Fallkniven destruction test!!!

me2 said:
Noss, is the edge on the Browning convex, or the entire grind? Dont worry about messing it up, since if it were ever used, it would look like that for long. AG Russells site says 1085 steel. Should work pretty well.
Click to expand...
Hey Me2; I'm not Noss, but it has a full convex grind. These knives kick ass; I have two of them. :thumbup:
Noss: Bro'...keep doing what you're doing. You've got my support, for whatever it's worth. I'm thinkin' of sending you monthly support payments. :D
 
Professor: Thanks

me2: Yes like Troop said it ha a full convex grind it starts at the spine and continues all the way to the edge. If you haven't seen the video on the browning site yet check it out. 1085 is a good tough steel it should do well.
http://www.browning.com/products/flash/knives.asp

tholiver: I have been looking at the Fallkniven Thor I'll have to wait a while on it because of the price. I am getting ready to test a Mora Clipper. I'm taking it out into the filed this week with the Browning. I'm going to work the Mora hard and see what I can do with it. If it comes back in one piece. I do plan to do a lightweight destruction test on it. No steel hammers just wood or plastic. All the field testing this time around will be on Video.

Troop: Glad to hear you like the Browning. I can't wait to get out there
and chop and split wood with it. No need to send monthly payments but thanks for the thought but I won't stop you if you do :D A few have donated some money and a few knives for testing. The Mora the Gerber LMFII the CS kukri Machete and CS SRK Carbon V were all donated for testing by a member of the knife community. All these test are coming up. Thanks bro :)
 
Noss you rock, can't wait to see what you report on the Browning - it's a beauty, but do I really NEED to replace my Kabar heavy bowie with it? Can't wait to hear what you find out.
 
Noss, you tested a Cold steel fixed blade (cheapie I believe) and it surprised a lot of people here as to how well it held up. I'd love to see you test a large fixed Dark Ops (that Paul Basil one would be Ideal) and maybe a D.O, folder as well. They are even more controversial than Cold Steel and I'd just love to see if they are as good as D.O. says or as bad as the haters say. You're the man for the job! How about it?
 
Shing said:
Ponitless.
Click to expand...

So I gather you think they aren't worth testing? Seems to me they are judged by most without a trial. It doesn't matter to me either way, but from the little I've seen that's not just hating them for the way they are advertised and what they are copied after, if I had to bet I'd say they'd take a lot before they failed. Could be wrong but i guess if people just say they are so bad with no real testing....well maybe that's what they want, to judge them with no testing. (the way I see it is anything made in the USA is worth testing, if for no other reason it gives jobs to Americans and there's just so many brand name knives made offshore these days)
 
noss4 said:
Nimravus Nut: Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed the test and benefited from it.

T.K.C. If you want scientific tests then I suggest you do them yourself.


SpookyPistolero: There is a purpose for what I do to the knives in my tests. I have debated this long ago. And don't worry it was not your knife destroyed in the test.

And by the way car manufacturers crash test cars on purpose to see how they will perform in an accident. I basically do the same thing minus the million of dollars of testing equipment. I stress and push the blades to failure. Yes I destroy the knives this is why it is called a destruction test.

My tests don't declare the best knife just the toughest knife. If you want to find out how tough a knife is then you have to take it outside and beat on it. you have to push the blade until it gives. There is no other way. If this takes place in your garage or in a test lab somewhere the goal is the same.

I fail to see why some of you can not see this. It's really very simple.
Click to expand...

let me ask you what you mean by "tough"?

If the strongest knife in existence still fails your tests...then whats the point? You dont have a control, you have no standard of what "tough" really is. at the end of the day all you have is a subjective " I think this knife is/isn't tough".

