Green Beret Destruction Test

Status
Not open for further replies.
noss4 said:
As far as I know I am the only one who does them publicly so I think the Dunce name was directed at me. I could be wrong. :D
Click to expand...

You are wrong. Starting with Cliff Stamp, I've noticed that there is some kind of a group of people out there who think it is somehow helpful to "test" a knife by pushing it way, WAY past all reasonable performance expectation. Everytime I stumble across those kind of reviews, I think, "Gee that's dumb."

If you're going to take comments like that personally, don't go around doing dumb things. :D
 
I appreciate the testing Noss does. Relevance of the testing he does is up to each person to decide for themselves. I would like to see an A-2 model tested though, my expectations would be it would do better.
 
kiahs said:
Actually, they do test vehicles to complete destruction. They even drive them into brick walls. That's where safety ratings come from. I can bet you that more than a few Rams have been destroyed in the testing process.
Click to expand...

They do this because there are performance guidelines set by the Federal government as to how well a vehicle is supposed to protect it's passengers in a crash. In other words, they're testing to see how well a vehicle behaves against an industry-recognized performance metric.

Are we claiming that the ability to pound a knife through sheet metal somehow became an industry-recognized performance metric? Are we claiming that knife manufacturers design knives with the idea that someone might want to beat on them with a steel mallet?

I don't think so.
 
The testing is a way for us to look at a knife and say, "Heres what it can take, and heres what it cant."

I really appreciate what noss does, and by no means think that its dumb, I actually find it quit entertaining!!:D

You dont hear the Busse guys going around and complaining, just cause the Fusion Battle mistress broke, well dont complain just cause the knife you like did not perform the way you wanted it to.


bulgron said:
You are wrong. Starting with Cliff Stamp, I've noticed that there is some kind of a group of people out there who think it is somehow helpful to "test" a knife by pushing it way, WAY past all reasonable performance expectation. Everytime I stumble across those kind of reviews, I think, "Gee that's dumb."

If you're going to take comments like that personally, don't go around doing dumb things. :D
Click to expand...
 
bulgron said:
Since I don't own a Green Beret knife, nor do have any desire to own one, I fail to see how I could "want" any particular result.

The testing methodology is stupid, period. It's like saying, "Gee, I drove this pickup truck into a brick wall and it was destroyed, so I guess it wasn't really built 'Ram tough.'"

Yep, that sure is helpful, yes it is.... (not)
Click to expand...

I can't help myself...I really dont' want to be looked at badly from any side here...but for sure, you CAN NOT know what a knife can do unless you take it to the limit...this is simply a fact. Much like your analogy...all car companies DO, IN FACT crash thier own vehicles, to see what kind of crash rating they will get...and then independent companies do the same tests all over again...so that they know if the company is full of it or not. I like to know that if I get T-boned by some drunk that my kids will be OK in the back seat...and I like to know that my knife can take a pounding...its just that simple. I would never treat my knives the way they are in the tests...I doubt anyone would. Its a TEST...and a good one I think.
 
Well, the mere fact that some knives (Busse's) survived the same test shows me something. I watched as Noss4 beat the living heck of the Busse Battle Mistress giving it handle strikes until I thought he was going to pass out from lack of oxygen kinda impressed me. Then I see a what is supposed to be a "high end" knife take two or three blows to its handle and break. And I love CRK Knives! But I mean heck, a good ole Buck Nighthawk is as tough as that and you can save yourself $200 or more.! I mean comm'on people, there's supposed to be reason we are paying the high prices for these knives,,like they're supposed to be better than the common production stuff! Ummmm, maybe not to everyone but it sure tells me something. If a knife can survive his test then I know it will never, and I mean never, let me down the way I use and abuse a knife.,,,VWB.
 
bulgron said:
BMW tests their vehicles to see if they can do what they were designed to do.

Are you claiming that the Green Beret was designed to pound through sheet metal, and be hit with a 3lb steel mallet? If so, I'd like to see the CRK literature that makes this claim. Please forward it to me.



You posted destruction tests in the Chris Reeve forum in the past? I don't see your user handle coming up anywhere on this forum except in this thread. And, while I'm not as frequent of a visitor to this forum as I am to others, it still seems that I would have noticed threads of this nature in the past, if they'd in fact appeared here.
Click to expand...

I put knives through many things they may or may not be designed for to test toughness and strength. Cutting rope is not a toughness and strength test. It just does not work.

If this was the first blade I tested I may agree with you but I have tested many now and I know what a tough knife is. I have many video tests to back up how I come to a decision.

I have posted almost every test in the testing forum you have been a member here long enough to know this.
 
I think the tests are helpful. However, the recent test doesn't not change my love for my Green Beret.
 
I would really like to see you test the A2 one piece models...they are my favorite of the CRK stuff.
 
bulgron said:
They do this because there are performance guidelines set by the Federal government as to how well a vehicle is supposed to protect it's passengers in a crash. In other words, they're testing to see how well a vehicle behaves against an industry-recognized performance metric.

Are we claiming that the ability to pound a knife through sheet metal somehow became an industry-recognized performance metric? Are we claiming that knife manufacturers design knives with the idea that someone might want to beat on them with a steel mallet?

