Fighting Knife Testing and Reviews ??????

[Darrel Ralph]

Steve got the question!!!!!!
Thanks Steve.
any other want to add to this ..

Cliff what about the utiltiy knives and survival knives?

Donna the answers are comming .. Just have to pry them out.

Cliff how about a list. ???




------------------
Web Site At www.darrelralph.com

 

[sing]

Steve,

Yup, lot of bases covered in that list.

I also agree that if it is going to be a knife that one wants to rely on, then one has to go through a battery test to make sure that blade is worth the trust. The word of the blademaker, even when given with integrity, is not enough if it is to be a piece of equipment on which one's very life may well depend. The blade may be well made but it may not fit one's attributes.

And, this leads to the "grip." The search for a perfect or near perfect grip is the primarily what led me into the custom arena in the first place. Every time the blade is worked hard in practice and in testing the grip retention is tested as well. That seems a given to me.

Putting oil on it, well... the next time.

TowW, testing on flesh is in fact what Guacho/Mario does with his now almost famous "leg of lamb" routine. I love reading how a blade performs on that because I do think it gives an indication of a blade's capabilities. I would do the same for each blade I have but... I don't make Mario's salary...

In terms of testing of hard use knives, I think Cliff has set a "standard" of sorts. Not everyone is in agreement with his approach of (near) "destructive" testing but I for one have always found them interesting/informative.

sing

AKTI #A000356

 

[Darrel Ralph]

I agree that Cliff has set standards

We just need them in simple one step terms.

This way we can set the standard for hard use type knives..
Cliff?

------------------
Web Site At www.darrelralph.com

 

[Donna Barnas]

S=====

 

[Boriqua]

Steve Those are some strigent tests and definatly something a knifemaker making a knife that ones life might depend on whether as a survival tool or fighter should aim for.

A question?

How important is grip change ability ?? I hear different things. In my personal experience the ability to switch from foward to reverse is more important on a utility knife than on a fighter yet many people make it a criteria on a fighter which comprimises to some degree grip retention. Meaning if you design a knife that will absolutly lock up in your hand then that is what it will do and in my opinion should. Has anyone really been able to switch from foward to reverse at even half speed sparring. Without hearing that dreaded thunk as your knife or training tool hits the ground.

As far as the term "fighter."
Everything again comes back to your definitions and intended uses.

A street survival tool should
Lock up very securely with little concern for even the slightest manipulation. (read forfinger notch)My RJ martin is a good example but of course there are many more. The drop handle and finger groove lock it up and ease penetration and point manipulation. Street confrontation is quick, mostly about poking and usually very up close. I feel that sheath design for street defense tool is almost if not more important than the actual knife. It should be well concealed but out and used in a flash. There is no place for dancing. Decide, draw and go. I have watched people stabbed nearly to death with screwdrivers and one guy lost and was stabbed 14 times with an umbrella. It was messy.

For a militery type fighting knife. I feel a more neutral well balanced blade and straight handle may be the order.With a straight handle with no more than a palm swell or pommel flair you can hold the knife comfortably in almost any blade orientation yet you give up a little of the security and straight punching strength of a notched drop handle. Modern day militery is not running at one another with edged weapons ala Braveheart. But a troop may be called upon to sneak up behind someone and with a reverse grip stab down into his opponent from behind. or switch to edge backward toward you for a slash upward or again from behind. Try those grip options with a drop handle. Cant be done.

I can symathize with Darrels dilema since everyones requirements for fighter are different. And always will be! The very reason why different countries and different time periods have seen so many different renditions. Go to the Metropolitan here in NYC and you will see everything from poker type daggars to REALLY upswept blade slicers.

My requirements for my fighter are pretty much the same as for any knife I use on a regular basis hiking, camping, work or cooking. It should have a straight, comfortable yet secure handle so I can use it in a variety of grips. Having the blade edge up while I cut apart those chicken cutlets with slimy hands is a great test. Does it feel awkward or as good as blade down. It should have some belly for effective chopping, slashing and cutting movements and it should be durable enough to withstand impact and a certain amount of abuse. DOes that make it a fighter. I dont know. But it sure is something Id want in a fight. All of these things relate to a knife fight as well. All the things that make a knife a great field and kitchen knife also make it an outstanding fighter. Remember that many cultures "fighting tools" originated from there users. A fighter is defined by the practice and person behind it. It is why I liked Sing's review. He did NOT try it sparing.His style and philosphy might differ from mine. What he finds desirable or what he finds works for him in sparring may not work for me. His review was about the ability of a knife and certain of its attributes. He proved it had good penetrating ability,cut well, was strong and had a secure comfortable grip. Sing makes it a fighter by his use and practice. Im SOrry Darrel if I couldnt contribute in a more clear cut way but I dont know that there is a real answer for everyone. I dont know that I love the term fighter ?

