MAD DOG Update #4?

whew... Sorry guys I couldn't here you, you're talking to loudly....

Steve/Sparks please take a step back a moment. You guys are too good to get this upset over something this small. Besides I hate to see a couple of good guys pound each other to a pulp when they are in such a violent state of agreement.

As I understand it the sequence of events runs something like this:

1) Mike conducts and publishes some knife
tests.
2) Were are all in agreement that the test
were conducted and reported fairly.
3) Mr. McClung of Mad Dog Knives advises
Mike that the ATAK used for the testing
may have been either defective or a
forgery.
4) We are in agreement that neither Mike
nor anyone else was aware of any
deficiencies in the test ATAK prior to
the information released by Mad Dog
Knives.
5) Mike agrees to redo the test using a
different ATAK (or more than one)

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think we have a general concensus, on items 1-5.

This leaves only one basic issue: Does the mandate we gave to Mike (by virtue of or encouragement of these test), extend to include the ultimate resolution of those issue raised by the test. That is, is it up to Mike to determine whether the test knife was a representative sample, or a defective non-representative sample as claimed by Mr. McClung.

If I read this correctly:
Sparks, believes yes.
Steve, you believe no.
Mike, believes yes.
and I'm sure ther are others you would say no.

Its normal for this kind of issue to come up on our first knife test. Maybe the question should be directed to our membership through the general forum? But, pounding each other over the head with it is not going to get us to a satisfactory answer.

Just my .02; thanks for hearing me out.


 
The only claims that I have made are that the Mad Dog knives I have owned, in particular, an ATAK, a Wild Thing, and a Lab Rat, did not or do not have fragile edges. The facts are my own experience. The three cases of Mike's test, Aubrey's problems, and Cliff's observations must be balanced against my own experience, Arnistador's experience, and the extremely low record of total returns experienced by Mad Dog Knives. The facts again are the reported returns from Mad Dog, which is as solid a fact as anybody in this debacle can claim. If Mad Dog knives were junk, he would be out of business rather than swamped with orders. He is cranking out 100 knives a month, and they are not all going to Knifeforums moderators.

Some Mad Dog knives in the hands of a SEAL trial may have been damaged by rust. Some handles apparently "failed". That must be balanced against the fact that the ordinary, non-SCUBA equiped soldier, policeman, hunter, sportsman, or martial artist has a better chance of winning the state lottery than seeing the handle come off of a Mad Dog knife unless it is deliberately removed.

My "complaints" have not been against the truthfullness of a test, or the accuracy of reports of a SEAL knife trial, but only against the lack of said balance in the statements made by Spark and Mike in particular, and against the impertinence of those, who never having had any experience of Mad Dog knives or Mad Dog customer service, feel compelled to insult him from the safety of an interenet mob, which is a reasonable characterisation of the hundreds (count them yourself!) of posts attacking Mad Dog on this forum over the last several days. The posts are my facts, they are there for anyone to see.

These WWW mindf_c_s always degenerate into arguing over who said what. If anyone has real interest in seeing how things unfolded, go back and read the threads and make up your own minds about it. Never accept anything anyone tells you at face value until you experience it for yourself. This is known as critical thinking. That is all I have tried to encourage in this matter.



[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 08 November 1999).]
 
That's the most well reasoned argument I've seen in this whole discussion.

Here's my reply to it.

I have never said that the Mad Dog ATAK is a bad knife. I am on record previously for extolling it's postives as well. Just ask Les about our little "debate" on IRC one night. The G10 handles are solid performers. The O1 steel, when properly maintained, works very well, and even though it can chip when over hardened, the cases of total failure are not extremely high.

What I don't approve of is the total lack of acknowledgement that the knife *does* have problems, namely in the coating and handle areas. I'm not going to concern myself with the number of claims of the knives dulling in their sheaths, or within a day when exposed to Sea environments because I feel that's a failure in user maintenance.

However, there is only so far user maintenance can go. Sooner or later, if you really *use* the knife, there will come a time where just coating it in Tuf Cloth isn't going to cut it. As a soldier, I've been on 36 hour movements in the rain, followed by digging in in more rain, and then lots of field work, again, in more rain. I've been in the field for 45 day stretches. I've seen what happens when Joe get's too little sleep, they don't maintain things properly. They forget, or leave it for tomorrow if it isn't a priority. I've seen bayonets rusted into their sheaths from this.