I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Your forgetting something and if you watch some of the videos you will see many knives can be driven through sheet metal without failure. So this was withing the knives capabilities to do so. Many knives can be pounded with a 3 lb sledge for an hour without breaking.

There is no industry metric standard of what a tough knife is. At least that I have found. Cliff Stamp does not even have a guide line for what a tough knife is that I have seen on his site. If I'm wrong someone correct me. :)
 
bulgron said:
They do this because there are performance guidelines set by the Federal government as to how well a vehicle is supposed to protect it's passengers in a crash. In other words, they're testing to see how well a vehicle behaves against an industry-recognized performance metric.
Click to expand...

And some go beyond that. I don't believe hanging a truck upside down by a single bolt is a government standard, but Ford did this in one of their ads. I also don't believe that companies would skip these tests if they weren't required.

Are we claiming that the ability to pound a knife through sheet metal somehow became an industry-recognized performance metric? Are we claiming that knife manufacturers design knives with the idea that someone might want to beat on them with a steel mallet?
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming that. As I said, I like my knives thin. I don't go for the "toughest knife on the planet" marketing that some companies like to employ, as I have no need for a "tough" knife. I do however believe that when a company uses the "toughness" of their knives in their ad hype, people shouldn't whine when they are tested against other knives that are advertised similarly.

Back to your original analogy. If all car companies tested their vehicles to a government standard and stopped, we wouldn't see ads claiming "XXX cars rated higher than any other car in side-impact collisions" or "YYY trucks can carry a much heavier load than ZZZ trucks.
 
I think the tests are pretty useful. If a knife can survive most of these destruction tests then I know it will last me a lifetime of -hard- use including accidents like hitting rocks, dropping the knife etc.

Cars are put through extreme and abusive tests too, and not just crash tests. They put them through extreme stress-testing that simulate years of normal driving.
 
kiahs said:
And some go beyond that. I don't believe hanging a truck upside down by a single bolt is a government standard, but Ford did this in one of their ads. I also don't believe that companies would skip these tests if they weren't required.
Click to expand...

Well here we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'm pretty sure big business does safety testing only because it is mandated by big government. I'm also pretty sure that independent labs exist only because of big government's safety standards, and so they can make a buck by performing comparison testing.

As for hanging a truck upside down by a single bolt, I also think that's dumb (so at least I'm consistent :D ). What in the world do they expect to convince me as to drivability, usability and reliability of a truck just because it can be suspended in a way that never will be seen by me or anyone else in nature?


kiahs said:
I'm not claiming that. As I said, I like my knives thin. I don't go for the "toughest knife on the planet" marketing that some companies like to employ, as I have no need for a "tough" knife. I do however believe that when a company uses the "toughness" of their knives in their ad hype, people shouldn't whine when they are tested against other knives that are advertised similarly.
Click to expand...

Again, I absolutely fail to see how anyone wacking a knife with a steel mallet is going to do anything other than convince me that wacking a knife with a steel mallet is a bad idea. This is because I already know better than to wack a knife with a steel mallet, and I don't consider that particular test to be any indication of how durable the tool will be under normal wear and tear.
 
If I was going to take only 1 knife with me on a mission as maybe a Green Beret will do from time to time then I would want it to be the best knife for the job. Any questions in my mind about a knife would have to be answered before I would take it so I would be looking to independent testers to answer some of my questions.

I've used knives for years when i've been operational and the tasks have gone from digging shell-scrapes, dropping trees, prying open stuff, hammering stuff and yes even piercing sheet steel on occasion. If I took a knife purely on the manufacturers advert and it broke I would not only be pissed but without a knife as there aren't many shops selling knives in the desert or the Himalayan Kush.

I recommend knives to friends but I also advise looking online for reviews so they can select the best knife for them. Noss adds to the info out there and does tests that answer any nagging little doubts many people have to the levels of extreme use they may or may not use their knife for.

I say keep the testing going Noss, ignore those that can't be open minded about how a knife is tested.
 
noss4 said:
Your forgetting something and if you watch some of the videos you will see many knives can be driven through sheet metal without failure. So this was withing the knives capabilities to do so. Many knives can be pounded with a 3 lb sledge for an hour without breaking.
Click to expand...

Well ok then, if I ever decide to buy a knife for the purpose of repeatedly driving it through sheet metal, I'll be sure to watch your videos. :D
 
Oh and as for normal wear and tear bulgron, do you think Green Berets do normal jobs with normal tasks? This is a relatively high end knife not a 'normal' one, it should perform above the normal.
 
Ikarus said:
I think the tests are pretty useful. If a knife can survive most of these destruction tests then I know it will last me a lifetime of -hard- use including accidents like hitting rocks, dropping the knife etc.

Cars are put through extreme and abusive tests too, and not just crash tests. They put them through extreme stress-testing that simulate years of normal driving.
Click to expand...

This is correct. If I can put a knife through a very hard stress test. Doing things that most will never do but a few may do. If the knife comes out on top. The odds of failure are greatly reduced that I will ever break the knife under much less.

We all make mistakes with knives. Is the knife less prone to the human factor or do I have to baby it ? If I can do what I did to the Busse FFBM for example Then I will say with 99.999 percent confidence the knife will never fail under
mild use that I normally do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top