Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Spark:
Yes, anyone who sells a product has an obvious bias as they are directly $connected$ to the sales of the product. As well the bias extends to other products that will compete with the ones they are selling. Now does everyone act on this well yes to an extent. Busse Combat spends money promoting their blades - they obviously don't promote Cold Steels blades, why not?
And yes, I don't take the opinion of anyone who is strongly connect to a product monetary wise as an unbiased source of information about that product. Furthermore you are the only one I have seen yet seem surprised that this is the case. Most makers / dealers will obviously admit they are biased towards the products they sell. Why for example don't 1sks list info or put up webpages for competing knives that you don't sell? Or why doesn't Mike Turber take out adds or actively promote KnifeForums?
This however does not mean that I think that everyone who is connected in such a way would lie or otherwise hype a product that they are selling. In fact I know of lots that don't. However the only reason I know this is because I have evaluated their products and verified what they are saying. Until this happens I am hardly going to place 100% confidence in what a seller says and as I have said before, the expected behavior that I have seen, in general, is to realize that this is the case.
In general, outside of the knife industry is this how you operate? If you go to a used car dealer do you accept point blank what he says about peformance or will you check the car out yourself? I would always do the latter, and in fact bring along a friend (mechanic) who can do a better evaluation than me.
From the defination (stress outside the design tolerance limits) abuse will induce failure almost immediately. It was never my argument that blades should operate above the spec'ed tolerances as that is hardly sensible.
You have brought this up before, it is clearly stated further down in the thread. As for the rest, yes, as I have stated before the methods are not well described, for Spyderco even, this is hardly a revelation.
You can't even induce fatigue unless the load is above the fatigue limit. And fatigue life is generally very high, low cycle fatigue is like 10^4 cycles, not a few dozen. It is critical how much of a percentage max load you are applying and the relationship is very extreme which is why there are people with lifetime guarantees on blades as the fatigue rate is very low or nonexistant for use as promoted.
As I said before regarding REKAT, it seemed to me the loads applied were far under the max so the number of reps would need to be very high to cause failure. It is quite possible that the impacts induced failure readily. However I never saw such an argument by REKAT and in fact Bob Taylor's comments on this previously (in regards to work that Steve Harvey had done failing a lock by impact beating on it with a stick) implied (or outright stated I can't remember) that was not the expected behavior. But in any case you have the Axis lock outperforming the Rolling lock, which was one of the locks that Spyderco had not tested when the Rolling Lock was stated as being the highest they have seen, nor was the Buck Strider, the compression lock nor several others they have recently tested.
That was never the point, my complaint was never with the ability or lack of to give 100 CI's for performance in all situations, as how something will respond to a high %of the max load, especially in a not tightly controlled way, is far from trivial to estimate. My problem was in general how such questions/comments were dealt with. You think they were handled in a reasonable manner. I don't for reasons I clarifed in the original threads themselves. And which would be obvious to anyone who has followed a review I have wrote as I state my expectations clearly. And of course these are not universal, opinions differ.
-Cliff
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 12-19-2000).]
Yes, anyone who sells a product has an obvious bias as they are directly $connected$ to the sales of the product. As well the bias extends to other products that will compete with the ones they are selling. Now does everyone act on this well yes to an extent. Busse Combat spends money promoting their blades - they obviously don't promote Cold Steels blades, why not?
And yes, I don't take the opinion of anyone who is strongly connect to a product monetary wise as an unbiased source of information about that product. Furthermore you are the only one I have seen yet seem surprised that this is the case. Most makers / dealers will obviously admit they are biased towards the products they sell. Why for example don't 1sks list info or put up webpages for competing knives that you don't sell? Or why doesn't Mike Turber take out adds or actively promote KnifeForums?
This however does not mean that I think that everyone who is connected in such a way would lie or otherwise hype a product that they are selling. In fact I know of lots that don't. However the only reason I know this is because I have evaluated their products and verified what they are saying. Until this happens I am hardly going to place 100% confidence in what a seller says and as I have said before, the expected behavior that I have seen, in general, is to realize that this is the case.
In general, outside of the knife industry is this how you operate? If you go to a used car dealer do you accept point blank what he says about peformance or will you check the car out yourself? I would always do the latter, and in fact bring along a friend (mechanic) who can do a better evaluation than me.
From the defination (stress outside the design tolerance limits) abuse will induce failure almost immediately. It was never my argument that blades should operate above the spec'ed tolerances as that is hardly sensible.
You have brought this up before, it is clearly stated further down in the thread. As for the rest, yes, as I have stated before the methods are not well described, for Spyderco even, this is hardly a revelation.
You can't even induce fatigue unless the load is above the fatigue limit. And fatigue life is generally very high, low cycle fatigue is like 10^4 cycles, not a few dozen. It is critical how much of a percentage max load you are applying and the relationship is very extreme which is why there are people with lifetime guarantees on blades as the fatigue rate is very low or nonexistant for use as promoted.
As I said before regarding REKAT, it seemed to me the loads applied were far under the max so the number of reps would need to be very high to cause failure. It is quite possible that the impacts induced failure readily. However I never saw such an argument by REKAT and in fact Bob Taylor's comments on this previously (in regards to work that Steve Harvey had done failing a lock by impact beating on it with a stick) implied (or outright stated I can't remember) that was not the expected behavior. But in any case you have the Axis lock outperforming the Rolling lock, which was one of the locks that Spyderco had not tested when the Rolling Lock was stated as being the highest they have seen, nor was the Buck Strider, the compression lock nor several others they have recently tested.
That was never the point, my complaint was never with the ability or lack of to give 100 CI's for performance in all situations, as how something will respond to a high %of the max load, especially in a not tightly controlled way, is far from trivial to estimate. My problem was in general how such questions/comments were dealt with. You think they were handled in a reasonable manner. I don't for reasons I clarifed in the original threads themselves. And which would be obvious to anyone who has followed a review I have wrote as I state my expectations clearly. And of course these are not universal, opinions differ.
-Cliff
[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 12-19-2000).]
