Knifetests.com-whats YOUR opinion

[Guyon]

while I was contemplating its profundity

Oh, and thanks for finding my original version profound. I do so treasure the compliment.

But I am a little confused. Where exactly were you addressing TGHM in your last post?

 

[theonew]

I went with "Mullet" after that, which I thought was pretty funny, but then I realized that Christ could be interpreted as having a mullet.

Dude

I am interested in your fascination with my writing and editing process, however.

I just have never seen it in real time like that, not arguing with your "logic"

 

[Guyon]

I just have never seen it in real time like that, not arguing with your "logic"

It's almost like watching a noss4 video, isn't it? Real time energy and "ultra-logical."

 

[Guyon]

In the future, I'll try to provide a stream-of-consciousness running commentary on the side (right now I see orthogonal1 viewing this thread, and I'm bracing myself for the fourteenth issuance of his "Noss4 Challenge") as I type my posts. Given the number of times that theonew (wondering if I should use the acronym or not) has called me out personally and given that run of hitting F5 and capturing my posts (that was a little creepy), I figure I'll just go ahead and divulge some of the inner workings as I go. I hope that this extra service is helpful (still thinking about starting a movie-review thread for some of TGHM's greatest hits complete with blurbs from some of the parties involved here... that may not play well though), and I hope that it will stave off any possible plans to stalk me.

 

[orthogonal1]

...

However, I and others here at Bladeforums have every right to complain when idiots regularly invade BFC with their fanboy antics and copycat destruction tests. When I speak of community, that's exactly what I mean. In my opinion, there exists an obligation to teach people that these so-called tests amount to nothing more than stunts. Hush tactics and consistent misinterpretations aren't going to quiet such objections.
...

The stunt mentality has gotten to the point that a well-respected survivalist recently issued a fairly dramatic statement aimed directly at such idiocy. This is someone who really has used knives in remote conditions where survival was an issue.

And so shall we "complain" when idiots continue to deride others by merely alluding to some "scientific testing" that would indicate someone else's conclusions are incorrect by using nothing more than misinterpretations and name calling antics, merely alluding to "proper statistical analysis" and other such non-substantive arguments of little pertinence.

And who is the un-named "well-respected survivalist recently issued a fairly dramatic statement"?

 

[Guyon]

I'm not sure anyone ever said his conclusions were incorrect. Blind squirrels do find acorns, and we've already been over the topic of luck. Remember page 25?

TGHM's methods are fairly non-existent though, and so even if he did somehow get it right (whatever it is at this point... toughness? showmanship? I don't know anymore. I know I'm referring to toughness, but I currently can't account for anyone else), how would we ever really know if his "conclusions" were luck or something else? There's no sound methodological trail to follow.

The challenge to prove TGHM wrong is pretty silly on this account. He hasn't practiced enough sound principles to even challenge his "conclusions" with any degree of precision. It's sort of like asking someone to disprove the existence of Sasquatch (orthogonal1 is going to ask me to go after Bigfoot... I just know it).

 

[Guyon]

And who is the un-named "well-respected survivalist recently issued a fairly dramatic statement"?

Sorry. Missed this one the first time. It was Jeff Randall.
Head over to his subforum and start talking about beating on knives with hammers. He'll likely tell you to piss off and ask you to take it elsewhere.

 

[orthogonal1]

I'm not sure anyone ever said his conclusions were incorrect. Blind squirrels do find acorns, and we've already been over the topic of luck. Remember page 25?

All you alluded to was luck. Sounds to me you are admitting NOSS4's conclusions may be correct afterall - it is just that it must be "luck" that he achieved his correct conclusions.

Never seen a blind squirrel so I don't know if they find nuts or not.

TGHM's methods are fairly non-existent though, and so even if he did somehow get it right (whatever it is at this point... toughness? showmanship? I don't know anymore. I know I'm referring to toughness, but I currently can't account for anyone else), how would we ever really know if his "conclusions" were luck or something else? There's no sound methodological trail to follow.

The challenge to prove TGHM wrong is pretty silly on this account. He hasn't practiced enough sound principles to even challenge his "conclusions" with any degree of precision. It's sort of like asking someone to disprove the existence of Sasquatch (orthogonal1 is going to ask me to go after Bigfoot... I just know it).

NOSS4's methodology, or lack thereof, has little to do with proving the conclusions right or wrong. When scientists, vice those who espouse they require "scientific methods", wish to prove something, they may or may not follow the procedures followed by some other. It is not a requirement.

And, no, I don't expect you to find Sasquatch, Bigfoot, Skunkman, etc. There are others out there doing that activity - activity, what a concept.

 

[Guyon]

I wonder if orthogonal1 thinks I'm some sort of brand-name loyalist who thinks TGHM must be wrong because my favorite knife broke early. I'm not. Busses have fared better than any other brand, I guess, and I like my Busse knives. The conclusions hardly matter to me though.

I object on two fronts: (a) TGHM isn't testing anything of value. How do I know? Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured. Hammer blows by hand is not one of them. Samples of 1 are not part of a valid test. (b) More importantly, TGHM has helped perpetuate a conception of survival knife quality that centers around it's unbreakable nature.... so much so that respected knife companies like RAT Cutlery are saying things like (I'm paraphrasing here) 'no more dumbasses please.'

Page 29 and I wonder if orthogonal1 has read the original thread title... Knifetests.com-whats YOUR opinion
Above is mine in two parts. Notice I didn't use the word 'conclusions' a single time.

 

[orthogonal1]

I wonder if orthogonal1 thinks I'm some sort of brand-name loyalist who thinks TGHM must be wrong because my favorite knife broke early. I'm not. Busses have fared better than any other brand, I guess, and I like my Busse knives. The conclusions hardly matter to me though.

One wonders if I care about brands - no I don't.

I object on two fronts: (a) TGHM isn't testing anything of value. How do I know? Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured. Hammer blows by hand is not one of them. Samples of 1 are not part of a valid test. (b) More importantly, TGHM has helped perpetuate a conception of survival knife quality that centers around it's unbreakable nature.... so much so that respected knife companies like RAT Cutlery are saying things like (I'm paraphrasing here) 'no more dumbasses please.'

You have gone much further than mere "objecting" constitutes.

Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured, but do not measure the toughness of steel samples that has been shaped into a knife blade. Toughness data gives one an idea of what a given specific steel may be in relation to some other steel, but I have yet to see a paper for peer review that includes testing various blade shapes as heat-treated and formed in what one commonly finds in knives.

Page 29 and I wonder if orthogonal1 has read the original thread title... Knifetests.com-whats YOUR opinion
Above is mine in two parts. Notice I didn't use the word 'conclusions' a single time.

Looks to me like you're backing away from your apparent arguments of the lack of worth of the "stunts" of NOSS4.

 

[tomcrx]

I object on two fronts: (a) TGHM isn't testing anything of value. How do I know? Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured. Hammer blows by hand is not one of them.

Not Really...Toughness is defines as resistance to crack propagation for many and a Charpy test is basically controlled hammer blows on a pre notched (i.e. stress risers) piece of steel. Charpy tests have a lot of inherent error in them which may or may not be accounted for statistically by the tester and in most circles are usually used comparatively. How does any of this carry over into how "tough" a knife is? It does'nt. It may help tell how "tough" the steel that is used to make the knife compared to other steels. There are no tests for knife "toughness". Noss is trying to determine his own. Good for him.

(b?)Samples of 1 are not part of a valid test.

Why? Do you think Chrysler crash tests every car, 10%, 1%, .01% that come off the line? Sample testing in R&D vs fully realized production are two statistically different models and will require way different sample sizes.

(b) More importantly, TGHM has helped perpetuate a conception of survival knife quality that centers around it's unbreakable nature....

Whoa ...what came first the chicken or the egg. I guess Noss's tests have helped all thses companies fund national ad campaigns touting "toughness", " high speed", "zero tolerance" and LT's DVD's. I think you give him way to much credit.

so much so that respected knife companies like RAT Cutlery are saying things like (I'm paraphrasing here) 'no more dumbasses please.'

Was'nt that due to Nub complaining his knife was dull and could not cut paper...How is that complaining about an unbreakable nature?

 

[Guyon]

If it is that steel A is tougher than steel B, then let's look up some toughness numbers and we'll see if you are right. Because once you make that test repeatable, you will be doing a charpy test and some strength tests. All information we have already from the steel mfgs.

Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured

Not Really...

Maybe you fellas could argue this one out.

Even if, as noted by both Broos and tomcrx, there are limitations on how much we can know from a charpy test, would tomcrx hold that noss4 is imparting controlled blows upon the knives he destroys?

Looks to me like you're backing away from your apparent arguments of the lack of worth of the "stunts" of NOSS4.

I still see them as stunts devoid of any thoughtful methods.

Why? Do you think Chrysler crash tests every car, 10%, 1%, .01% that come off the line?

Are you telling me that cars and knives are the same animals? Or that TGHM implements controls that are similar to a car crash test? Regarding knives, not cars, Sal Glesser had this to say about samples of 1.

Testing only one knife as a sample of the species is also not a very good sampling, in my opinion.

Of course, Sal doesn't know a whole lot about knives.

Whoa ...what came first the chicken or the egg. I guess Noss's tests have helped all thses companies fund national ad campaigns touting "toughness", " high speed", "zero tolerance" and LT's DVD's. I think you give him way to much credit.

I thought I wrote, "has helped to perpetuate." So you're arguing that we need to perpetuate this notion of knife quality?

Was'nt that due to Nub complaining his knife was dull and could not cut paper...How is that complaining about an unbreakable nature?

Maybe you missed the larger quotation....

RAT has always been about a no-bullshit philosophy of Individualism, Survivalism, Common Sense and Reason. We are NOT interested in catering to any other mindset. That does not mean that we don't welcome newcomers to this philosophy of common sense, Individualism and Survivalism. In fact, we love to see new folks come on board and learn. All we're saying is if you want to get out and run through the woods like an idiot, throw knives, beat on them with hammers or intentionally abuse shit just becasue you can, and then not understand how to maintain it after all of that, then buy someone else's stuff.

 

[orthogonal1]

Maybe you fellas could argue this one out. ....

As par for course, you fail to fully quote and seek misinterpretation:

"Scientists have good ideas of how toughness in steel can be measured, but do not measure the toughness of steel samples that has been shaped into a knife blade. Toughness data gives one an idea of what a given specific steel may be in relation to some other steel, but I have yet to see a paper for peer review that includes testing various blade shapes as heat-treated and formed in what one commonly finds in knives."

"Not Really...Toughness is defines as resistance to crack propagation for many and a Charpy test is basically controlled hammer blows on a pre notched (i.e. stress risers) piece of steel. Charpy tests have a lot of inherent error in them which may or may not be accounted for statistically by the tester and in most circles are usually used comparatively. How does any of this carry over into how "tough" a knife is? It does'nt. It may help tell how "tough" the steel that is used to make the knife compared to other steels. There are no tests for knife "toughness". Noss is trying to determine his own. Good for him."


Looks like we have some agreement.

Finished knives are not tested, at least publicly, and at best any toughness data that is generally available for a given steel is simply a "probably" proposition when applied to actual knives.

A 'tough" steel can easily fail in use due to the heat treat and/or a knife shape having stress risers. Emperical data trumps theoretical calculations.

 

[tomcrx]

Maybe you fellas could argue this one out.

Even if, as noted by both Broos and tomcrx, there are limitations on how much we can know from a charpy test, would tomcrx hold that noss4 is imparting controlled blows upon the knives he destroys?

No...never said that. I said the results of Charpy tests can be variable and impart no real value on knife "toughness". They only say something comparatively about the how "tough", as defined by metallurgy i.e. crack propagation, about the steel the knife is made of. There is no "toughness" standard for knives.

I still see them as stunts devoid of any thoughtful methods.

Good..feel free. No one is trying to censor your opinion

Are you telling me that cars and knives are the same animals? Or that TGHM implements controls that are similar to a car crash test?

