Knifetests.com-whats YOUR opinion

[Gator97]

Hopefully this isn't beating a dead horse, but is the purpose of a knife not to cut?

Yes, primary purpose is to cut, and I suspect, all of the forum members, no matter how naive they might seem to the enlightened ones here, understand that part.
However, if you believe that is the only purpose, did you ever ask yourself a question why make 1/4 or even 3/16 thick blades at all? Or have you ever complained to the makers of those knives why waste all the metal?
They(thick blades) clearly cut a lot worse compared to thinner ones. The best cutter I have so far is ~1mm thick custom knife made for me by Phil Wilson. It was an extra effort and money to thin it down, from I think 3/16 bar. If there was no difference I'd keep it at 3/16. Agree?

Or the Kukris for example? They are used as choppers, digging and gardening tools, pretty much anything. Nepalese were wrong all along?

Insipid as they may be, TGHM's reviewing "methodology" is clearly biased towards knives that are soft and resistant to prying and shock.

OMG!!! As you guys write this, one might think Noss is hiding that and you are the ones revealing the truth to the public Even though, he clearly outlines the testing procedure and goals. With quite large, red letters.

I don't think anyone would be surprised if Noss stabbed a 10v fillet knife into a car hood and the tip broke off.

I think he wrote the following straight for you, lemme quote knifetests.com: For some who don't seem to understand. The knives I test are heavy use work military,tactical,combat knives.
That might be a reason we haven't seen fillet knife destruction test by Noss
I suspect you never bothered to read that? If yes and you did, then well, Noss can make that distinction so far, and you can't
If you have never read that, then it'd be more appropriate to read the testers goals and procedures before criticizing them here, wouldn't you agree?

So I'll pose some questions to the Pro-Noss camp here - Is the ideal knifetests.com knife one that forsakes all other qualities for toughness?

The one that sacrifices other qualities for toughness. Except, the goal of his testing is exactly that, as stated, and there is very little time spent on edge holding on "normal" cutting, etc.. So, why do you have to ask that question anyway, when Noss says that, we all understand that...
Because you, like others here assume we're not smart enough to understand, were misguided?

Resistance to breaking from prying or being struck with hammers is very low on my list of qualities I prefer in a knife.

Which is why Noss tests are most likely useless for you. Which is absolutely fine. However, there are ~6 billion other people on the planet, few thousand on this forum, does everyone has to adhere to the same standards as you do? You might prefer fish to all other foods, so what, we all stick to that as well?

The argument that Noss is showing "how far the knives can be taken in a survival situation" doesn't hold up. ... Starting a fire, whittling, skinning game, are those tasks not more realistic in "survival situations"?

To make such a statement I assume you have survived all possible survival situations... I personally have no idea what might be a survival situation with a knife, and I don't claim to...

Noss assesses exactly the face value of what he's doing: the ability of a knife to be bent laterally, stabbed into sheet metal, and hit with hammers. Drawing inferences about the "quality" of a knife from those activities is fallacious.

? Dude, quality is what you are looking for in a given product for the intended or desired use. If he wants thick super tough knives, so be it. Why does he, or anyone else has to judge the knife(for which he paid his own money), or anything else for that matter, by your standards?

This is exactly the same logic religious zealots use to talk about wrong gods and wrong beliefs...

 

[Gator97]

Only if they were to rate the entire knife solely on its edge retention. I'm not certain that I have ever seen that done.

But I have seen some folks compare blade alloys solely on one type of performance. I have complained and argued about that in posts as well.

Funny, you never mention intended use of the knife. There is very little toughness left in those 65-67HRC Yanagibas, which based on your ratings would put them very low on the knife quality ratings, yet the price and demand for honyaki knives(the hardest of them all) is very high. And you're clearly warned that if you drop it, very likely it'll break, during sharpening on the stone if you press hard enough on the tip and the handle it might break, so you have to keep proper hand placement on the knife, etc...
There is no universal rating system for the knives. If you know one, I'd appreciate a link or reference to the source.

 

[Gator97]

And where does Noss say that he is rating the entire knife based upon strength and toughness?

Forget it. As far as I can tell from the comments here, most of Noss' critics never read that and test proc page.

 

[knarfeng]

So when someone just tests edge retention are they redefining the standard with which to judge a knife or simply testing one aspect of a knife's performance?

Only if they were to rate the entire knife solely on its edge retention. I'm not certain that I have ever seen that done.

But I have seen some folks compare blade alloys solely on one type of performance. I have complained and argued about that in posts as well.

Funny, you never mention intended use of the knife. There is very little toughness left in those 65-67HRC Yanagibas, which based on your ratings would put them very low on the knife quality ratings, yet the price and demand for honyaki knives(the hardest of them all) is very high. And you're clearly warned that if you drop it, very likely it'll break, during sharpening on the stone if you press hard enough on the tip and the handle it might break, so you have to keep proper hand placement on the knife, etc...
There is no universal rating system for the knives. If you know one, I'd appreciate a link or reference to the source.

