Ontario Rat-3

[R.A.T.]

Do you think Ontario would support the D2 RAT-3 as a more robust knife than the SR101 Howling Rat?
-Cliff

This is a typical Stampism. Trying to get something stirred up out of basically nothing.

Who even mentioned comparing the two knives? The Howling Rat is a great piece... I love it. The RAT-3 is a great piece also. I have not heard Swamp Rat try to compare their knife to ours and we have not tried to compare our knife to theirs - in other words there is no debate on this topic. Again, they're both great little knives so your attempt to salvage what you can out of this thread for your own agenda is just not working.

Jeff

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Trying to get something stirred up out of basically nothing.

Actually you are the one blowing the issue up, and taking the thread off on a QC slant, here is what I said, which I thought was actually more positive than anything :

Blade looks solid, same shape as the Howling Rat, handle design has positive and negatives in comparison. The Howler works better for heavy power cutting, and that style is better for precision work, especially in side grips.

Assuming it is 1/8" stock it is a different class of blade though. The Howling Rat is really heavy duty for its size. I'd prefer no index finger on that class of blade though , I like the way Boye grinds them :

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/boye-hunter-side.jpg

The Deerhunter is an exception piece in that class range as well, as is the Mora 2000 per dollar. Nice design anyway, just function, no speed holes.

I asked if Ontario would support the RAT-3 being a more robust design (which you avoided answering) because when said the Howling Rat is a more robust design (SR101 is much tougher than D2 and the stock is 3/16") Jones contended it so I asked if Ontario would support his promotion.

-Cliff

 

[R.A.T.]

I like you Cliff because you make me laugh, but I absoutely refuse to be suckered into a debate on which knife is better. Again, I like 'em both. Let the consumer decide which one they like the best. They might just like both of them. We feel they will be served well by either.

Jeff

 

[condahaw]

Well anyways, I'll buy one in a minute when they're produced in 1095. I might even break down in the meantime... I have and do own other blades produced under the RAT logo and have never been disappointed: bang for the buck, benefit/cost no matter how you slice it. And yes, I have owned Busse blades and I sure like that INFI steel...

Dave

 

[averageguy]

I'm apreciative that both Jeff and Mike took some time to post here and clear up some of Cliff's hyperbole.
It is unlikely that either of these gentlemen are contemplating bastardizing their designs into some sort of heavy chopping tool - so I know that you, Cliff, will never appreciate these knives or most real knives.
The Ontario RAT knives are intelligently designed and well executed.
Made in the USA - and impossibly priced.

 

[knifetester]

As a small utility knife steel D2 tends to work really well, assuming a decent hardness. Why would you want 1095 over D2 in that size of knife? It looks a bit light to be a heavy beater.

1095 is not just for impact tools, it can also be excellent in light use knives, as Alvin Johnson has pointed out many times (though this would be at near full hard).

Why would someone want 1095 over D2? There could be many reasons.

First, if somone is seeing micro-chipping as the reason their knives are dulling, they will want to go with the toughest steel they can. There is little argument that 1095 is tougher than D2. For example, someone cutting around a lot of bone.

On the other hand, if someone is cutting a lot of abbrisive materials, like cardboard, and sees actual wear as the dulling method, then a highly carbided wear resistant steel like D2 would probably be a better choice.

Further, if someone values ease of field sharpening using improvsied means, then they may appreciate the ease of sharpening that 1095 offers, and see D2's wear resistance as a detriment.

If someone is using their knife at a very high polish edge finish, for wood work for example, then 1095 may be a better choice. While D2 can be polished, it is much easier with 1095, just look at the choice of wood working tools being offered in simple carbon steel for that exact reason.

For people that have no need for corrosion resistance, than that feature of D2 over 1095 is not of any advantage. Conversely, some people actually prefer simple steels for marine work, since they tend to surface rust rather than pit.

Maybe they just like 1095, and don't like D2 for whatever reason. If the knife is offered both ways, then it is up to them to decide how to spend their money.

