Review : SOG X42 TiN Recondo

[The General]

Very interesting thread!

One thing I would ask Cliff is; is it possible to present the data in pye or bar charts? I have asked you this before and you were thinking about it. I think Ron was quite correct in suggesting that the reviews can be a little 'difficult' to those who just want to read a good review without overly complex presentation (I think that was what Ron was trying to say?). Now I don't have any trouble understanding the tables, but with a casual glance after a hard days slog a University, they are VERY off putting.

I realise the nail test would have been worse on a knife, but as a final test that actually represents a real camping possibility test has far more value to me than a lesser hypothetical pipe bash. I would rather see how the knife performs in a way that could happen to me than not. I was perhaps overly critical of some of you testing methods, but if you ask a person what hammering a knife with a pipe will do... In hindsight, I understand that it is less force based upon area of impact and thus less force, but god it would mean much more to me than a pipe base. Nail impact IS a real world possiblity. It happened with a knife of mine (clone of a 9" Cold steel master Tanto in 440a), the blade deformed and rolled on a 1cm area and required a long time to sharpen out, steeling caused the edge roll to snap away. The said nail was in a log, just under the surface of the bark, I dug it out and it had been cut in half!

Sorry if my asperations and desires caused me to be a little 'hostile' that was not my intent.

------------------
Wayne.
"To strive to seek to find and not to yield"
Tennyson
Ranger motto

A few useful details on UK laws and some nice reviews!
http://members.aol.com/knivesuk/
Certified steel snob!

 

[Cliff Stamp]

The General:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">is it possible to present the data in pye or bar charts?</font>

Sure, I just added a bar chart to the Recondo review.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">a final test that actually represents a real camping possibility test has far more value to me </font>

While I can understand that, to me I am more interested in a lower stress test because it helps me set the durability level more accurately.

In retrospect, I should have done both on different sections of the blade, and then did the final lateral hit later on. I will keep that in mind for future work.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Sorry if my asperations and desires caused me to be a little 'hostile' that was not my intent.</font>

No worries.

-Cliff

 

[Joe S]

Awwww, Cliff, c'mon. You know that thermoplastics don't plastically deform.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

The sheath does not experience plastic deformation as the knife is withdrawn, it is exactly becuase the deformation is elastic that Kydex is a suitable sheath material. If Kydex did not have a such strong resistance to plastic deformation, ie. an extensive range of elastic deformation, then the retention would be zero right after the blade was withdrawn the first time as the sheath would not return to the original shape.

Still looking for your next review Joe, the last one was quite excellent :

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000371.html

-Cliff

 

[Crayola]

To Ron and Cliff:

W haven;t had a thread like this in a looong time, and I thank you for having one now. This thread has brough up issues about reviewer bias, reviewer reader bias, testing methods, fairness when dealing with knife manufacturers, respecting private property, grain structure, RC values, and a whole lot more. Though a controversial and an emotional thread, it is from these types of threads that we forumites learn the most. I repeat, we are learning tons from this thread, and I say it is the best one I have read all month. I hope that Ron and Cliff especially, but everyone else too, can see the big picture and see the good side of this thread!

P.S. Ron, thansk for the contest info.

------------------
"Come What May..."

 

[OwenM]

I don't see where all the controversy is coming from.
A thick edge doesn't cut well.
A BG-42 blade at high Rc isn't impact resistant.
Water is wet.
The sky is blue.

IMO, BG-42 was a poor choice for a heavy duty knife of "extreme" design, and is far from the "ultimate steel" for this knife's advertised intended uses. Admittedly those uses are not listed, but SOGs write-up of the knife's "history" suggests that it is made to hold up to anything it would encounter in the field, including chopping and prying.
Don't act like your knife is some ultimate heavy duty tool, and maybe people won't smash it to pieces proving that it's not.

Cliff,
One thing. I don't see how you could use the data compiled as a baseline for BG-42's performance (which is your stated objective) when you didn't even reprofile the edge to a realistic, usable angle. I think that would have given you a better idea of edge retention/wear resistance, and even a more realistic view of impact resistance. As it is, the info's not really much use.

edit for sp

[This message has been edited by OwenM (edited 05-17-2001).]