That's where the danger is. It's when the user doesn't have the opportunity to give it that extra TLC that a high maintenance knife needs. And since there is proven capillary action with these knives, a re-examination of the coating is in order. That capillary action isn't fiction. I've seen the pictures. I heartily suggest that Mad Dog consider offering some of his knives with a TiAN coating or something with a much smaller porousity (sp?) as this would go great lengths to eliminate these concerns. Heck, just charge a bit more for it, I'm sure that the customers will pay, since they are paying for what the knife is already.

Second is the whole glue issue. Again, all that's needed is a change to the tang to ensure mechanical lockup (in addition to the glue), and everything would be good. But, don't tell me that the glue bond is perfect as is, because I've now seen it for myself. If the glue bond was so great, it'd bond to the G10 and the hard chrome so well that when we hammered the handle off the knife, the G10 would rip apart before the glue seperated from the chrome. This was not the case, however, and the chrome was nice and smooth, without a trace of glue on it.

A reverse tapered tang or a flanged tang would prevent a bonding failure from ruining the knife. It would take a complete failure of the tang from rust before it could come out, not just a slight subsurface "bubbling" of the chrome as it is now.

Yes, the instances that this has occurred have not been common. However, the fact that they occurred at all is reason enough to reexamine and make changes to prevent this sort of thing.

These are not unreasonable changes. But the sheer fact that they are uniformly ignored and not resolved is either apathy or negligence, and for the price, neither is excuseable, IMHO.

Again, to reiterate, if you properly maintain the knives at all times, you probably aren't going to run into many problems. And they will probably serve you very well. But if you should experience a failure, well, we've seen what happens.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here


[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 08 November 1999).]
 
Steve Harvey, I own in the double digits all sort of Mad Dog knives (too many to count). I have destroyed one Mad Dog in testing and had one converted to a folder. I think his ceramic knives has no equal in its category. I think his new warranty stink. I believe his product claims are misleading, and I believe you are too hard up on your own experience. I can confidently say that I know more about Mad Dog knives than you do. Should people listen to me instead of you, I don't believe so in real life. This is the reason why United Cutlery and Cutco and many other companies are still doing well selling mediocre knives.
 
Spark :

I read about the Mad Dog / Jaw's of Life test and was impressed until I remembered that mere digging was considered abuse, so I'd hate to think what chopping through a car roof would do to the warranty.
Click to expand...

First off mild steel is not overly difficult to cut. While in the article about the "vs Jaws of Life" one of the officers states something like "no other knife could do this" that is completely false. Any steel knife will cut mild steel, that is *unhardened* metal. Note that no other knife is actually used to compare against. When MD complained that I struck the TUSK with the Uluchet, just for reference I took my Spyderco Calypso Jr. and repeated the cutting striking the back of the blade with a hammer. Flattened down the swedge some but that is all, I just ground that down evenly later.

Second, MD has never actually stated digging is abusive. In the following thread :

http://www.physics.mun.ca:80/~sstamp/knives/maddog/000785.html

He does describe what he thinks of people who would dig with his knives, but he never actually says its abusive. By the way its not overly stressful. I actually sharpen all my garden spades to make weed and sod removal easier, they are not made out of well tempered tool steel and they easily survive. I have dug many holes with many knives, just recently I did an impact comparison with several including the Busse Basic (it came out on top, surprise).

-Cliff

 
I do have a question or two about the rejection of a knife and the subsequent testing of the hardness. Is it not true that a knife could have been rejected for reasons in addition to a variation in hardness? Is it not true that repeated tests on the same sample of steel will have variation in measured Rc hardness of +/- 2 (or 3)?

How will the data obtained from the 3rd party test of hardness be used in the debate? In most tests, acceptance criteria based on measurement accuracy (or precision) and number of samples measured is established. Now would be a good time to think about the use of the data.

Do we have any QC guys around that can do an experimental design for this case? What is the expected variation? The reliability of the test (Type 1 and Type 2 errors). What other characteristics could have made a given knife a reject?

In the subject of handles, a specific design goal for the ATAK was electrical isolation of the handle from the blade. Anyone who would either intentionaly or accidentally cut a energized circuit would find that an important feature. If another knife does not have this feature, is it a failure in this category? To evaluate a handle without reference to a design goal may be a problem.

If a further test is done on a knife for which (Dr. Welch) the owner agrees, how about 2 additional tests: a handle resistance to pull off (simple matter to rig a cable and pull on lanyard hole and measure tension, I recommend that 500 lbs be establised as a max test level). Salt water immersion for 3 weeks and repeat handle pull. I would think that 3 weeks immersion will not damage more than the edge of Walt's blade (I know Walt, easy for me to assure you that it is fine but what do you think?).

