I wonder how many people who drive over-built SUVs, Jeeps, Volvos, etc. and carry ZT's, Hinderers, "over-built" folders of any company, or "over-built" fixed blades daily... actually use them.
Well, if you're driving the car or cutting with the knife, you're using it regardless of whether or not your reaching the full potential of its "toughness", and that potential is there should you ever need it (i.e. insurance). It's up to each user to decide how much insurance he wants
The volvo (and driver) will take less damage in a crash than a smart car, the over-built knife's blade won't snap off as easily when you need it not to. Over-built is safer than under-built. Just saying...
I think Noss's videos are unscientific in that they don't give accurate data because of inconsistency of forces applied to the knives and his sample size is one knife. He's not testing a dozen. He tests one.
One randomly selected representative from a batch of uniformly produced individuals theoretically
identical. If that individual is NOT representative of each in the batch, there is a manufacturing QC problem. But if you doubt the results, you are free to replicate the tests, they are performed with maximal transparency, which shows greater scientific integrity than tests performed by many other makers/manufacturers, etc.
Second, "inconsistency of forces applied" is representative of real-world use, as is performing the tests by hand (rather than machine), and extrapolates more reliably to the forces other users might employ, not to mention that the sheer number of applications of force (hammer blows) given to each knife turns much of that inconsistency into statistical noise.
The videos show that certain knives can handle abuse, but since not all knives are designed to handle abuse, ... doesn't really mean much when it was ... If it wasn't engineered to be used that way, testing it that way proves nothing other than it does not fulfill a function for which it was never intended...
On the contrary, most of the knives tested are expressly advertised/marketed or promoted by others as
specifically able to handle abuse, "built like a tank" etc., but that isn't the point, the point is to show how much abuse the knife can take
regardless of its intended design, which shows just how far each can be pushed
beyond (or before) what the author/maker intended. Watch the Mora Clipper vids - that little sucker can take a LOT of abuse!
... The Green Beret knife looks like a sturdy, solid knife that would handle regular use and then some. It probably takes and holds a nice edge too. I imagine it would do well at cutting tasks.
"Looks like", but
doesn't and
doesn't - Do you see the need for this sort of testing?
The point is that if you design a knife as though all that mattered was toughness (thick stock thickness, thick edge, 1/2 saber grind, 55rc, thick tip, marketing that indicates military use), it should be tough.
... an overly solid knife for edc uses ... designed for the military to use in the feild of combat... whatever combat throws at you, be that bashing in a window, prying open a bent humvee door, cutting through metal from a crushed vehicle, whatever. If you market to the military: you need to be able to stand up to military use or you need to specify in your marketing 'for normal cutting tasks only'. ... A thick knife with a thick edge at 55rc and a low saber grind doesn't.
It's important to remember that what a knife maker *thinks* about his knife means absolutely nothing to the end performance of the knife once it's created. The only thing that matters is the tool thats in your hands. The physics of the world we exist in dictates what that knife is or is not capable of doing: not the makers words. When NOSS tests a knife ... he's testing the knife itself. That knife and all of it's various attributes says that it's designed to take the same level of abuse ... with an obvious tilt towards hard use with it's exceptionally low RC for a supersteel, thick stock, low saber grind, thick edge and tip. I can't stress this enough: that is not a thin edc slicer in any regard.
Well said. :thumbup:
