Knifetests.com Project 1 Destruction Test.

I don't think so--there is no joint of any kind between the blade and handle, it's all one piece. If this was a solid chunk of A2 pipe at 58 HRC, you could beat it all day and not break it. The blade was the weak spot, and would be at any hardness---though a few points higher and a different primary grind without serrations would, I still contend, be a tremendous step in the right direction. ;)
 
Grampa said:
There's a knife that's been used successfully in the real world, in real wars, for several generations.
Click to expand...
How would you know that kabar knife never failed US serviceman during the war, may be in exactly the same way? There was no internet back then to report it immediately, and when at war it's very unlikely you'll be in the mood to write up a report for bladeforums about blade failure even if you survive that failure event and the war. And I suspect you wouldn't expect same performance from standard issue knife vs. 400$ semi-custom that is promoted as "virtually indestructible".

Bors said:
Did the knife chop? Yes it did. Did it cut? Yes it did. Could you dig with it? Untested however, I suspect that it will dig as well as it chops that is it can but a there are better choices.
So does the knife live up to CRKs claims? In short I think it does.
Click to expand...
It didn't perform all that well on chopping and cutting. If it was promoted as mediocre blade may be you'd be right, but it's not promoted as such, nor it is priced as such. You wouldn't pay 400$ for a knife if the maker told you it'll chop so so, cut so co and probably will break under stress, would you?
As for the digging, well if you dig sand or other soft soil it's easy, try digging frozen soil, especially rocky one and you'll see how hard it is and how hard it can be on the blade to the point of breaking.

Anyway, I don't agree about that test being unscientific thus invalid. It's not scientific for sure, but in real world when U have to button your knife into the wood(for whatever reason) U will be doing the same, nothing scientific, just bang it to get the job done.
 
I want noss to test a Nkonka in 3v. I have one signe by Chris they are a limited run but 3V is tuff stuff and I would like to see how it fairs over the Project 1. It also does not have serrations which would take them out of the equation. Unfortunatley there are not many.
 
It didn't perform all that well on chopping and cutting. If it was promoted as mediocre blade may be you'd be right, but it's not promoted as such, nor it is priced as such. You wouldn't pay 400$ for a knife if the maker told you it'll chop so so, cut so co and probably will break under stress, would you?
As for the digging, well if you dig sand or other soft soil it's easy, try digging frozen soil, especially rocky one and you'll see how hard it is and how hard it can be on the blade to the point of breaking.
Click to expand...

The below quote is from CRKs web site regarding the Project 1.
It plainly says that the knife "is perfect for chopping, digging and cutting". with exception to the serrations it does not "specify" any material.

Now will it do what is claimed as I said yes it will according to how the below is written...

Is it as tough as what would be expected out of a $400 knife hell no. Is it's performance a disappointment, after all the raving over the years about CRKs knives well it's clearly a major disappointment.

Noss's tests are showing that you don't always get what you pay for.
Right know I would classify CRKs fixed blades as a very poor performing and clearly not worth even 20% of what's currently charged.





The Project I (spear point blade) was designed in conjunction with Sgt. Karl Lippard, USMC and author of The Warriors - United States Marines . The concept was to fulfill all the features which Sgt. Lippard felt were vital for a knife carried by a Marine. The 7.5 blade is perfect for chopping, digging and cutting, with sufficient weight up front for maximum strength and ideal balance. The wave serrations on the cutting edge are designed to cut easily through nylon cord or harness. The 2 cross guard has a night index which tells you by touch which direction the cutting edge is facing. The Project II has all the features of the Project I but has a traditional clip point blade.

The symmetrical leather sheath has a strap-and-snap closure that can be moved to accommodate left or right hand draw.
Click to expand...
 
Just by looking at the thickness of the GB and P1, I wouldn't have expected such an easy break. Also, using a rock to baton your knife to split wood or for some other hard use should definitly not break the knife, especially knives like these. I sharpened my GB a while back and tried to dig a little hole in some wood and the end of the tip snapped right off. I thought it may have been only due to my thinning of the blade, but now I believe the steel's brittleness played a part in that breakage. And I was doing light stabbs and digging in PARTICLE board, not solid wood with knots. $300.00 indeed.
 