If all we are after is an opinion of toughness then its realy no different than looking at the spec sheet and saying "this knife is made of ___ inch thick ____. it must/cant be a tough knife".
 
fishface5: If the k-bar is serving you well then you probably don't need to upgrade if the browning is an upgrade. I know how it is though I'm always looking for a better knife to try out. It's hard for me to stick to one knife. There are so many out there and new ones are always coming out. This is what keeps me broke. :D

jill jackson: Way ahead of you I plan to order a dark ops the 20th of this month for a test. I'm going to test the Raven. The Paul Basil design has a saw on the back. This will weaken even the best design and steels. I try to look for the most solid design for a destruction test.

mr.trooper When I first started I had no clear definition of what a tough knife was and I'm sure not many did either. Destruction testing was never put in front of everyone to see. If the manufactures did it, it was usually behind closed doors. The K-Bar heavy bowie was the first one I tested. Only after I have tested more blades and witnessed first hand what a knife could endure compared to another. I was able to form a definition of what tough meant. I put most of the blades through the same regiment of tests. I use methods that get the point across to the viewer that a knife is tough or not. Yes a hammer is destructive to a knife yes chopping concrete is destructive to a knife but this is the whole point of using these methods to see if a knife is tough or not. All the knifes fail in the end because I don't stop until they do. Just because the knife breaks at the end does not mean it is not tough. If it is able to endure through a 1hr or 90 minute torture test then yes it is tough because these is the amount of time the toughest have lasted I don't make a claim it is tough I show everyone it is tough or not. Everyone my have different standards and view the tests differently depending on what they are looking for or how they interpret what they are seeing.

A knife should be able to take solid metal impacts for a given time because on
many of the knives I have tested they have been able to do so with out failure. A knife should be able to decimate concrete without chipping or breaking because many I have tested have done so with out failure. A tough knife should be able to sever steel while being hammered because some I have tested have been able to do so without failure. This is based on the knives I have tested and the methods I use.

If every knife I tested broke on the concrete then I would say it is not possible for a knife to perform this task. If every knife broke on the first few hammer impacts then I would say this is not possible for and knife to be able to endure. If this was the case on every knife I would not do these tests but
this is not the case. This is not me just saying this. Everyone can see this for themselves. This is why I believe in video taping everything I do.

I have a rating system on the site because many requested I do so. I have a disclaimer about the ratings on the site.

I don't get in an uproar about what knife is far superior to another on the site
I let the viewers make the call. I do the tests. Video tape it and put it out there for all to see. What everyone does with it is up to them.

I hope this answers your question. :) If not I'll clarify it
 
noss4 said:
Professor: Thanks

me2: Yes like Troop said it ha a full convex grind it starts at the spine and continues all the way to the edge. If you haven't seen the video on the browning site yet check it out. 1085 is a good tough steel it should do well.
http://www.browning.com/products/flash/knives.asp

[:)
Click to expand...

Noss, thanks very much for posting this link! I was wondering about that knife and his video helps me a lot in my decision.:thumbup:
 
mmmotorcycle: No problem..Hardhart posted it in the testing forum last month. This got me interested in the knife and it had an affordable price.
 
mr.trooper: I need to clarify the statement I made in my quote you posted. I don't declare the toughest knife in the world just the toughest knife
I tested so far. I updated this on the web page so people don't get the wrong idea.
 
mr.trooper said:
If the strongest knife in existence still fails your tests...then whats the point? You dont have a control, you have no standard of what "tough" really is. at the end of the day all you have is a subjective " I think this knife is/isn't tough".
Click to expand...

Why would there be a control? Or a standard?

Noss conducts destruction tests, not controlled comparison tests. There is no "Noss4 Institute of Knives" certifying knives for toughness. He destroys a knife to see its strength, very simply. What you will not get is a "pass" or a "fail", or "this is the knife to buy".

What you DO get from his tests, though, is "what breaks first", "what breaks second", "don't do this with that knife, it could possibly be a weak point", and the overall sense of the abuse the knives can take before failure, AS DETERMINED BY YOURSELF after watching the videos.

