Navy Seal test info.

A

adfprpusn

Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
19
Many ads for the SOG Seal Knife 2000 indicate that it was chosen for use with the Navy Seals after going through all sorts of tests for this and that. In an old A.G. Russel catalog it says that most of the major knife makers submitted knives for this test. I was wondering if anybody has seen any detailed reports on what was tested and how the runner ups preformed. I would think that if tax payer money was used than it might be "public Domain" or something. I remember reading detailed articals when the Army was testing 9mm's to replace the Colt 1911 sidearms. Has anyone seen anything? If so, where?

P.S. How do you work the spell check on these forums anyway. Lord knows I need it.
 
My younger brother was a SEAL in the 90's. He said at the time the only issue knife was a Mission Titanium fixed blade, and it was only issued to certain units in the Navy and not just the Seals. I hope that helps.
 
Don't know about actual test reports, but when Walker was heading "Fighting Knives", there was at least one, if not two, article(s) that dealt with the testing when the original contracts were arranged with MadDog Knives.. and the subsequent debacle...
 
Early 90's- Blade Magazine ran a huge article on the new Seal knives. It(the issue) had a blue cover with the Mission knife on t, small inset photo of Gen. Swarzkoff(sp?) middle bottom. Steve Shackleford wrote it, and detailed the tests, knives tested, costs, etc....
 
The test Cliff linked to, is close to the Seal version. A few tests missing are a salt water emersion test, a elec. conductivity test, and a wood drilling and chipping test(using blade tip) that were also done.

A few custom makers(Lainhart, Strider, and I think, Emerson, etc....) also submitted knives to the test.
 
My son is a SEAL, and he said they got the Glock bayonet issued to them because the SOG was too expensive. Both far better than that Ontario slug.
 
Wunderbar said:
My younger brother was a SEAL in the 90's. He said at the time the only issue knife was a Mission Titanium fixed blade, and it was only issued to certain units in the Navy and not just the Seals. I hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Have a SEAL bud who carried a Randall,90's,but I've long wanted a Mission Titanium just always wondered what they're like to sharpen.
 
Your friend isn't John Gay is he? I heard the Randle he was carrying might have saved his leg from a gun shot in Somalia.
 
No.It wasn't he,my bud was in Africa though.Have heard of the Randall saving a SEAL incident,also a Busse stopping a BG bullet in Iraq and saving a soldier from a possibly fatal wound. :thumbup: :cool:
 
Thank you all for your help.
It is sort of interesting what the seals actually do carry. I am sure the test or tests were conducted to see what knife or knives would be best suited for most missions. I am also sure that knives are often picked specificaly for certain missions in one team while on another team a "general issue" knife might be the norm. And all of these policies change with new leaders, administrations, and budget restraints. I would also think that a SEAL would have a lot more of a disposable attitude about a knife than say a Green Beret. While instructing gurillas miles behind enemy lines a GB would depend on his knife to live for the next 6 months or so. A SEAL's mission might take one evening and require a "make it happen at all costs" attitude. Both examples would require a tough knife, but other considerations (such as cost) might also be a factor.

This sort of speculation is great fun but the main thing I wanted to know about was how different knives held up to different tests. This test could have been done by HUD for all I care. Cliff, (I address your name with reverence), thank you for responding. Your link was just the sort of mouth watering morsal I was looking for. Mr.Bowie, I am pursuing your lead as we speek,(anyone have any old "BLADE" issues?). The Randall knives you others spoke of, are those the ones by Ontario?

Thanks again guys. One finall thought, I went and cheked out a Seal knife 2000 after reading Mr. Yams piece. I an normally not too keen on a knife that I can't hook into my Lansky. I must confess that it seemed very stout and the edge seemed "crisp". I would almost be interested in buying one if it were called something else. I may be dumb, but who wants to be labled as a "SEAL wanna be". I guess the folks at SOG marketing figure quit a few do and they have the sales to prove it. Or maybe I ought not to care so much about what people think or what a knife is called and just buy the thing.

Here I was just trying to make a joke, and I go and get all philosophical on ya'... Well there is always the Lansky issue.

Thanks for letting me ramble...If your still reading.
 
We have our own Randall forum here,you can check it out.Randall's are made in Florida.Orlando,I believe.You get on a list to buy a Randall,it can be years,there is a reason for this.You should check it out.Randall's can be bought on the secodary market. :thumbup:
 
I would shudder to think that someone never carried a seal 2000 on a real world mission and proved the sog banter---mine works fine---think they shoulda named it white shark or somethin'---tuff critter--worse reputation
 
Billat908 said:
My son is a SEAL, and he said they got the Glock bayonet issued to them because the SOG was too expensive. Both far better than that Ontario slug.
Click to expand...


b.s. :jerkit:
 
This was first brought up on Knifeforums when McClung moderated a couple of forums there, it gets mentioned every now and again. Basically he had a significant order which he never filled despite selling identical models at shows.

-Cliff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top