I like both 1095 and D2, but I usually buy slip joints in 1095 or similiar steel, and avoid D2, even though many people will say it is "superior" for that use. For my uses, it may not be.

1095 is just a darn good, versatile steel. I would venture to guess there have been more knives made out of 1095 than every other knife steel combined, and they performed very well.

Now as it happens, if I was ordering a RAT-3, I would want it in D2, while I prefer the RAT-7 in 1095 (and I own both versions.)

Jeff Randall AKA R.A.T.,

Why did you choose to add the finger choil on the RAT-3 instead of not adding that feature and increasing the usable blade length?

One one hand, I can see where it would add some controlability, but on that short of a blade it seems controable enough. As well, I can see how it has become one of your design "trademarks" (not in the legal sense) seeing as how the other RAT series knives incorporate it.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Knifetester, I would not contend any of the 1095 vs D2 points, nice reasoning, comprehensive. Owen's a user, I just was curious as to his perspective. There is no right/wrong there, just what you want. I'd take D2 in that style of blade as I see it more as a cutter than a utility tool. Of course if it was 1095 full hard then I'd take the 1095 version.

It is unlikely that either of these gentlemen are contemplating bastardizing their designs into some sort of heavy chopping tool - so I know that you, Cliff, will never appreciate these knives or most real knives.

Yes because the other knives I mentioned, Deerhunter, Mora 2000, and Boye Drop Point Hunter are obviously designed as heavy chopping tools. The Deerhunter and Mora are 1/16" thick with acute edges, the Boye's are full flat ground to 0.005" at the edge. My main EDC knives are actually all way thinner in cross setion than the RAT-3, they are also much harder and far more optomized as being "knives".

-Cliff

 

[R.A.T.]

Why did you choose to add the finger choil on the RAT-3 instead of not adding that feature and increasing the usable blade length?

There was actually some debate on that. We pretty much run all of our new designs by the folks on our forum since they use knives a lot and have a lot of valuable opinions when it comes to what's needed in the field. Some of them had asked us not to put the choil in. The reason we decided to do it is it basically turns a 3-finger knife into a full-grip knife. Unlike what some folks have jumped to conclusions on about the RAT-3, it is actually designed as a fully concealable fixed blade. While it works great in the woods, we're seeing a lot more rescue, LEO, and military folk picking this knife up as an EDC. I predict it will become the best selling knife of the RAT line in short order.

Jeff

 

[knifetester]

Owen's a user, I just was curious as to his perspective.

Yes, Owen treats his knives like the tools they are, and he has an extensive knowledge of knives, and tons of hard use, both in the military and civilian context.

I remember several years agao he posted a picture of his 710 that had the scale melted by molten slag! Just take a look at his Groovemaster.

Seriously, Owen is a really impressive guy, and when he writes, I make sure to read. He has more common sense than half the people I know put together.

When I think of the top "knife people" Owen is right up there, along with guys like Jeff Clark, Joe Talmadge and a few guys that don't post here.

 

[knifetester]

The reason we decided to do it is it basically turns a 3-finger knife into a full-grip knife.

How long is the handle?

One of the RAT-7's real strong points is its handle design, very comfortable. IS the RAT3 a downsized verion of that, if so what is the scale?

BTW, great picture on that leg holster. I assume that is a Deputy US Marshall based on the badge. IS the RAT-3 issued or approved by the USMS?

Certainly not a use that I would ever have for a knife, but pretty cool. (I cut apples not bad guys). I know nothing about tactical stuff, but I assume he has the knife there as a back up weapon. From my perspective, I would want the knife behind the pistol for use in weapon retention. Of course, I have the luxury of having a perspective in the abstract instead of real life putting my neck on the line.

IS Bladetech the OEM sheath maker?

 

[averageguy]

Whatever Cliff - you've got the answer for everything, just like the newbees.
I, for one, am tired of hearing it.

 

[R.A.T.]

BTW, great picture on that leg holster. I assume that is a Deputy US Marshall based on the badge. IS the RAT-3 issued or approved by the USMS?