Also, what about Rc tests on all test blades? I don't think a Rc test is very expensive, and a sense of the variation would be interesting.

What about repeating the cutting through the car roof test. Thaddeus punched a BM AFCK through a car hood-- no damage, Cliff found a car to "experiment" on. A visit to the junkyard would have some interesting results, would it not? Take a non-metalic mallet to pound the blade through a 18 inch length of a 1974 Ford trunk lid?

Another question about tests. A lateral bending test would not be very complicated. Place a knife in a vise at the blade midpoint and apply a moment to the knife with the cable in the lanyard hole, measuring the moment arm from th evise to the cable connection and the tension in the cable. Establish a max test level, say in the range of 80-100 ftlb for 6-7 inch utility knives. A larger value without bending makes a better prybar, not counted as a mark against a knife?

How about a cutting test? A 4 ft long pad of standard shipping cardboard boxes (the ones marked "this box certified to hold no less the x pounds"). The knife is forced through the entire pad, thicker blades will be harder to force through and this will measure the tradeoff between excessive strength and cutting ability.

I know people have made innumerable suggestions about blade testing in the past and frankly I have not kept up with them. But a few performance characteristics like acceptable lateral bending strength, cutting ability and handle pull off would be interesting. Perhaps we could establish a working group to develop a test series? Welch, GONESAILING, Nam Viet Vo, Mike and others. A little funding could develop a set of fixtures for measuring simple knife characteristics. Subjective issues would still be up to each person who tests. THe model for my thoughts is the tests in Road and Track magazine.

Check out this discussion for an example of civil discourse about a potentially controversial issue: http://www.knifeforums.com/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000261.html

I remember reading over a year ago about the testing of the Mad Dog DSU knives by the Navy. Anyone have that test report available?

With expectations of wonderful suggestions, esp from Walt,

Noel

 
Finally getting into some areas where I have knowledge! Yay!

The capillary action of hard chrome as well as it's ability to mask underlying rust/corrosion is well known in the firearms industry. Something doesn't have to be published in Scientific American for it to be true. (Have they ever published a report that 01 steel rusts? No? Then it must not!?! Ridiculous!) I had a .45 nearly ruined a few years back by corossion working it's way under the hard chrome. The gun survived, but not without some scarring.

The simple oxide coating (Parkerizing) on the RTAK mentioned above is NOT as good as corrosion protection as hard chrome, nor have any claims been made as such. However, it is easier to keep an eye out for rust as it will show up immediately on the knife and can be dealt with. The Parkerizing will not hide or mask the corrosion.

I have used a Ka-Bar (parkerized 1095 steel) extensively in swampy and jungle type environments with no problems that weren't immediately apparent. I was able to clean my knife when I saw rust starting. And since I used the knife several times a day, it was easy to keep an eye on. I have never been SCUBA diving with it.

Back to the issue at hand......

Mad Dog makes good knives. Even Spark and Mike say so. No one is painting Mad Dog Knives in a bad light. Mad Dog has painted HIMSELF in a bad light several times. I haven't visited Mad Dog's forum in quite a while because I got tired of posts being deleted and edited. (Mine included.) Anyone who has anything negative to say about Mad Dog's knives IS attacked. Their "qualifications" and backgrounds are challenged, their posts are edited or deleted, they are ridiculed and hammered until the leave and all the while the REAL issue or question was never answered. Excuses are made, fingers are pointed, and conspiracy theories are formulated.

It isn't Mr. McClung's fabulous knives that I shy away from anymore. It's the maker himself. I will not buy a knife from a maker who cannot back his knives. I will not buy a knife from a maker who refuses to answer questions whether HE considers them worthy of his time or not. I am the customer. I am right. And even when I'm not right, it's the makers job to treat me like a customer. (Until I become unruly and insulting.) It is a makers job to educate me about his knives. It is the makers job to tell me WHY his knives are worth so much and to tell me what I can, or in Kevin's case, cannot expect from his warranty.

Can Kevin make a good knife? Yep. Does he need lessons in how to treat customers even potential ones? In my opinion, Yep.

