My thoughts on science and testing.

[STR]

Many times on our forums here and on all others on the internet as well as in magazines we have often times had 'hard science' thrown forward as the reasoning behind why we use one steel over another for this or one handle material over another for that and often times we've found that even with hard science something is still missing because things don't always add up. A while back a big arguement ensued about a certain steel being used in knives by a certain company and the fact that it was the worst possible choice of steels one could pick for a 'beater' knife and yet today we have that very steel working not only well, but actually doing so beyond expectations.

CATRA edge testing, field testing, knowledge of heat treatment, carbide size and elemental charts and many other advances in metallurgy do in fact enable one to make predictions to an extent but I would suggest always remembering that the scientific method can never prove a particular theory as true or false unless all (key word there is "ALL") the variables can be controlled in that testing involving the forces related to both the cause and the effect of what we observe.

Because of this the most we can ask of the scientific method of testing is for it to help us in coming up with probabilities as to a partial judgement of a given hypothesis or theory and whether or not it is going to pan out. Therefore, we as individuals, testers, or scientists as well as other experts in the field cannot be expected to be able to predict or know with 100% accuracy that x + y will = z whenever the human hand is involved. We see many things in cutlery going on that probably shouldn't work if you listen to one source but yet they do work by others in practical testing. Many experts argue back and forth at times about how silly one blade steel is or one hardness is in a particular application and yet another maker or, tester or end line user can win competitions with that very blade that isn't supposed to work. Once again we have the human hand involved.

For this reason its necessary to always take whatever is written as fact about blade steels, hardnesses, and just about anything else that reads back to you as highly opinionated for what its worth only and, recognize that it is, at best an educated guess and nothing else no matter who it may originate from.

STR

 

[Torm]

Well said STR.

 

[I.V]

I'm going to have to agree on that one as well

 

[STR]

Thanks and keep in mind. It goes for me as well.

For one example. I've argued and been very opinionated about the use of thin liner locks by Emerson and other companies as 'hard use' or 'combat' knives when for all practical purposes and from results of testing I know that the gents thickness liner locking folder is the worst possible choice for a lock on a hard use folder. I know enough to sway away from this lock for myself in any uses other than easy cutting and using jobs. I mean, of all locks available to users that will work better in a hard use environment that are currently being made the liner lock is the most likely to defeat and fail in use on you and not just fail but do so miserably in that type of use and yet, go figure, the fact is that in many human hands those very locks are being used by end line users in the military, law enforcement and other emergency service work quite hard at times. It is one of those things that gets a guy to thinking. Its also one of those things that makes you realize that no matter how much science or testing you do you can never really predict what can happen when the human hand is involved.

STR

 

[I.V]

well, although I agree about the liner lock issue and really don't use them myself I did find something that may help explain them.

When I first got into knives I had liner locks, when new they don't engage all the way across the tang which is claimed to be the proper way for a liner lock to engage (for wear over time purposes). This also seems to be helping accidental release due to the fact that the liner needs to move a ridiculously short distance to disengage. I found on many folders that once the liner is worn out and engages fully across the tang it is less likely to slip, both due to the greater distance to travel before release and due to a deeper arc by the liner itself. Over some more time the blade will develop some vertical play but the lock for the most part will remain stable until too worn out.

How does this all add up? I think most users will not put their knives to hard use before developing trust in the locking mechanism, during that time the lock is either proved worthless or worn out enough to actually be a little more stable.

One more thing, the life of the liner lock is very short in comparison to other locks, but to the average knife buyer (not us nuts) the blade is probably the first part of the knife to be damaged beyond repair (misuse, neglect, lack of sharpening skills or any other reason) forcing them to replace the inexpensive to buy and\or produce liner lock for another. If the average knife doesn't last beyond a certain amount of time, it makes sense for companies to not invest the extra money in knives that are designed to last longer.

This is all of course PURE SPECULATION ON MY END AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS NOTHING ELSE BUT ANYONE. But it could be true..