This is my opinion, there are many more like it but this one is mine.


------------------
ALex

http://home.att.net./~a.boriqua



[This message has been edited by Boriqua (edited 07-08-2000).]

 

[Darrel Ralph]

Yes Alex
Thanks for the comments
The term fighter has many meanings.
Thats why I listed survival and others.
A good camp knife works well if its thin IMHO.

Please keep going all of these things are being soaked up.

Cliff anything on the heavy stuff?

------------------
Web Site At www.darrelralph.com

 

[Sal Glesser]

Very interesting thread. Testing for anything is always a difficult thing to do.

If you were going into physical confrontation with another animal, be it human or otherwise, wouldn't you want your "fighting knife" to perform as well as a "natural fighting knife" like the claw of a lion?

You would not expect your "claw" to break off. You would expect it to penetrate and sever upon contact regardless of the force applied. You would not expect to "drop it". You would expect that it would be "instant ready" and be able to apply it where ever you chose to. Strength, Control, Performance?

How would a test for this be created? Kind of like a "kata" that touches each question in execution.

IMO, if it don't cut, then it aint no good. No matter how beautiful the handle may be in form or material.

1st: edge - it is a knife, right? (material, geometry, form)

2nd: Strength (Don't matter how good it is if if breaks!)

3rd: Control (It has to do what you want it to).

I imagine these could be further broken down.

Donna, you opened up a barrel of snakes. And we thought testing for edge, corrosion & lock strength was difficult.

Just sharing thoughts.

sal

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Steve, excellent post.

[phonebook]

I have done this recently, and what I found was critical was the mass of the blade. With some very heavy knives like the Busse Battle Mistress, 18" AK khukuri, HI Bowie (massive thing), I could poke them through the phonebook.

The problem here is that the phonebook was on a table so it couldn't move. I was interested in the performance for utility reasons so it was representative for that. However for a fighting knife, wouldn't it be a better test if you hung the phonebook from some rope so it was allowed to move?

I forgot to measure the amount of force I was using on the stabs, mainly becuase I was just fooling around. But it seemed to me that it was a lot (vague I know), but I think I would have knocked someone back with the kind of hits. How much force would this require anyway? 50 lbs? 100 lbs? 150 lbs?

The strike by the way, was just bicep, no shoulder, forearm raised and then extended. Details can be found in the WB review.

Edge Durability :

How much force is realistic here? Is this a full force cut? Concerning the 50% statistic, is this supposed to be regarding the area of the blade that makes the impact? I have not done this but will give it a shot if I can locate some chain - but off the top of my head any area that makes contact will not cut much of anything.

The problem is that while you can easily pound a decent knife through soft metal, if the blade encounters a lateral force while in the middle of the cut, it can take significant damage, as it does not have nearly the same bending or impact resistance as it does to compression (which is insanely high). These lateral forces will arise during strikes as the medium and the blade will be in motion.

I just checked, I don't have any chain, but how about some 1 mm thick, 1" dimeter copper pipe?

The grip tests I have done. I haven't had any body hit the blades, but have done very hard hits with them in various orientations with no problems. As for the oiling, there are few blades when oiled that I can hang on to. Unless they have either very prominent guards (Busse) or have a very aggressive grip surface (Reeves). The guards are a stop gap measure as the blade will still move around, forward and back and even rotate.

I would think that for a fighting knife I would want security over comfort. Not so low ergonomic wise that it would hinder control, but wouldn't you rather a little redness after use instead of a slip? How long is a knife fight going to last anyway? I have done chopping sessions multiple hours long so ergonomics are very critical, but isn't a fight going to be a minutes affair? I would want a very aggressive checkering.

Sing :

I think Cliff has set a "standard" of sorts.

This was never my intention. I would like to see a standard developed but I don't want to be the one that writes it. The primary goal of posting my reviews is to generate discussion, not dictate a point of view.

One general comment about fighting knives, aren't there more than one type? I have seen makers offer very slim blades as fighters that would break apart on some of the things that Steve suggested, but I think that these blades are for a very different type of combat. Certaintly not a knife vs knife type of thing, and they seems to be intended to go around things rather than through them.

Is this realistic or even sensible or should all fighting blades be able to take really heavy stresses?


-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 07-09-2000).]