My favorite knife maker is Newt Livesay. Does he make the prettiest knives out there? Nope. Are they the best across the board? Nope. Is there "better" steel than parkerized 1095? Arguably, yes. Then why do I buy so many of his knives? Because he is a pleasure to deal with. I modified on of his knives (poorly) and sent him pictures of it. Did I get a nasty post about how I voided my warranty? Nope, I got a friendly letter stating that it was a good idea and that he was going to start doing it to the newer models. I sent him a knife I was less than pleased with. Did I get a call stating that I wasn't qualified to question his design? Nope, I got a new knife. An order of mine got lost when his computer went down a while back. What happened? I got a 45 minute phone call on HIS nickel during which he apologized for the delay, asked how my life was, just chatted a while, then threw in a free knife to thank ME for MY time. THAT is what customer service is all about.
 
Well I have stayed out of this because I don't know nothing about Mad Dog Knives or the testing of knives.

So I called a friend of mine, Stephen (Steve) Schwarzer to see what he thinks. You may have seen the latest Blade Mag. article on Knife Tests Cutting through the Hype. Fact or Fiction, written by same. He is a Custom knife maker and sold his first knife in 1976.

He finds the controversy about the testing interesting to say the least.

He would love to test a Mad Dog Knife.

Does any one have a problem with this?

I can not think of any one that would be better for this job than the man that wrote the article. I am sure he would not be biased in any way.

I would think MD would love to clear up this mess.

------------------
Danny Ridenhour
1-888-KnivesRUS
www.888knivesrus.com
Check out our new website!
 
the4rth,

I am sorry, but I deleted the post you replied to. Your reply stands alone well though.

I did not say that because it had not been written up in Scientific American, that said capillary action does not exist. I said that the suitability, or not, of hard chrome as a corrsion inhibiting blade coating as compared to the alternatives is still a matter of debate, not a matter of certainty. If you are going to call me ridiculous, please read more carefully.

All I am campaigning for, is that when someone, particularly when it is for the twentieth or thirtieth time in two days, criticizes some feature of a Mad Dog knife, they offer some feature of another knife in existence somewhere on this planet that is better. Spark speaks of rust on Mad Dog knives as though Mad Dog knives are the only tool steel knives in use. He speaks of the failings of Mad Dog knives in a SEAL trial without mentioning that the Mad Dog ATAK was judged better than its competition in that trial. If you are going to criticize Mad Dog knives, do so in the context of reality. If a Mad Dog knife cannot survive being immersed in sea water for 3 weeks, that is not a drawback unless compared in all ways to a knife that can.

You speak of the drawbacks of hard chrome, but what knife in Mike's test, or anywhere else for that matter, is using a coating that is better in all situations, especially for highly abrasive environments? Spark suggests Titanium Aluminum Nitride, you suggest that even oxide coating may be better. What about in those situations that Spark speaks of where equipment can't be maintained? Would you rather have a coating that allows more rust but allows you to see it better, or a coating that prevents it better? Your alternatives have their merits, but they are not convincingly better for all situations. I submit that there is no right answer in every case, and it is therefore a matter of opinion, not fact, to say that hard chrome is not just as good a blade coating as TiAlN. Are TiAlN or oxide coatings now commonly used on firearms in the place of hard chrome?

If you could not get along with Mad Dog, that is at least partly your responsibility as well as his. Getting along with people is a two way street. I have publicly criticized certain aspects of Mad Dog knives. We still get along fine. I know I can rely on him to stand behind his materials and processes, and he can be sure I won't ask him to fix my screw ups on warranty. (How's that chrisJohn?)

[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 09 November 1999).]
 
Please let me restate my position on this matter. I wish to insure that the knife that Mike tests is a genuine Mad Dog, not a reject. That is all.

To this end, Jim, aka 'Gonesailing,' has agreed to x-ray the knives that were agreed upon in my conference call with Mike and Spark: the second gen ATAK2, and a Shrike. I actually tossed in my first gen ATAK2, which is the same type as Mike tested, just to see if it had notches also. If it doesn't, it seems to me that it is more likely that Mike tested a bogus knife.

After definitive x-rays, the technique of which has been suggested by Mike Turber (45 degree oblique views of the tang), Jim is going to send the second gen ATAK2 to Mike for testing, assuming no notches are found.

This is what I consider my best attempt to get a genuine Mad Dog knife in Mike's hand for retesting. Which is all I wish to do.

I doubt that a retest of a genuine MD will have a significant effect on the results of the test. I just want to make sure that all the products tested are genuine.

I have no interest in getting involved in any further or alternative testing. I have no interest in subjecting my second gen ATAK2 to destructive testing; I made an offer to Mike to do just that in the past, as at the time, it appeared that x-rays would not reveal the notches reliably. Mike and I now agree that, properly done, x-rays will reveal the notches. Thus, I much prefer to get my expensive knive back intact.

