Sad day for me a ZT lover...

[sharp_edge]

I don t think so if you batoning with this frame lock folder knive . Frame lock /liner lock too / is spring and will bend little when we make shock impact on blade and will disengage .........as if we held the knife upside down in hand and try to stab blade in wood . .............It s fraction of time and force is big ... lenght of blade act as a lever ......... no hand or cord wrap will stop that to happen .

I completely agree with you on not using a framelock/linerlock folder for batoning because it will likely deform or damage the lock face. What I was saying is, referring to the OP, that when firmly hand-gripped, a frame lock folder will not likely fold or slip (and cut one's fingers) when being spine-whacked.

 

[Fred Sanford]

I wonder if people ever get tired of being wrong...

I'm starting to think people just post stuff and don't even research anything at all.

 

[wensynch]

That is my general impression of them as well, framelocks in particular. What makes it worse are the attempts to overbuild them, which increases rigidity: Flimsy liners will actually not wear the contact surfaces as much as the more rigid framelocks, because they have thin flexible bars that relieve impact wear on the locking surfaces.

Also what is overlooked is that a narrower stock, "flimsier" liner lock generates a more "biting" friction on the contact surface, just from being a narrower, flimsier piece made of harder materials: This combines two things: Less slippage from the narrowness of contact (especially if the end is roughly finished), and less concentration of force from the overall flexing: Flimsier bars take the slippage tendency away from the locking surface, by bending, which is exactly what framelocks don't do: They concentrate the effort on the locking surfaces, hence more wear/slippage...

Framelocks are also much more rigid on impact, so all the forces again get concentrated on the locking surfaces.

This was brought home to me when Cold Steel tested the Sebenza, and it failed the handle weight test at around forty pounds (which I pointed out was about the weight of the DA trigger of a Walther PPK, or at least the CZ 50 I used to have)... There was a bit of an issue of measuring the distance from the pivot to the weight attachment, if I recall... I don't have the greatest confidence in Cold Steel tests... But generally it was acknowledged the frame lock design was far from the greatest for strength, reliability, and that failing the spine wack test was common... I found this surprising.

The better argument in favour of frame locks is that with the hand holding it tightly it will hold up better: This may be true, but it does not inspire great confidence...: I think framelocks and even liner locks would be better suited to slim folders that do not project an image of great "strength": In the case of many overbuilt framelocks, there is a great discrepancy between the knife's appearance and its actual ability, which is an invitation to an accident.

As far a spine wacking being a useless demonstration, I only remembered later an incident where my Cold Steel Pro-Lite really saved a trip: My bike chain had jumped off the gear wheel and wedged itself between the frame and gear assembly: It had been wedged there by the force of my full force pedalling being abruptly stopped, so you can imagine the energy...

Because of the narrow space, the only tool I had that could reach in there, and tap the chain free, was my Pro-Lite's spine...: A somewhat beefy liner lock folder, with a curious "double hump" bowie blade and a very functional oval opening hole (which I liked better than a round hole), probably one of the best liner lock folders of the time (around 2000): I proceeded to spine wack it about a hundred times to free the chain, spinning it full force by the tip of the handle: Finally, after all that tapping, the chain came free and the trip, hundreds of miles from home, was saved... (Otherwise the bike's rear wheel would not even turn, so I could not even push it besides me as I walked: It would have had to be carried: That meant abandoning it...)

Not my actual knife:

A pretty beefy lock at the interface, but elsewhere the liners are thin throughout, so again not the rigid bar/faraway flex point of a framelock:

I would say generally, because of this built-in flexibility issue, that thin-bar liner locks are probably better in reliability than framelocks, which is the opposite of the impression they make... I still do not like that, on linerlocks, the all-or-nothing ball detent "step" is the only real safety feature keeping the knife closed: After decades of carry, an oddball incident will eventually jar it open... Lockbacks keep a continuing closing pressure, which is the big reason to choose them.

I have to say that, as I wacked the Pro-Lite's spine a hundred times as hard as I could, it never occurred to me that a linerlock, or a lockback for that matter, could slip... This being around 2000, I had fifteen years to wait to first hear of the spine wack test, and of failures doing this... I do however remember in the 90s hearing about liner locks opening in the pocket, and of this being considered a common issue...

Gaston

I like this comment.