 

[Ron Andersen]

Crayola,

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">...respecting private property...</font>

You're talking about that poor pipe, aren't you?

Who is standing up for the rights of that pipe?!

As said, I initially responded emotionally. But the ground I covered was important. I've settled down to my normal congenial self. I'm happy to find out there is a larger picture here being understood. Cliff has asked for constructive input on the review. I've given him some. After talking further with our engineers and maybe contacting a researcher or two, I'll give Cliff more thorough "constructive" input. I don't know Cliff well, but from our interaction, I think it will be well received (maybe not agreed with, but well received). He seems to appreciate "thoughtful" comments.

It wasn't my goal to make this into the "thread of the month."

Regarding the contest, we're excited about getting one started. Did you see the possible prize? Wow!



------------------
Ron Andersen
Consumer Services Manager
SOG Specialty Knives, Inc.

Website: www.sogknives.com
Email: ron@sogknives.com

 

[Ron Andersen]

OwenM,

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">IMO, BG-42 was a poor choice for a heavy duty knife of "extreme" design, and is far from the "ultimate steel" for this knife's advertised intended uses. Admittedly those uses are not listed, but SOGs write-up of the knife's "history" suggests that it is made to hold up to anything it would encounter in the field, including chopping and prying. Don't act like your knife is some ultimate heavy duty tool, and maybe people won't smash it too pieces proving that not.</font>

This is well received. As the manufacturer, we walk a fine line. Unlike other manufacturers who advertise their product piercing, slashing, and smashing everything in sight (which is extreme hype), we just want to put out an excellent product that can do many of those things. To protect ourselves (in both warranty and in liability), we limit the use of our products to "intended use scenarios." In reality, in a pinch, does someone need their knife to do extreme tasks (such as prying)? Of course. And we want a product that can perform beyond it's intended use with success. But there are better (and cheaper) pry bars and better (and cheaper) choppers (such as an ax) than a knife.

Our choice for BG-42 as well as our target Rc was slightly more for edge retention than other capabilities. Though, we do not want those other capabilities to seriously suffer. If I remember correctly from a source I read about BG-42, for each Rc point (or was it two?) the hardness is dropped, there is a 20% drop in edge retention.

Is this steel the "ultimate" steel? There certainly are many opinions on people's favorite. Some carbon steels have a reputation as being better. BG-42 is certainly an extreme steel, but with any, there are strengths and weaknesses. With the stainless steels, it has qualities that make it among the best. We are excited to be using it and it has a future in our product line. It is still just new enough to knives that the industry is getting to know it.


------------------
Ron Andersen
Consumer Services Manager
SOG Specialty Knives, Inc.

Website: www.sogknives.com
Email: ron@sogknives.com

[This message has been edited by Ron@SOG (edited 05-17-2001).]

 

[Cliff Stamp]

OwenM:

[altering the edge profile]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I think that would have given you a better idea of edge retention/wear resistance, and even a more realistic view of impact resistance. </font>

The impact resistance I can extrapolate from how the serrations handled the same hits as they are about the angle I would want the plain edge. They suffered much more extensive damage. Now you have to consider that the points increase the contact pressure, but the damage to the serrations was much more extensive than just destroying the points. In any case, if the plain edge can't handle the impacts at a very obtuse angle, then its only going to get worse as it is thinned out.

In regards to edge retention for low stress cutting, yes, I feel that the low initial sharpness of the BG-42 may have skewed its edge holding ability on the high side as it outperformed the ATS-34 Vision by over 10:1 in this respect in its ability to slice through 1/4" poly. This is actually fairly interesting in its own right. As well the much larger edge angle may have increased the edge holding as well but increasing the resistance to deformation, but not to anywhere near that extent.