In regards to new and better steels, I believe that they really are new and better but again, the average user may not necessarily feel the difference. Stones used to work for us as cutting tools, so did bronze and iron, now steel - and it works well, very well. So well in fact, that even though I see a huge difference between S30V and a SAK for example, the lesser steel of the SAK, still performs above and beyond most of my needs.

Again, just an opinion, sorry for rambling and sorry if I didn't make any sense, I'm tired

 

[STR]

I agree its almost criminal the way some come with the lock barely engaging the blades.

To expound on your thoughts more though. Longer knives built of thin liner stock are so easy to leverage sideways causing the lock to move off the contact with simple wrist flex and sideways torque that causes the locks to fail that its almost a joke really among testers in the industry to label them as anything other than novelty hype items. All knives out there built like the Emerson Persian, and the Spyderco Military, the BenchMade AFCK and others that long and with that thin of a liner set up are accidents waiting to happen if you interview most testers.

Its like this. Thinner stock is easier to flex which is why so many longer knives are also guilty of having off center blades. Thicker is harder to manipulate laterally under stress and thats needed on a longer handled longer bladed knife. Most mechanical engineers and other field testers or those that have studied it can tell you that from looking at them. Its been rumored that this was the real reason that Rat Trap folder was discontinued suddenly because all these things were brought to the attention of the makers of that folder by Cliff Stamp and Joe Talmege or other testers who they use or have used and trusted for testing their products. I've often disagreed with Cliff on many things but on this he is right on in his view.

A longer knife allows much more stress at the pivot contact point where the blade and lock mate up. 100 pounds of pressure on the lanyard end of knife like the Persian is much more weight on the pivot and lock area than 100 pounds on the lanyard end of a Buck Strider Mini 881. When you use the formula developed by SOG, BenchMade, Spyderco and other manufacturers that do thier own in house testing they all can vary by some degree. But they all point to the same end result and that is that the same amount of weight on two different length knives is actually many times more weight at the lock contact on the longer knife. On a long knife like that it can be as much as 5 times difference in stress and weight at the contact by compound leverage. Back when most of those knives were first designed and offered this was not known. Now that it is public knowledge and easily verifiable the right thing to do is discontinue them and/or start offering a safer more reliable model. For this I applaud Spydercos efforts as of late with their public cry for suggestions on a new lock for the Military.

In the auto industry they'd be forced by law to recall the ones out there not up to current safety standards but we don't have that kind of watch dog group for knives currently. If makers and manufacturers continue to set up their own watchdog groups and do what is right making corrections as new learning comes along with the safety for the end line users of their products always a concern hopefully we will never have such a government run watchdog group hovering over us.

STR

 

[alejandrino]

Not sure if I am out of topic here, but I think only fixed blades should be used for combat in the military. Longer blades, ease of deployment from sheath and no chance of failure from closing, no matter what type of folder lock there is! Of course a folder for personal use is fine but not when your l;ife is at stake ,I don't care who makes the folder but there is always a chance of failure from a folder as design parameters can not make folders too overly thick and heavy as it defeats the folder concept of ease of carry.

 

[I.V]

In regards to the military, no knife is good for combat, period, If you are ever put in a situation where you have to use your knife for combat it means you are probably alone and have lost your rifle. The rifle makes a far better CQC weapon then a knife (when used as an impact weapon), and so does the standard G.I. helmet.

I've had a fixed blade when I was in the military. It was big and uncomfortable and was very quickly replaced by a leatherman which was much more useful.

Should you, god forbid, ever be in a knife fight, you'll discover that a folding blade is just as lethal as a fixed one - you don't need a strong lock for a stab through soft tissue and you dont need any lock for a slash.

Back to topic - I think people may have a hard time to believe that they bought a 'not so good' product and spent a lot of money for it. The reviews and testimates are out there but unlike the auto indastry, here you're more likely to find a 'working as intended' reply if you complain that the knife's liner is too thin. Mazda in Israel for example, recalled all the 6 models after they found the fuel tank was of faulty design.

