Performance testing?

blademan 13 · Jul 9, 2003

Zius recently posted some links with some performance testing done on various Fallkniven products. This included the results of documented, controlled testing. Surprisingly, I found the thread elicited very few responses and was locked for some reason. I found this information quite intriguing, especially in light of the 2 following quotes.

I think it's time for them to step up and present some facts. I want some factual performance data on the knives that they promote

The only competitor's performance results that we will publish will be those that have been supplied to the public or to us privately by other makers. We will only publish the name of our competition if they give us permission to do so. If you want to know how another maker's knife will compare to a Busse Combat knife ask the other maker to duplicate our tests. We will gladly duplicate their tests.

I, for one, am very curious as to how the Fallknivens would compare strength wise to Busses of similar stock thickness and blade lengths and was wondering if this would be possible for you to do. These look to be tests of lateral stress, which seems to be a very important criteria in a proper knife design. Looking forward to seeing the results. Thanks for your time.

WTFOver · Jul 9, 2003

Well, my guess is that this was locked during the "Great Locking of ALL OSF Threads" that Jerry just did a bit ago. The Charts were infomative.

I think you can get much comp info from the other links that were posted in the same thread and the videos on the Busse Combat Web Site. If you have specific results of destructive testing that you are interested in and ask Jerry I'm sure he can provide them either on line or off line. Just post them or call the shop. I have never had a problem getting Jerry on the phone when I have called the shop. In fact Kassi has often put Jerry on the phone even when I didn't want to talk to him.

(After all, we all know Kassi & Shaggi run the shop and just let Jerry hang out there to keep him from bugging Jennifer all day long!)

UffDa · Jul 9, 2003

At the risk of sounding belligerent, you aren't looking very hard.

Cliff Stamp has done extensive testing of various knives under very harsh conditions. He provides detailed facts and figures. Do a search and you will find the info if you really want it.

Look at the Busse Combat web sight. There is a lot of info there. WTF mentioned the videos. Look at the bottom of your screen. You'll find them.

Josh Muller · Jul 9, 2003

jerry also mentioned that he was going to present a good sized report on their steel testing for the various steels they tried before infi was found (pirates of the carribean is out!!

)

albiet in two weeks, i take jerry on his word, cliff's testing definitely gives an idea of the outer limits of the blades abilities.

Jerry Busse · Jul 9, 2003

Jamie and Zius, That's good info on Fallkniven. Thanks for the links.

We do testing differently but just as controlled. We have devised simple mechanical tests that demonstrate the degree of the bend to breaking point and the amount of pressure required to make the bend (This kinda rules out thin filet knives from scoring so high).

Unlike Fallkniven, our bending test involves putting our blades in sharp cornered, steel jawed vises that are clamped tightly to the knife and which introduce major stress risers to the blade. Therefore our numbers are not able to be compared to theirs due to this different methodolgy. However, ANY maker or manufacturer can duplicate the "degree of the bend" portion of our test for nothing more than the cost of the blade. This test can also be performed "live" at shows to support their claims as Busse has done quite often.

The vise bend test is also, in our opinion, much closer to duplicating the most severe type of lateral stress that a blade may encounter during an actual survival situation where the introduction of stress risers is very probable.

My hat is off to Fallkniven for their testing and for publishing their results.

This, and doing "live" demonstrations to support these claims, is all that Busse Combat asks of any maker or manufacturer who makes a knife that they claim is worthy of being called a "survival knife".

It is crucial that the consumer know the limitations of their knife BEFORE they are called upon to use it in a drastic situation.

Good info boys!

Thanks,

Jerry

Cliff Stamp · Jul 10, 2003

blademan 13 :

I, for one, am very curious as to how the Fallknivens would compare strength wise to Busse s of similar stock thickness and blade lengths ...

Most cutlery steels of similar hardness levels are very stiff, and thus stock thickness will dictate how difficult it is to bend a blade. However there are massive differences in how the knife reacts as it bends, when it takes a set and when the set turns into a tear.

Two custom makers did prying tests on their ATS-34 blades on Bladeforums a few years ago. One was witnessed by a group of users. Both makers had very stiff blades, and both broke at low angles of flex. This is why that not every steel at 1/4" thick makes a good prybar.

