REKAT Lock Durability?

Spark · Dec 12, 2000

Cliff, first, you only have to look at the post above yours to see who has axes to grind.

Second, regarding this comment

recently in the Survial forum it was commented that an older Busse blade chipped out on a coconut. I asked on the Busse forum if this was the expected behavior of the A2 blades. Very quickly Andy Prisco commented that it was not. When I discussed this with Busse later on he said the same thing. There was no excuse about coconut chopping being unscientific. Why not? There is easily as much variation in stress on the edge chopping a coconut as pressing down on the handle of a folder?

you have to compare apples to apples. An old blade chipping out on a coconut is not the same as deliberately forcing a perfectly good locking mechanism to fail - and then screaming that the manufacturer has a faulty product. How the two instances were handled also shows a difference in how the subjects were broached, etc.

Furthermore - the edge is designed to take repeated impacts and hold up, that's one of the intended purposes of the knife. I have yet to see any promotional material from REKAT (or any lock manufacturer) stating that their lock is designed to take multiple negative impacts (direction of closure of the blade) and then still withstand advertised, undamaged steady loads. Your examples aren't relative, they are two different situations -
1. A product not performing as expected or advertised during a common task that it would experience in any normal use. If we likened it to a car - it would be like the wheels falling off because of a tap on the bumper, compared to;
2. A product failing from a situation which it is *not* designed for - and then the company being taken to task for it. Sorry - that would be like complaining that the windows on a car leaked - because you dumped it in a river!

You must consider that if the knife has already had it's lock mechanism damaged through whatever means, your claims of scientific testing go right out the window, along with the expectations that the knife live up to it's advertising. If I (hypothetically) lock a knife open, with the blade in a vise, and whack the handle with a hammer 10 or 15 times, then test how the lock holds up, it is a whole different ball game from testing a brand new knife in controlled conditions, in a machine designed specifically to test locks (like the Spyderco machine). Asking a manufacturer to then comment on the (hypothetical) test above, without the knife in hand is like asking them to divine the intent of a Palm Beach voter - without seeing the ballot in question.

The simple fact is, scientific method or not, no matter how Rage did a pressdown, he could not come near 1000 lbs of force. If the lock was really as strong as stated on the webpage then it is simply not possible for it to fail in the way it did.

Regarding the impossibility of testing the hobbit more than x inches from the pivot, I can readily think of a way to do so - use a cheater bar. You are able to put more weight further away from the pivot, etc. But testing an already damaged lock mechanism and presenting that as valid evidence is flawed methodology at best.

Third, don't question my motives for defending anyone - you should be questioning the motives behind those doing the attacking. I don't know about you, but I was raised to do the right thing, and help those in need. Maybe you had a different set of "rules to live by" growing up. When I see "hit and run" posters who make a claim about problems, then are never seen again; the same individuals posting the same drivel over and over again; and suppossedly "objective" third-parties weighing in like they have been wronged, my suspicions are aroused. Have I defended REKAT more than others? Yes, primarily because they've been subject to more of this than anyone else - but rest assurred that I'd do it for Chris Reeve or Emerson if they were dealing with the same problems. Oh wait - I've already done so for both.

Fourth - I don't read every thread in every forum Cliff - so your comment of

And why don't you defend the other companies with the same zeal that you speak out for REKAT. I recently posted up a review of the Machax from BK&T and it contained many negative elements, fit and finish issues, steel dents up and chips out on wood, handle is too slippery etc. . There are no posts by you in any of the threads about it.

So if I don't respond to something you say, it doesn't imply that I agree or disagree with whatever you said - it probably means that I didn't read it, or I didn't feel a need to respond if I did. Your logic in this "example" is laughable at best - I'd expect better of a teacher.

Finally, regarding this comment

As well Spark, you and Mike have a history of entering into threads about REKAT, making claims and or attacks to antagonize the posters into attacking and/or then locking the threads before the people you are making statements to refute what you say. The last thread I started about the Gunting for example:
http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/002298.html

I didn't lock the thread in question, Mike did - I had a response I was ready to post to it but it was locked before I got there. Do I show a pattern of behavior sticking up for REKAT? Sure. Does that make it wrong? Hell no. That's like blaming a victim for being raped - it's REKAT's fault that a few misguided individuals feel that the only way they can get any attention for themselves is to take potshots at others?

I find it sickening that people would play this game and then absolve themselves of any personal responsibility in the results they get - and yes Cliff, that includes you. You have yet to own up to a single time when you've been proven wrong in any thread, yet here you are still harping on issues who's facts are nebulous at best, and outright distortions in all likelihood.<HR>

Andy, if you want to compare percentages, how about examining your own numbers. Of all of your less than 100 posts (80 as I write this), how many are either A. Promoting the Gunting (or something else a certain person is associated with), or B. ragging on REKAT? I'll bet the percentages are rather high. So, who's agenda is more prevalent? Sorry, sucker, but your own argument works rather well against you - but thanks for giving me the ammunition to use. Anyone care to work up the numbers? Here, let me...
<a href = "http://www.bladeforums.com/cgi/search.cgi?action=simplesearch&ForumChoice=ALL&ExactName=yes&SearchUser=Andy+W">Click here to see all the threads Andy has posted to.</a>
Hmmm, a quick search shows 4 threads that you've posted to in the REKAT forum - with about 10-12 posts in those threads... Hmmm, that means that 15% of your total posts have been devoted to going after REKAT in their own forum.
Let's look at another thing, hmmmm, it would seem that out of 49 threads that you've posted to, you've posted to 26 threads in the CSSD-SC forum. Hmmm, almost 50% of your total posts and threads are either promoting a certain individual, or a product they are associated with... wow, some statistics there... what's *your* agenda? Is this just a *coincidence*? Is there a "pattern" here? Are you going to tell us the threads and posts where you attack REKAT, and promote the Gunting, aren't related?

So, Andy, if you want to question my motives, let's see if turnabout is indeed fair play. What do you have to gain by promoting this new product and attacking REKAT? Could it be that someone you know has direct monetary ties to the success and failure of the above? Maybe I should phrase it as a riddle - How many students does it take to promote a knife?

Now, let's look at it from a "reasonable man's perspective". As a reasonable man, would any of you be suspicious if you saw a pattern of behavior like I outlined above?

See, I don't have to have a motive to defend someone when they are being attacked unfairly. That's called being a good Samaritan - and I've gone to the carpet for more than a few people on these forums when someone has a less than honest agenda.

You, on the other hand, cannot claim the same. So, thanks for coming out of the closet - it's nice to see exactly where you stand. Now you just have to admit it. BTW, next time you step on your johnson, you might want to remove the golf cleats first.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

Spark · Dec 12, 2000

Addendum to the above - I have to apologize to Cliff, on the drive home I remembered that he did indeed admit when he was wrong on a previous occasion, during the recent ArcLite cord wrapping thread. My apologies Cliff, I was in error.

Addendum to another point - I also forgot to add this to the "reasonable man" point I made above - I stated

Now, let's look at it from a "reasonable man's perspective". As a reasonable man, would any of you be suspicious if you saw a pattern of behavior like I outlined above?

I want to add this to it - Now ad to this, if you saw this pattern of behavior from a few individuals, each of whom have a demonstratable connection and common desire with another party, would you find it unreasonable to believe that they were all acting in concert, trying to achieve a common goal?

For example, if you see a group of people attacking one product, then turning around and promoting another, but otherwise not getting involved in discussions, would it be unreasonable to think that there was an ulterior motive for doing so?

Kinda makes you think.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 12-12-2000).]

Andy W · Dec 12, 2000

Okay Spark and all that might be following this; here are all of the posts that I have on the REKAT forum.

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000291.html

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000400.html

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000405.html

Regarding my last psot under "Rekay quality" let it be noted that Bob did get & repair the two knives at the Blade show but came back to me in bad condition which I refused to post as I am postive I would have been accused of attempting to make them look bad. I then sent the knives to Cliff Stamp for his testing which provided the basis for all this crap now (read the now locked Escalator & Gunting thread). You'll see once again why I don't want to get involved.

It's quite obvious that I am truly a jerk and only want to see REKAT fail (this is sarcasm for those who can't tell). One only needs to see the current state of quality control problems to see where my position is. As far as who I train with and what knife I advocate, it should be irrelevant. I have more experience with the Gunting than all but a very small handful of people on this planet and I do my best to inform others if they ask questions. I would be happy to do the same regarding my Crossada, Hells Belle, or any of Laci Szabo's knives. I guess that because I am a friend & student of Bram's that I should keep my mouth shut on any issues that involve REKAT or the Gunting because I am biased; if this is true, I still believe that you should stay out of it as well Spark.