Would sharpening and repeating the edge holding work been of interest, yes. Would lowering the edge angle and repeating it again also be useful, yes. But as noted, the overall cutting ability of that blade would still have been low even with a thinned out grind due to leverage factors, poor handle ergonomics and other blade geometry factors such as a shallow sabre grind on thick steel. As well, at the time I had nothing to go on from SOG that the obtuse edge grind I was working with was anything but the correct one and thus accurately represented the cutting ability of the Recondo.

Also I had to consider the amount of work that it would have taken to alter the blade geometry, the lack of involvement by SOG, the overall lack of functionality if the steel was too brittle, and the fact that I had much more interesting blades on hand. I simply decided that my time would be better spent elsewhere.

The fact of the matter is that you can make any knife into a high performance blade is you put the time in. For example I could have altered the primary and secondary grind on the Recondo, including a lapping down to 1/16" stock, modified the handle to increase the ergonomics, and got a nice leather sheath made. I would have a very nice extremely high performance light utility knife, a sort of high end version of the Deerhunter by A.G. Russel.

Can I do these kinds of modifications with every knife - well yes, but am I going to. No obviously not. The fact is given a choice of what to work with I will tend to gravitate towards the higher performing knives I have on hand. If you look at the reviews you will see that some of them are far more detailed than others. This is an obvious bias now that I think about it. But something that I don't think will be removed in the near future as I simply enjoy working with higher performance blades more.

When I have made really extensive modifications in the past to knives so as to alter the performance (Basic and Battle Mistress from Busse Combat, Machax from Camillus etc.), there was high performance in there somewhere to give me an incentive to do it, or interaction from the maker/manufacturer to prompt it. Or I simply didn't have any other blades on hand. If the Recondo had held up better I probably would have got around to an edge reprofile later on.

In any case, am I interested in the low stress edge holding ability of BG-42 as compared to ATS-34? Yes. BG-42 at a high RC than ATS-34 with additional high carbide elements and futhermore still a finer grain structure, is obviously going to have better low stress edge retention. I would be more curious however as to BG-42 as compared to CPM-420V with both heat treated by Phil Wilson. And yes, I do have work planned along those lines. And as noted above, once it is done I will link the relevant details to the Recondo review. And clarify any grossly differing performance aspects outright.

Crayola :

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">the good side of this thread</font>

I would have done the review if for no other reason for the information I have gained on how reviews are generally done in the knife industry. I severely doubt that the expectations of behavior that Ron has detailed in the above are just limited to SOG.

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 05-18-2001).]

 

[Joe S]

Ahh, the lack of reviews is mostly due to lack of new knives, along with lack of time. With funds being devoted to school (physics, coincidentally enough), and the everpresent girlfriend, and classes, and near full time work, Ive been in a dry spell. Nice of you to remember, though.

Although my reviews are much more qualitative than Cliff's, if anyone's interested, i'll probably doing one on the CRKT Kasper Companion as soon as I get the one I just ordered. I know that it's not new news anymore, but I haven't heard anyone say much about it other than, "I pulled it out of the sheath a few times, I carried it around, and it's cool." I was planning on using it as daily carry utility, so I'm going to have to run it through the wringer before I can trust it.

Thanks for the kind comment,
Joe S.

 

[Ron Andersen]

SOG received Cliff’s TiNi X-42 Recondo here on July 23, 2001. The knife is the one Cliff reviewed and is the object of this thread. Here’s the relevant information:

• Rockwell hardness observation: Rc61
• Materials observation: The knife was received in approximately eight pieces (missing parts: slabs, sheath, about 20% of the blade mostly comprised of the tip section and about 20% of the handle mostly comprised of a section in the middle). One piece of the blade portion was moderately rusted, showing it was subjected to corrosive conditions the remainder of the knife was not subjected to. There was no visible evidence we could find of a materials-oriented failure (surface anomalies).
• Conclusion: Considering the condition of the Recondo, the most likely cause of the multiple fractures are consistent with the blunt force trauma outlined in Cliff’s article. With Cliff’s account of how the knife failed (multiple locations) and from our evaluation, it is reasonable that the destruction of the blade occurred during the extreme activities this knife was subjected to that it was not designed to perform.