You need a certain level of stiffness of course, however you also need ductility, the ability of the knife to resist sudden fracture and more importantly splintering. I have pryed with VG-10 and when broken it can shatter into multiple pieces.

The same can be seen when trying to cut through the edge with hard objects. You can easily see large edge break outs on the more brittle steels, this is impossible with the tougher steels which will just impact and bend.

I would also agree that prying with a knife should be done in the most extreme way, against the jaws of a vice as this sets the lower limit on performance, the least the user can expect if everything goes wrong.

Of course any such information by a manufacturer is appreciated by users interested in performance which is why I put links to that testing in the reviews after it came out.

I do think however that Fallkniven should be comparing the yield points as well as the tensile points, the former they ignore which would be the critical point to most users as it the case where the knife has taken permanent damage in the form of a set.

-Cliff

blademan 13 · Jul 10, 2003

Thanks for the feedback. I guess I just wish there was a testing facility out there where standardized, measureable tests could be conducted on various knives. This would allow buyer's the opportunity to judge the performance of the knives on a level playing field.

This is part of the problem when talking about testing and throwing numbers around. The numbers generated by different companies mean very little unless they are standardized. Fallkniven did some nice testing IMO, but I don't know exactly what the numbers mean? While I know that I cannot generate 400-500 pounds of force without a pipe, how do these numbers change when the knife is jerked rather than having the force applied smoothly?

Cliff,

You shattered a VG-10 blade by prying with your bare hands? Please explain the circumstances if you could.

Eric Isaacson · Jul 10, 2003

Originally posted by blademan 13

You shattered a VG-10 blade by prying with your bare hands? Please explain the circumstances if you could.

Jamie,
This isn't that hard to do. I don't know the circumstances on Cliff's blade, but I've done it myself on several knives. As a matter of fact I just did it 2 days ago

If you haven't tested a knife to destruction before you should, it is quite an eye opener (make sure you are wearing the appropriate safety gear)

(no the knives were not Busse or Swamp Rat

)

SpearHead · Jul 10, 2003

Jamie, I agree that to have conclusive and tangible proof, it would be nice to have a testing "standard". The problem arises when someone actually does it.

If the tests are done with several different knife brands with exactly the same stresses and conditions... say in a manufacturers shop... who believes the results? Immediately the manufacturer doing the testing has his credibility questioned because, he is obviously biased. After all, he does have a horse in the race.

On the other hand, if a third party, with academic credentials to back the research and test results does the testing... at the conclusion of testing his credibility is called into question because since he "must surely" be in bed with the winning maker.

And lastly, say you get Joe Experience off the street and give him several comparably priced and marketed knives to test. Regardless of the results, all but the winner will swear up and down that tester had too little experience, no credentials, and no knowledge of the knife making business on which to make an accurate comparison. Besides, he must be on the winners payroll.

Even when the tests are done side by side in a public forum, the loser is always going to claim that there was some sort of subterfuge going on and that the testing was unfair.

If you look at the contemporary knife market's history objectively, you can see this play out over and over. So, with that in mind... how do you propose we resolve this quandry?

SpearHead · Jul 10, 2003

Here's an idea. Let's petition the UN to create the International Committe on High Performance Bladeware Endurance Testing. That should solve everything.

nick681 · Jul 10, 2003

Good Idea Spearhead! I volunteer to be the US Minister of High Performance Bladeware.

Nick

~Nuclear INFIdel and member of O.I.N.K~
~Aint this place a geographical oddity? TWO WEEKS from anywhere!~

Dark Nemesis · Jul 10, 2003

Originally posted by SpearHead
Here's an idea. Let's petition the UN to create the International Committe on High Performance Bladeware Endurance Testing. That should solve everything.

Will there be inspectors to make sure every blade is tracked, except the ones which are hiding in sheaths? cause you could never expect a knife to be in a sheath that would be unfair....

nick681 · Jul 10, 2003

Good Question DN I'll look into it.

Nick

~Nuclear INFIdel and member of O.I.N.K~
~Aint this place a geographical oddity? TWO WEEKS from anywhere!~

Cliff Stamp · Jul 10, 2003

Blademan 13 :

I don't know exactly what the numbers mean

They are torques and are *constantly* misused to over hype knives. When the 1000 in.lbs lock statistic first started being thrown it around, multiple manufacturers called it "1000 lbs of force" or "1000 lbs of pressure", both are wrong, the latter is meaningless (it is like saying the knife is one hour long). Of course these statements would have the average user think the lock was unbreakable, however anyone who used such a knife quickly realized it took no where near that level of load to break the lock.