Mike and Spark; if I have misrepresented what I understood you to say, or what your position on this matter is, please feel free to correct me.

Thank you all, especially Jim, for your cooperation in this matter. Walt
 
Steve, must admit that I have followed the MD threads as I am a multiple MD owner and have used every MD knives I own. I have read your accounts with interest even if they are a bit biased, but your last post brings up something I have intimate knowledge of, the blunted/chipped off tip of an ATAK2, as it was my knife!

No one went crying to Kevin McClung. I just inquired about warranty service or having the tip reground. Supposedly according to a MD dealer, Kevin McClung altered his warranty policy after my digging episode. The whole process took longer than it should of, and I had to endure massive flamings from MD fans. Stick to what you know, not conjecture.

The fact of the matter that adults would attack a fellow knife user for using what was billed as a no holds field/combat knife in a such malicious manner is pathetic. The sad fact is that so many seem to prefer belitting and attacking others in an attempt at shoring up what is a simple consumer product.

------------------
"Women bring life into the world
and much death, for they sway the
destinies of men." -Anneas
 
Sorry ChrisJohn, I didn't mean to open an old wound, but do you see your name in my post someplace?
Some mention of a digging episode?
I was just making a point using a hypothetical situation. I'll change it, OK?


[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 09 November 1999).]
 
[I apologize for the crankiness in the following post. I'm pretty tired, and I should probably have saved this until morning - Spark 1.22 AM]

Boy, how many times do we have to keep making the same points.

You want me to provide better examples about what he could change to improve his products? Ok, no problem, let's look at Kevin's nearest competitor, Mission Knives, with their MPK in A2, you know, the knife that looks like an ATAK and who's titanium version is actually being issued to SEALs.

Mission saw the handle failures that Mad Dog knives had and they fixed the problem. Flanged tang in an injection molded handle means no glue to fail.

You ask which knife out there has a better coating? Mission also saw the problems with the rust under the hard chrome. So, they picked another coating, and another blade steel. Will the knife rust in water? Yes, just like any other steel, though probably not as fast as 01. If I'm wrong in this, I'll be happy to retract that statement.

Unlike the hard chrome, the rust won't use the coating to travel it's way across the blade. Oh, we'll test the A2 MPK we were sent during the next round as well and see how it performs. Maybe a good test would be "Stick the knives under sea water for 3 weeks and see what happens".

Do I claim that no tool steel knife will rust like a Mad Dog? No, and I ask you to show me where I have ever made that statement. But, I do have serious issues with the hard chrome combination.

BTW, you are incorrect in your statement above about being able to see the rust and do something about it with the hard chrome. Or it's preventing it "better" You see Steve, though the hard chrome may allow rust to travel under it, once it's started, the coating has to be completely removed before the user can do anything to stop it. In my opinion, it's better to have it readily visible on the surface and be able to clean it away, than not knowing it's under the surface and eating the knife away. For people who make such a big deal about having knives they absolutely have to depend on no matter what, this isn't quite rational as a "feature" to me. Having an abrasion resistant knife just isn't as important to me as having one that doesn't hide the rust. I haven't seen too many knives abraded away.

Heck, for that matter, what's tactical about Hard Chrome? It's hardly subdued. Last time I checked, tactical didn't mean "attracts attention because it's practically reflective".

Second, since you brought it up, let's talk about the SEAL test. A lot of mileage is gotten out of the "Sole Source Justification Letter", yet I hear almost nothing about why the knife wasn't included in the next tests and isn't currently the Sole Source knife. Maybe it's because there is a "Never buy these again" report out there (of course until we get the hard copy that's speculation)? Just because it was judged better than it's competition doesn't mean squat if it fails shortly thereafter, or if it was best in a pack of mediocre contenders. By the way, the knives didn't fail during the SEAL trials in 91, this was a seperate situation and unit, located in Hawaii.

As far as coatings on firearms go, yes, you do commonly see Parkerizing on firearms. You also see anodization, and every other coating under the sun, including Black T, Hard Chrome, etc. What's commonly used? Depends on what you are buying. Hard Chrome certainly isn't standard on many parts. But like the4th said, it has been a drawback on some firearms, just like it's been on some knives.