My issue with REKAT is with the quality control. It is a topic that has come up more than once from many different people and I believe that it is recognized that they aren't "tops" in the fit & finish dept. The crux of this issue is that if anyone who knows Bram or has a Gunting mentions anything negative about REKAT they get attacked. If you look at the latest QC issue I can only assure you that if I were to post that this is not uncommon, I would be immediatley jumped by Team REKAT and/or Spark. Any negative feelings I have about them stems from the way I have been treated in the past. Hell I even got attacked on the ROS forum when I mentioned that I liked Bob's disarming tapes but wouldn't recommend them beacuse Bob doesn't offer further training or seminars. I will admit that things seem to be handled a little more rationally now that Christina is posting.

And regarding where I post; outstanding observation! I primarily post in CSSD because that is where my interests lie. I generally don't cross over to the Spyderco forum to promote the Gunting or anywhere else. I have a few posts on Filipino Combat arts and some in Practical Tactical as well. I also post on specialoperations.com in the Marine Corps SOCNET (andy0331) with some degree of regularity and if anyone wanted to check I post rationally there as well. Of course, any individual will post most frequently where their interests lie or on something they wish to support, however when you do the same thing, Spark it is all in the name of justice right? B.S., I guess we all have "agendas" you just live in denial or believe that you are absolved of any wrongs because you think you know it all.

I would like to belive that we would actually get along if we met without bias, but I doubt it. I would welcome any comments positive or negative that you have about the Gunting (I ASSume that you have played with one by now). AS of yet you certainly haven't commented on it at all except that it hasn't been proven yet. Hey here's an idea why not do your own testing or side by side comparison between a Gunting & an Escalator and post your results. Or go witness one done by Mike or some 3rd party who doesn't care one way or another.

Lighten up Spark, I'll admit to my dislike for being attacked and why I regretably am wasting my time on here now, but you still claim the moral high ground and dodge any personal involvement, gimmie a break.

Andy

Cliff Stamp · Dec 13, 2000

Spark :

[Busse vs REKAT]

you have to compare apples to apples.

You are missing the point in the details. I have also discussed using blades in areas that they were not designed for with many makers and manufacturers. Busse, Strider, HI, etc, plus P.J. Turner, Phil Wilson, Ed Schott etc. . None of them have the attitude that you are defending on part of REKAT.

I have yet to see any promotional material from REKAT (or any lock
manufacturer) stating that their lock is designed to take multiple negative
impacts (direction of closure of the blade) and then still withstand
advertised, undamaged steady loads.

Check REKAT's forum, I asked about this specifically and Bob Brothers stated that impacts were no more damaging that slow loads on the Rolling lock. Therefore if the hammer shots failed the lock the slow load strength is much lower than claimed. Unless loads below the fail point can weaken the lock severely - which is a rather important point to ignore.

As well this was exactly one of the aspects of the capabilities of the necessary ability of the lock suitable for a "fighting" folder that Sal Glesser commented on some time ago as he realized that it was possible for blades to have high energy contacts during a confrontation.

A product failing from a situation which it is *not* designed for -
and then the company being taken to task for it.

Assuming the relative stress is similar to what it is designed for yes you should expect the company to stand behind the lock. If I broke my Machax filleting fish would you defend its behavior? It is clearly was not designed to do it and is horrible at it. No of course not because the level of stress is far below what it is designed to take.

If I (hypothetically) lock a knife open, with the blade in a vise,
and whack the handle with a hammer 10 or 15 times, then test how the lock
holds up, it is a whole different ball game from testing a brand new knife
in controlled conditions

Yes, specifically you are doing a very low limit "fatigue" test of the lock and when it fails under a much lower load than the NIB limit you have showed a large weakness.

Regarding the impossibility of testing the hobbit more than x inches
from the pivot, I can readily think of a way to do so - use a cheater
bar.

Rage clearly stated that he didn't do this.

You are able to put more weight further away from the pivot, etc.
But testing an already damaged lock mechanism and presenting that as valid
evidence is flawed methodology at best.

It is examining something other than NIB strength but that is hardly flawed. It is actually a much more realistic statistic. As the blades will only be NIB once.

you should be questioning the motives behind those doing the
attacking.

That would be you and REKAT. I, Bram, Andy, Driscoll, Jody etc., have described problems with the blades and locks - you are the ones you decided to make the discussions personal.

I don't read every thread in every forum Cliff

Ok I have now made you aware of the problems I have had with the Machax, are you now going to defend it with the same effort you put into arguing for REKAT? Do you want me to drop you an email whenever I put up a negative post so you can defend the maker/manufacturer in the same manner than time and time again you argue for REKAT.

As for the right or wrong of you defending REKAT, or course it is perfecty right for you to argue for them. However it is not when you use your status as an admin to control discussions. As well when you have $ties$ to them it is hardly the case that you can claim to be unbiased.

-Cliff

Spark · Dec 14, 2000

I'll separate my posts into two parts - one to deal with Andy, and the other to deal with Cliff. Also, to make this clear, I am posting this not as an Administrator of BladeForums.com, but as a member of the knife community with direct experience in what's going on and the background behind this situation.

Andy - first off, for someone who claims "I don't want to get involved", you sure have a propensity for doing the exact opposite.

Second, I don't think you realize that you've created a double standard. You claim that it's irrelevant that you train with Bram, advocate both his teachings and the Gunting, and are a certified instructor in his school; yet the fact that I'm a friend of Bob Taylor's is somehow evidence that I've got an agenda because he's somehow lining my pockets and I have a vested monetary interest in seeing him do well? Boy howdy, that's some good reasoning there. Sorry, but if you are going to make claims like that, you'd best do a better job of backing it up - if REKAT and Bob Taylor go under tomorrow, it won't effect me. If something major happens to your school and product, though, you are probably going to be in a world of hurt.

Third, you state

And regarding where I post; outstanding observation! I primarily post in CSSD because that is where my interests lie.

Again, apparently what's good for the goose is not good for the gander. You pulled all sorts of BS statistisics out of your fourth point of contact that *proved* that I had an agenda. Yet, when the percentages are against you, it's only means that these subjects are what you are interested in? Holy double standard Batman! And yes, that is sarcasm Andy, I'd hate for you to think it's something else.

Andy, if you are going to point fingers, you had better damn well be able to measure up to the yardstick you hold against others. I'm happy that you take an active interest in so many fields - but that doesn't excuse poor behavior, nor does it give you an excuse to pursue a vendetta against someone who hasn't done anything to you.

Fourth, I am again seeing these claims that you and Cliff are the ones being attacked - that's BS, pure and simple. That's like saying the votes in Florida haven't been counted. You will notice that I am simply refuting your points on a case by case basis, and I'd say doing a good job at it. It's not my fault that your own arguments don't hold up under scrutiny. Thus far, I've seen you claim that I have an agenda, that I am defending Bob / REKAT strictly because of money, that I'd change the content of your posts if I felt like it, that REKAT's customer service sucks, and that REKAT's QC needs improvement with regards to fit and finish. Well, I'll agree with you on the last, there is indeed a bit of room to improve there - but sorry, bucko, you are dead wrong on everything else. Feel free to point to examples though, prove me wrong.

You make the statement

The crux of this issue is that if anyone who knows Bram or has a Gunting mentions anything negative about REKAT they get attacked. If you look at the latest QC issue I can only assure you that if I were to post that this is not uncommon, I would be immediatley jumped by Team REKAT and/or Spark. Any negative feelings I have about them stems from the way I have been treated in the past. Hell I even got attacked on the ROS forum when I mentioned that I liked Bob's disarming tapes but wouldn't recommend them beacuse Bob doesn't offer further training or seminars.

Now, if that was the whole truth, you'd have just cause to have a beef. Unfortunately, it's not the whole truth, or even half of the truth.

So, to use your own words against you - yes, I'd say it has a lot of relevance - the fact that you train with Bram, that you actively endorse the Gunting and CSSD-SC, and that you promote both of the above would indicate to anyone that you aren't an objective or disinterested third party.

If that was it, there wouldn't be a problem - but that's not it. Instead, you (and your cohorts) are actively engaging in both character assassination and product disparagement of both Bob Taylor and REKAT - and that's not cool. The reverse cannot be said of me - I am not out there waging a campaign against Bram (or his teachings), nor am I disparaging the Gunting or Spyderco. Feel free to prove me wrong.

So, we'll look at the facts and we'll add it all up. I'll let the readers here make their own decisions.
Fact: Bram Frank and REKAT collaborated on a knife design resulting in the Escalator. While this project was ongoing, nothing but praise could be found from Bram and his students.
Fact: Without going into details, Bram Frank and REKAT parted ways. Soon thereafter, we start seeing Bram's students making massive, repeated complaints about how they have all sorts of problems with the knives, how the rolling lock sucks, how REKAT sucks, and how their products are crap.
Fact: Despite repeated requests for these horrible, defective, beat up, crappy quality knives returned to REKAT for repair work, despite repeated promises (by Andy, over the course of several months) that they would be shipped back to REKAT, they instead are handed over at the 2000 Blade Show, where Driscoll and another party demanded they be fixed on the spot. During this exchange

Bob Taylor examined Driscoll's knife for an improper heat treat because Driscoll had claimed that the tip "just flew off" and the blade was defective. Bob found no evidence of this - the tip was snapped off from stress such as impact or prying - he could see the damage with a jeweler's loupe.
Bob Taylor offered to take Driscoll's Escalator back to Idaho and have Bob Brothers regrind the tip, for no charge. Driscoll refused.
Bob Taylor examined the Black T finish on Driscoll's knife and found that contrary to his claims, the finish was not "flaking off" but had in fact been severely worn. Bob Taylor offered to take the knife with him and have the blade refinished, at no charge. Driscoll refused.
Bob Taylor examined both of Andy W's knives and discovered, surprise surprise, that these were front-lock prototypes that had been beaten to hell. Bob wanted to take both knives back to REKAT's shop so that he could examine them - Driscoll again refused and demanded that they be fixed on the spot. Bob did what he could at the Blade Show - he replaced the springs.
Upon leaving, Driscoll made a statement to the effect that "You'll never hear about these knives again" - well, here we are, same knives, different day.

How do I know all of this? I happened to be about 15 feet away at the BladeForums.com booth - right after this event I went to Bob's booth and asked what had happened. So, I find it extremely humorous that these claims about "poor customer service" and that "Bob didn't fix the knives" are being made - it isn't representative of the truth. Bob offered to make everything right and went beyond what he was required to do - it isn't his fault that you failed to live up to your end of the obligation.

Now let's look at some other facts...
Fact: We've seen at least 3 students of Bram's make direct derogatory statements against REKAT after their relationship was terminated.
Fact: We've seen Bram's students actively take steps to antagonize and provoke REKAT in threads - here's one example - http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000286.html - That right there should be enough to convince you that *something* is up.
Fact: We've seen plenty of Bram's students actively take steps to promote the Gunting or Bram Frank
Fact: We've seen lots of "hit and run" posters attack REKAT - yet when asked to back up their claims, they are never to be heard from again.
Fact: Several people actively take steps to damage REKAT's / Bob Taylor's reputations in other forums, through email, etc - actively engaging third parties to aid in their character assassination.
Fact: Despite repeated complaints about the quality of REKAT's knives by Bram's students, they've all shown an amazing reluctance to have the knives fixed by REKAT, or even examined - here's another example http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum22/HTML/000400.html

When you put this all together, would a reasonable man find a pattern in this behavior? Does there seem to be a pervasive agenda here? Damn straight, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to put 2 and 2 together.

So, Andy, put your money where your mouth is. Show me quotes - give me URL's where I or REKAT or Bob Taylor have done anything you accuse us of. Oh, and for all the spectators here - let me make this perfectly clear - neither I, nor Bob, nor REKAT threatened any legal action... I'll let everyone guess who did - I'm sure I'll get another little legal threat after this thread.

Do I hate you? Nah, I'd have to care about you first before I could hate you - and I don't know you well enough to care about you. Should we ever meet, I'll buy you a beer, but please don't insult my intelligence by spewing your drivel and expecting me to swallow it with a smile.

Remember, you were the first to go down this road - so don't complain when your motives are questioned and your own history, credibility, and integrity are found to be lacking. And don't be surprised when I'm more than a bit suspicious when I see the same people harping on REKAT problems - especially if they are a student of Bram's. Instead of anything resembling an act of manhood, all I'm seeing here is a bunch of sneaking about, quick strikes, and then slinking away like a hyena's. When pressed on any specific issue, instead of actually addressing the problems, all we ever see is a lot of broken promises (like "I'll ship the knives immediately!"), lame excuses ("I don't want to go without the knife!"), smoke and mirrors / redirection ("I'm not attacking you, you are attacking me!") and outright falsehoods. This does not bode well for honest discussions.

Finally, I'm not going to make any comments about the quality of the Gunting, because I haven't handled one for anything more than 30 seconds - so I don't feel qualified to make an informed opinion on anything other than the first impressions I gained.

As far as it's construction goes - it's a Spyderco Knife, and since I've yet to see them put out a half-assed product, I have no doubts that it is well engineered with high QC.

With regards to it's purpose, however; I'm a fan of the concept, but I don't feel this knife (or any other iterations of it, like the Escalator) will have enough appeal to make it successful in a business sense because it requires extensive training before it can be used correctly or successfully. As such, I feel that the decks are stacked against it (or any other iteration) because it's too heavy in user requirements.

I also feel that the "Kinetic Opening System" on a live blade is extremely dangerous in untrained or careless hands - the goat**** factor is quite high and I can easily see someone inflicting serious wounds upon themselves if they use this knife without the proper training. In summation - it's an interesting product, but too specialized for any massive success. That's just my opinion, I'm calling it like I see it.

<HR>
Now for you, Cliff -

You are missing the point in the details. I have also discussed using blades in areas that they were not designed for with many makers and manufacturers. Busse, Strider, HI, etc, plus P.J. Turner, Phil Wilson, Ed Schott etc. . None of them have the attitude that you are defending on part of REKAT.

What attitude is that exactly, Cliff? That they need to physically see a knife before they comment on what's wrong with it? That they don't recommend their folders be used as prybars? That they don't recommend intentionally damaging the knife then expecting it to meet factory specs?

You then state -

Check REKAT's forum, I asked about this specifically and Bob Brothers stated that impacts were no more damaging that slow loads on the Rolling lock. Therefore if the hammer shots failed the lock the slow load strength is much lower than claimed. Unless loads below the fail point can weaken the lock severely - which is a rather important point to ignore.

Sorry Cliff, but I looked up the quote in question and I do believe you are reading it wrong. In this thread, http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/002387.html , Bob Brothers states

Multiple impacts showed the more times you hit it less force per blow was needed to do damage to the knife. We did not do any tests to find a sustained impact the lock would take do to the number of knifes and time it would take to do such testing.
At what point does the lock get damaged and develop play and or become unstable? 1000 in.lbs is near the upper limit the lock will take if repeatedly stress the lock at this point it will at some time fail. Its like running an engine at the red line it will do it but its not going to last for long. In franks post he says his weight is 216 lbs. put that 4-in. from the pivot and we get 864 in.lbs. torque thats easy to figure. Whats not and why we say theyre not unscientific is how fast did he accelerate his weight onto the knife do the numbers and youll find it dont take much and you go from under 1000 in.lbs to well over and did accelerate himself the same for each thrust and the same for each knife. Same goes for the hammer. If he repeated the tests today they may or may not come out the same way.

That's a pretty cut and dried explanation - and it makes perfect sense to me. Of course, I'm not a university scientist - but feel free to explain to me just how you got your above statement from Bob's.

You then state

If I broke my Machax filleting fish would you defend its behavior? It is clearly was not designed to do it and is horrible at it. No of course not because the level of stress is far below what it is designed to take.

Nope, I sure wouldn't. I would, however, defend it's behavior if you attempted to use it to lever a 3000 pound weight of the ground and it failed, or if you put it in an industrial press and bent it in two, or cut through it with an acetylene torch or any other unreasonable test. Filleting a fish and whacking a lock with a mallet are not apples to apples. Furthermore, if you care to remember, I wholeheartedly supported your taking Mad Dog to task about his Panther failing simple tasks that it had been advertised to do. I also jumped in with my own comments - so, please, pretty please, put up or shut up. I call it like I see it - and my track record on that is pretty damn good.

It is examining something other than NIB strength but that is hardly flawed. It is actually a much more realistic statistic. As the blades will only be NIB once.

Yeah, but extremely few knives are going to have their upper limits tested repeatedly and then be expected to perform like a NIB knife. Nice try Cliff, but again, you have to compare apples to apples - testing the cutting edge to see how long it will stay sharp is not the same as beating the crap out of the lock over and over again - you can restore the edge to sharpness - you can't restore the lock if it's functionally damaged.

That would be you and REKAT. I, Bram, Andy, Driscoll, Jody etc., have described problems with the blades and locks - you are the ones you decided to make the discussions personal.

Cliff, if you really believe this, I'd like to visit the world you live in - but just visit. Clearly, you've yet again transferred the blame from the attacker to the victim. I've pointed to numerous allegations above that have been made about both me and REKAT, and yet somehow I'm on the attack? Sorry, but *I* am not the one who complained about the quality of my knife then hemmed and hawed when asked to send it back. You don't see me on the CSSD-SC forum knocking the quality of the Gunting, or the Customer Service of Spyderco, or the problems with anything I've mentioned - I'm just responding here. I'm not the one who refused, point blank, to have the knife fixed. I'm not the one who's running around attacking one product then promoting the competitor. Look at yourself and be honest - can you say the same thing?

Ok I have now made you aware of the problems I have had with the Machax, are you now going to defend it with the same effort you put into arguing for REKAT? Do you want me to drop you an email whenever I put up a negative post so you can defend the maker/manufacturer in the same manner than time and time again you argue for REKAT.

Sure, if I happen to read the thread and think that you are making a wrong comment. I took you to task in the ArcLite thread, and I sure don't have any ties to Camillus, so that kind of blows a gaping whole in your statements, wouldn't you say? Or would you say that because we sell Camillus products at 1SKS I'm biased towards them as well? Heck, for that matter, we sell the hell out of Microtech products and Benchmade products, and I'm sure that you are going to say we're biased towards them as well, right? Go ahead and say it - I'm sure anyone who knows Mike will get a big laugh from that.

As for the right or wrong of you defending REKAT, or course it is perfecty right for you to argue for them. However it is not when you use your status as an admin to control discussions. As well when you have $ties$ to them it is hardly the case that you can claim to be unbiased.

Again, you are making statements that you are unwilling, or unable to back up. Please feel free to provide URL's showing me using my Administrator status without cause, solely to benefit REKAT.

Furthermore, I could level the same *bias* claims against you. Tell me, Cliff, did you or did you not make the statement that you could and would destroy knifemaker's reputations if they did not send you free knives? Think carefully...

Cliff, you've yet again shown an amazing ability to twist simple statements into something completely different from what they factually are. Please feel free to support anything you state in the future - it will make for a more interesting discussion.

Spark

[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 12-14-2000).]

Willie Boy · Dec 14, 2000

When I asked my question about the durability of the rolling lock, I really did not intend to initiate such a heated debate.

For the record, my question was simple and uncomplicated. I do not have a beef with REKAT at all. As far as I am concerned, they stood behind their product, as they should, and made me whole. Therefore, I would not hesitate to purchase another REKAT when the time comes.

While I have no desire to butt in or become involved, I hope those involved in this heated debate can resolve their differences soon. Life is too short!

Cliff Stamp · Dec 16, 2000

Spark :

What attitude is that exactly, Cliff?

Refusing to comment on performance issues, expectations, and character attacks on individuals with negative comments about the blades. This is of course a personal judgement. When McClung was asked what his warrenty was awhile back on his forum, one of his common defenders immediately jumped in and said that this question should not be dealt with in a public forum and the thread should be locked. So it is obvious that different people have different ideas about which questions should get answered and was it reasonable to some will not be to others.

Same thing with customer service. Some people think it is perfectly fine to have to pay to get a NIB knife fixed. I think that is mental. If you buy a new blade you get a 100% product or the maker handles the cost. If someone I bought blade from expected me to pay for something like this then my opinon of their customer service would be horrible. Same thing with everything else, some people finds delays really bothersome, to me they are not nearly as much of an issue as the performance of the blade.

You might see the way REKAT handled the questions as perfectly fine, same with the negative comments, and obviously you do. I don't. So we have a difference of opinion. Based on what I have read and seen it leave me with no confidence in their products. It is a judgement I make based on my experiences. You of course are free to make whatever other one you want to.

That they need to physically see a knife before they comment on what's wrong with it?

This is not necessary to comment on if its the expected behavior or not. It would be of course to know why something didn't behave as expected.

That they don't recommend their folders be used as prybars? That they don't recommend intentionally damaging the knife then expecting it to meet factory specs?

Again clouding the issue by trying to make the arguments sound unreasonable. Yes, if a knife can take 1000 in.lbs of torque on the lock without failing I would expect to be able to pry with it (vertically) and the blade to take it as I can't generate that much torque. As for damage, you functionally damage a knife every time you use it by wear, removal of metal during use and sharpening, fatigue on the blade etc. . What is important is the relationship between the type and magnitude of the intentional damage and the intended use of the blade.

As for the impacts, I clearly asked what the lower limit was in order to generate damage. The only specific reference to this was the 1000 in.lbs. Yes it is obvious if the folder (or anything else) is stressed at its max tolerance it will weaken. But there was no mention of weakness induced from lower torques, the minimum safe torque etc.. If this is indeed the case, you can break the rolling lock with repeated 500 in.lbs torques for example - then it is a critical point. I don't think however that this is the expected behavior for obvious reasons.

This same aspect is a common arguement brought up against liner locks, ie. them become unstable with use. You can test them and have them pass then a few months later they fail the same tests. If this is a similar case with the Rolling lock then it is an issue that should be stated fairly clearly as otherwise it seems to me the impression that most people have is that unless you go to 1000 in.lbs the lock is fine.

As for your "I'm only dealing with the issues" argument. You have made personal comments again and again. Not stating facts about blades but making the arguments instead center on the people by making character judgements on them and implying motives behind the posts. Your "you never admit when you are wrong for example". This one is laughable to anyone who has followed what I wrote as I can think of several dozen times off the top of my head where I have changed public opinion about knife behavior and corrected past postings. The goal of course is to simply deal with my comments by trying to convince people I am unreasonable and won't listen to the facts instead of just discussing the issue at hand.

And as for :

did you or did you not make the statement that you could and would destroy knifemaker's reputations if they did not send you free knives

I think it was Simonich who first brought this up (or maybe Bob) in one of the Talonite threads. I ignored it then as generally anyone who wants to believe a rumor is not someone I have any desire to convice otherwise anyway. I have no $ties$ to the knife industry so I can pretty much free to ignore nonsense like that without functional consequences. However since I have been asked in email to comment on it several times by people who have put themselves into the role of doing it themselves, and you a forum admin brought it up in public -

As far as I know I was supposed to say something like this on an irc chat. I have heard several versions, with and without the free knives angle. The only connection I have to the internet is through the university server and irc programs are not allowed to be ran on the machines here (problem with gaming early on I think). 2-3 years ago I had an outside connection, but I only had it for a few months. I think there may be time left on it. I never used it all that much because of the service problems. In any case I have not been on irc since then, and when I was back then briefly it was before Bladeforums.

Now of course you could argue that I simply used a friends computer, well yes I could have, but then obviously he (or anyone else) could have done that without me. If there is some kind of address verification for irc chats that connected the poster to the computer I post on here then let me know as it is a security problem and I will involve the admin on my end as these issues are not taken lightly with research machines for obvious reasons. Same thing if you have an email with full headers that traces back to this machine.

As for the statement itself, logically it is unsound for a fairly obvious reason to anyone who makes unhyped products as there is an immediate block they can use against anyone trying something so stupid. Because of this, to me it reads as really moronic. Secondly it would be appearant to anyone who has dealt with me or even just follow the reviews that I have done that I don't keep blades I am asked to review (HI, Gurkha House, etc.) nor to I accept discounts on blades (Phil Wilson, Lynn Griffith, etc.) I have bought because of reviews I have done. Sometime I will be given things, even though I say they are not necessary in which case I just pass them on to someone else (Busse Basic, Steel Eagle, Razor-Edge Sharpener, etc.)

I do however tend to keep blades for a long time as my reviews are *really* drawn out and as well I am not exactly rigerous in getting blades back immediately after reviews are done. In fact right now I have 6 outstanding lots of blades that the reviews have been completed on and the blades are packaged up waiting to be dropped off at the post. As well I have about the same number of blades tied up in reviews in progress to varying degrees.

As for the free issue, it costs me money every time I review a knife. When a blade comes through the border I have to pay customs duty and inspection fees on a blade. Around $25 - $50 is common, but it can be much higher. Recently the total was over $200. When the blades are returned I have to pay shipping and the costs can be quite high for the blades, again $50+ is not uncommon (insurance, registration etc.). So basically I pay can easily pay around $100+ to review a blade that I don't have after the review. If it was my intention to get blades at no cost this is a really stupid way of going about doing it costs me money and I don't keep the knives.

The rumor struck me as kind of funny when I first read it as it was so over the top and obviously fake that I would have guessed Cougar wrote it. However suprisingly enough it seems that a fair number of people do believe it readily. But then again, you can make people believe anything, you just have to find the right people. McClung convinced a lot of people that the problems people were having with his blades were because of "fake" Mad Dogs being made from his rejects and being sold unaware through his dealers.

One last thing, in regards to the Spyderco testing that you cite again and again. You are using an outdated reference. Newer locks have been tested and the current high strength standard used by Spyderco, 200 in.lbs per inch of blade length is significantly over the Rolling lock statistic for the Sifu. As well the statistics for the Strider folder are higher again.

-Cliff

[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 12-15-2000).]

yoda4561 · Dec 15, 2000

You 3 are gettin outta hand, take this elsewhere so the poor guy can get some straight answers.

Spark · Dec 16, 2000

I love how you only choose to respond to the first paragraph, Cliff, and ignore the rest of the post - while skipping back to a previous one.

Soooo, let's get this straight... you are now comparing REKAT to Mad Dog and his followers? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any "Cult of the Rolling Lock" on the forums... though I do see a "Cult" forming elsewhere.

You are also being misleading and / or factually inaccurate in regards to your comment

Some people think it is perfectly fine to have to pay to get a NIB knife fixed. I think that is mental. If you buy a new blade you get a 100% product or the maker handles the cost. If someone I bought blade from expected me to pay for something like this then my opinion of their customer service would be horrible.

Please feel free a thread where REKAT's made any customer pay for repairs on a knife that the owner hasn't disassembled or broken themselves?

You then state

Yes it is obvious if the folder (or anything else) is stressed at its max tolerance it will weaken. But there was no mention of weakness induced from lower torques, the minimum safe torque etc.. If this is indeed the case, you can break the rolling lock with repeated 500 in.lbs torques for example - then it is a critical point. I don't think however that this is the expected behavior for obvious reasons.

Cliff, if I took a hammer, and hit a knife repeatedly, are you telling me that you think that it should be able to withstand infinite repetitions without any damage? No offense, but that's asinine. Apparently you don't have a firm grasp on the realities of physics if you think that everything out there is designed to be indestructible. You, of all people, should grasp that given enough time, even a constant drip of water can wear through a mountain. Why is it so inconceivable that whacking a knife with a hammer, repeatedly, will cause enough mechanical wear and tear to create problems with it's locking mechanism? This should be obvious to anyone - but, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

This same aspect is a common arguement brought up against liner locks, ie. them become unstable with use. You can test them and have them pass then a few months later they fail the same tests. If this is a similar case with the Rolling lock then it is an issue that should be stated fairly clearly as otherwise it seems to me the impression that most people have is that unless you go to 1000 in.lbs the lock is fine.

No, I'd say that it gives that impression only to those who don't have a lick of common sense. No where do I see claims that the Rolling Lock is indestructible, or any less susceptible to mechanical wear and tear than any other mechanism out there.

Unlike the liner lock, however, it does not rely on friction to function - it instead relies on shear strength. I think we'll both agree that it takes quite a bit more force to shear a piece of steel, than it does to wear down that same steel to the point where it's tolerances are no longer tight enough to function reliably. That's why the Rolling Lock can function so much better with less material - it doesn't have to have as tight tolerances, nor does it need to have as much mass. There is little or no wear when it engages (unlike the liner lock) and even if there is, all it has to do is rotate a bit more, and it's just as effective - unlike the locking liner, which, when worn, becomes too short to meet the tang of the blade.

As for your "I'm only dealing with the issues" argument. You have made personal comments again and again. Not stating facts about blades but making the arguments instead center on the people by making character judgements on them and implying motives behind the posts. Your "you never admit when you are wrong for example".

Already covered and apologized for. Unfortunately, you do seem to have an amazing ability to ignore what's convenient however...

About your own bias and how "to me it reads as really moronic" - well, Cliff, you call it like you see it, and I'll do the same. But, please, don't make these claims about how it couldn't ever possibly be true. We all know that behind a keyboard, everyone out there can claim to be ten feet tall and bulletproof. One has only to look at how Mike Anderson went after Ron Hood to see how a person can cause all kinds of hell by using misleading and false statements - it is even more effective when the person in question has some sort of "background" that lends weight to their statements. Even if factually inaccurate, it doesn't take a lot for a person to quickly gain a negative impression about a company or product, especially if they don't do their own digging and someone with some "credibility" is knocking it.

You, Cliff, have put together all sorts of reviews on knives. This lends a certain weight to what you say, much like when I weigh in on something as Administrator of this site. While your testing is inventive, it's not always accurate - nor are your conclusions. Several times, in several threads, you've been corrected when your judgements were dead wrong. Furthermore, you'll bird-dog a topic repeatedly, even though your initial conceptions are incorrect. An example of this is the Bob Brothers quote you referenced, which I then corrected you on. Another was when you went after Jerry Fisk on how to use one of his own designs. There are many more examples.

Regarding the "outdated" information from the Spyderco test - I'd like to see where Spyderco stated that the Strider knife with it's liner lock, outperformed the Rolling Lock. I'd also like to see where they invalidated their previous tests that measured the Rolling Lock as being able to take 1000 lbs. Just because the data is old, doesn't mean that it's inaccurate. But, feel free to prove me wrong and provide some source quotes. Regarding the Strider's performance - the only information I've been able to find on that is here - http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum27/HTML/000452.html - let me know if I'm looking at the wrong thread. From what I read, the "whack tests" showed that the Strider folder could take a 600-800 pound impact 2 inches from the pivot, while REKATs were steady load - though I will readily admit I could be entirely incorrect and reading this wrong. From what I understand, if that's the case, I'd love to see a head to head on a Strider and a Sifu and see exactly what happens with both - Spyderco has the machine, that should answer any and all questions. IIRC, REKAT's testing involved a Pocket Hobbit... but that's neither here or there.

Finally, you again imply that because I work for 1SKS, I am somehow beholden to the knife industry, and therefore, will compromise my integrity for the sake of a few bucks. Please, feel free to put your money where your mouth is and show me a few threads where I've given praise to knives that don't deserve it - I know I've got a few out there criticizing some of the knives that are popular sellers for us, and would like to hear just how this fits in with your "logic". Or promoted products just to help line our pockets and not because the information wasn't out there. Please, cite your sources.

Also, Cliff, while impugning my motives and statements, you did little, if anything, to disprove my conclusions, so again, please feel free to reference what I stated above and correct me.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 12-16-2000).]

Rob Simonich · Dec 16, 2000

Cliff, yes, I asked the question first. The statement I heard had nothing to do with "free knives", only that you could destroy a knifemaker if you wished. I read your post a couple times and you should have been a politician as I see no clear answer there, a simple yes or no would have been much better.

Driscoll · Dec 17, 2000

Spark,

It seems that you have quite a few things completely wrong.

First off, I have never mentioned what happened between Bob Taylor and myself at the 2000 Bladeshow, that I considered business between the two of us. It seems that I now have to do so because there is another incorrect version of what actually happened ( the one you just posted).

First of all, I walked up to his table, he took one look at my nametape turned to his assistant and said Go get Spark. This I find suspicious enough, but Ill leave that alone.

First you said:

Bob Taylor examined Driscoll's knife for an improper heat treat because Driscoll had claimed that the tip "just flew off" and the blade was defective. Bob found no evidence of this - the tip was snapped off from stress such as impact or prying - he could see the damage with a jeweler's loupe.

I was at tailors table for maybe 10 mins max, how the hell could he have examined a knife for improper heat treatment? He wasnt even holding the knife for the whole 10 minutes. I have stated before and that the tip didnt come off from prying anything, I told taylor this again at the show. It comes down to one of two things, hes lying or I am.

You then said:

Bob Taylor offered to take Driscoll's Escalator back to Idaho and have Bob Brothers regrind the tip, for no charge. Driscoll refused.

Yes, that is correct, I have stated on other threads that if a maker cant get a knife right the first time (or the vast majority of knives) I have no confidence or desire to have it repaired in the same manner. I have confidence in Bob Brothers grinding, that isnt the case, I believe that if I had handed the knife to Bob Taylor I would never have seen it again.