 

[sing]

Cliff,

I said a "standard of sorts" because you approach the test systematically with your uses/needs in mind and make comparisons of the knife tested to others to provide context. Is it a "universal" standard? No. That may not be achievable because of differences in needs and uses.

>>Is this realistic or even sensible or should all fighting blades be able to take really heavy stresses? <<

Depends on the type of blade and the user's preferences/skills. Personally, I think when a blade gets to be 12" and over it should be able to take more stress because at that point it is getting to a length where it is expected to perform defensive as well as attack or counterattack measures. By "defensive" I mean parrying another weapon be it a stick, blade, crowbar, etc. It has the length and leverage to make such maneuvers pragmatic. A smaller knife has the possiblity of accomplishing this but it is really not pragmatic for most people of average skills, certainly not for me.

The defensive manuevers with a smaller blade would most certainly incorporate mostly movement and angling of the defender than reliance on blocking or parrying with a bigger blade.

I guess I would generalize a bigger big blade as being designed (or should be designed) with weapon vs weapon encounters in mind, such as knife fighting knife. Smaller blades would be more suited to "fighting with a knife." Some overlap but differences in requirements emerge.

Again, I think the user's preferences and skills really affect what s/he wants in a blade and thus the difficulty in setting an universal standard.

sing

AKTI #A000356

[This message has been edited by sing (edited 07-09-2000).]

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Sing :

I guess I would generalize a bigger big blade as being designed (or should be designed) with weapon vs weapon encounters in mind, such as knife fighting knife. Smaller blades would be more suited to "fighting with a knife."

Yes, that is exactly the distinction I had in mind. Well written.

I think the user's preferences and skills really affect what s/he wants in a blade and thus the difficulty in setting an universal standard.

I don't think you should look at a set of tests as some blind method to pick the "best" knife just based on which gets the highest total score.

However if you quantify a blades performance over a broad range of tasks the reader can use their own knowledge to interpret the results and decide how the blades "rates" for them and thus pick the best blade. When setting up the tests it is obvious that some people will think some are not necessary, not functional, even abusive, etc., but that doesn't matter.

What is critical is that you hit all the points that people think are functional so they are not left wondering how it will perform in some necessary aspect. Now of course it is not possible to be 100% in that area. But you should be able to get really close as long as you are open to what is being done.


-Cliff

 

[BRAM]

as Sal said..If it doesn't cut..well whio needs it??..LOL
Ok Donna,,As for BATTLE TESTED? RANDALL stands out,,They have been used in every theater of combat..by service men from every department/division. Bo's #1-14-2-15 are specifically designed as he put it in simple terms to eliminate the enemy and save our soldiers lives..Randall knives have done that over and over again..
They have cut off limbs, heads, torsos etc..all in the heat of battle..They have cut through others knives..they have been and still are the standard to which others will be held..advertising crap aside no one comes close to that.
No my knife will do this, my knife can cut this..BATTLE TESTED??..RANDALL..PERIOD...
Not it did this hundreds of years ago,no ancent history ...real usage in modern times..
Thanks BO!!!

 

[Cougar Allen]

I've been thinking about the grip issue lately. My test is to use dish detergent with a little water and stab a pine 2x4 with all the grips I use, gradually working up to full power stabs. I tape cardboard over the edge first.

Trouble is that only proves the handle is good enough for me. I have a grip that can crush coal into diamonds and I suspect many knifemakers do too; knifemaking exercises the grip. Just about any handle works for me, for a short period (my hand does get tired rapidly when I do full power stabs with a guardless puukko, but not too fast for a fight).

There are two basically different ways to make a handle -- either shape (guard, subhilt, or more subtle shapes, but depending on shape rather than texture) or texture -- checkering, leather, cordwrap, etc. You can combine the two principles in one handle.

If you use a military hammer grip style a shape handle works fine -- a guard, a forefinger groove, even a guard and a subhilt works fine if you take a hammer grip and stick to it throughout. Shape handles usually limit the grips you can use, though. Some handles don't work at all in an edge-up grip. It's not just a matter of comfort. I don't care about comfort for fighting; it won't hurt me to take an uncomfortable grip for a few seconds -- if I can hold onto the knife.

A plain straight handle with a leather thong wrap or some kinds of cordwrap is very secure (for me anyway) in all the grips. My current favorite has a leather thong wrap handle, thicker at the spine side than the edge side, and only a speedbump guard. That works for me, but some of the women I teach don't have a grip that can crush coal into diamonds and they don't feel secure with it. They're as much concerned about the possibility of the knife being torn from their hands as about thrusting.