Finally, about my not getting along with Mad Dog, again, that's something that he's to blame for. I don't seem to remember anyone else sticking up for him on Rec.Knives or RecDotKnives.com, before it was in vogue to be in the Cult of the Dog. I also remember who bailed him out when he started picking on Andy Stafford and Lynn Thompson and couldn't handle it. And I also remember very clearly how he was all too eager to stab me in the back when I left KFC. So please, don't lecture me on where *I* screwed up in our "relations".

To this day when someone asks for a Mad Dog knife, I don't hesitate to send them to Tim Lau, Scott Moore, or Shannon Lew because they are all people who I feel I can trust. I've met Scott more than once and have "known" Tim for going on 3 years now through various common interests. I've heard nothing but good things about Shannon, ever.
I still recommend his Kydex to anyone wanting a good holster, and if someone asks my opinion on his steel knives, my overall judgement remains the same: very good with some problems that need to be addressed. His ceramic knives are another matter, he's done some excellent work there and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them.

But with all the rest of the people, included those who own *several* Mad Dog knives freely admiting he has an attitude problem, please don't lay the blame for that at everyone else's feet.

This is getting tiresome, Steve. At this point it seems you are arguing just to argue. We can go tit for tat in this, but I'd appreciate you pointing to examples and using some facts to back up your statements, as it's getting old.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here


[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 10 November 1999).]
 
Guys (Steve and Spark),

You should stop arguing - you are just wasting your time (and ours as well). English is not my mother tongue so I may not understand everything - but you two are speaking totally different languages. Or both of you are speaking of something else.

Steve - you should reread the posts carefully. I do not like evrything Spark says, sometimes I disagree, but now I have to support him. You accuse him of generalizing - but he is not.

I am not MD owner and I will never be. I do not care if the knives are good or bad, expensive or cheap... and this is not the problem here.

MD claims that his knives are near perfect and some people do not agree. NO knife is perfect - is it that difficult to understand. Steve - you are talking about your experience with MD knives - which was good. Others are talking about their experience - not that good. WHY cannot you accept it? WHY Mr. MD cannot accept ANY criticism?

Is is known fact that Customer Service is more important that anything elese in every industry or business (if you want I can provide more numbers, sources...etc). WHY Mr. MD cannot accept or understand it?

For that you (Steve) should reread the post of the4th, paragraph starting: MD makes good knives. .... ....

This is the problem here.

David

[This message has been edited by David1967 (edited 10 November 1999).]
 
Just to set the record straight, there are no Mission MPK's in any of the supply warehouses at the Weat Coast Teams. Saw one in a drying cage not too long ago though.

Most recent "official issue knife"...Buck Intrepid. Before that...Glock field knife. Real high speed huh?
 
Derek, since I'm not Mission knives, I can neither confirm or deny that. Hopefully Rick will jump in and say "X number of knives went here on this date" or something along those lines.

If I'm wrong, I'll retract my statements. I don't have a problem with that.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here
 
Reasonable enough, Spark. This is the kind of exchange we should be having all along. This is dialogue not product assassination. Now we can compare points for all those people whose time we are wasting by forcing them to read this.
wink.gif


You mention the A-2 MPK. The handle attachent design looks pretty good. It looks great. But when comparing the two knives, one has to weigh the chances of a Mad Dog handle coming off (practically zero) against the fact that according to Mission Knives themselves, and supported by Cliff's review of it, the A-2 MPK is heat treated rather softer than is usual for A-2 and this has an impact on edge holding. So you have the trade off of handle attachment, a non-issue for 99.99% of knife users, for a difference in edge holding that a user will experience every day that the knife is used.

You never said that other tool steel knives won't rust, but you implied that rust was a drawback of Mad Dog knives in particular, which it is not. Uncoated O-1 may oxidize faster than A-2 or it may not. Given all the variables like abrasion of softer coatings, I would call the corrosion comparison between the ATAK and A-2 MPK a draw, and that is not to say that the ATAK might not be superior, particularly in circumstances where sand inside a sheath may seriously abrade a softer coating. The best blade coating in the world only works if it stays on the blade. That is Mad Dog's reason for choosing hard chrome.

You win on the brightness of hard chrome, no contest, but that has never been an issue with me. I want a tactical knife to have a low visual signature while its sheathed, but once it is drawn, I want it to scare the heck out of people.

Sole Source Justification has never been an issue in this debate. My issue is you and a bunch of others focusing on what you perceive to be the failings of Mad Dog knives without giving any credence to their advantages. I have no problem with that under normal circumstances. You can give your points and I can give my points, and we can have a friendly back and forth about the pros and cons of different knives. These are not normal circumstances unfortunately.