No, the USMS does not endorse or issue the RAT-3. The Deputy Marshal shown in that photo is a long time friend of ours and he offers feedback on our designs on a regular basis. The photo was taken at a recent course he and I attended together.

Blade-Tech is the manufacturer of the RAT-3 sheath. Handle length on the RAT-3 is right at 3.5" You can get a full grip on it but it sure feels good when you slide the finger in the choil.

Jeff

 

[Keith Montgomery]

Jeff, here is another vote for 1095.

 

[Gossman Knives]

Thanks Jeff and Mike for making some great well made affordable knives. You guys along with Ontario, are doing the knife buyer a great service with the way you handle your customers. I have a RTAK and it's one of my favorite "big" blades. Handles excellent, cuts well and is a breeze to resharpen. Keep up the good work guys.
Scott

 

[sak_collector]

Looking forward to getting myself a RAT-3 one of these days soon.

Living out in the sticks, it is always nice to have a small, stout out-of-the-way fixed blade when doing the outdoor projects.

 

[R.A.T.]

Again, thanks for the support. Mike and I have dedicated ourselves for many years to researching gear (not just knives) that works and is affordable to the average person. There is a lot of good equipment out there and sometimes it's hard to debate which is better. Many times is just depends on the environment and personal preference. Some folks like the Stoner designed AR type rifle, some like an AK, some like an FN. All of them have their strong and weak points. At the end of the day all that matters is that the gear functions for the person betting his life on it. If we didn't trust and believe in our own product in some of the places we go, then we would not even think about selling to someone else going into harms way. Our suggestion to any customer is to buy what you're comfortable with, regardless of the hype, and personally test that product for ALL of it's characteristics. For knives this would include toughness, cutting efficieny, comfort, carry ability, etc. For the most part price does not have a bearing on true field performance. I've bet my life many times on a Cold Steel SRK and a 5 dollar machete and would be happy to do that again anywhere in the world.

Jeff

 

[OwenM]

knifetester, thank you for the nice compliments.

Cliff, I would prefer 1095 in this particular knife 'cause it would be a beater, and I'd like good cutting ability combined with good toughness. As much as I like the better stainless steels and D2, I'm more than willing to compromise some wear resistance for an edge that is less likely to suffer serious damage from hard use. Not that I have a shortage of knives, or even many complaints about those other steels. Matter of fact, that's the whole issue for me here. I have plenty of knives, and I'm pretty happy with them. Still, I've been looking around for a carbon steel knife in this size range and thickness to try out at work, but haven't found many that have both a blade and handle that I like without going custom. So, the simplest way I can put it is that the 1095 version would fill a niche for me, while the D2 wouldn't.

...course I might buy the D2 anyway :footinmou

 

[Brian Jones]

Do you think Ontario would support the D2 RAT-3 as a more robust knife than the SR101 Howling Rat? Jones contended it so I asked if Ontario would support his promotion. -Cliff

Cliff, if this is the kind of inference you draw from very little data, I wonder how you get through a knife test and end up with any kind of accurate conclusion at this point. You have twisted a simple statement of mine into a "promotion." Don't put words in my mouth that I never said, thankyouverymuch.

My point was not to "imply" that the RAT-3 or the Howling Rat are better or worse than the other in certain aspects. They are different (apples & oranges), and I have not done a side-by-side test EITHER, so what I was saying (very clearly) is that neither you, me, or anyone else could draw such a "definitive" comparison conclusion just by looking at pictures. Now, if you had done a comparison test between the two, I'd accept your statement, with the evidence of your comparison, becuse then you'd have more credibility from having handled both knives in this instance. If you were to have credibility, then your comparison statement should have been written as a hypothesis ( "the Howling Rat NIGHT be more robust." ) instead of a "definitive conclusion." Your ego is getting way too far ahead of your intelligence lately.

