in CPM-3V or the Benchmade Adamas manual folder in D2, model 0275. I've had several of each, although I'm a casual user.
And the pic below shows my favorite way of carrying a fixed blade...


 
Perception of what we have is better and something else is inferior ties into the
justification for what we have bought.

A good written review giving a users opinion after he has used the knife for some time is all I am interested in.
 
marthinus said:
Perception of what we have is better and something else is inferior ties into the
justification for what we have bought.

A good written review giving a users opinion after he has used the knife for some time is all I am interested in.
Click to expand...

I feel the exact opposite in many ways. Users are far too easily influenced by myths, legends and personal bias. An experienced user is a decent resource, but objective data is king.
 
I've never watched a whole knife testing video in my life, nor will I. Have zero interest in them. I've watched vids about a certain knife, but not testing vids.
I've always stuck with brands/knives that have a pretty good track record, and have never felt the need to watch a test.
Didn't even realize so many did test until I joined this site.

I have held off on a couple of buys from what I've read here from members I trust.
 
Lycosa said:
Years ago, Ken Warner stated that knife testing has gone too far. That was years ago and it's crazier now.
The only test my knife has to pass is cutting things. So far, not one of my knives have failed me.
rolf
Click to expand...

This sums it up with crazy accuracy.....
 
If it feels good in my hand during use, cuts what I need to cut, and sharpens easily then in passes my tests.

Some of those "hard use" tests WERE fun to watch at some point, but now its just silly. Like said above it has gone too far. My Mora won't survive prying a dead bolted door open with the blade, so is it not a good knife?

Because of these tests I think the average knife thickness has increased over the years also. People expect to see a 4mm blade on knives now, and i really prefer the cutting ability of a much thinner blade.

I was brought up to use a knife appropriately. Protect your edge and choose another tool when the task requires it.
 
I watch these tests simply for entertainment, and it will never decide what knives i buy. Since I won't ever be doing that stupid crap they do in videos.

I've mentioned this before, my cheap $5 gift shop knife can cut just as well as my large sebenza. And it has massive blade play. Yet it never fails at work.
 
DocT said:
Locks that fail, like most liner locks, cause serious, and un-needful injury. I, for one, am glad to see these types of tests, and more (though they do serve to show what I already knew...friends don't let friends buy liner locks for work).
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion...as a "hard-user." We seem to have lots of lock-wars here, and that's okay...it helps to sort out the good from the bad. I would be interested to hear (or see pics?) of your liner-lock failures and what caused them. And perhaps, how those failures might have been prevented. Thanks.
 
I don't see a problem with tests that give some dynamic load to the lock, in addition to just static weight. I have a Spyderco lockback that could probably withstand a pretty hefty amount of weight before failing. However, it will pop unlocked if bumped suddenly. I don't mean a heavy spine whack, either. I can hold the handle with just my thumb and forefinger, hold it 6 inches above a table edge, and tap the spine down against the table, and it will unlock. I carried a Case Sharktooth on the farm for a couple years, and its lock also became unreliable with use. Have a custom liner lock that doesn't handle sudden loading, too. One time I was using it when a wasp started buzzing me. I took a quick swipe at it with the knife (and missed, of course :) ) and the blade folded up on my fingers. And it hit nothing but air.

A fixed blade doesn't have these shortcomings, and I carried several of them over the years, but I couldn't come up with a system that was as handy as a one handed folder, especially in winter. It takes a bit of extra time, and lots of extra care and attention to resheathe a fixed blade. I can't hardly even see the sheath on my belt when wearing winter clothing. Trying to blindly resheathe it while wearing gloves is a good way to stab yerself. But a one handed folder can be out, cut that baling twine (or whatever), and be back in my pocket in one fluid motion in less than 2 seconds, without having to look, which is especially helpful when ya need to keep your eyes on rambunctious steers.

I used up several knives until they were plumb wore out, and broke some, but ya know what finally ended even more of 'em? They got lost. A super strong lock, or new whiz bang steel, does absolutely nothing to help ya find that knife that was planted *somewhere* on the back 40, or trampled under straw and manure in the cattle shed. (That one was a fixed blade that I set down, because I couldn't safely resheathe it at the time, by the way.) When will someone come up with a homing device or somethin' to make knives loss-proof? That might prove to be an even more valuable contribution to the knife community than a new lock. :)
 
the possum said:
I don't see a problem with tests that give some dynamic load to the lock, in addition to just static weight. I have a Spyderco lockback that could probably withstand a pretty hefty amount of weight before failing. However, it will pop unlocked if bumped suddenly. I don't mean a heavy spine whack, either. I can hold the handle with just my thumb and forefinger, hold it 6 inches above a table edge, and tap the spine down against the table, and it will unlock. I carried a Case Sharktooth on the farm for a couple years, and its lock also became unreliable with use. Have a custom liner lock that doesn't handle sudden loading, too. One time I was using it when a wasp started buzzing me. I took a quick swipe at it with the knife (and missed, of course :) ) and the blade folded up on my fingers. And it hit nothing but air.

A fixed blade doesn't have these shortcomings, and I carried several of them over the years, but I couldn't come up with a system that was as handy as a one handed folder, especially in winter. It takes a bit of extra time, and lots of extra care and attention to resheathe a fixed blade. I can't hardly even see the sheath on my belt when wearing winter clothing. Trying to blindly resheathe it while wearing gloves is a good way to stab yerself. But a one handed folder can be out, cut that baling twine (or whatever), and be back in my pocket in one fluid motion in less than 2 seconds, without having to look, which is especially helpful when ya need to keep your eyes on rambunctious steers.

