Scientific testing

P

PrimitiveMan

Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
916
I'm going to suggest something here that I have been thinking about for a while.

We do reviews often, but they are 1 knife reviews, by that, I mean they are not actually compared to any standard.

I am going to suggest when a review is done, we compare it, WHERE POSSIBLE to the closest model in the Buck knife line.

Buck is an American icon. They have an extensive line and should be considered the standard. Some will obviously be better, some lesser performars than the Buck they are compared to.

Obviously you can't always take 2 knives into the field and perform similar tasks, but if you can, it will provide creedence to your review.

Why not make it objective rather than subjective?
 
Buck??? :confused: I have butter knives that hold a better edge! ;) Raise the bar a bit...

The part that always bothers me about knife comparisons is that without identical thickness and edge geometry you cannot compare the two in all fairness.
 
Why not make it objective rather than subjective?
Click to expand...
Because so many aspects of knife preferences are subjective, and cannot be measured empirically. Comfort, aesthetics, personal history...

I am going to suggest when a review is done, we compare it, WHERE POSSIBLE to the closest model in the Buck knife line.
Click to expand...
Uh yeah... :rolleyes:

Buck has a nice line of very inexpensive knives, priced right considering the low-end materials used. I happen to like the few that I've owned and used, but their lineup is nowhere near complete enough to have comparable models for most outdoor knives on the market. You'd be comparing apples-to-oranges 90% of the time.

What Buck would you compare to a Mora? A Swiss Army Knife? An Opinel? A $400 custom? A convex grind Bark River? etc., etc., etc.
 
OK,

I'm with you.

Who has a better standard line of knives that would represent a "Standard"?

Keeping in mind NO COMPANY will represent all scenarios or specifications.

Or would you rather just keep going along saying "Joe thinks this knife is great because it botons great"?

Never mind. let's just keep going with personal opinion.
 
There are dozens of ways to scientifically measure various aspects of a knife's performance. Comparing it one-on-one to a dissimilar knife isn't one of them.
 
You would have to through out bias which will never happen. IMO you can only compare how they do a specific job. Take the knives to be compared and slice a pork loin with knife A (example only) then do the same thing with knife B. That won't test edge holding but it will test slicing ability. Chop through a 3 inch limb with Knife A then chop through the same limb with knife B then see how the edge hold up. Thas how I compare knives.

However, not being a rich man, Price means a lot in picking a good knife. Knife A may skin 20 deer with out touching up the edge. The knife costs 250.00. If I skin three deer a year and don't have to touch up Knife B which costs 15.00, then what is the best deer hunting knife for me? Is it worth 235.00 for me to only have to sharpen it every 6-7 years? Not hardly.

The best item on the planet is worthless to me if i can't buy it anyway.

You can do the same thing with a edge. I bought a Buck Nighthawk and put a killer Convex edge on it. It compares very well to my Bark Rivers. I had some knives that siguy did convex edges on, they also compare well In the tests I mentioned above.
 
Last edited:
OK.

Will do.

On second thought, nevermind.

Let's just keep rolling with opinions. They certainly spawn more rhetoric.
 
I try whenever possible to list "X does as good as Y in my experience at..." or sometihng of the like. And I try to take pictures similarly to people can get a feel for things.

But the problem is there's no one knife we all have. I don't own a single Buck knife, for example. The closest thing I can imagine is picking a Mora. But even that assumes that I'm going to use a mora for the same tasks as a Fiddleback Woodsman, for example. It's just apples and oranges.

I think a better approach to the problem is to do a few basic tasks to see how the knife fares. We'll all know how well your basic mora can make a fuzz stick, cut a block of cheese, carve, etc. So seeing blade X do the same tasks and how well it does at them can be quite helpful.
 
Tell ya what. I'll play.

I checked the current inventory and I have two knives that I can mess around with that meet the criteria.