Then this:

Bob Taylor examined the Black T finish on Driscoll's knife and found that contrary to his claims, the finish was not "flaking off" but had in fact been severely worn. Bob Taylor offered to take the knife with him and have the blade refinished, at no charge. Driscoll refused.

This part of my discussion with taylor took up most of the time I was at his table, he instantly became deaf and stupid. I repeated myself at least 6 times and he stuttered out the same crap again and again. This is what basically happened.

_____
Taylor you said the Black T was flaking off, I dont see it flaking off here

Driscoll It was flaking off, as you can see a large portion of the Black T is off, after this happened I lightly rubbed the edges that were flaking and put the knife in a box, where it has been for weeks, it hasnt had a chance to flake again.

Taylor you said the Black T was flaking off, I dont see it flaking off here

Driscoll Did you just hear what I said? It was flaking off, as you can see a large portion of the Black T is off, after this happened I lightly rubbed the edges that were flaking and put the knife in a box, where it has been for weeks, it hasnt had a chance to flake again.

Taylor you said the Black T was flaking off, I dont see it flaking off here.

Driscoll Are you deaf man? It was flaking off, as you can see a large portion of the Black T is off, after this happened I lightly rubbed the edges that were flaking and put the knife in a box, where it has been for weeks, it hasnt had a chance to flake again.

Taylor you said the Black T was flaking off, I dont see it flaking off here.

Driscoll (repeat) by this time I was punctuating my sentences by pounding on his showcase.

Taylor Ill take the knife back with me to re-finish it

Driscoll no thank you, I want nothing further from you as far as this knife is concerned

Now, the knife was not severely worn, I had not cut anything but very soft items with it. I already stated why I refused to return it.

Then you said this:

Bob Taylor examined both of Andy W's knives and discovered, surprise surprise, that these were front-lock prototypes that had been beaten to hell. Bob wanted to take both knives back to REKAT's shop so that he could examine them - Driscoll again refused and demanded that they be fixed on the spot. Bob did what he could at the Blade Show - he replaced the springs.

Once again Spark, the lock on those knives were NOT prototypes as you keep repeating. They were sold to the mass public as fully functional. Those locks were used on many different knives (why a prototype on several different knives? I dont know, doesnt make sense to me either, maybe they were never intended as prototypes) In fact they are the exact same locks pictured on the front of tactical knives magazine.

Now ask yourself why a knife manufacturer would allow a prototype on the cover of a major knife magazine?

I cant remember if Bob Taylor offered to take Andys knives back with him, he may have, if he did I would have refused, there were not mine to give. I did NOT demand their repair, I had brought them to Taylor at the request of Andy with some questions. Bob Taylor did replace the springs, and cheaply as expected, you could see an obvious difference, there was now a gap in the knife. Once again Cliff probably knows what Im talking about. And one other thing, the knives were not beaten to hell, as Cliff about that too.

Then this:

Upon leaving, Driscoll made a statement to the effect that "You'll never hear about these knives again" - well, here we are, same knives, different day.

I did make that statement, but YOU have it all wrong. I find it amusing that you hear what you want to hear then twist what someone says to suit your own means. When I said you in that statement to taylor, I meant taylor, not everyone else in the whole world. I have lived up to what I said, I have never contacted taylor again about those knives, as was my intention, my business with him concerning those knives is over. When people discuss problems with a REKAT knife I will tell people about my dealings, I do think I have something to offer.

Then this:

How do I know all of this? I happened to be about 15 feet away at the BladeForums.com booth - right after this event I went to Bob's booth and asked what had happened. So, I find it extremely humorous that these claims about "poor customer service" and that "Bob didn't fix the knives" are being made - it isn't representative of the truth. Bob offered to make everything right and went beyond what he was required to do - it isn't his fault that you failed to live up to your end of the obligation.

Yes, your table was 15 feet away, when Taylor made the statement Go get Spark I looked over at the Bladeforums table, IT WAS PACKED, you sure as hell werent standing there watching events unfold, if you had Im sure you would have mentioned the beating I gave to Tailors showcase. When I asked Taylor what Spark had to do with REKAT and myself he shut up, quickly.

Bob did NOT offer to make everything right, it was like pulling teeth to get a spring from him. His idea of customer service was to accuse his customers of doing everything out of the ordinary to damage his knives, completely absolve himself of any guilt, and take a superior air.

Earlier in your post you said this:

- if REKAT and Bob Taylor go under tomorrow, it won't effect me. If something major happens to your school and product, though, you are probably going to be in a world of hurt.

This only shows the whole how little you know about anything. Andy doesnt have a school, no students either. He works in the Real Estate field, the only product he has is that of Real Estate. Andy is paid by neither Spyderco, or Bram. Making an idiotic statement like this shows your true ignorance of the facts, shows people that if you can be wrong on something so simple that you are truly wrong in the reasons you think are behind their actions. Let me ask you Spark, just because someone is a student of Brams means they cant have a legitimate problem with a REKAT product? According to you thats exactly what it means.

You also said this:

Fact: Bram Frank and REKAT collaborated on a knife design resulting in the Escalator

Which you KNOW to be untrue, the knife design is Bram Franks, completely, you have personally seen the designs that date before there Bram ever met Bob. The only thing Taylor ever did was manufacture the knife. He had no part in its design.

There is one thing you do need to remember Spark, and that is that YOU are the third party here, everything you hear is second hand. Which explains why you are so wrong on so many points.

Driscoll

[This message has been edited by Driscoll (edited 12-17-2000).]

Strider · Dec 18, 2000

The only thing I will coment on is the prototype remark. After subscribing to Blade for close to 20 years and later all the other knife magazines to come along I have seen numerous front covers with prototypes from factories on them.
Bob

Andy W · Dec 17, 2000

Also regarding prototypes on magazine covers, yes it most certainly happens. The most exposure the Escaltor got in magazines was a standard size REKAT ad showing a front/top lock Escalator and said "a Bran Frank design" yes they misspelled Bram's name. I know this came out in Blade magazine around the time of the '98 SHOT show.

And as far as prototypes are concerned. the Tactical knives cover/article by Andy Stanford on the Pocket Hobbit shows the Pocket Hobbit clearly, and the blade is stamped with prototype. Seems that they only stamp a few of them prototype and the other prototypes just get passed around & sold. I got my Escalator trainer from Bram and the live blade from Pioneer Valley Knife & Tool (why would PVKT have or sell a prototype?).

Andy

Spark · Dec 17, 2000

My what a tangled web we weave... let's break down this into parts.

First of all, I walked up to his table, he took one look at my nametape turned to his assistant and said Go get Spark. This I find suspicious enough, but Ill leave that alone.

I don't find it suspicious at all... third party observation turns things from hearsay to evidence in a court of law. Less wiggle room for either side. It's too bad we were so busy, I would have enjoyed observing this first hand.

I was at tailors [sic] table for maybe 10 mins max, how the hell could he have examined a knife for improper heat treatment? He wasnt even holding the knife for the whole 10 minutes. I have stated before and that the tip didnt come off from prying anything, I told taylor this again at the show. It comes down to one of two things, hes lying or I am.

Or, perhaps, you don't know anything about knifemaking, heat treating, materials engineering, etc, and he does. Bad heat treats tend to make themselves visible at the fracture points in a variety of ways. Bob said that he examined the knife with a jeweler's loupe and looked closely at where the breakage had occurred. There were no sulfur lines in the metal. There were no cracks in the blade. There were no crystallized structures or visible deposits. What there were, however, were signs that the knife had it's tip broken off due to stabbing or impact. You don't have to hold a chocolate chip cookie for 10 minutes to recognize it as a chocolate chip cookie.

Taylor you said the Black T was flaking off, I dont see it flaking off here
Driscoll It was flaking off, as you can see a large portion of the Black T is off, after this happened I lightly rubbed the edges that were flaking and put the knife in a box, where it has been for weeks, it hasnt had a chance to flake again.

Click to expand...

Well, that's a first then, because Black T typically doesn't flake off - it wears. It wears down to a gold color on the "bare" metal - which was present on the pictures you showed us earlier this (last?) year. That's a charecteristic of the teflon base to the coating - it bonds with the metal. Pressing or rubbing the edges down wouldn't magically bond the coating to the metal again - they'd just continue to flake away. Perhaps you could call Mr. Birdsong at 601-939-7448 and ask if this is typical with his coating, because this has to be the first time I've heard of Black T flaking away. I guess all those firearms guys who swear by it must be wrong. I guess companies like H&K must have the stuff all wrong as well, since they use Birdsong as a contractor.

