Red Scorpion Six Blades Predator WSK Video Destruction Test Completed

Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
1,009
440C Stainless Steel
Blade thickness 1/4"
RC Hardness of 57
Blade head: 4 1/2"
Draw knife:2 1/4"
Blade Width: 2 1/2"
Blade to handle: 6 3/4"
Handle:6 1/4"
Handle scales Micarta

Summary of test:

Cutting: I peeled an apple and cut some 10,000 lb webbing the Predator did this easy.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%201_0002.jpg


Chopping: I chopped a 2x4 this was not hard to do.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%201_0006.jpg


Batoning: I begin to baton a landscaping timber and broke the tip off with the wood baton. The tip is very weak since the knife has saw teeth and leaves the tip vulnerable to this kind of failure.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%202_0002.jpg


Cutting: I cut the webbing again and only noticed a little decrease in initial sharpness.

Whittling: I would have liked to do a field test but I didn't have time. I whittled a stick down to a point using the narrow edge section of the predator. The knife performed well at this task.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%201_0004.jpg


Saw: I sawed some clean notches in a 2x4 about 3/8" deep very quick. It was hard to go any deeper as the blade would bind.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%202_0001.jpg


Concrete: I chopped into a concrete block chipping the edge from time to time. The knife did not break during this.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%203_0001.jpg


Hammer Impacts: Using the 3 lb steel mallet I hammered the knife edge into the cross grain of a 2x6. The knife took some heavy hits and did not break. I then hammered the saw portion of the predator to see if I could get a failure. I could not do so. I flattened the saw teeth but the blade held up fine.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%204_0001.jpg


Concrete/Hammer: I hammed the edge into a concrete block splitting the brick. The predator took some very hard 3 lb hammer impacts on the narrow and saw portion of the spine never breaking the blade.


Concrete continued: I hammered what was left of the tip into a concrete block,breaking it into several sections.
there was no further damage to the damaged area of the broken tip.

Flex Test: with the tip secured in the vice about 1.5" I flexed the blade to about 20 degrees until the tip broke.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%205_0003.jpg


Body weight test: I placed the predictor in the holder at the beginning of the edge grind. I stood on the handle with all my 225 lbs. The predator took all my weight just fine. I bounced up and down on the tang and still no failure occurred. I pulled the blade out of the holder 1 inch from the edge grind and repeated the test, The blade snapped this time around.
Red%20scorpion%20six%20blades%20predator%20D%20test%20Part%205_0004.jpg


Side tang impacts: I placed the blade the vice and hit the tang with the 3 lb Hammer. The predator broke on the second hit. Only a few knives I have tested the can endure this test.

Overall: The Predator is functional. It cuts well. It chops fairly well. It is fairly tough but not super tough. The edge is brittle and some chipping did occur during very hard use. The saw is functional for notching. The tip is very weak on the predator and broke during batoning wood with wood. The blade is very ridged and did not flex much before the tip section broke. Heavy prying is not going to work well with the predator. The handle screws all fell out during chopping and impact work.


The Videos are in 6 parts posted at www.knifetests.com

Enjoy the videos. They were made for you :thumbup:
 
Definitely not worth the money:barf:
440-C or 01 I don't see much different Among them:cool: I must pay $ 1000 and wait 2 years for it:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

thanks noss4
 
Very good test.It looks like a good knife...If you don' t want to do anything else than cutting and chopping.
 
Awesome test Noss.I was waiting for this one.I knew sooner or later a WSK was going to end up on the block.
Could you post some dead pics of the blade?I want to see how it failed in relation to the pics of my old one.
 
Awesome test, Keep up the excellent work. I look forward to the Trail Hawk review. I know you will do it justice.
 
I too found the tip to be fragile. If you look at the original Beck or Linger WSK, the saw teeth don't go all the way toward the tip therefore leaving it much thicker and stronger.
 
Good test. The tip issue and fasteners are being addressed in the updated version. We have also offered to replace the Broken knife of the donation.
I will send over a New set once they are out of Production. They are Carbon steel!
I have listed a few specs on these in different threads. I don't want to bore you with it here, but I will post this pic of the Proto-types.
Noss send me an email with address and I will put you on our list. We are doing Invitation only Pre-Release orders on the first run. I will include you on that so we can do this test earlier rather than you having to wait so long to tear something up. lol
IMG_3161.JPG

You can see that we have made major adjustment as to the location of the start of saw further increasing the tip strength. We have also changed fixtures to stainless steel. We will fasten more securely than the other version. They were not epoxied in place because I thought more guys would be removing the handles and placing their own custom scales on, Lesson learned these will be.
Never thought of this thing cutting through concrete like it did.
 