I think it gives a good informative perspective with a perfect example of hard use, at least to me. Hard use pretty much means anything you can throw at it; the only tool you have be it pry, hammer, nail, plate, spoon, anything. It's the Rambo test. I thought everyone wanted an adamantium knife? Captain America unbreakable shield. Thor's unbreakable hammer.

Folders were never hard use, but I would imagine that would be a goal for folders. Benchmade built it's on this hard use 'lock', the point is still to make a mechanism that is unbreakable.

Well, that's what I want.


Of course if that knife ever to be made, everyone would likely lose business. I'd be happy with my unbreakable knife though.

 

[EChoil]

That is my general impression of them as well, framelocks in particular. What makes it worse are the attempts to overbuild them, which increases rigidity: Flimsy liners will actually not wear the contact surfaces as much as the more rigid framelocks, because they have thin flexible bars that relieve impact wear on the locking surfaces.

Also what is overlooked is that a narrower stock, "flimsier" liner lock generates a more "biting" friction on the contact surface, just from being a narrower, flimsier piece made of harder materials: This combines two things: Less slippage from the narrowness of contact (especially if the end is roughly finished), and less concentration of force from the overall flexing: Flimsier bars take the slippage tendency away from the locking surface, by bending, which is exactly what framelocks don't do: They concentrate the effort on the locking surfaces, hence more wear/slippage...

Framelocks are also much more rigid on impact, so all the forces again get concentrated on the locking surfaces.

This was brought home to me when Cold Steel tested the Sebenza, and it failed the handle weight test at around forty pounds (which I pointed out was about the weight of the DA trigger of a Walther PPK, or at least the CZ 50 I used to have)... But generally it was acknowledged the frame lock design was far from the greatest for strength, reliability, and that failing the spine wack test was common... I found this surprising.

The better argument in favour of frame locks is that with the hand holding it tightly it will hold up better: This may be true, but it does not inspire great confidence....

A pretty beefy lock at the interface, but elsewhere the liners are thin throughout, so again not the rigid bar/faraway flex point of a framelock..... I would say generally, because of this built-in flexibility issue, that thin-bar liner locks are probably better in reliability than framelocks, which is the opposite of the impression they make...

I find your comments interesting too, Gaston. A new take on things and details I'd never really considered. And it makes some sense.

That lock and interface looks to be the same as what's on the CS Ti-Lites, which I have been SUPER impressed with. I didn't realize that lock design was used on any other knife--I was thinking it had been recently 'pat. pend'd" but I guess it's been on other knives of theirs.

I seem to recall the test you mention that Cold Steel did against a Sebenza. It opened my eyes to some things too.

This thread's been squirrelly at times but I may have learned a couple things here....or at least some reasonable theory

 

[The Aflac Duck]

This thread's been squirrelly at times but I may have learned a couple things here....or at least some reasonable theory

From Gaston's one-sided, myopic, and biased point of view? Good luck:thumbup:

 

[EChoil]

From Gaston's one-sided, myopic, and biased point of view? Good luck:thumbup:

Oh, c'mon, man....I don't know the guy, I just think it's food for thought and found it interesting. Truth is elusive here anyway.....

 

[Valle]

Framelocks are the worst possible kind of lock for hard use. A lock that depends on hand positioning for maximum reliability is the definition of optimism. And linerlocks are not that far behind in the quest for worst possible lock for extreme use.

Those ZTs sure are pretty, though. When I look at the work done at the titanium side of the ZT561, that´s a sight to behold.

 

[Danke42]

Why didn't the lock fail before the blade broke? That seems to be counter to everything I've learned from knife tests.

 

[Valle]

Lateral pressure would put the bulk of the stress on the pivot.

 

[KELAMA]

Oh, c'mon, man....I don't know the guy, I just think it's food for thought and found it interesting. Truth is elusive here anyway.....

^:thumbup:
I'm not sure if you caught the connection, regarding his own hypocritical, myopic, extremely biased post, EChoil; but for people who've been around this place for any reasonable time, it's blatantly transparent:

"This was brought home to me when Cold Steel tested the Sebenza, and it failed the handle weight test at around forty pounds."

Do you see the bold, large, word, above (key word: Sebenza)? ^ It's seems that when anyone on this forum makes a comment perceived to be negative, against this maker, or knife, all objectivity, goes completely out the window. That my friend, ^ is a perfect example of: "myopic!"