In reality, this number comes from applying a load one inch from the lock, which of course will never happen in reality. Most knives can take loads with levers at least six inches long, and up to about 12 for the larger ones. For most knives it would therefore be much more sensible to post the break points in ft.lbs, which would then be just 83 ft.lbs for the 1000 in.lbs statistic. Both of these are the same number, however one of them is much better from a promotional point of view.

The last VG-10 blade I broke was a Deerhunter, which was locked in a vice and just twisted with the wrist until it broke, which wasn't difficult as the knife is thin. Knives of that size are not difficult to break until about 3/16", which is enough for really heavy prying until the blade is chopper sized at which point 1/4" or so is needed.

Of course it depends on how much prying you want to do, which is why it is useful for manufacturers to state how much force it takes to bend the blade to an angle at which it takes a set and then breaks. Of course to be meaningful the warrenty has to cover such use - which it rarely does.

SpearHead :

how do you propose we resolve this quandry?

Ignore the baseless critism. There will always be those who will argue without reason or logic based purely on faith. There is on way to resolve anything with someone of such a mindset. No evidence can convince them as they don't need or want evidence to reach a conclusion. What you can do is provide the information and thus allow the people who are interested to learn from it.

-Cliff

blademan 13 · Jul 10, 2003

Originally posted by SpearHead
Jamie, I agree that to have conclusive and tangible proof, it would be nice to have a testing "standard". The problem arises when someone actually does it.

If the tests are done with several different knife brands with exactly the same stresses and conditions... say in a manufacturers shop... who believes the results? Immediately the manufacturer doing the testing has his credibility questioned because, he is obviously biased. After all, he does have a horse in the race.

On the other hand, if a third party, with academic credentials to back the research and test results does the testing... at the conclusion of testing his credibility is called into question because since he "must surely" be in bed with the winning maker.

And lastly, say you get Joe Experience off the street and give him several comparably priced and marketed knives to test. Regardless of the results, all but the winner will swear up and down that tester had too little experience, no credentials, and no knowledge of the knife making business on which to make an accurate comparison. Besides, he must be on the winners payroll.

Even when the tests are done side by side in a public forum, the loser is always going to claim that there was some sort of subterfuge going on and that the testing was unfair.

If you look at the contemporary knife market's history objectively, you can see this play out over and over. So, with that in mind... how do you propose we resolve this quandry?

Good points all. But I feel the only logical one would be independent third party testing. I believe most labs or testing facilities are more adamant about objectivity than we ever will. It is their business and livelyhood. I don't think they would really risk their reputation on something as menial as knife testing. Regardless, total objectivity could be guaranteed by;

1) the manufacturers all having a representative present during the testing and then signing off saying everything was on the up and up BEFORE the actual findings were officially released.

2) While many of us here can recognize a specific manufacturer just by glimpsing a naked blade, this is very likely not to be the case when an independent testing lab is used. Just to small a percentage of the general population are into knives that deeply. I would say it might be entirely possible to have sterile blades tested with no affiliation to the company producing them.

I really think that most manufacturer's are afraid of having the results of comparison testing published and made available for fear of having their knives judged soley on this criteria. While strength definitely is a worthy trait in a knife, it is not the only one. They need to realize that sometimes. I don't know what it costs for labtime or the like, but I could most likely gain access to a Physics lab and run some tests all by myself. But then again, we would run into problems as Spearhead described above.

What really sucks about this is that I feel some of the knife magazines should present this information. They have the resources, time and knowledge to pull it off. Why don't they do it? Because they would lose money on advertising from those companies whose numbers were not that good.

I was into motorcycles for many years and always looked forward to reading the dyno charts of the various bikes tested, especially if it was a shootout on the same class of bike. Dyno's don't lie and can be very revealing, not just who makes the most horsepower, but at what RPM is it made at? Sure there is always going to be the horsepower king, but is that peak horsepower at the expense of less power down in the RPM range you generally ride in? You know, I never once saw a manufacturer fail to provide test bikes when asked.