BTW, my last post, including the comments about getting along with Mad Dog, was addressed to "the4th", but it is interesting to get some insight into your lack of objectivity regarding Mad Dog.

In these threads, I have only responded to the posts of others. I didn't start any of the threads. I did not make an issue of this at all until the third page or so of Mad Dog bashing posts in Mike's "Update...concerning Mad Dog" thread. I did not question the integrity of any person, or try to discredit any knife, though I admit I was occassionally a little sarcastic in pointing out some poorly thought out statements. For example, if I am arguing just to argue, who is arguing with me? You, for one. What are you arguing for?

As for demanding facts from me, I am making no material claims other my own experience! You are the one who has claimed that handles have fallen off of Mad Dog knives due to rust on the tangs, repeatedly, in a way that implies it is a serious flaw in the knives. As evidence you have produced one Fighting Knives magazine article that refers to some "handle failures" experienced by some Navy SEALs. Mad Dog Knives reports only a handfull of returns, ever, and none for handle failures due to rust. I am not saying that you are wrong, or even that your concerns are not valid in a theoretical sense. We can agree that the SEALs never returned the failed knives, or you can believe that Mad Dog and his wife are liars. It is immaterial. As a practical matter, for the overwhelming majority of Mad Dog owners, like 99.8% (assuming 12 failures, rather than one or two, out of 6,000 knives) of them, it is a non-issue. The handles will never come off their knives unless they take deliberate action to remove them.

In your last paragraphs, I see hope that we are finding the sort of common ground we need to let each other have our different opinions. You seem firmly attached to your notion that a Mad Dog knife will desolve in sea water like whale poop.
smile.gif
I think that's a little funny, but its fine, as long as you acknowledge that there are a lot of other good knives made out of similar material
wink.gif
, with handles attached by epoxy, and with blade coatings that each have their strong points and their weaknesses.



[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 10 November 1999).]
 
Steve, you bring up some good points.

Regarding on my focusing on the failings, consider it in this light: I'm focusing on the failings of these "super knives" to live up to their hype. It's sort of an "Emperor has no clothes" situation, as I see it. You can either dazzle them with brilliance, or baffle with BS, but I'm trying to deal with the facts here and the facts are that hype aside, there have been, and still are problems with Mad Dog Knives.

Regarding the Heat treating of the Mission, yes it's softer. It's also less likely to chip and easier to resharpen, and since Cliff was so kind to illustrate why chipping is bad, I'd say having a slightly softer knife versus having one that is building up internal fractures is a pretty clear choice. I can always resharpen a knife that goes dull.

Looking at the rusting issue, rust is a problem with all knives, pure and simple, no if ands or buts. However, it's an extremely big issue with the Mad Dog knives due to the coating, because of the above mentioned problems with it. So while the steel itself isn't the entire problem, combining it with the hard chrome leaves you with a very real problem indeed. It doesn't matter how tough the coating is if the rust attacks through the exposed edge, right?

I have not done head to head comparisions of the coatings myself, but I did some research on the subject and every indication I have is that TiAN is indeed more abrasion resistant than the hard chrome. Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) provides a more uniform coating process than the chrome plating. Heck, TiAlN is being used for coating cutting tools right now, so that should tell you about which is more abrasion resistant. On all the pages I read about abrasion resistant coatings, hard chrome wasn't even mentioned. In addition, with the smaller particles, there is less surface area for the rust to attack if there is an exposure or the bare steel and no cappillary action due to the coating itself. Again, TiAlN is the winner.

Here's one of the sites I took a look at, but there's several (70+) others as well... http://www.tribology.dti.dk/plastics_moulds.html

I'm glad we agree on the subdued issues regarding the hard chromeHowever, for knives billed as being superduper military in nature, this is a *basic* flaw. I mean, what are the first things people look for? Shine, Movement, Outlines...

As for focusing on the failures, that's what you tend to do in a discussion on the *problems*. When we're discussing the fact that a knife chipped out, you'll pardon me for not emphasizing that it has a nice sheath, as that's not the topic. You discuss a problem to come up with a solution, you don't try to draw attention away from it as that doesn't solve the problem.

Why am I arguing? Quite frankly because at this point I
1. Am fed up with the hype,
2. Am unwilling to let bogus information be bandied about, especially when I have proof staring me in the face,
3. Realize that if the information isn't disproved, it's going to keep being repeated over and over again until more people are convinced that it's the "truth".