Back on topic. There is a newly listed Zero Tolerance 0630 in the sales sub-forum, with a custom scale. That sales thread prompted me to do a Google search, where I found this excellent BladeForum review. v I'm pretty confident, that the OP would've had much better success with this model! :thumbup:

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/1265746-ZT-630-thoughts-and-(mostly)-pics

 

[The Aflac Duck]

^:thumbup:
I'm not sure if you caught the connection, regarding his own hypocritical, myopic, extremely biased post, EChoil; but for people who've been around this place for any reasonable time, it's blatantly transparent:

"This was brought home to me when Cold Steel tested the Sebenza, and it failed the handle weight test at around forty pounds."

Do you see the bold, large, word, above (key word: Sebenza)? ^ It's seems that when anyone on this forum makes a comment perceived to be negative, against this maker, or knife, all objectivity, goes completely out the window. That my friend, ^ is a perfect example of: "myopic!"

Actually, the Sebenza has nothing to do with my comment...

Nice try though:thumbup:

 

[KELAMA]

That is my general impression of them as well, framelocks in particular. What makes it worse are the attempts to overbuild them, which increases rigidity: Flimsy liners will actually not wear the contact surfaces as much as the more rigid framelocks, because they have thin flexible bars that relieve impact wear on the locking surfaces.

Also what is overlooked is that a narrower stock, "flimsier" liner lock generates a more "biting" friction on the contact surface, just from being a narrower, flimsier piece made of harder materials: This combines two things: Less slippage from the narrowness of contact (especially if the end is roughly finished), and less concentration of force from the overall flexing: Flimsier bars take the slippage tendency away from the locking surface, by bending, which is exactly what framelocks don't do: They concentrate the effort on the locking surfaces, hence more wear/slippage...

Framelocks are also much more rigid on impact, so all the forces again get concentrated on the locking surfaces.

This was brought home to me when Cold Steel tested the Sebenza, and it failed the handle weight test at around forty pounds (which I pointed out was about the weight of the DA trigger of a Walther PPK, or at least the CZ 50 I used to have)... There was a bit of an issue of measuring the distance from the pivot to the weight attachment, if I recall... I don't have the greatest confidence in Cold Steel tests... But generally it was acknowledged the frame lock design was far from the greatest for strength, reliability, and that failing the spine wack test was common... I found this surprising.

The better argument in favour of frame locks is that with the hand holding it tightly it will hold up better: This may be true, but it does not inspire great confidence...: I think framelocks and even liner locks would be better suited to slim folders that do not project an image of great "strength": In the case of many overbuilt framelocks, there is a great discrepancy between the knife's appearance and its actual ability, which is an invitation to an accident.

As far a spine wacking being a useless demonstration, I only remembered later an incident where my Cold Steel Pro-Lite really saved a trip: My bike chain had jumped off the gear wheel and wedged itself between the frame and gear assembly: It had been wedged there by the force of my full force pedalling being abruptly stopped, so you can imagine the energy...

Because of the narrow space, the only tool I had that could reach in there, and tap the chain free, was my Pro-Lite's spine...: A somewhat beefy liner lock folder, with a curious "double hump" bowie blade and a very functional oval opening hole (which I liked better than a round hole), probably one of the best liner lock folders of the time (around 2000): I proceeded to spine wack it about a hundred times to free the chain, spinning it full force by the tip of the handle: Finally, after all that tapping, the chain came free and the trip, hundreds of miles from home, was saved... (Otherwise the bike's rear wheel would not even turn, so I could not even push it besides me as I walked: It would have had to be carried: That meant abandoning it...)

A pretty beefy lock at the interface, but elsewhere the liners are thin throughout, so again not the rigid bar/faraway flex point of a framelock:

I would say generally, because of this built-in flexibility issue, that thin-bar liner locks are probably better in reliability than framelocks, which is the opposite of the impression they make... I still do not like that, on linerlocks, the all-or-nothing ball detent "step" is the only real safety feature keeping the knife closed: After decades of carry, an oddball incident will eventually jar it open... Lockbacks keep a continuing closing pressure, which is the big reason to choose them.

I have to say that, as I wacked the Pro-Lite's spine a hundred times as hard as I could, it never occurred to me that a linerlock, or a lockback for that matter, could slip... This being around 2000, I had fifteen years to wait to first hear of the spine wack test, and of failures doing this... I do however remember in the 90s hearing about liner locks opening in the pocket, and of this being considered a common issue...