As with all SOG products currently in production, we are constantly reviewing their performances. Since their inception (over the past year), we have been looking at our BG-42 steel knives to find enhancements we can make. Review of existing Rockwell hardness standards are included. Because of this year-long examination, SOG decided to digress a bit from Latrobe’s hardening guidelines of Rc 61-64 and modify these knives to range of about Rc 59-60. These new standards are in the process of being instituted on forthcoming product.

This change will likely not dramatically increase toughness on these blades. Steels in the category of BG-42 (including steels such as CPM 440V and CPM 420V) are desired for increased edge retention and wear resistance. Characteristically, the toughness is decreased. Accordingly, these knives are designed for applications associated with cutting and stabbing. Blunt force trauma, heavy prying, and stabbing into hard surfaces are not consistent with the nature of this steel. SOG’s BG-42 will continue to offer the outstanding edge-holding attributes ascribed to this type of steel.

As always, if anyone is interested in more information, please feel free to email me.

 

[Bugs3x]

Thanks for the followup, Ron. I truly appreciate the objective stance you've taken, given such an unusual test of your product.

Since I surprisingly bought myself a Sebenza nearly 2 months ago, I've been frequenting the CRK forum. Today I read a thread -- not sure when it was initiated, but think either yesterday or today -- where a question was asked of CRK why they didn't use BG-42 for their 1-piece knives. The response was that they believed their knives would be subjected to considerably more shock than the Sebenza blades, and that they didn't perceive BG-42 as likely to do well in such environments. They then went with A-2, which has considerably more ability to withstand shocks.

Now, I certainly realize that the Recondo is targeted for different uses than the CRK 1-piece knives. But, the potential uses shouldn't be worlds apart. I also realize that the CRK knives are quite heavy duty, while the Recondo is designed as a light-weight knife.

Nevertheless, I am curious as to how SOG went about choosing BG-42 as the steel for a knife that was quite likely to be used in an outdoor, camping, potentially survival sort of environment. Obviously, there are many other steels that could have been chosen. Some of those, certianly, are more frequently used for fixed blade knives than is BG-42. For example, both 440C and ATS34 are quite frequently chosen as the steel for a number of hunters and skinners and tactical blades.

So, am wondering if you can share the thinking behind the SOG choice of BG-42. Thanks,

 

[Doc4570]

When BFC received the software upgrade, I couldn't imagine what
purpose the "Ignore List" served.
I now think that software designer was a genius.

Ron,
I recently had a surface-to-air missle laying around and
fired it at my SOG Bowie.
It performed even worse than the Recondo.
Unfortunately, I don't have any pieces to send to you.
Complete restitution would seem to be your only recourse.
Not once does your warranty mention "surface-to-air missles" so don't
try to weasel out of it.
I'll email you my address.
Doc

PS: Below is a bar chart documenting knificular deterioration.
Before SAM ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
After SAM |

 

[Sergiusz Mitin]

Doc,
If I have counted properly you are evaluating knife performance after your test as 1/34 of its initial performance?
Hmm, taking into consideration your own description of test conditions - could you specify please which part of your knife performed as 1/34 comparing with NIB one?

Bugs,
ATS-34 is very nice steel if pure edge holding is required with no stress loads. Hunting blades are intended to deal with pretty tough animal skin and fur, which additionally can be sandy and gritty. This combination can deprive blade of sharpness even more efficiently than cardboard. On the other hand game striping usually is made up of calm, non-violent movements what do not stress the blade and put in question its toughness. So it's nothing wrong with ATS-34 in small - medium hunting blade.

For heavy-duty blades ATS-34 is too brittle as well as BG-42 at about 62-64 HRC. In my opinion 440C or VG-10 would be better choice for blades intended to take a lot of stress. Here I'm speaking about stainless steels only. Spring steels and high-speed steels can take much more stress but this is the topic for another discussion.

I would go also with lower hardness for heavy-duty blades. It's better to resharpen your knife somewhat more frequently than to stay in wilderness with broken blade.

