[Poll] Are lock strength tests pointless?

Are lock strength tests pointless?

  • Yes, they have no bearing on actual knife usage

    Votes: 31 24.0%

  • Yes, it is purely a marketing strategy

    Votes: 17 13.2%

  • Yes, it's just stupid YouTube antics

    Votes: 20 15.5%

  • Yes, "hard use" is just abuse

    Votes: 8 6.2%

  • Yes, other

    Votes: 7 5.4%

  • No, I just like an added feeling of security

    Votes: 16 12.4%

  • No, I've had a lock fail on me before

    Votes: 17 13.2%

  • No, it shows me the limitations of each design

    Votes: 58 45.0%

  • No, I use my knives hard and I like a strong lock

    Votes: 10 7.8%

  • No, other

    Votes: 13 10.1%
  • Total voters
    129
  • Poll closed .
dogstar said:
This topic came up in another thread, so I am starting this to avoid hijacking the original thread.

Lock strength tests like this one, are they idiotic and pointless, or do they provide useful data?

Me, I don't go out of my way to abuse knives (except one time). I still find these tests informative. If it is a knife I will depend on in the outdoors, I would prefer to go with a stronger lock (or none at all).

Please vote and share your thoughts, thanks. If you vote "other," please share your reason.
Click to expand...

I voted yes because I use them hard if I need to and I don't want to worry. I can't believe I'm the first to ask but tell us about "Except one time" . Curiosity has taken over and I have to know...
 
anthonycastorena2014 said:
I can't believe I'm the first to ask but tell us about "Except one time"
Click to expand...
Well, I wanted to see if I could bust up a big branch using just my Svord mini peasant knife. One can argue whether something like this is necessary, and I would yield that it probably never is. I tried to use wedges and protect the little knife when possible, but it still took a pounding, and held up fine. This is why I put so much stock in this design.
For those who say "pics or it didn't happen," you can watch it at 2x to save 6 minutes of your life.
 
The poll is bit confusing ,because:

#1) Not all tests are good and fair measures of actual / functional strength in operation .

#2) Operational strength is dependent on the whole knife , i.e. all the parts working in concert . The knife is only as strong as its weakest (failure ) point .

#3) It is misleading to imply that a given type of lock is equally strong (or weak) in every knife of different brands , models etc .
***********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
I personally believe lock strength is extremely important in a carry knife; that might be needed for emergency , survival , or just hard work under harsh conditions .

The locking folder, for hard use , should be as close functionally to a fixed blade as is practical , IMO .

IMO , the most meaningful tests reflect real world possible uses (and abuses that might occur under stress) .

Tests to compare different knives should be consistent , objective and as measurable /repeatable as possible .

Testers with a vested interest are always most suspect . ;)
 
If your "main" knife (that you use for just about everything) is a folder, then a good lock makes sense.
So weighing the balance between "ease of operation" and lock strength is a valid data point for choosing your knife.

Personally I use a small fixed as my main EDC and a folder as "light task" backup. For ease of use, I love slipjoints, especially ones with one hand opening.
Folding knives are designed to close so all locks have in common that they can be (accidentally) disengaged by the user or fail, however strong the lock is.

This is today's carry and I already used both: The UKPK to cut up a Käsebretzel and the TRC 12S to break down a sturdy box from a delivery this morning.


Tuesday.jpg
 
There has not yet been a lock strength test evaluation which could be considered scientifically valid.

I think I know which thread you're talking about.

I would love to see empirical data for lock failures, but there are a daunting number of variables! Never mind that a crossbar lock and a framelock have different force transmission vectors, there's steel chemistry, blade thickness, even heat treat regimen. You would have to come up with a machine that would allow you to measure strain- and shock-loading values. Even then, most people don't swing a knife perfectly blade-on straight with their intended target, so some +/- factor would need to be figured out, like a graph that shows the difference in force at the lock if you end up a little off-kilter to either side.

I don't think we're likely to see much progress toward this, because just building the test equipment would be the same cost or more as tooling up to produce an entirely new knife, and I can't imagine it would help to sell knives.
 
These lock strength tests/debates are akin to engaging the safety on a firearm and then squeezing the trigger with 800 lbs of force to see if you can break the safety. I don't ever hear gun crowds argue about the strength of a cross bolt vs sliding safety.