Gaston

FWIW: I just wanted you to also know, Gaston: I for one, thoroughly enjoyed/appreciated, reading your very thoughtful comment! :thumbup:

 

[Joshua J.]

I wonder if people ever get tired of being wrong...

[video=youtube;AW0TVkcBFkw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW0TVkcBFkw[/video]

Color me impressed.
There's a few things you can specifically notice in that video. One is the full engagement of the lock bar on the lock face, and the surfaces are parallel with each other, and the gritty sound when unlocking means the bar is actually binding with the tang. Trouble is I've seen way too many threads about people complaining about that exact thing, it's part of why I say "convenience and lock security are directly opposed". Make that knife unlock smoothly and it won't perform as well, which may not mean immediate catastrophic failure but all these factors add up.
That's also why the Spyderco Compression Lock sarted out with such a fantastic reputation but hasn't shown so well recently. People harped on the "lock stick" issue for years and years. Spyderco fixed the "lock stick" and now the Compression Lock doesn't hold as well as it used to.
As the video host specifies, it's "that specific model" that has tested well, not that lock type or brand in general.
I still have an 0560 hanging on my wall and the lockup looks nothing like that, I can be confident it would not handle that kind of stress.
One of the biggest problems with liner locks and framelocks is the huge amount of variation in the execution of the design. The ZT 0550 specifically looks like a winner, but people need to be aware of what correct execution of the lock looks like.

Bravo, good job ZT in making a proper Framelock.


Alternatively, watching this video today I couldn't help but grin from ear to ear the whole time. Definitely consider Cold Steel if you're looking for a good knife.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=swIFqGBEiIA

Andrew Demko and Cold Steel truly have a unique product on their hands.

 

[EChoil]

Color me impressed.
There's a few things you can specifically notice in that video. One is the full engagement of the lock bar on the lock face, and the surfaces are parallel with each other, and the gritty sound when unlocking means the bar is actually binding with the tang. Trouble is I've seen way too many threads about people complaining about that exact thing, it's part of why I say "convenience and lock security are directly opposed". Make that knife unlock smoothly and it won't perform as well, which may not mean immediate catastrophic failure but all these factors add up.
....

Agree here. I prefer the perfect amount of lock stick. I also prefer sounds on certain of my computer's actions. It's a verification thing.....sensory.

I realize a lot of people don't. All's well.

We may disagree, however, regarding lock face contact. I am of the school that the lock should contact the blade only at a single POINT (i.e. slightly non-parallel to the blade kick) as opposed to contacting the entire surface, for maximum lock strength.

 

[insta9ves]

FWIW: I just wanted you to also know, Gaston: I for one, thoroughly enjoyed/appreciated, reading your very thoughtful comment! :thumbup:

+1, it was actually a great post.
definitely more helpful than commenting on people's eyesight. from my astigmatism point of view

 

[Alfazulu]

I think he's saying it's a fantasy situation because there is no need to ever baton a log that large with a folding knife, and batoning wood in general is not something that very often needs to be done anyway.
Not only that, but that log is way too large for the ZT to be able to properly baton, though I'm sure you could try and get through it with enough time.

And frankly, prying with a folding knife, especially one that in theory was designed for COMBAT or EDC, and not for outdoor use at all, is really not a good idea, and you should not be surprised that the tip broke at all. The 0620 is an Emerson design with the wave feature, made for fast deployment, and to be able to be used as a weapon if needed. It is not AT ALL designed to be used the way you have here. Not all knives will be built to handle the same things.

I would think combat situations could include some VERY brutal forces on the blade. If you're in a fight for your life, you're going to be putting everything you have behind that knife, and likely hitting bone. Given that, I don't think the OP's test was fantasy.

The tip on the Grip is much thicker, and 154CM is tougher in general the way BM heat treats it than the way that ZT does their Elmax. Elmax will hold it's edge much better, and is much more corrosion resistant, so that is generally the trade-off there.
Not only that, but BM generally makes their knives (it seems) with the idea that they have no idea what type of people will use them, so they make the geometry of their blades thicker in order to keep people from being able to break them easily. ZT designed the 0620 with more a performance concept I would think (though it's still not the best knife out there when it comes to just cutting performance).