This may be more or less useful to people depending on their needs, but the beauty is that FULL VIDEOS are posted so that you can decide for yourself. If you think that is somehow completely useless to everyone, then you are beyond help.
 
noss4 said:
fishface5: If the k-bar is serving you well then you probably don't need to upgrade if the browning is an upgrade. I know how it is though I'm always looking for a better knife to try out. It's hard for me to stick to one knife. There are so many out there and new ones are always coming out. This is what keeps me broke. :D

jill jackson: Way ahead of you I plan to order a dark ops the 20th of this month for a test. I'm going to test the Raven. The Paul Basil design has a saw on the back. This will weaken even the best design and steels. I try to look for the most solid design for a destruction test.

mr.trooper When I first started I had no clear definition of what a tough knife was and I'm sure not many did either. Destruction testing was never put in front of everyone to see. If the manufactures did it, it was usually behind closed doors. The K-Bar heavy bowie was the first one I tested. Only after I have tested more blades and witnessed first hand what a knife could endure compared to another. I was able to form a definition of what tough meant. I put most of the blades through the same regiment of tests. I use methods that get the point across to the viewer that a knife is tough or not. Yes a hammer is destructive to a knife yes chopping concrete is destructive to a knife but this is the whole point of using these methods to see if a knife is tough or not. All the knifes fail in the end because I don't stop until they do. Just because the knife breaks at the end does not mean it is not tough. If it is able to endure through a 1hr or 90 minute torture test then yes it is tough because these is the amount of time the toughest have lasted I don't make a claim it is tough I show everyone it is tough or not. Everyone my have different standards and view the tests differently depending on what they are looking for or how they interpret what they are seeing.

A knife should be able to take solid metal impacts for a given time because on
many of the knives I have tested they have been able to do so with out failure. A knife should be able to decimate concrete without chipping or breaking because many I have tested have done so with out failure. A tough knife should be able to sever steel while being hammered because some I have tested have been able to do so without failure. This is based on the knives I have tested and the methods I use.

If every knife I tested broke on the concrete then I would say it is not possible for a knife to perform this task. If every knife broke on the first few hammer impacts then I would say this is not possible for and knife to be able to endure. If this was the case on every knife I would not do these tests but
this is not the case. This is not me just saying this. Everyone can see this for themselves. This is why I believe in video taping everything I do.

I have a rating system on the site because many requested I do so. I have a disclaimer about the ratings on the site.

I don't get in an uproar about what knife is far superior to another on the site
I let the viewers make the call. I do the tests. Video tape it and put it out there for all to see. What everyone does with it is up to them.

I hope this answers your question. :) If not I'll clarify it
Click to expand...

ok. i think i understand a little better what your trying to accomplish.

About your rating system...Do you think your data is concrete enough to make a fair comparison between various knives, or did you just add it to satisfy your users?

And have you ever tested the same knife twice?

znode said:
Why would there be a control? Or a standard?

Noss conducts destruction tests, not controlled comparison tests. There is no "Noss4 Institute of Knives" certifying knives for toughness. He destroys a knife to see its strength, very simply. What you will not get is a "pass" or a "fail", or "this is the knife to buy".

What you DO get from his tests, though, is "what breaks first", "what breaks second", "don't do this with that knife, it could possibly be a weak point", and the overall sense of the abuse the knives can take before failure, AS DETERMINED BY YOURSELF after watching the videos.

This may be more or less useful to people depending on their needs, but the beauty is that FULL VIDEOS are posted so that you can decide for yourself. If you think that is somehow completely useless to everyone, then you are beyond help.
Click to expand...

i think you misunderstand me. Im not trying to get anyone to tell me what the toughest knife is. The reason you need some sort of a standard is because without one everything is subjective. If everything is subjective you cant take any real data from it.

You don't have to declare the "toughest knife in the universe" or anything but i think you DO need to have a "toughest knife so far", even if that knife broke. another option would be to average the ratings for the top 5, or whatever, toughest knives so far. That way you have SOMETHING stable to compare the results of a knife in question to. If a knifes rating is in ____ range then its above average, it its below ____ then its below average ect.
 
mr.trooper said:
ok. i think i understand a little better what your trying to accomplish.