WTF no. It was an example of relevancy of sample size. Sample size for QC of a fully realized production line is way lower then that used in R&D or when ramping to production. Give me a percenatge of knives from a manufacturer's production run that you would consider acceptable.

Regarding knives, not cars, Sal Glesser had this to say about samples of 1.

Pull the whole quote please

The purpose of testing a product is to determine how well it performs and what are it's limits. One must exceed the limits to know the limits.

As a factory, we use repeatable lab testing for sharpness, edge retention, strength (lock, blade, etc) and Q-fog for corrosion testing. We use the foundries specs on toughness (but we do have our own Charpy).

We have found that "real world" testing can defy the lab numbers, so we feel that actual use in "real world" situations is just as impoortant as lab tests.

The difference in testing is often the amount of accumulated knowledge one has when doing these tests.

"Testing" your "first knife", is really just learning and while providing opinion, isn't very credible. Testing only one knife as a sample of the species is also not a very good sampling, in my opinion.


sal

And he was nice enough to qualify it with "in my opinion"

Of course, Sal doesn't know a whole lot about knives.

Never said it never will. I respect the man and his product. It looks like you said it though

I thought I wrote, "has helped to perpetuate." So you're arguing that we need to perpetuate this notion of knife quality?

Why do you buy all those Busses anyway?

Are they great for wood carving and kitchen prep? Betcha those 1/4" thick blades are really great at filleting fish.

Are as tough as they say?

How do you know?

What standardized testing have they undergone?

What did the Charpy tests say?

I just gotta know...puleeze

P.S. Considering Jeff's recent posts. I assumed they were in response to Nub's nonsensical posting and threat to break a RAT and have it replaced under warranty ad nauseum in response to Jeff's calling him out

 

[Guyon]

There is no "toughness" standard for knives.

So exactly how is noss4 helping us to understand toughness? I'm listening. How does beating on knives with a hammer, treating each knife differently, and then assigning them relative Swords of Doom really help us know anything about how they stack up as tough knives?

Give me a percenatge of knives from a manufacturer's production run that you would consider acceptable.

Do you know of many manufacturers that pull one item, test it, and then call it a day?

Never said it never will. I respect the man and his product. It looks like you said it though

Guess your irony meter is broken.

Why do you buy all those Busses anyway?

I like them. You have a problem with my tastes? Again with the aesthetics...

Are they great for wood carving and kitchen prep? Betcha those 1/4" thick blades are really great at filleting fish.

Ah! The demented pry bar argument. I see...

No, I tend to respect tools and use them for the proper job. Knives and cinder blocks? Not so much. When I want to fillet a fish, I turn to one of these...

Are as tough as they say?

Who's "they"? My Busse knives perform well for my outdoor uses. That's all that matters to me. I'm not the one who's hung up on toughness.

 

[Guyon]

P.S. Considering Jeff's recent posts. I assumed they were in response to Nub's nonsensical posting and threat to break a RAT and have it replaced under warranty ad nauseum in response to Jeff's calling him out

Feel free to check with Jeff then about specifics. While you're at it though, be sure and ask him what he thinks about guys in hockey masks who beat on knives with sledge hammers. I'd love to see the reply.

 

[theonew]

rc-4 destruction test

Actually, we are getting about 30 to 40 degrees flex on the 1095 on the overall length of the knife. In other words, if you hold the tip in the vice and then flex the blade it will flex about 30 to 40 degrees before snapping. If you chuck it up in the vice mid-way up the blade then you won't get as much flex since you're not working over the whole length of the knife. Where this blade appears to have broken was through the thumb grippers on the spine since they are natural stress risers. Everything that Noss did in his test were expected results since Shon does flex and break tests on every batch of knives that he heat treats. All in all, I think Noss did an excellent job on the knife and the knife did an excellent job on him... and we thank him for the test

 

[Guyon]

That's a telling wink. Jeff did say this too, of course.

Never forget the fact that the knife industry is about 90 percent bullshit.