Gator, I'm sorry, but you totally missed the point of my post.

My comment was entirely addressed to the quote from theonew.

People would not be"redefining the standard with which to judge a knife or simply testing one aspect of a knife's performance" UNLESS they were rating the entire knife based on edge retention. I have seen no one do that. I certainly do not.

While I do perform edge retention testing, I compare alloys, not knives and I do not say that "alloy A is better than alloy B". I say that "Alloy A at hardness X had better edge retention than alloy B at hardness Y". I am reasonably well trained as a materials engineer and I am careful with my comparisons.

 

[Gator97]

Gator, I'm sorry, but you totally missed the point of my post.

My apologies, I really misunderstood what you wrote, sorry.

 

[knarfeng]

no harm. no foul.

I should have written more carefully.

 

[theonew]

knarfeng, while Noss is clearly testing both the steel and the design of a knife for strength and toughness and giving them a rating, he is clearly NOT claiming that he is testing the overall functionality of the knife, i.e., edge retention, cutting ability, corrosion resistance, sharpenability. Hey look, I have lots of problems with these tests and think lots could be done more precisely even given the condition of the laboratory , but they provide some insight to me and plenty of other non-newbies. What's the big f'ing deal here.

You know what really kind of sucks. I have a question I would like to start a thread about regarding strength, flex, ductility and HRC. My dilemma is that I could illustrate my question very easily by referring to a few of Noss's destruction videos, but in doing so I run the risk of getting the thread trolled, run off course or even locked. Kind of a bummer.

 

[Broos]

Well, it's either that or you honestly believe that vertical compression from a carrot can fracture or bend 65HRC steel.

And you honestly believe that the MUCH smaller lateral force from a carrot dulled your edge?

I explained several times, that it is human factor. So far you you have not provided single shred of the evidence that hand cutting is the same as machine cutting. You simply discard robotics and I figure mechanics as well, that is besides biology

A lateral force is a lateral force regardless of whether a machine applies it, or a person applies it.

I assume a cut is a cut. The edge goes through the material being cut, and the MAJOR factor in how the knife dulls is the force that cuts, a force that has been measured often and is often used as the measure of cutting ability in a hand tests.

On the other hand, you are assuming that a lateral force, that no one has measured or observed the affects of, is very important.

And while you have assumed this without any real information or data on this force, you have provided not a single shred of evidence that shows how this unmeasured force contributes to dulling (in addition to the much greater down force we know is the major factor in dulling).

I have explained how one can easily get a machine to apply a lateral force. So once someone can actually show that this lateral force really is important, than one could easily get a machine test to apply the force with machine testing. Despite your assertions, a force is a force regardless of whether a machine or a human applies it. The steel cannot tell the difference.

I think, to the contrary, you are making assumptions that contradict everyday observations and very simple physics.
Let's start with the fact that any lateral force on the knife during the cut isn't just the force you push it to the side, but more like lever, where exerted force on the edge is proportional of the blade width and cut depth. So, for the case when the knife is 50mm wide and the edge is stuck in the medium 5mm deep, the exerted force(lateral, on the edge) would be 10 times the load force(lateral).

I think you are trying to calculate a moment without mention of a force, which does not make sense. It might help if you draw a force vector diagram - that is the best way to visualize a moment. I do not think a moment calculation is correct in trying to theorize the magnitude of a lateral force in this instance, because there is no fixed pivot point unless it is the very edge (so no moment). I have calculated a simple calc for lateral stress based on force and contact area, and the much larger area of contact (the side of the knife blade for lateral forces versus the very thin edge for downward force) and smaller magnitude of force makes the pressure from lateral forces MUCH less than the cutting force. I think this is pretty intuitive also. Maybe you can provide a vector diagram showing what you are trying to explain above, or sample calculations for how you have calculated lateral force, and exactly where this force exerts itself on the side of the edge or blade?

? What does Noss have to do with my argument with you about hand vs. machine cutting?

I was just pointing out that this exact issue has been discussed before, and that Wayne G. and a BYU Prof agree with me. I guess you didn't read the old thread again.

And I reserve the right to talk all I want about nossy - he is the one who started the trash talking, and now is afraid to come here to face those he badmouthes or explain why he feels compelled to talk trash in his videos. I guess he likes starting crap, but then needs his supporters to finish what he starts.