But then again, you don't pay $20,000 for a knife do you?

 

[STR]

But then again, you don't pay $20,000 for a knife do you?

In this household the only way that would happen is if I intended to sleep with it and make it my new life partner! I think a Scagel is one of the few even that high. Auto industry may not be a good analogy. Its just what came to mind regarding public safety.

On hard stabs with liner locks I recall Cliff Stamp stopped taking liner locks at all for testing after doing so many that defeated during the tests. One test was hard stabbing it into a phone book and measuring how much it penetrated. A high percentage apparently closed during this test preventing good penetration. I've never thought of a folding knife as a weapon. But apparently a lot of folks do.

STR

 

[STR]

Also, watch dog groups scare me as do times when I see gatherings of masses of people to form gun and knife rights organizations. It was this reason that I chose the auto industry as my example rather than say what I was thinking but what was really on my mind was this knife rights stuff. It speaks of reglatory legislators and new laws forming new restrictions on such things as blade lengths, shapes, type of openings and locks among other things. We have those over the gun industry and I understand other countries have very strict regulations for cutlery and a registration of knife makers. With a NRA organization to help gun rights and a newly formed knife rights organization formed to now do the same for knives in the USA the talk of regulatory and watchdog groups is on the minds of many more here than there were just a few years ago. This was part of all that was brought up and talked about at a recent gun show and it was all on my mind when I initially thought of this thread.

For this reason its been discussed that certain advertisements and promotions regarding folding knives by some companies do more damage than good and reflect on all knife companies in a bad way. Many that do not promote theirs this way actually get upset over this type of hype and promotion and apparently its due to the negative feedback in the industry as a whole from what some of these otherwise very small companies do to promote their own knives. Its been discussed privately anyway, that some of the hype being promoted that reflects negatively on other companies as a whole from these otherwise separate companies may be a call for some regulation in the future limiting such behavior or at least strongly frowning upon it.

During the course of these conversations both the Emerson knives and Cold Steel knife companies came up among others promoting such things as slashing and cutting of meats, teaching defensive postures and more. Looking over the promotional videos of these companies its easy to see why many would be upset. Some of the stuff Lynn Thompson does is really questionable IMO.

STR

 

[I.V]

While I would agree that some of the marketing used by those companies is questionable to say the least, I can't argue with the fact that its smart and it works. For as long as it is legal to sell the product the company can't be touched, once it's not then it's either a matter of changing some names and shapes or colors or closing the company - and while the company works, they want to make money.

Examples; The auto industry isn't a bad example, depends how you look at it. It's good to show things from a business point of view. People like versatile tools, they like to have as much as possible in the smallest package possible and so you get SUV's and SUT's and all that stuff.. "I want to carry lumber, take the family camping, go off road and do 0-60 in 5 seconds" is the approach. Same goes for knives, so on one side of the spectrum, multi tools evolved because people wanted pliers and screwdrivers and wire cutters and all the tools you can think of in a nice small package and on the opposite end you have people thinking that edged tools are also weapons (can you blame them? it's been more than true throughout history).
There you will find a "Great camping knife that can also stab through concrete if needed" and is of course aptly named "Night assassin" or something of the sort in order to stand out.
In forums like these you can also find the groups connecting in threads asking which multi tool could also be used in self defense.
For the average buyer it's very appealing to spend $10,000 on a car that does 0-60 in 5 seconds and to spend $60 on a knife that can stab through concrete. Even though they really have no use for either one.

Another thing to think about in those marketing techniques is that most of the people we like to call NKP's will hardly ever buy a knife, if they do, statistics show it will most likely be a SAK of some sort or anything else cheap. The rest of the market is us (a small part I think), professional users (another small part) and casual buyers or buyers for illegitimate purposes (even if only in theory).

Again, I could of course be completely wrong but at the moment it makes sense to me.

 

[STR]

Actually I don't think you are off base at all. In fact your real world experiences and input from a soldier's side as well as other things you mentioned were thoughtful and well put.

Thanks for contributing.

STR