Bors said:
The below quote is from CRKs web site regarding the Project 1.
It plainly says that the knife "is perfect for chopping, digging and cutting". with exception to the serrations it does not "specify" any material.

Now will it do what is claimed as I said yes it will according to how the below is written...

Is it as tough as what would be expected out of a $400 knife hell no. Is it's performance a disappointment, after all the raving over the years about CRKs knives well it's clearly a major disappointment.

Noss's tests are showing that you don't always get what you pay for.
Right know I would classify CRKs fixed blades as a very poor performing and clearly not worth even 20% of what's currently charged.
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
I just want answers!

I think maybe we'll never get them.

I hope CRK listens to this (critical) feedback and at least internally does something about it.

I'd hate to see them just ignore it and hope it will go away and just depend on there reputation to pull them through... It would be a shame, cause I really do want A GB.
 
I might as well chime in with my opinion on what should have been expected from the P1.

If CRK says a knife is "Perfect" for something I expect it not to suck at it. Even if the knife had not broke I would be very unimpressed with it due to its chopping.
 
It's all a matter of opinion. For CRK, it is his opinion that it's perfect for whatever he advertised it for.

I expected more from a CRK and from the price.

I don't understand the physics or whatever of the testing to comment accurately but what I can say is if all the knives are tested in almost the same way then it give a good relative comparison. It may not be real life but I'm certain that a Busse or Fallkniven is a better chopper, slicer, tougher, stronger and etc compared with a cold steel bushman for example.

(Thanks to these tests I know what to buy and what to avoid. Forget all the hype and the marketing and down to the nitty gritty)
 
I think everyone should grab pitchforks and torches and march over to CRK's doorstep and DEMAND that they turn over the beast who heat treated these knives this way! lol jk hope I don't get banned for that.
 
sirahren said:
I just want answers!

I think maybe we'll never get them.

I hope CRK listens to this (critical) feedback and at least internally does something about it.

I'd hate to see them just ignore it and hope it will go away and just depend on there reputation to pull them through... It would be a shame, cause I really do want A GB.
Click to expand...


CRK has at least in my mind taken a big hit with the two knives tested. I think if they want to continue to play in the fixed tough knife arena they clearly need to make some changes.
 
I'd still give Kudos to CRKfor replacing that knife for Noss. I'm not very sure how many makers would to that in this situation.
 
Gator97 said:
I'd still give Kudos to CRKfor replacing that knife for Noss. I'm not very sure how many makers would to that in this situation.
Click to expand...

Actually that is a pretty commn practice, for damage control if nothing else. Not saying its not a good thing.
 
I think Noss should do the same tests again to the replacement provided to him. He has been criticized for a lack of consistency in his testing methods -- it would be interesting to see if the replacement breaks in a similar fashion i.e. similar stress at the serration by the handle. Then again if it passed his tests with flying colors it could spark some further and very entertaining debate... Of course its easy for me to ask him to trash another very expensive knife :)

My thoughts on the test... I am no steel or knife expert by any stretch of the imagination. But I will say watching the video I was pretty shocked how easily it broke, especially since it wasn't the dread concrete block or steel pipe test. It is marketed as being very very tough and it came off very weak. I had been coveting one of the smaller reeves camp knives. I think I might stick with my love of Fallknivens given the results of the A1...
 
While I'm in no way an engineer, I do remember from several of my engineering classes the stressed placed on metal where there was a cut/hole, or in this case serrations. I was signifiantly impressed (enough to remember it 12 years later) watching a cool color graphic display of the forces exerted on a metal bar we bent with some machine. The locations that had previous holes had all of the force concentraded at that point, causing it to fracture much earlier then a bar without any holes.
Another example is the old British airliner of the 60s (the Comet?) that kept crashing for no reason. After several years they figured that the way the windows were cut (square, not round) concentrated the stresses and kept failing.
Anyway, that's why I have my Doug Ritter-grip with no serrations in my PSK, and carry the standard grip w/serrations as my EDC. :)
Official or scientific, not at all, just some of my thoughts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top