About your rating system...Do you think your data is concrete enough to make a fair comparison between various knives, or did you just add it to satisfy your users?

And have you ever tested the same knife twice?



i think you misunderstand me. Im not trying to get anyone to tell me what the toughest knife is. The reason you need some sort of a standard is because without one everything is subjective. If everything is subjective you cant take any real data from it.

You don't have to declare the "toughest knife in the universe" or anything but i think you DO need to have a "toughest knife so far", even if that knife broke. another option would be to average the ratings for the top 5, or whatever, toughest knives so far. That way you have SOMETHING stable to compare the results of a knife in question to. If a knifes rating is in ____ range then its above average, it its below ____ then its below average ect.
Click to expand...


Like a post mentioned earlier, Noss is not running a laboratory, he is doing these tests in his shop. There is no fancy laser meters and CNC machines, just simple tests to see what you will expect from a knife if pushed to its limits.

Every test is subjective, even in a controlled laboratory, individual tests have variables.

Are you paying for the knives? These tests are for you to draw your own conclusions. Accumulate the information and decide for yourself what you will spend on next. Better yet, buy the knives you like (two of each) and send them to a gov't certified controlled laboratory to test them for you (oh yeah, it would cost a "s#!t" load of money).
 
mr.trooper: People emailed me and said they would like to see it narrowed down a little. I'm doing more and more knives and the site is getting crowded so I think a rating system is good idea for those who come to the site and don't want to watch 80 plus 10 minute videos.

I feel the tests have become consistent enough for a rating system. The one thing with knives is there are so many variables to consider. I perform many different tests to show toughness on one single knife. There is no way to bullet proof it. The ratings should be looked at as a quick guide to narrow down the tests on the site. I state this under the about ratings page.

I have an outlined a testing procedure on the site and do my best to follow it. Depending on how far a knife gets and how well it can perform some of the basic tests before the destruction parts begin. I give it a rating of 1 to five Some things I do differently because it is a different knife and I want to test different things with it.

Is there room for improvement ? Yes
Is it ever going to be perfect ? No

I have not yet tested the same knife twice. I have nothing against this and it would be all the better to test more of the same knife.

Like I said. I leave it up to the public to make the final call. I don't tell people to buy the knife or not buy the knife anywhere on the site.
 
noss4 said:
Nimravus Nut: Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed the test and benefited from it.

T.K.C. If you want scientific tests then I suggest you do them yourself.


SpookyPistolero: There is a purpose for what I do to the knives in my tests. I have debated this long ago. And don't worry it was not your knife destroyed in the test.

And by the way car manufacturers crash test cars on purpose to see how they will perform in an accident. I basically do the same thing minus the million of dollars of testing equipment. I stress and push the blades to failure. Yes I destroy the knives this is why it is called a destruction test.

My tests don't declare the best knife just the toughest knife. If you want to find out how tough a knife is then you have to take it outside and beat on it. you have to push the blade until it gives. There is no other way. If this takes place in your garage or in a test lab somewhere the goal is the same.

I fail to see why some of you can not see this. It's really very simple.
Click to expand...

Most manufacturers do failure mode testing of their knives. I have some of the results of tests done by Imperial Schrade. In one of those particular tests they were comparing the LB-7 knife to the Buck 110 and several others for lock integrety. Not for advertising puropses but to insure the integrety of their own designs and processes for the best end product. There are even machines made that lock and unlock knives counting the cycles until the lock is so worn the lock or joint fails. Rockwell testing is in a small way destructive testing since the blade is dimpled in the process.

And what do the Bladesmith societies do to the knives their applicants work so hard to produce? They destroy them in testing.

I didn't read every post in this thread, so if I am repeating previous posts, my apologies. My opinion on this matter is worth exactly what you paid for it. Zip.

Codger
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top