Now, FYI, IMHO, Busse knives are some of the finest high-end blades out there. I've never seen, handled, or owned anything with the Busse reputation attached that did not absolutely kick-ass. I would trust my life to a Busse or Swamprat knife anyday, simply because I know they put out a seriously great product.

KEY POINT HERE IS WHAT JEFF SAID: That OntarioRat does not do comparison selling. So, your question quoted here is irrelevant.

Now, when I asked for concrete evidence of the "numbers of failures and returns", you said do a search. Well, I hold you to a more specific standard than that -- because you are so detailed in your numbers in your tests. But when it's convenient for you to talk about "multiple failures," your standards for evaluating any available data become vague and inconclusive. You rely on hearsay and second or third-hand innuendo when convenient. So, these statements from you are false and inaccurate, and it is frankly disgusting how you cast a certain light on some makers and companies with this kind of carelessness. You are grossly neglectful and inconsistent in your thinking.

The problem is, many of the newbies here are in awe of your tests because they don't yet know what a real test constitutes or they just figure because you have lots of numbers you might know what you're talking about. And then you make a careless statement based on nothing concrete. Is this the way you conduct your tests too? By doing a search on the forums? The newbies here should do a search on the forums and see how many of the top knifemakers get ticked off at you and try to correct you and just give up because you or more interested in winning an argument than contributing anything worthwhile. When you first started on the forums, you were not like this. I think some self-examination is in order for you, Cliff.

My problem at this point Cliff, is that you lack manners and probably need to move to a more populated area and learn about social etiquette. It's not nice how you keep jumping into others' threads and taking them way off course, like you did here, and in just about every other thread. You pay no attention when people tell you this. It's fine to publish your conclusions, or ideas here, but this is a discussion board. You tend to talk AT people here, not with them. It is selfish, boorish, and egotistical.

In many internet environments, they call that "trolling."

So, the issue so many folks here have with you is your manners. Amazing how many awesome knifemakers you have alienated, and you're the one who loses because you could have learned from them.

Don't bother with a response, because your track record is there for all to see if they care to really examine in detail.

This is my last post on this hijacked subject.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I'm more than willing to compromise some wear resistance for an edge that is less likely to suffer serious damage from hard use.

There is that, carbon steels like 1095 when hardened correctly can take some amazing stresses that shatter stainless blades even with thicker profiles. I have a few similar blades in 52100 which are solid.

With the low hardness Ontario is running 1095 though it is overkill on carbon content, they could get the same hardness with a medium carbon steel in bainite, which on paper tends to be insanely tough.

Looking forward to see how Thom's experiment works out, if it is solid maybe Justin and Clark can do a run of bainite flat ground RD9's.

-Cliff

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Now, if you had done a comparison test between the two, I'd accept your statement, with the evidence of your comparison, becuse then you'd have more credibility from having handled both knives in this instance.

SR101 is a much tougher steel than D2, and assuming as noted that the RAT-3 is 1/8", the cross section is thicker on the Howling Rat, however even they were the same in that regard, the steel itself makes it a more robust design. The impact toughness of these steels are not even in the same class.

If you could not make such conclusions based on steel and geometry it would be impossible to design knives nor could you pick suitable steels or knives in general. By your logic users can't actually decide if a 1095 or D2 TAK is more suitable to thier uses based on part experience with said steels which is completely false. Read Owen's post where he described why he would prefer 1095 over D2, same reasoning.

What would be very difficult to judge from pictures would be fine details when the knives are similar in design, such as which knife would cut better because it is hard to judge edge profiles from a picture. Or if one knife was O1 and the other 52100 which one would have the best edge retention or toughness as these steels are close and the heat treating could sway it either way.

Now, when I asked for concrete evidence of the "numbers of failures and returns", you said do a search.

Yes, as the information is there if you care to look for it including in the forum that you moderate, most problems were in late 2002, but they continued up to 2003, mine was this years and it had the same problem due to a grind invariance. I have seen many multiple Ontario's failures myself, with a frequency which is much higher than anything reported for any other blade of similar price.

-Cliff