Knife one - Eric Frost Mora 780
Price - $12
Handle - Synthetic (plastic)
Grind - scandi
Steel - Swedish High Carbon Mystery Metal
Handle length - 4.5"
Blade Length - 4.25"

Knife two - Buck Diamondback (Large)
Price - $10
Handle - Synthetic (rubber with two finger grooves)
Grind - Hollow
Steel - 420HC
Handle length - 5"
Blade length - 4.25

Both imported. One from Sweden, the other from China.

Both handles are comfortable with no hot spots. The Buck has a cleaner spine with thumb grooves. The spine on the Mora is obviously stamped and not as "clean" as the Buck.

The Mora has been used but the Buck is unused/new condition.

I have to leave tomorrow for Indianapolis for business so I won't be able to put them to use 'til the weekend but if it helps, I'll take both out for some use/abuse and post some results and pics afterwards.

Chris
 
Yeah, i guess it is too difficult.

If you think about it, Rockwell hardness and similar blade shape would tell you 90% and the remaining 10% would be personal preference.

Of course not all knifemakers will be totally truthful about hardness.
 
Over the years, I have come to know and respect peoples knife opinions. I am fine with the way reviews are put up now. Example, from reading JeffHs reviews over the years, I know what jeff considers to be a good knife, and through his opinions I can draw my own. Same goes for Will, Ruben, and Tonym etc.....I respect the effort people put into a review and I personally enjoy reading the customers feedback and my friends opinions on certain knives. I am really not interested in an "assembly line" review. People like Tonym etc.., have used ALOT of knives, and therefore have an idea of what they are talking about.

If I look at a review, and see the facts put down and in front of me, and the reviewers opinions listed as well, through looking at how the blade handles certain skills, I can draw a wonderfull impression of said blade, just by comparing it with past reviews I remember on similar but differant knives.
 
Sounds good to me.

If you trust them for a review, so be it.

I was thinking about something along the lines of people that didn't know them so intimately but still were interested in knowing knife performance, but I guess they will have to wait until they are more comfortable with the reviewer.
 
Here are the criteria I use when judging an outdoor knife, or any using knife really. Some of these are somewhat measurable, while others are so subjective as to be useless information for another reader:

1- Aesthetics
2- Comfort
3- Loss-proof-ness (I made up that word)
4- Cost/material ratio. Am I getting my money's worth in materials?
5- Affordability.
6- Suitability for tasks at hand.
7- Durability
8- Weight
9- Bulk
 
Bob W said:
Here are the criteria I use when judging an outdoor knife, or any using knife really. Some of these are somewhat measurable, while others are so subjective as to be useless information for another reader:

1- Aesthetics
2- Comfort
3- Loss-proof-ness (I made up that word)
4- Cost/material ratio. Am I getting my money's worth in materials?
5- Affordability.
6- Suitability for tasks at hand.
7- Durability
8- Weight
9- Bulk
Click to expand...

Thats usually what I try to do. Some times I get carried away, but I try.:D

I know I like to compare things to the highest efficiency I have on hand, E.G. this hatchet chops so much compared to a 18" wetterlings. Or a knife whittles this close to a SAK, just becuase it has outragous cutting ability, it obviously also lacks durability compared to heavier built knives, but its a good standard.

That make any sense?:D

I think it would make more sense for the standard to be what Dave posted above, but also compare your knife or tool to a common level of use you would get from something specificly designed for that job.

Like again, it chops as well as the best chopper you have,or shaves as well as the best chaver you have.
 
SpookyPistolero said:
......I think a better approach to the problem is to do a few basic tasks to see how the knife fares. We'll all know how well your basic mora can make a fuzz stick, cut a block of cheese, carve, etc. So seeing blade X do the same tasks and how well it does at them can be quite helpful.
Click to expand...

The "test" will vary in its content and structure as much as the tester and knife being tested. Sure, there is some subjectivity. If it were not for that, I wouild feel as if I were at work.:barf: It's like "in-hand" shots. How subjective is that? We all have different size hands but that pic, in particular, seems to give us the most "value." I don't mind making comparisons to other knives but it will be "at will" and dependent upon a number of arbitrary and subjective motivators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top