The same can be said for knives, I just feel that if I was running a knife magazine, this is what I would want to see in my reviews. Hard, cold facts from performance testing backed up with a subjective review on how the knife actually works. Let people decide for themselves what they think is the best for the way they use their knives.

Sorry for the rambling, just got caught in the moment. More thoughts?

Jerry Busse · Jul 10, 2003

Jamie,

I just wrote a 2 page response and lost it to a disconnection!!!!! I'll try again tonight! Lots of good points being made!

Nuke on!

JohnnyO · Jul 10, 2003

Dont ya just hate when that happens?

UffDa · Jul 10, 2003

Jamie:

I'm not sure what kind of knives you make. If you are a bladesmith, I'm sure that you are aware of the tests given by the ABS. Just in case you are not aware of the tests, here's the URL for the journeyman test.

http://www.americanbladesmith.com/ABS_JSTest.htm

A lot of people scoff at bladesmithing as being obsolete and silly, but I have not heard of many if any stock removal knife makers who are willing to put their knives to the test with the exception of Busse Combat.

In a thread on another forum a year or so ago, Ed Caffrey said that he had a test blade in his shop that had been bent 90 deg. and back to straight 17 times without the edge cracking. This was fully heat treated 52100. Believe it or don't.

UffDa · Jul 10, 2003

Jerry:

A suggestion......

If you are going to type two pages, you might want to do it off line in Word or whatever and cut and paste it the forum. That saves a lot of aggravation and allows you to edit, check spelling and maybe say, "THEHELLWITHIT!".

Zius · Jul 10, 2003

Therefore our numbers are not able to be compared to theirs due to this different methodolgy.

Mr. Busse, I think I can convert the data from your test setup to compare them with Fallknivens testing. I have already modelled your setup, and all I need to do is enter the numbers. If you can please post the following numbers:
- Tested model
- Blade thickness
- Force exerted at breaking
- The lever between the point where the force was exerted and the vice
and a picture where the blade geometry is clearly visible and/or (preferably and) the measurements of a cross section of the tested model, it should be a matter of minutes to calculate the stress at breaking.

but I don't know exactly what the numbers mean? While I know that I cannot generate 400-500 pounds of force without a pipe, how do these numbers change when the knife is jerked rather than having the force applied smoothly?

Jamie, the only way to make sure that tests are reproducable (which is the golden standard for scientific testing), to conditions should be ideal to be modelled. Usually, the model discounts a number of things to remain comprensible and mathematically solvable. Reality is usually worse than the modelled world, but that's just the way it is. Collision tests with cars also fail to take a lot of things into account, but that does not diminish their validity.

I would also agree that prying with a knife should be done in the most extreme way, against the jaws of a vice as this sets the lower limit on performance, the least the user can expect if everything goes wrong.

Cliff, I don't completely agree for the reasons I mentioned in my reply to Jamie. The reason to do testing should be to validate the mathematics behind the design of the blade, not to approximate performance in the field. Your tests do that. However, a test setup like Busse uses can easily be modelised, without taking possible point loads (force concentrations) into account. Those force concentrations can be compensated by wrapping the vice in cloth, or by smoothing the edges of the vice.

On the other hand, if a third party, with academic credentials to back the research and test results does the testing... at the conclusion of testing his credibility is called into question because since he "must surely" be in bed with the winning maker.

I doubt a serious academic research institute (such as the Lulea University of Technology) would stake their precious reputation on faulty knife tests. The real money for those guys isn't in testing knives.

About the ABS tests: they are good for their purpose (determining whether an applicant is able to design and make a knife that passes the tests for which it is designed), but I do have some criticism, if they are to be used to compare knives.
- Knives are designed to pass that test, not to be a great user knife, although the test criteria may force the maker to make a good allround knife.
- The criteria don't have to fit a specific use for the knife. For instance, I don't need dedicated chopper to pass all of the tests. I just expect it to be a great chopper. An axe would certainly fail, but might serve me better in the woods. Likewise, I wouldn't expect my SAK to chop.
- With regard to bending or breaking: there have been many discussions about it, and I think it is entirely dependant on the intended usage of the knife.
- A more serious drawback is that the ABS test isn't reproducable, since both the skill of the user and the materials used (rope and wood) aren't uniform.

Performance testing?

Pirate