Do you have ANY information about how BM heat treats 154CM, or how ZT heat treats Elmax? I doubt it. This is straight conjecture stated as fact. And then you talk about Benchmade's INTENT when designing the blade versus ZT. Do you work for EITHER?! This is an insane statement. Also, the tip on the Griptilian is NOT thicker. I measured. The ZT is thicker!

And the reason the lock slipped so much is because of the steel lock insert. The interface allows for little to no wear throughout the life of the knife, and a very good lock provided it's USED AS INTENDED. Hammering on the blade is obviously not something that you should ever do with any framelock knife, and you should be glad that all that happened was that the lock slipped. It very easily could have permanently destroyed the lockbar as well, and if it had not had the steel insert, then you probably would have damaged the lock face too much for it to be able to even lock up again.

So a stainless lock insert, a feature that's supposed to be a PREMIUM feature is a failure point? Really?! Deal with the facts, the lock failed.

Simply put, you used your knife in a way that has no logical reason, and is not how it is ever intended to be used, and it broke. It sucks that it broke, but YOU broke it. It is not the knife's fault that you broke it.

I'm not big on straight up calling people out, especially Platinum members and given that I'm relatively new, but this whole post was insane, fact ignoring, assumptions-stated-as-facts, fanboy BS. There were several statements made as facts that were either blatantly untrue or that you obviously could not know.

The simple truth is that the Benchmade outperformed the ZT in this test, and there are tons of people trying to justify it. I see TONS of threads around here where people abuse knives, and no one ever says a word. Someone hammered a freaking Busse into his freaking DRIVEWAY and you guys all congratulated him and Busse. But the second someone batons with a ZT and it breaks, he's just an idiot. I only read the first page, and was so irritated I had to immediately comment, but this whole thread (first page at least) just smacks of biased fanboy love.

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

I only read the first page, and was so irritated I had to immediately comment, but this . . . just smacks of biased fanboy love.

Sure does. . .

 

[Bryan J]

I would think combat situations could include some VERY brutal forces on the blade. If you're in a fight for your life, you're going to be putting everything you have behind that knife, and likely hitting bone.

I'm envisioning a soldier trying to baton a 3 inch folding knife through an enemy combatant's arm, when all of a sudden the frame lock fails! The enemy combat raises his AK-47 and shoots the solider. If only the Department of Defense had issued the Benchmade Griptillian this soldier would still be alive!

 

[Charr]

To be honest, I debating even responding to this comment at all, since it will likely turn into a rather long conversation, but I feel like some things really need to be addressed here, so here we go...

I'm not big on straight up calling people out, especially Platinum members and given that I'm relatively new, but this whole post was insane, fact ignoring, assumptions-stated-as-facts, fanboy BS. There were several statements made as facts that were either blatantly untrue or that you obviously could not know.

I'm going to discuss this part first, admittedly out of order, so that we can get a few things out of the way first:
1. I don't know you, and you even admit to not being here very long, so trying to "call me out" isn't going to be something that is received very well from my end, especially when you're using rather aggressive and frankly downright rude ways to describe my post.
2. You claim that I don't know several things in this post, but rather than try and find information to contradict me, or even simply asking for sources or reasoning for my claims, you immediately mark it as "fact ignoring", "assumption-stated-as-facts" and "fanboy BS"...the smell of hypocrisy in the air is strong.
3. The fact that I am a platinum member here shouldn't have too much bearing on how we interact. In fact, I try to treat everyone here with as much respect as I would hope to receive from them, being fellow enthusiasts of the same hobby. That said, you have obviously failed to show me that respect, and have "called me out", so here we go.

I would think combat situations could include some VERY brutal forces on the blade. If you're in a fight for your life, you're going to be putting everything you have behind that knife, and likely hitting bone. Given that, I don't think the OP's test was fantasy.

Yes, a combat situation will put strain on a knife, but not in nearly the same way that batoning through wood will, obviously. Unless you plan on bludgeoning your attacked to death with the spine of your blade, the forces experienced when in combat will be VASTLY different from the repeated wacking of the spine when batoning.