I used up several knives until they were plumb wore out, and broke some, but ya know what finally ended even more of 'em? They got lost. A super strong lock, or new whiz bang steel, does absolutely nothing to help ya find that knife that was planted *somewhere* on the back 40, or trampled under straw and manure in the cattle shed. (That one was a fixed blade that I set down, because I couldn't safely resheathe it at the time, by the way.) When will someone come up with a homing device or somethin' to make knives loss-proof? That might prove to be an even more valuable contribution to the knife community than a new lock. :)
Click to expand...

That's actually why I don't mind the zombie-knife trend. It's way easier for me to find toxic green than black when I put it down somewhere. ;)
 
A folding knife is simply a pre broken knife.

If you want strength get a fixed blade. For normal cutting tasks a folder is usually fine.

As for cutting tests, I like the way Jim Ankerson does and documents his, but I'm probably prejudiced because he tested one of mine.
 
I hate it when these kinds of threads show up and the same crowd go on how the slipjoint is king and no testing should be done on knives. Get with the times. I guess let's not test watches for water resistance or durability since all it has to do is keep time. Or guns, you know since they only need to shoot and not get dirty? Let's also not test safety features in a car since you know if you're doing it right like you guys say, you'll never get an accident. Yep let's not test load weight on cars, or any safety features in tools/machinery/equipment cause you should be doing it right. :rolleyes:

It's group think, elementary style thinking, emotion that usually make people say that about knives.
 
Oh yes they freakin do. Don't even try to deny it. Don't think you're some superior person because you use ol' tiny slipjoint and anybody who needs a locking folder is some inept fool. I have no respect at all for people who think like this.

Seat belts are a safety feature like a lock is. So to say it doesn't compare is ignorant at best and let's me know not to pay any attention to your future posts. Good day.
 
Seilu said:
Oh yes they freakin do. Don't even try to deny it. Don't think you're some superior person because you use ol' tiny slipjoint and anybody who needs a locking folder is some inept fool. I have no respect at all for people who think like this.

Seat belts are a safety feature like a lock is. So to say it doesn't compare is ignorant at best and let's me know not to pay any attention to your future posts. Good day.
Click to expand...

Actually....I don't generally use a slipjoint...I tend to carry a small fixed blade.

The problem with all of this is that people tend to test things to the extreme.....whilst their needs are so far from the extreme that it's not even funny.

Seatbelt testing is for safety indeed. However if you never drive over 10mph then how important is it to you to test your seatbelt at speeds going 200mph?

What we tend to see on the forums is someone testing a knife at 500mph.....and the proclaiming that it's no good....while no one has needs for their knife that extreme.

So we get people claiming that linerlocks are terrible and unsafe....whilst 99.9% of users don't need any locks at ALL in the use their knives are getting.

And testing watches for waterproofing...yeah sure...on some watches that could be usefull.....on others...not so much.

The problem isn't testing. The problem is FAIR testing. The slipjoint people tend to understand this......the tactical foldercrowd...often not so much.

Don't get me wrong...I work in software testing as a dayjob. I love testing, reading about testing, doing testing it's all good to me.

But as a test professional I've also learned that beforehand you need to set a Definition Of Done. A point where you decided "enough's enough" and any further testing really doesný help our goals.

There's some overlap in your examples sure. (Sorry about the previous post saying there wasn't ANY. It was late when I posted and I was very tired).

But as I said the problem is PROPER testing. Would you test a gentleman's watch to 300m depth? Or a normal car for 5000+ pounds load? A Pickup for 300mph speeds? Yet this is what's being done within the knife world.
 
LX_Emergency said:
Actually....I don't generally use a slipjoint...I tend to carry a small fixed blade.

The problem with all of this is that people tend to test things to the extreme.....whilst their needs are so far from the extreme that it's not even funny.

Seatbelt testing is for safety indeed. However if you never drive over 10mph then how important is it to you to test your seatbelt at speeds going 200mph?

What we tend to see on the forums is someone testing a knife at 500mph.....and the proclaiming that it's no good....while no one has needs for their knife that extreme.

So we get people claiming that linerlocks are terrible and unsafe....whilst 99.9% of users don't need any locks at ALL in the use their knives are getting.

And testing watches for waterproofing...yeah sure...on some watches that could be usefull.....on others...not so much.

The problem isn't testing. The problem is FAIR testing. The slipjoint people tend to understand this......the tactical foldercrowd...often not so much.

Don't get me wrong...I work in software testing as a dayjob. I love testing, reading about testing, doing testing it's all good to me.

But as a test professional I've also learned that beforehand you need to set a Definition Of Done. A point where you decided "enough's enough" and any further testing really doesný help our goals.

There's some overlap in your examples sure. (Sorry about the previous post saying there wasn't ANY. It was late when I posted and I was very tired).

But as I said the problem is PROPER testing. Would you test a gentleman's watch to 300m depth? Or a normal car for 5000+ pounds load? A Pickup for 300mph speeds? Yet this is what's being done within the knife world.
Click to expand...

Testing is fair if methodology is sound and equally applied. The conclusions people draw from those tests may be silly, unfair, etc., but to claim the testing is unfair is a bit silly. I can perform perfectly fair testing to see what knife works best as a spatula. If someone concludes that X knife is worthless because of my testing that's on them for extrapolating a conclusion the data doesn't support.

You bring up test examples, but you ignore that testing to failure is a very, very standard measure. Will you test a pickup at 300mph? No, but you'll test its top speed. Ditto with the depth a watch can withstand and the maximum load a car can take. That's kind of the only way we have to get comparative data. Do you really think anyone is going to be happy if you say, "Okay, guys, 250 cuts in a CATRA test is all we need, so once we get to that we're just going to stop."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top