We then read -

Once again Spark, the lock on those knives were NOT prototypes as you keep repeating. They were sold to the mass public as fully functional. Those locks were used on many different knives (why a prototype on several different knives? I dont know, doesnt make sense to me either, maybe they were never intended as prototypes) In fact they are the exact same locks pictured on the front of tactical knives magazine.

Click to expand...

I never said that the lock was a prototype - the front locking mechanism was standard for the first generation of REKAT knives. I said that the Escalators in question were prototypes - and I'll list several reasons why. The Escalators with the Front Lock were prototypes. They had the following characteristics -

Front disengaging Rolling Lock

Weaker springs

Liners made from a weaker steel, instead of the full hardened production liners and internals.

Functionally, the knives had different dimensions and construction.

Production models were made with CNC machining, the prototypes were made on a drill press and with hand tools

There's more, but I don't have the list in front of me - I left it at work. My mistake, I'll admit.

I can't say I'm surprised that Bob would have been reluctant to only replace the springs in the knives - anyone could have predicted something exactly like this was going to happen. Just to refresh everyone's memories, take a look at the top of the thread - the statement is made that the knives were serviced and came back even more screwed up... and this was made to seem indicative of the service REKAT provides. What a shocker! It's almost like Bob knew that people who have an agenda would pull something like this! I mean, what is he supposed to think - you don't want him to repair the knives or examine them at his shop, but just the fix the springs, boy howdy, can anyone smell a setup? I mean, gee, why on earth could Bob possibly be suspicious of your motives, Driscoll? It's not like you've given him any reasons whatsoever (and yes, that's sarcasm).

This only shows the whole how little you know about anything. Andy doesnt have a school, no students either. He works in the Real Estate field, the only product he has is that of Real Estate. Andy is paid by neither Spyderco, or Bram. Making an idiotic statement like this shows your true ignorance of the facts, shows people that if you can be wrong on something so simple that you are truly wrong in the reasons you think are behind their actions. Let me ask you Spark, just because someone is a student of Brams means they cant have a legitimate problem with a REKAT product? According to you thats exactly what it means.

Click to expand...

No, I'll stand by what I said. If it comes out tomorrow that there is a big, bad, hidden secret behind what you are pushing, I'll have to say that your credibility is going to be completely shot - furthermore, I'd have to say that you'd have a hard time promoting your "views" or any products. That, in turn, leads to a severe dent in *someone's* pocketbook.

I also never said that one of Bram's student's can't have a problem with any products under the sun. You can all dislike Jello pudding for all I care; or only drink Kool-Aid. But, when I see a *group* of Bram's students taking active steps to both disparage and denigrate the products and character of a company (like REKAT) or any of it's associates (like Bob), then that raises my suspicions. If it was just a problem with the products, or customer service, or anything else, I wouldn't even be bothered. What get's me, though, is the fact that there are all these "problems" but none of you are remotely interested in any solutions - while at the same time, you are using them to promote a similar product. You see, taken one at a time, there isn't anything that would raise an eyebrow. But when you add it all up - the attacks, the harassment, the common background, the competing product, well, let's just say that I don't believe in coincidences. There's a legal term for that - it's conspiracy. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Sorry, but if you don't like being viewed suspiciously, you shouldn't have given so many reasons to do so. I won't go into the things that have been occurring off the forums, but you've put more than a few nails in that coffin. I'll leave it at that.

Fact: Bram Frank and REKAT collaborated on a knife design resulting in the Escalator

Which you KNOW to be untrue, the knife design is Bram Franks, completely, you have personally seen the designs that date before there Bram ever met Bob. The only thing Taylor ever did was manufacture the knife. He had no part in its design.

Click to expand...

Oh, horse puckey. You are kidding me, right? Are you telling me that Bram came up with the Rolling Lock as well? That's one story I've heard going around, but I'd like to hear it from a "reliable" source.

Are you saying that Bram provided the CNC plans, design hours, and everything else? That Bram did all the testing on construction? That Bram did materials and heat treat testing? That Bram's drawings were 100% ready to be turned into production pieces? That Bram and REKAT didn't have to modify the designs

Boy, if that was the case, why did Spyderco pay REKAT $18,000 when they came out with the Gunting? I mean, from what you are telling us all here, REKAT was just a contractor, hired to put the knives out. Sorry, but the drawings I saw weren't exactly like the knives that were produced. And I've never heard of a company willing to pay $18,000 out of pocket on a slam dunk - which is what you are telling me this was. After all, Bram designed the knife, 100%, right?

I have no doubt that Bram came up with the concept of the Escalator / Gunting / whatever; I have no doubts that it was a straight line development from the Jot Singh Khalsa knife, with new applications. I've said it before, I even think it's a good concept - I just don't think it's going to go anywhere commercially.

So, Driscoll, enlighten me. Illustrate for us all, just how ignorant I am in these matters. I am just a student, oh master.

Spark

[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 12-17-2000).]

Click to expand...

Spark · Dec 17, 2000

Andy, what was the time frame that you purchased your front lock live blade from Josh? Any chance of nailing this down with any precision?

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

Andy W · Dec 17, 2000

Spark, with certainty, no, I'm not sure of the exact time I got the knife. I do know however that it was between mid-Dec '98 and late Jan '99, if that's any help at all. I do remember that the "standard REKAT tube" that it came in did not mention prototype or anything else on it, other thatn the modle number, etc.

For what it's worth,
Andy

Cliff Stamp · Dec 19, 2000

Spark :

[sending back NIB knives]

misleading

Yes, I reread that, it looks like I was saying that was in regards to REKAT, it was not. It was referencing a thread in the main forum that has a commonly debated issue in which people exhibit difference expectations about customer service, which was my point. What is reasonable to some will not be to others.

if I took a hammer, and hit a knife repeatedly, are you telling me that you think that it should be able to withstand infinite repetitions without any damage?

Depends on the max limit. If it is high enough above the working stress you can't even induce fatigue so yes the lifetime is practially forever. For example take a blade that can flex to say 60 degrees before distorting, now flex it to 45 and return to true and repeat until it breaks. It will take a very, very, very long time if ever.

Why is it so inconceivable that whacking a knife with a hammer, repeatedly, will cause enough mechanical wear and tear to create problems with it's locking mechanism?

Based on the quoted specs, it seems to me that the forces are too low as compared to the max limit especially when the cycle time is so low (a few hits). This is also supposed to be included in the design of the lock as part of its abilities as a "fighting" folder. I have also never seen it clearly stated except by you that this is the expected behavior. And on top of this you have not clearly stated what the safe working limit is. This obviously would be the best no hype statistic for torque.

About your own bias and how "to me it reads as really moronic"

I didn't say that the idea that I was biased was moronic. It is in fact a pretty standard first pass argument against any negative critism. What I said was that particular rumor I found fairly moronic as it contains several large obvious logical flaws. As well of course is the fact that its form is far from standard, nor is even the medium that I supposedly stated it in.

you went after Jerry Fisk on how to use one of his own designs.

We disagreed on issues of method, nothing more. But yes, that does irritate some makers who want to dictate issues of performance and use, ie. "I am the maker, know your place", instead of discuss them. Which is the point, there are some makers who don't mind such discussions, and in fact encourage it - those are obviously the ones that I have confidence in.

I'd also like to see where they invalidated their previous tests that measured the Rolling Lock as being able to take 1000 lbs.

They never stated this in the first place. There is a huge difference between saying a lock can take 1000 in.lbs of torque as compared to 1000 lbs of force. The latter is at the same time a much greater claim (on the surface) but so vague as to be useless except as promotional hype. As for Spyderco, the 200 in.lbs of torque per inch of blade now cited as a high end standard, is above the 1000 in.lbs claimed for the SIFU.

As regards to Strider, yes, I would assume they are not using the exact same method as Spyderco's. I am not sure for example does either compress the blade horizontally which would greatly stabilize the lock nor how they are determining the force of the impact/load or even what state the blades are in after "failure". However the torques they have cited are greater than the 1000 in.lbs for the Rolling lock, and Bob Brothers has stated that impacts have the same effect as slow loads in regards to limit torque so you can compare based on that.

you again imply that because I work for 1SKS, I am somehow beholden to the knife industry

No I don't imply it, I stated it fairly clearly. You have a direct monetary relationship with the appeal of knives you are selling, this is an obvious bias.

As for your statements about the Gunting that it requires training, well yes, so does any blade. However the Gunting was designed to adapt naturally into any open hand and/or assisted locking/trapping/striking system. So in general it requires less training to use effectively than a blade which just functions to cut.