 

[Brian C]

Originally posted by Doc4570
When BFC received the software upgrade, I couldn't imagine what
purpose the "Ignore List" served.
I now think that software designer was a genius.

Doc, I couldn't agree more. My list is growing daily.

 

[Ron Andersen]

Doc,

I'll have to re-read our warranty policy. I thought destruction by SAMs were covered! But thermonuclear devices go too far.

BTW, helpful chart.

Can someone show me how to use the "ignore list"? Is that anything like, "If I don't see it, it must not be there"?

 

[Gator97]

Originally posted by Sergiusz Mitin
Bugs,
ATS-34 is very nice steel if pure edge holding is required with no stress loads. ...

For heavy-duty blades ATS-34 is too brittle as well as BG-42 at about 62-64 HRC.

It's not that simple I think.
Strider MH, which is made of the ATS-34, and I can't call 6.5 inch long blade small, and most definitely it's a heavy duty knife.
Can't comment on BG-42 yet, hopefully when my other BG-42 blades from Strider arrive, I'll have some data to compare.

In short that ATS-34 MH by no means is brittle. I've chopped aluminum tubes, cables wood and other stuff, with it, w/o any damage to the edge.

Not that I am promoting ATS-43 here, I never liked ATS-34/154CM in general. With that Strider MH exception, all of the ATS-34/154CM blades I've ever had were chipping, and those were folders, not heavy duty blades, and the edge I'm putting on the is the same 24 degrees as on the MH. I'd like to have a thinner edge on the folders, but...
Apparently the good heat treatment can do wonders Probably no heat treatment (proper) can make ATS-34 tougher than A2, yet it's plenty tough for most of the heavy duty tasks.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Gator97 :

all of the ATS-34/154CM blades I've ever had were chipping, and those were folders, not heavy duty blades, and the edge I'm putting on the is the same 24 degrees as on the MH.

Some of the manufacturers like Benchmade were really pushing on the hardness of their ATS-34 blades getting them 61-62, and the difference in a couple of RC points can cut the impact toughness in half on some steels. As well, I seriously doubt that Benchmades heat treat is as tight a procedure as Paul Bos performs. Lots of other factors to consider though, like handle security and ergonomics as well as cutting performance, as all of those can influence edge durability, unless you are determining it in a very controlled manner (lock the edge in a vice and cause an edge impact with a hard object).


Bugs3x :

Nevertheless, I am curious as to how SOG went about choosing BG-42 as the steel for a knife that was quite likely to be used in an outdoor, camping, potentially survival sort of environment.

As am I, more specifically on exactly what tasks did the Recondo in BG-42 at 61-62 RC outperform the same blade in 440A. Yes, the BG-42 one would have more resistance to edge rolling and wear in light use, however look at the geometry of the Recondo and ask yourself what is it optomized to do? Compare it for example to the Deerhunter from A.G. Russel which will outcut the Recondo many times to one. The only advantage the Recondo would have is greater strength - which means a greater functionality in regards to prying, now is this suited to BG-42 at 61-62 RC?

For something like the Recondo, you are directly better off with something inherently tougher and more ductile like 420HC. Dropping the RC on the BG-42 will still not give it the toughness of 420HC at a similar RC (~58), and now the great "edge holding" of BG-42 is not such an advantage as both steels will tend to roll with similar ease, and the BG-42 will still be more brittle and less ductile and more resistant to sharpening. The wear resistance would only be a factor if you were cutting something that is very abrasive like Fiberglass insulation again something you would be better of doing with another knife. And the greater toughness and ductility of 420HC would be of great benefit in harder use, as noted by Reeve in the above quote comparing A2 to BG-42.


The problem is not the heat treat, or more specifically the choice of RC, as it is the optimum RC for that steel, the extra couple of points of hardness is one of its features over ATS-34 (it has others, inherent greater wear resistance, finer grain, "cleaner" composition etc.) . However this simply does not suit a thick (3/16") blade, with a "tanto" point, an obtuse primary grind (sabre, shallow hollow), and a thick and obtuse edge profile. Which, as described in the advertizing, is not a light use, high performance cutting profile, but a much heavier tasked blade, ie. "survial", "extremely tough, hard, and durable ", etc. .