Since people are so interested in science and knowledge, maybe someone should test firearm safeties. Maybe lock strength testers should stand a loaded shotgun up with the butt end on the ground, muzzle up. Slide a stout dowel across the trigger and bounce on it like a pogo stick and see if their body weight can break the safety. I mean, we can't be running around with firearms with safeties that won't hold less than our body weight.
 
J. Doyle said:
These lock strength tests/debates are akin to engaging the safety on a firearm and then squeezing the trigger with 800 lbs of force to see if you can break the safety. I don't ever hear gun crowds argue about the strength of a cross bolt vs sliding safety.

Since people are so interested in science and knowledge, maybe someone should test firearm safeties. Maybe lock strength testers should stand a loaded shotgun up with the butt end on the ground, muzzle up. Slide a stout dowel across the trigger and bounce on it like a pogo stick and see if their body weight can break the safety. I mean, we can't be running around with firearms with safeties that won't hold less than our body weight.
Click to expand...
I think you’ve captured the essence of the issue.

One group looks at a safety mechanism as an additional, but ultimately untrustworthy, measure of safety. No right-minded gun owner walks around cocked and locked, pointing the gun at people and squeezing the trigger

The other group seems to want the safety mechanism to be a guarantee against all manor of failure. My folder’s got a lock on it, so why don’t I hammer it through a car door?
 
EngrSorenson said:
I think you’ve captured the essence of the issue.

One group looks at a safety mechanism as an additional, but ultimately untrustworthy, measure of safety. No right-minded gun owner walks around cocked and locked, pointing the gun at people and squeezing the trigger

The other group seems to want the safety mechanism to be a guarantee against all manor of failure. My folder’s got a lock on it, so why don’t I hammer it through a car door?
Click to expand...
You've very eloquently stated the core issue.

There's a much more succinct way to state it but I think it's against forum rules.
 
As a straight comparison in isolation, pointless outside of very extreme circumstances. I mean we all have had, or know someone firsthand who's folded a cheap liner lock because the lock-plate failed. But if they are done in the way that I've seen a certain type of reviewer do, where it's ergonomics focused, it has value. Like if someone who does pistol reviews says that if you have big hand and hold really high and tight it can induce malfs, or a certain design needs to be treated differently if you are a lefty, then I think they can have value. I could see it being possible for a knife to maybe bounce back if the deployment was too hard (not sure how, but possible) or the lock isn't as good if its too gentle. Maybe a twist in a certain way takes pressure off the lock, or creates a leverage point. That has value, but I doubt anyone is doing that sort of work. It's not like climbing gear where someone can buy a reasonable sample size and break test a few examples, most reviewers have an N of 1, so that really limits any "actual" number value.
 
I don't personally think it's pointless perhaps more an inquisitive interest (on my part at least) as to how strong a lock is. Would I ever require the strength of a triad lock - no not unless it was the only knife I had in a SHTF situation.

Obviously for EDC use a slipjoint is ime more than adequate unless you want to stab or baton etc... not really something normally required in civilian life.

For a military or rescue knife I can see the benefit of a very strong lock where the convenience of carrying a folding knife is preferred.
 
I've had a liner lock fail on me, but it was on a $10 knife that had almost all the screws fall out of it too, so it wasn't a surprise. I have yet to have a lock of any kind fail on me under normal use on a quality folder unless it was a lemon, and that's not going to show up on a test.

I guess from a curiosity standpoint these destructive lock tests are ok, but don't take them as gospel, I think the saying goes. Personally I just watch them for entertainment purposes.

I'm not planning on using my knife as a foothold. Nor will I hang from it, or use it as a seesaw, or whatever other wackiness these testers put their knives through. I just use it to cut stuff. I don't need a lock to be able to withstand 500 pounds worth of spine pressure cause realistically, at least for me, I'll never be able to exert that kind of force on it anyway.
 
For a company or person making knives, a good engineer would know the strengths and weaknesses of different design attributes and preferably have quantitative, experimental data to compare them.
 
Peter Hartwig said:
What is up with this polls math
Says 82 votes 149%, actually 122 votes
As of th is post
Click to expand...
Folks are able to check more than one option (essentially cast more than one vote), hence if you add up all the %, it goes over 100.

However, if you look at the percentages individually, there is nothing counter-intuitive happening. As I write this the most popular choice is 41 selections out of 85 voters, which is 48.2%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top