 

[Guyon]

That's a great thread, theonew. I guess Jeff is on board the noss train after all. :thumbup:

Agreed. Personally I like his tests since deep down most of us like to blow up and break things and his tests lets us see it in action. Screw science, lets' blow something up!

And so are you, it seems.

I was really amazed to see how well the edge held up through all of that That knife, to me at least, seems to exhibit an ideal balance between edge retention and toughness :thumbup: Can't wait to get my first RAT :thumbup:

 

[Gator97]

Interesting how this thread has slowly gotten moved from an argument about stunts v. tests to an argument about political freedom.

This is exactly the lies and misinterpretation I mentioned in other post. While I don't think this thread needs going back to old posts again and again, since you have very short memory let me remind you that a) you were the one justifying your trashtalk with "concern for potential damage inflicted on n00bs". And I from the very beginning was opposed to policing testers and posters. So, the statement how this thread "slowly gotten moved" is false 100%, you know that just as well. If anything at all, you were told 100 times that nobody needs your protective care, and some of us value freedom of testing a lot more than the alleged care.

However, I and others here at Bladeforums have every right to complain when idiots regularly invade BFC with their fanboy antics and copycat destruction tests.

More name calling. BTW, this forum is just as free for Noss any anybody else to post as for you. You can complain and criticize in a civilized manner all you want.

In my opinion, there exists an obligation to teach people that these so-called tests amount to nothing more than stunts.

Ah oh It's terrific that you feel so obliged, but in a real world, when you feel obliged to protect/teach/educate someone and that someone doesn't want it, if you don't back off you will get a restraint order, and if you still insist on your protection you will end up in jail. In other words, your obligation feelings are very misplaced, and the implementation is severely lacking.

Hush tactics and consistent misinterpretations aren't going to quiet such objections.

Great, best defense is a good offense, in this case, to accuse others of what you and your pals do... Few lines above you declare fight on "invaders" just because their tests and antics are different from yours and now you pose as a freedom-fighter? That was you who was opposed to "live and let be" correct?

While I don't see Busse fans telling people to go out and beat on their other brands

And I don't really see Noss posting on his site inviting everyone to break their knives. He says I do so, and that's it. Using your logic, you should be attacking a lot authors of various videos, people post a lot more than breaking knives, really dangerous stuff for life.

So what should we do? Well, teaching them better respect for their tools is a start. I'm all for that.

Considering that we're not in a mandatory school, unless a person wants to learn from you... You're just being annoying dude trying to shove his ideas into someone else's head.

I have a lot of Busse knives, and my "abuse" extends about as far as hitting their spines with a baton log.

And that obviously means we have to learn form you Gimme a break.

I like them. You have a problem with my tastes?
...

No, I tend to respect tools and use them for the proper job.
...
When I want to fillet a fish, I turn to one of these...

I, I, I... You're not the universally accepted template for the knife use. And the universe doesn't revolve around you either.
Ok, we get that, you are different, unique, and you have your ideas how a knives should be used and tested. And honestly, I do respect your ideas and tests, but that's it... Respecting your right of speech and options absolutely doesn't mean I have to adhere, accept, obey or whatever.

The stunt mentality has gotten to the point that a well-respected survivalist recently issued a fairly dramatic statement aimed directly at such idiocy.

Phew.. You're really steaming, what's up? I'm not a survivalist, just a programmer, and when one wants to learn about survival he'll ask that expert and read more and ask questions. But, meanwhile the same person really wouldn't appreciate self appointed mentors telling him how to test/use/abuse his knives that he paid for. It's as simple as that.

Yeah, I know you believe you have the right ideas, and I know your knifetesting gods are the only right knife testing gods, but so is the other side... Why can't you just get that? Why do they have to think, or at least act as you want them to?

My Busse knives perform well for my outdoor uses. That's all that matters to me. I'm not the one who's hung up on toughness.

For e moment there I thought you empower your Busses to perform better Anyway, so when it comes down to you you do understand that "That's all that matters to me". ANd doesn't sound like you need a teacher or two to consult how to use them. So, why exactly do you think others need your guidance even if they're not asking for it, and especially when they openly say no thanks...