 

[theonew]

And I reserve the right to talk all I want about nossy - he is the one who started the trash talking

I don't have speakers on this computer so I don't know what Noss said about you, but in any case let me say this: Noss not *#@^ing cool. While I often disagree with Broos, he is a smart contributing member who doesn't deserve any crap

 

[knarfeng]

I believe the issue is that Noss rates the knives based solely on how well they withstand stresses that are well beyond what survival knife is going to face and with nothing of the other attributes a successful survival knife must have to function as a knife. With his talk of the "hammer of truth" it is hard not to infer that he is rating the entire knife. Certainly in his posts he has stated repeatedly that the only property he values is "toughness".

Were he to give a workout to a knife using it to perform tough work that a survival knife might really have to perform I think his ratings would be less of an issue, hockey mask or no.

I understand your reticence to use the Noss material. As all can tell by the length of this thread, his name is a hot button. I don't really have a good solution for that. It is hard to get past tainted data.

 

[Broos]

Noss is clearly testing both the steel and the design of a knife for strength and toughness and giving them a rating, he is clearly NOT claiming that he is testing the overall functionality of the knife, i.e., edge retention, cutting ability, corrosion resistance, sharpenability.

I could illustrate my question very easily by referring to a few of Noss's destruction videos, but in doing so I run the risk of getting the thread trolled, run off course or even locked.

He is not testing steel strength, and he is not testing steel toughness.

Now if you are using the laymans subjective definition of toughness, than everyone has an opinion. Technical toughness of the steel will only be obtained by the proper ASTM test. And no one has defined or agreed upon what is the definition for knife toughness or knife strength, so you need to define what you want to measure before you start testing.

What he is illustrating is the wisdom, or lack thereof, of hitting some knives with a steel hammer. And one should realize that issues inherent with impact testing before making any sweeping conclusions based on a video of one knife breaking due to an inherently unsafe and unpredictable test method. You may be able to beat on some knives with a hammer for a year, but at some point, if you continue to beat on it with a steel hammer, the probability that the next hit produces a potentially explosive and shrapnel flying catastrophic failure increases. That is why so many companies have policies that detail you should not beat on hardened steel with hardened steel.

If you want to know the strength of a knife, you have to test it to destruction, and measure the force that caused destruction - you should then state what was the mode of failure - bending or fracture, and look at the fracture and determine whether it is a brittle fracture or ductile failure (I don't think there will be much ductile failure with knife steels). And I think you could pretty reliably calculate how strong a knife blade is if you have the tensile strength from the steel manufacturer.

I don't think anyone would object, if you started from a basis of correct conclusions based on his videos.

And thanks for your comment above - nothing wrong with disagreeing and discussing our difference amiably, and hopefully we can learn from each other, though I know I am difficult to convince!

 

[theonew]

I believe the issue is that Noss rates the knives based solely on how well they withstand stresses that are well beyond what survival knife is going to face and with nothing of the other attributes a successful survival knife must have to function as a knife. With his talk of the "hammer of truth" it is hard not to infer that he is rating the entire knife. Certainly in his posts he has stated repeatedly that the only property he values is "toughness".

While the "hammer of truth" is freakin' hilarious, I'm not sure where that came from. This is from the url: http://knifetests.com/Aboutratings.html. And so you don't have to click on that accursed URL here's what it says (I have no idea why he uses graphics for his text ) As far as Noss's personal values regarding knife toughness, I have no idea but they are probably not what mine are.

 

[Grimspoon]

The site is both entertaining and informative. I love knowing what the breaking point of various knives are, and I especially love not having to figure it out on my own.

I hope Noss keeps doing what he does. More power to him!

 

[Gator97]

And you honestly believe that the MUCH smaller lateral force from a carrot dulled your edge?

a) Lateral force isn't as small as you imagine because of the lever action. b) compression strength as we both agree is bigger than bending.

...you have provided not a single shred of evidence

Uhmm.. Matter of fact, I have provided quite a bit more than repeated "you have not provided a single shred"...
On the other hand... What exactly is the evidence you have provided? You keep talking about methodology, science, etc, so far I have not seen a single photo, formula or a test result from you. Obviously, it is easier to "disprove" with vague statements like - it's not quantifiable and such, but at some point you'd have to do a little better than that? I understand it's very convenient and time saving for you, just posting "you haven't provided" thing again and again vs. spending time on sharpening, cutting, microscope and photos, but still. You could do some of it, and it'd be more convincing.

...Despite your assertions, a force is a force regardless of whether a machine or a human applies it...

Like I said, in my previous post and for some reason you skipped that, if you believe your statement is true, why don't you make a cut, straight cut on the paper or carpet... How hard is that for you to try?
And while at it, have you come up with the way to cut steel bar with m2 knife 65HRC, since machines can do that, and it's all the same to you?

I think you are trying to calculate a moment without mention of a force

??? Did you read what I posted? Lever force formula is very simple, and I was calculating the force, not the momentum. And if you count, force was mentioned few times, literally.