These different forces are handled differently by different locking mechanisms, depending on what the mechanics of the mechanism are.
In this case, the Axis Lock handles the impacts rather well, as the forces of the impacts are only going to further force the lock to stay in place, while a framelock, which is by NO means the strongest locking mechanism on the market, will usually fail from repeated impacts to the spine because it will either cause the lock face to deform (in the case of a traditional titanium framelock), or it will likely slip and close because of the intense vibrations or repeated impacts (which is what we see here with the steel lock insert, as it prevents the lock face from deforming).
Not only that, but the forces being applied when batoning are going to be in perpendicular to the spine of the knife, and therefor will be hitting the lockface at an angle, furthering the possibility the lock will slip.

While this test does give you information about some aspects of a knife's performance, it will not be a good test of a combat situation. If that is what you were after, then you should try stabbing and slashing a target that is a good approximation of human flesh. For this, a pig's carcass, or perhaps some ballistic gel are good analogs if you have them.

When stabbing, all of the force of the impact is going to be directed into the lock face directly perpendicular to the interface between lock and blade, so the force is much less likely to cause the lock to fail, and the physics involved are very different then batoning through wood.
When slashing, the forces will be applied in the opposite direction of when batoning, onto the edge of the knife, so there will be no additional strain on the lock face, but rather on the stop pin, making the lock rather unlikely to fail.

Do you have ANY information about how BM heat treats 154CM, or how ZT heat treats Elmax? I doubt it. This is straight conjecture stated as fact. And then you talk about Benchmade's INTENT when designing the blade versus ZT. Do you work for EITHER?! This is an insane statement. Also, the tip on the Griptilian is NOT thicker. I measured. The ZT is thicker!

And this is what I am talking about when I say that there is some hypocrisy in the air here...

Now, while I do not have the actual heat treatment formulas for each company in front of me, I do know the hardness that each company aims for when they treat their blades, and the general properties of the steel involved, so let me explain this for you:
1. BM heat treats there 154CM with a target hardness of 58-60Rc when they treat their blades, and in my experience
through the information I have gathered on this forum, their steel tends to be a little bit more to the middle-lower area of that, around 58-59. This gives 154Cm a little more toughness in general, at the mild expense of the edge retention. It also makes the steel a little more flexible, and able to take flexing and prying a little better.
2. ZT heat treats their elmax a little harder than BM does their 154CM, taking it a little closer to 60-61Rc, and I have seen several measurements on their Elmax showing that it tends to be closer to the 61Rc mark on that scale than 60. You can look them up for yourself if you want to try and argue with me at this point, since I honestly don't care enough to put the time in when you won't give the courtesy of doing the same.

And I don't speak for BM when I talk about their intent making the blade, but it is pretty obvious from the design and the marketing they do for the Grip that it was made to be a good, general-purpose, all-around knife, and it does that very well in my opinion.
And the 0620 in question here by ZT was designed by Ernest Emerson, who is very well-know for designing combat-style blades, and has his own company, Emerson Knives, that does just that. The wave feature, which is featured on the 0620, is also designed to make opening the knife in an emergency situation as fast as physically possible. While Emerson designs certainly can be used for EDC, and many people do that all the time, they are actively designed with the potential for the blade to be used as a weapon, making the intent of the design rather damn obvious if you ask me for that one.

I might not work for BM or ZT, but I do a lot of research, both here and with my own hands, and I have a lot of time put into this hobby, giving me a good amount of information to pull from, which is more than I can say for you. You seem to prefer baseless claims, and instead of correcting what you think is an incorrect statement, you only find it necessary to say I'm wrong, without any contraditory evidence to back up YOUR OWN claims...

And either way, neither blade was made to be a bushcraft knife. That much is obvious to anyone with a pair of eyes any experience with knives.

And if you measured that the ZT has a thicker tip, then that;s fine. I am willing to admit that I am wrong in some areas here, but may I ask where you measured, and if you measured just the very tip, or did you take into account that angle of the grind on both tips and the amount of steel supporting the tip in each? Because I am fairly certain that the tip on the Grip is more obtuse, and therefor more reinforced to handle prying, than the ZT, which has a more acute and gradual grind on the tip, so that even if the actual termination of the tip is thicker, there is less steel supporting the tip, and it is more likely to fail because of that.

And lastly for this part, calling my statement "insane" is both an incorrect use of the word, and frankly incorrect. Even if my statements are incorrect, they are not be any means "insane". I would suggest getting the dictionary out and looking what the definition of insanity is, because it certainly does not apply to what I have said.


...this response is too long so I will post the second part shortly...

 

[Charr]

Still trying to get this stupid thing to work so I can post the rest...