Lately I'm thinking the ideal might be a plain straight or barrel-shaped handle with leather or cord wrap (or checkering or some kind of texturing, stippling, whatever) with a fairly large guard and either a fairly large pommel or a taper so the handle is wider and thicker at the pommel than at the guard.

Indexing is an issue in two different ways. If the handle is symmetrical you can't tell edge from spine. I think that matters mostly for neck knives; they get twisted sometimes. Another sense of indexing, though ... if the handle is round, even though you may know where the edge is because you know which way you drew it -- you only know approximately which way the edge is oriented. Try closing your eyes and drawing a round handled knife and chopping at a piece of wood or a cardboard box and you'll see what I mean -- you won't hit it square on.

I want a knife to be strong enough to take inaccurate full power stabs at pine without breaking and I want to be able to stir it around vigorously inside the attacker without worrying about it breaking. I don't think strength is much of a problem except with folders and with some fixed blades that don't have a full tang.

If you try sticking a knife into meat and stirring it around at random and with vigor you might be surprised at how well you can rip through meat with the spine -- even with no false edge or swedge at all -- and even with the flat.

-Cougar :{)

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Cougar, as for grip security being dependent on strength, well of course, but all aspects of blade performance are dependent in the same manner. As long as you reference to a baseline people can still interpret your comments. Now if your baseline is that all blades are secure, well then people will know to ignore that aspect of commentary from you.

Hopefully once a set of tests becomes more accepted more people will start doing them. Once this happens the total set of info can be used and not just one persons result. So basically if you wanted to know how secure the XXX fighter was you could look up the comments from say a dozen or so people doing similar things and from that body of work draw a conclusion.

Of course the more you post the more people will be able to get a feel for your abilities and thus know what parts of your review are relevant to them and what parts they can ignore as your physical abilities are far too different. For example, Will Kwan likes to chop with his large Salyan, and the 20+" AK, he is then not someone you would want to comment on how heavy or slow a blade is as his reference is going to be 4-6 lbs khukuris. Not exactly a common one.

I want a knife to be strong enough to take inaccurate full power stabs at pine without breaking and I want to be able to stir it around vigorously inside the attacker without worrying about it breaking.

The second is not much of a problem and should be possible even for small knives. However the first would require a pretty thick knife and point. There are a lot of fighters that I would break the points of at wood stabs where the line of force was inline with the thrust let alone when it was not. As an example :

http://www.robertsoncustomcutlery.com/nealneck.htm

I don't imagine this would fare well in the point vs steel plate that steve described either. I think that this sort of falls into the second type that Sing described. The Busse Badger Attack would probably fare exceptionally well though.

-Cliff

[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 07-10-2000).]

 

[straightblastpfs]

Interesting subject Donna, glad to see Darrel and Cliff and many others adding to it.

I have used several different knives on animals, some where I wanted, others where I had to. Blood is a substance unlike just about anything else you can play with. Go to your nearest butcher, get some raw meat and play with it. Careful when you grease up many of the micarta and G10 handles and then stab the knife into something.

Although any knife will fit the category of "fighter" if it is the only knife you have and you must fight with it, I prefer to carry a fixed blade with a very strong and sharp tip, with at least a portion of the top edge sharpened, thus giving two cutting edges on the same knife. Unlike many, I prefer a shorter knife 4-7" blade, as opposed to the very long knives, as I have found them harder to disarm and more concealable...both when sheathed and not. There is a good argument that short blades cannot or will not reach vitals, but to me, my #1 priority is a fast, light, blade as I train to "defang the snake" as opposed to stab it into submission. Personal taste, really.

Finally, training, training, training. The fighter, in my opinion, makes the fighting knife. Give a slow, untrained, unfocused attacker whatever knife you want, and put him against someone who uses his / her smaller knife with expertise. My money will be on the lesser of blades every time

Oh, and all the talk about disarming a man with a knife? Give me a good pair of track shoes instead, please.

Great topic, thanks.

Bruce

 

[Brian_Turner]

The only thing I was going to add to Steve's lists was to reverse the direction of the oil test to check grip while stabbing, but Cougar Allen added that!

In response to Cougar's comments about grip, though, I can only say that with an improperly designed handle, even your coal crushing grip will fail if the contouring does not offer purchase. Just like a car with a huge engine is hobbled by poor tires, a grip that does not offer contact with the appropriate points of one's hand will be ineffective regardless of the user's strength.

------------------
AKTI Member #A000832

"Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes, the bear eats you."