Bg-42 at 62-64 RC would however would be near ideal for something like the A.G. Russell Deerhunter. A blade ground out of ~1/16" stock, a full flat primary grind right to a *very* thin edge (0.01") ground at an acute angle. Its too bad this is not one of the steels being used for the new series of Deerhunters last time I heard, M2 would have been nice as well (~63-65 RC). The low impact toughness and ductility would be of no consequence as that is a blade designed simply to cut under a light load, and the excellent edge strength and high wear resistance of BG-42 would make it excell in doing so.

-Cliff

 

[Ron Andersen]

Hi Bugs,

Sorry I did not respond to your question earlier. That was an oversight on my part. I appreciated your post and its tone. The "ignore list" comment was not directed at you!

Now, to answer your question. The Recondo is not designed as an extreme, all-in-one tool. As a matter of fact, not many knives are. Severe prying and blunt force trauma activities are not part of the capabilities of the average field knife. If there are manufacturers out there that promote these activities (and make knives able to do so), it is far from the norm and you wind up paying for it in the price of the knife.

Conversely, a knife in the "fixed blade" category should be able to do some of these things in a pinch (not their regular activity). But if it breaks at a noticeable degree bend using a lot of pressure, the user should not be upset, knowing they asked too much of the knife.

The use of BG-42 was targeted for edge retention and wear resistance type activities. Not everyone likes to sharpen their knife often in the field. With BG-42, that becomes less necessary. Overall, the knife will perform very, very well in other, nonstandard tasks, but there are a few knives available with bigger, thicker, and more flexible steel that will certainly out perform it in non-traditional tasks.

The Recondo is not long and heavy enough to be an adequate "chopper" (something Cliff did not recognize). Can one chop with it? Of course, but not as well as others. BG-42 steel characteristically is not a steel that will accept the shock of high impacts with non-giving materials as with other, tougher blades.

As a cutting knife, fighting knife, and general use field knife, it will perform excellently. No thermonuclear devises (or lashings with a steel pipe). If someone's field uses require heavy prying, heavy chopping, and blunt force trauma with other steel objects, the user will need to get used to also carrying a pry bar, ax, mallet, and whatever else they might need (acetylene torch?). It is silly to expect maximum performance from "every" knife (from all categories); especially if one's uses go beyond the intended use of a knife.

Bugs, I hope this answered your question.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Ron :

The Recondo is not long and heavy enough to be an adequate "chopper" (something Cliff did not recognize).

This was covered in the review, to be specific :

Being very light with a neutral balance, the Recondo chops very poorly.

I went on to quality what "very poorly" meant, what chopping technique was used, and other factors that influence the performance such as edge profile and how the different included angle on the serrated vs plain gave different results. Length can be a factor, but it is not as critical as the others, the WB for example outchops the Recondo 2.5:1, but is of a very similar length. The balance and mass however are very different as is the edge profile.

If someone's field uses require heavy prying, heavy chopping, and blunt force trauma with other steel objects, the user will need to get used to also carrying a pry bar, ax, mallet, and whatever else they might need

Or simply a suitable knife, several of which I can think of which would directly outcut the Recondo as well.

[prying and such]

a knife in the "fixed blade" category should be able to do some of these things in a pinch (not their regular activity). But if it breaks at a noticeable degree bend using a lot of pressure, the user should not be upset, knowing they asked too much of the knife.

These are relative terms "noticeable degree bend", "lot of pressure", with no baseline for reference at all, and thus are meaningless. This is a really unfair way to promote the blades use. You are telling the user that yes you can do these kinds of things with the Recondo, but if it breaks the knife is not warrentied. How are they supposed to know what the knife can or cannot take when you are not being specific at all about the abilities of the knife, how much force it takes to break it, at what angle etc. . Depending on what other blades the user has used, plus their physical abilities, they could obviously have a very different version of what these terms mean than you do.

-Cliff