It is a great knife and I knew it would do well. I use mine everyday in some form. The sawback makes a great meat tenderizer. The brick thing caught me by surprise too. I will be getting a carbon model when they come out for sure!! Stainless tubing flared out fixes the handles well.
 
Noss,

I would like to see you test a few different WSK's in this category and put to rest all the speculations about this WSK thing being gimmicky and over engineered. That would be fun. Come up with the standardized testing and receive items from third party source not from the Company or Individual knowing that item will be tested in this manner to maintain the integrity of a test.

I think he has a pretty good start as unconventional as it is. I think you should further refine the techniques to an engineering procedure to provide an unquestionable consistency to achieve a true unbiased testing to failure so a rating can be established. For example: When he vices it in and takes the 3lb sledge and counts the number of strokes he swings and it breaks. That is a cool test, but the variables in the Speed and Force of the swing in conjunction with the weight determines Velocity at which it hits the intended target. This has to be able to be duplicated and recorded to be accurate.
Because the reality of the test is tainted that the viewer can only see the thing break there is no measure of force it withstood. But if he could achieve a more scientific method of measuring force he could call it the NOSS rating of 1-10 in stress categories. Then it can truly be a legitimate testing source, rather than some guy wearing a mask destroying some gear. I am sure he has a following here and people will be pissed about this, but it has truth. This is not a slam or retort but an observation for improving testing procedures and keeping all things equal.

I think a more accurate test although crude would be to take a hydraulic jack and get to a Zero and then apply pressure by the number of times you raise and lower the handle. This would help to establish a metric for ratings based on the numbers of PUMPS it will take vs. who is swinging the Hammer. It would take the bias out of the equation and bring more integrity to overall procedure. Thus reducing critics of your work.

Some watchers view the videos as a negative thing as the knife being a piece of crap if it breaks, but his tests are brutal and he proves out what the blade can endure before it reaches failure. I haven't viewed a video of his that says a knife he tested was a good or bad buy. The reason I am making this comment is for the average Joe viewing this type of video sometimes makes a premature judgment such as Ishiyumisan as to the durability of a knife under review.

This is where critics of this testing come into the picture and other manufactures and makers do not want to damage the investment they made into making and marketing a product to let someone destroy it and an amateur viewer see a video and think that the product is bad because it fails at some point. When the truth of the matter is they all will fail at some point that is his objective. I think this should be stressed more strongly to the viewers. So they truly understand the point of the whole thing. Also, the tests obviously demonstrate excessive abuse and they don't want every swinging Joe to be trying to collect on the warranty. lol Most have a warranty but when you read into them they are basically at their discretion. Chris Farley said it best in Tommy Boy about having a Guarantee. You can have GUARANTEE stamped on piece of Crap, but you still have a guaranteed piece of crap. Guess I should make up a few document papers with a hologram for our stuff too. Lol
I think NOSS has some good stuff going on but needs to tighten up the testing tolerances especially when it comes to force applications, they would get more participation. Keep on going bro.
 
Good point Aaron. Testing standards that I deal with in the steel industry have to be controlled and consistant in order for us to determine if a steel mills product meets our standards. A bash test is very subjective in it's results. For example all fillet knives would fail this test. Does that mean there are no good fillet knives?
 
Well, for those nay-sayers on the other thread: If you want to know how a company response to these tests *should* look like....: Post #10 would be it.
:thumbup:
 
Good point Aaron. Testing standards that I deal with in the steel industry have to be controlled and consistant in order for us to determine if a steel mills product meets our standards. A bash test is very subjective in it's results. For example all fillet knives would fail this test. Does that mean there are no good fillet knives?

I think knife tests should be tailored to the way a specific knife is marketed: Fillet knives are usually not marketed using phases like "hard use", "we'll be impressed if you break it", "survival", "extreme situations", "the strongest" , "toughest"......you get the idea. Not that this applies to the knife tested in this thread, but one that is named in one way or another after an elite unit invokes a certain expectation and it sells based on that expectation....and it should live up to that expectation. Very different for a knife that is market more neutrally.....like a Mora for example.
 
HoB, Point well taken. I was just saying a more controlled test should be made. Noss4, your tests are great and I love them but I am kinda with Aaron that a more accurate way of doing it should be determined.
 
Back
Top