 

[Samurai6]

Not doing the grip stability test in the thrusting direction was an oversight. I would definately do that.

Cliff:

Re the phonebook penetration test:
I would not test a 4" folding fighter next to a 10" bowie. All the tests I do are subjective and relative. I like to test two similar knives, and if one is better, try to figure out why. This allows one to make general observations about what attributes make a tip penetrate better. I am not really interested in an absolute rating system where you could measure performance and say the HI Kukri was a better penetrator than a Sebenza. You want isolate the attribute you are testing so that you can apply those observations to 4" fighters, 7" fighters, or 27" swords because people use all different sized weapons based on environment and personal preference.

Re edge durability:
This was the area where I had the most doubts myself about the test I suggested. In the martial arts, you do a lot of blocking, passing, and parying, and the force used is generally nothing like taking an all out swing at an achored target. Even so, I wonder how many blades are being made today that could undergo such impact and still be decently sharp. I will have to give that one some thought.

Re handle stability:
Yes, I would definately make stability a higher priority than comfort in a fighter, though again, a maker should look to acheive as good a compromise as possible.

All:

In prioritizing stability versus mobility, as in grip changes. I believe it is possible to acheive both. I find that handles with flat sides are easier to twirl or flip than those with heaviliy contoured sides. Incidentally, that means that some big folders have what I consider excellent fighter grips. The large Apogee is a good example, and the Sifu is excellent in both stability and in control during transitions.

The bottom line is that I don't think any sort of absolute, or measurable tests would be useful, or maybe they would be, but I just don't like the idea of them. There are a million different knife buyers, practicing different fighting systems, with different personal preferences, and every knife maker's imagination will find a different solution to each person's needs. I think it only useful to define what should be expected of a fighter so that a maker can design a knife to perform those tasks well, and as a mechanism for a knife maker to evolve his designs, a way of knowing if his recent change was an improvement or not.

In the final analysis, a warrior uses whatever he can find in his environment as a weapon, and should be able to use any knife to his advantage as long as he remembers its limitations. The purpose of testing a fighting knife design is to push those limitations.

 

[Cougar Allen]

I brace the pommel against my palm in saber and dagger grips. I use a simple hammer grip with some knives; with others I hook my little finger behind the pommel. I often don't use a thumb brace in reverse grip.

I select knives before I test them, before I even buy them, so I can't say every handle is secure enough for me or every blade is strong enough. Particularly with blades -- I prefer carbon steel and I avoid buying blades that look weak to me. A puukko blade 1/8" (3.2mm) thick and 4" (10cm) long is strong enough -- in carbon steel not tempered too hard. As you know a puukko grind leaves a lot of the blade at full thickness, and even that design might not be strong enough in a hard-tempered stainless.

I'm afraid I might be giving the impression I think all knives are equally good fighters -- not true at all. There's a big difference in ergonomics for the moves I use and teach and I haven't even started to talk about that. I think I'll save that for another post.

-Cougar :{)

 

[sing]

Steve,

>>The bottom line is that I don't think any sort of absolute, or measurable tests would be useful, or maybe they would be, but I just don't like the idea of them. There are a million different knife buyers, practicing different fighting systems, with different personal preferences, and every knife maker's imagination will find a different solution to each person's needs.<<

That succinctly clarifies what I mean by "individual perferences."

For example, I do like flatter handles on small knives for transitions but don't care about that on bigger blades though someone mentioned that as an attribute they like. For me, I get a good grip on a big blade and it's staying there til the end.

I also agree about making comparisons between reasonably similar size knives. No point in a big bowie vs. A/F dagger.

sing

AKTI #A000356

[This message has been edited by sing (edited 07-11-2000).]

 

[Ivan]

As far as actual battlefield kills, I bet the Khukris win hands down. One incident in Italy in WWII proves this to me. Several Gurkhas were in a farmhouse studing some maps whne they heard noises down stairs. They picked up their Khukris(18'' ), went into the cellar, killed nine Germans and went back up to their maps! What a bunch of tough arriors WIth Tough killing knives. Everything comes in second to this knife!

 

[Samurai6]

The Filipino Bolo brigades and guerilla fighters did their share of combat testing during the Japanese occupation also. I've got a WWII era bolo that belonged to my wife's uncle, and a couple new ones made by the grandson of the blacksmith who made it. They are battle veterans, but nothing really unique, just truck springs turned into a streamlined machete.

A blade is a blade really. What they are designed to do is pretty simple. Modern materials and processes have only improved them. I don't think we've lost anything over the recent years in terms of fighting blade design.