...correct in trying to theorize the magnitude of a lateral force in this instance

So, instead of all the theorizing, and giving me science assignments(and no equipment to compete them), you could do very basic tests K? Like cut some paper, or stick the knife in the same carrot, or small piece of wood and twist it. Let's see how will it hold up. Or for the change, try edge flex test, simply push the edge from the side with a nail or any hard object and then observe the same edge applying strictly vertical pressure.

I was just pointing out that this exact issue has been discussed before, and that Wayne G. and a BYU Prof agree with me.

So, that's You, me, Wayne G and Byu. And again, why Noss? I'm not aware if you had the same debate with him.

And I reserve the right to talk all I want about nossy - he is the one who started the trash talking

You certainly have the right, but the last part - he started first.. Come on. 3rd grade? Besides, the question was why did you really need to trash talk in an unrelated post.

Anyway, in the end, to summarize - you say hand cutting is the same as machine. And then you complain about Noss not using machines? He's got different pair of hands?

 

[Gator97]

While the "hammer of truth" is freakin' hilarious, I'm not sure where that came from.

I think he mentioned that few times, and here

 

[cj65]

Hopefully this isn't beating a dead horse, but is the purpose of a knife not to cut?

Insipid as they may be, TGHM's reviewing "methodology" is clearly biased towards knives that are soft and resistant to prying and shock. These seem like ancillary qualities, at least in terms of use.

I don't think anyone would be surprised if Noss stabbed a 10v fillet knife into a car hood and the tip broke off. Likewise I doubt that a chinese produced Rough Use knife or what have you is any good at cutting a good fillet.

So I'll pose some questions to the Pro-Noss camp here - Is the ideal knifetests.com knife one that forsakes all other qualities for toughness?

Resistance to breaking from prying or being struck with hammers is very low on my list of qualities I prefer in a knife.

The argument that Noss is showing "how far the knives can be taken in a survival situation" doesn't hold up. Batonning with sledgehammers and stabbing sheet metal seem pretty far fetched in terms of life and death situations. Starting a fire, whittling, skinning game, are those tasks not more realistic in "survival situations"?

Noss assesses exactly the face value of what he's doing: the ability of a knife to be bent laterally, stabbed into sheet metal, and hit with hammers. Drawing inferences about the "quality" of a knife from those activities is fallacious.

Hold on there Slim! Have you ever been faced with a sheet metal barrier preventing you from obtaining water in a wilderness survival scenario? I do not think so sir! Being able to stab through sheet metal to obtain water for hydration is more critical than you seem to understand.

I am not even going to go into the value of fending off wild hammers trying to bash your skull in when you are starving and thirsty in the wilderness. It happens all the time, just ask the boy scouts. There is a hammer defense badge that they have to earn. The toughest scout leaders makes them poor scouts do this with one eye blindfolded.

Shame on you Slim.

 

[theonew]

Broos, yours is a baby with the bath water type of argument. Since nothing in these tests is up to your level of testing procedure they are therefore completely null and void. I'm fine with that but don't agree. As you point out, it is hard for knife knuts to even come to a consensus opinion on a comprehensive definition of toughness, let alone how you might fully quantify it. A more technical quantification of strength, well yeah, Noss could quite easily do that with a fair degree of accuracy and I wish he would, but hey you get what you pay for.

As far as long term fatigue of a steel from repeated impacts, I would love to know more. You seem to be saying that repeated impacts on steel with a softer steel, will, over time, but more importantly, at random moments, induce catastrophic failure. Sounds plausible but can you point me to some data that shows this process? In one episode he pounds a thin 1095 butcher knife with his evil 3 lb. hammer through wood for an hour without failure. Was that a fluke and if he tried it again it might fail on say the 10th hit? Does batoning a knife with wood cause the same stresses over time just at a lesser rate? Any data you have would be greatly appreciated.

When I sell my killer app and become a gazillionaire, I promise I will set up a state of the art facility to test knives and publish results and would love to have you on board. Until then, well, we have Noss and really not much else to help us gauge the elusive property of toughness in thick, overbuilt, hard use knives.

 

[theonew]

I think he mentioned that few times, and here

Thanks, I've got the context now
Fairly arrogant, but given the level of trash talking nonsense at the time, kind of understandable.

 

[Guyon]

For all those who are going on and on about how Noss only "tests" large, thick knives, maybe they could explain that Mora Clipper stunt to me.

 

[Gator97]

I promise I will set up a state of the art facility to test knives and publish results and would love to have you on board. Until then, well, we have Noss and really not much else to help us gauge the elusive property of toughness in thick, overbuilt, hard use knives.

I predict you will share the same fate with Noss, more or less Given the nonexistent knife testing standards, disagreement to ABS tests...