Heck, look at how long you've hung onto the "no handle failures ever" story. By the way, Rick from Mission says he's personally seen knives with the handles rusted off, apparrently he traded an MPK for one. So, there's Greg Walker, Rick, and the yet to be found Lt. Murphy.

Now read what I'm going to say next very, very carefully. Since you've brought the point up, I am not calling Mad Dog or his wife liars. However, on examination, lots of things that he says don't make sense.

You repeated make mention of shooting holes in Mike's arguments, so turn your crosshairs to solving these puzzles.
Kevin has said that there have been no handle failures, ever. Yet we have at least 3 people with 1st or second hand knowledge otherwise.

Kevin said that he bought several runs of various steels for his latest "SuperKnife" project. Yet we know that the minimum amount of steel purchased is going to be anywhere between 4000 - 60,000 pounds, an entire mill run. Where's the extra steel? Was it used? Were knives made out of it?

Kevin says he's had 6 warranty returns ever, yet this flies in the face of statements from those who have had warranty problems and have posted here. More people than ChrisJohn, Cliff, etc have had their knives returned... Heck, the industry return rate is 6%! 6 returns ever is less than .1% if we go by his statement that he's made over 6000 knives. Keep in mind that I've heard of at least 6 warranty cases during the 2.5 years I've been doing the forums, and Mad Dog has been making knives for close to 10 years now....

Kevin says that the notches are there to mark a knife that fails heat treating. Yet out of 10 knife makers we've talked to, not one would mark the tang where it would be hidden by the handle, much less mark it twice, once on each side, radially symetric, instead of marking the blade itself. Furthermore, Allen said that while he was there, they immediately destroyed each blade that was a reject. Finally, we now hear that the knife may have been a shop knife that made it out the door. How interesting that the only people who have cut off the handles have both seen the notches on their knives. What are the odds of both people getting the stolen / reject / fake Mad Dogs?

I won't go into the questions raised about his background, as this doesn't involve his knives and truly are another subject.

So, I'm not going to say Kevin is a liar. Confused, maybe. Possibly he has memory problems, or is fatigued. But I'm not going to call him a liar. I'll wait until I have solid facts in hand before I make any kind of statement like that. All I'll say is that there's something that doesn't add up with his stories when you dig any further than the surface and look past their face value.

Spark
 
I have the MPK in A2 and an ATAK2. I have gotten my edge to chip with the ATAK2. I hammered the blade part way into a piece of a block of particleboard and flexed the blade. The edge took must of the force and chipped readily. A small section of the tip on the ATAK2 bent slightly from stabbing a 2x4. The tip was straightened out but it is now quite weak. The ATAK2 chipped while I was lightly chopping on a piece of soft iron. So far it is the only knife to chip on the soft iron block. The MPK (A2) was not bothered very much by any of these activities. The MPK edge was slightly impacted by the iron but was extremely difficult to notice. The ATAK2 does hold its edge much better than the MPK (A2).

Recently I used the MPK (A2) to put air holes into a drum (55 gal.). The only damage was the finish was scratched off on the grind lines. I would not think of doing this with the ATAK2, the tip would have bent or the edge chipped.

The edge of my ATAK2 did not chip from chopping hard, soft, or dried up wood. This included everything from maple dowels to soft pine. I am a bit surprised that Mike’s test knife chipped by chopping 2x4’s but I believe that did happen. Without reading Cliff’s reviews I may still be happily chopping with the ATAK2 and not tried flexing the edge.

I may have one of the defective ATAK2’s, it is in the correct time frame. I did purchase it from an authorized dealer.

I’m Sorry for deviating from the main topic.

Will


[This message has been edited by Will Kwan (edited 10 November 1999).]
 
Spark,
Good show. I'm going to pretend I didn't read the confused and memory bits, and your assumption that Kevin is lying about his steel trials without any facts, and focus in on the good parts, accentuate the positive, as it were.

In observing arguments, objective people frequently assume that the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the opposing views.

Hopefully there have been some objective observers to this <ahem> event, who have come to such a conclusion. If so, I am satisfied. I just didn't want it to be completely one-sided.

Oh, and on the subject of TiAlN. It is indeed very hard, but I have gotten the impression from a knife maker who TiAlN coated an ATS-34 knife for me that it is more porous, and thus a somewhat less effective rust inhibitor than teflon coatings, at least when the Teflon is new. So it is not without its shortcomings either. I am planning on giving several knives of mine a rainy beach camping trial this winter some time. I will toss my TiAlN coated blade into the comparison. Maybe then I will have something more than third hand information to share.

[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 11 November 1999).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top