-Cliff

[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 12-18-2000).]

Driscoll · Dec 18, 2000

Spark,

Now your truely being stupid, and will obviously stop at no point to prove how stupid you can be. You said:

"Oh, horse puckey. You are kidding me, right? Are you telling me that Bram came up with the Rolling Lock as well? That's one story I've heard going around, but I'd like to hear it from a "reliable" source."

No one said anything about the rolling lock, which has nothing to do with the design of the knife. According to your foolishness the man who designed the lock-back had a hand in desgining every single knife that has a lock-back. The knife would have been the exact same knife regarless of what kind of lock it had. Quit grasping at straws.

then this:
"Are you saying that Bram provided the CNC plans, design hours, and everything else? That Bram did all the testing on construction? That Bram did materials and heat treat testing? That Bram's drawings were 100% ready to be turned into production pieces? That Bram and REKAT didn't have to modify the designs"

the design hours?, yes he did.
Testing on construction? Nothing to do with the actual design.
Heat treat? Nothing to do with the design again.
Modification of designs by REKAT? The only modifications done by REKAT were purely cosmetic, Bob doesn't have the skill, background or training to use or understand the concepts behind the knife muchless have a hand in significantly altering it.

According to Spark's law of idiocy an architect that designs a building has to go out and heat-treat the rails, personally assemble the structure, weld a few rafters, and do "materials" as he puts it. Then the fool that plants a few shrubs out front can rightfully claim a hand in designing the building.

Do you think before you post?

Driscoll

[This message has been edited by Driscoll (edited 12-18-2000).]

Sal Glesser · Dec 18, 2000

It seems that this is an uneccesary argument that is going nowhere. I really don't want to get involved (My Dad said "never argue with a fool, onlookers can't tell which one is the fool"). Just trying to lighten it up?

I will say that the Escalator/Gunting had no connection to the Jot Khalsa model.

It is just my opinion, but I think the Rolling lock is an excellent lock.

Nothing is absolute and pobody's nerfect.

I believe the argument is over the definition of the word "design". Moran designed the Spyderco Moran, but we still had work to do to get it into production. We engineered the materials and made minor changes, added Kraton, etc.

We bought the design from REKAT based on the cost in time, effort and materials that REKAT had into the design. Bob let me know what he wanted and we complied.

Surely you guys have better things to do with your time.

sal

Spark · Dec 19, 2000

Cliff, well, I didn't think you could do it, but you surprised me - I have indeed lost my last shreds of respect for you. I'm sure plenty of others will agree that whatever credibility you once had is now gone as well. I will give you this, however, at least you have the balls to actually say you think I'm biased.

Chew on this - if I'm so biased towards companies we sell the knives of, why have I publicly stated that I don't like the Microtech LCC? Since you probably didn't read those posts, I'll clue you in: I don't like it at all - I think the blade shape ruins a perfectly good knife, I find it aesthetically wrong. Heck, it's our most popular seller right now, and I've made a few posts saying that I don't like it.

I've also posted a few times that I think that the MOD CQD is too big for daily carry for civilians - it's better suited for Law Enforcement and Military work - but gee, what's our most popular MOD seller? The CQD, imagine. And who do you think are the primary buyers of the CQD? Civilians, non-military, non-law enforcement, non-rescue or security or what have you. Fortunately, it seems that MOD is coming out with a smaller sized model.

And since your hypothesis is supposed to carry over to everyone (everyone who sell's knives must be biased in your view)- why don't you ask Mike about his feelings on Benchmade and Microtech - I'm sure he'll give you an earful.

But, since you pride yourself on being a scientist - how about you put your money where your mouth is and show us your proofs. That's right, give us something to back up your hot air. Show me where I hyped something, intentionally omitted flaws, persuaded someone to buy a piece of crap, or otherwise give evidence to your claims. Take your time. It's put up or shut up time - you made the claims, now you get to back them up.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree as far as fatigue, wear and tear go - because obviously you don't live in the real world. Please tell me what your mechanic says next time your car needs a repair and you won't pay the bill because you think that the parts should have lasted forever. After he's done laughing at you, I'm sure he'll be more than happy to educate you on the facts of life.

Based on the quoted specs, it seems to me that the forces are too low as compared to the max limit especially when the cycle time is so low (a few hits). This is also supposed to be included in the design of the lock as part of its abilities as a "fighting" folder. I have also never seen it clearly stated except by you that this is the expected behavior. And on top of this you have not clearly stated what the safe working limit is. This obviously would be the best no hype statistic for torque.

Well, Cliff, that would mean that you assume that the folder is designed to take infinite abuse from those who have nothing better to do - and that isn't the case. Even your beloved Strider folder won't last forever, but I don't see you making any beef's about that.

Second - your statement leads back to the lack of, wait for it, scientific measurement in the testing! That's right, you have absolutely no clue how much force was exerted by the hammer strikes, let alone what the weight of the hammer was, how far away from the pivot it struck, etc etc etc ad nauseam. Do we know the exact number of hits? Were they placed in exactly the same spot? Were the hits in a completely vertical plane, or was there lateral striking? What was the condition of the knife before the testing? See, Cliff, without any constants or even solid measurements, your claims that the testing was scientific are pretty hollow. So, please, back up your claims.

You should also note the following statement from frank aka rage

The only reason i whacked the axis, rekat, and pinnacle with the rubber malet is because they all passed my weight test, when i mean weight test, i mean really thrusting your weight on the knives handle, literally while having both my hands on each knife, i would jump and then thrust, then repeat this many times, nor the rekat, axis, or pinnacle failed.

So, what do we gain from this - that the lock didn't fail after multiple, full force weight tests - it was only after the lock was already damaged from this that the hammering caused it to fail the whack test; something you routinely fail to acknowledge.

Let's look at your example of flexing a knife. Apparently you still fail to get the concept of metal fatigue, stress, or wear and tear. You flex it enough, and eventually it *will* snap. It's just a matter of time. Even springs fail, and they are designed to be used as such. Why is it so hard for you to grasp that if you continually abuse a knife, eventually it will fail. You bend the knife too far, and guess what? It snaps. Bend the knife almost too far, and that weakens the internal structure - so that the lesser bends later cause the same failure.

Now, Cliff, all you have to do is add 2 + 2. Reread Bob Brother's quote. Reread frank's posts. Think for yourself - "Hmmm, if the lock was already damaged from the weight tests, could the amount of force required to make it fail be reduced in a straight line?" Yes, do the math Cliff - I'm sure you can figure it out. Maybe.

Finally, give it a rest already about the "is this expected behavior" - Cliff, nobody can "expect" every situation - that's why we don't see car companies simulating an elephant landing on a car roof after it's had a head on collision. Furthermore, despite all your blather about "Well Company X says it's unexpected", you've yet to show me a company that simulates frank's tests as part of their testing. The burden of proof is on you here - put up or shut up. What I do see is plenty of steady load testing under controlled conditions. Not - let's jump on the knife then whack it with a hammer and see if it fails the whack test. If they do indeed perform such testing, I'm willing to bet that it's a bit more controlled so that they can learn what went wrong where.

I said it before, and I'll say it again - I personally feel that you are simply blowing smoke. You've yet to do anything to prove any of your claims, instead you are engaging in the equivalent of throwing a spaghetti dinner at the wall - hoping that if you toss enough, something will stick.

<HR>

Driscoll - nice to see that you are still "rising" to your own level there. And yes, considering how hard a time certain people have keeping their stories straight, please feel free to be as specific as possible, everyone loves precision. I'd love to nail you down on some details instead of having to listen to your vague generalizations.

I'll answer you tomorrow, I'm going to go to bed now. But don't worry - I've got some questions that I can't wait for you to answer. That is, if I don't get another lawyer letter first... <HR>

Sal - Yeah, I have plenty of better things to do, unfortunately, it seems that others have nothing better to do than to try to drag a good company through the mud. I guess it takes all kinds.

About the Jot Singh Khalsa - the drawings I saw had a knife that was awfully similar, at least in the initial phases. It may have changed, but the original drawings looked pretty similar to me.

Good night all, get some sleep...

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

REKAT Lock Durability?

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Andy W

Cliff Stamp

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Willie Boy

Cliff Stamp

yoda4561

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Rob Simonich

Big Bear

Driscoll

Strider

Andy W

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate

Andy W

Cliff Stamp

Driscoll

Sal Glesser

Spark

HPIC - Hatas gonna Hate