Testing that knife, especially the edge....

[Marion David Poff]

OK,

I have been rolling a list of things over in my head to use as a testing medium for knives.

A good list would include different ranges, like thin stuff through thick stuff.

It would also include stuff that everybody cna get there hands on.

Like a Bic Roundstick writing utensil.

Or 550 cord.

What do you all think?

Here are some threads for reference....

Edge testing, How do you do it?
http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000515.html

ABS cutting competetion
http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002075.html

------------------
Thank you,
Marion David Poff aka Eye, Cd'A ID, USA mdpoff@hotmail.com

"We will either find a way, or make one." Hannibal, 210 B.C.

 

[Marion David Poff]

No bites?????

 

[Jerry Hossom]

I'll bite, because this is a subject that I and some martial artist friends are very much involved with. I'm speaking now of fixed-bladed, tactical knives only. As we see it there are three general categories of performance that every tactical knife must address.

1) Handling. The knife must "feel" right. It should be of an appropriate weight for its size, the balance should be correct (ideally somewhere in the neighborhood of the forefinger), the handle should provide a secure yet flexible grip in all tactical positions, and the knife fit the intended user and their fighting style, in handle size and shape, overall knife size, and in edge versus point geometry. Since this last is entirely subjective, I'm not sure it can be measured other then to see how well the maker satisfied these requirements for the evaluator.

2) Cutting Efficiency. Tactical knives are not designed to cut 2 x 4's or cardboard. Whether or not they hold an edge is far less important than that they take a good edge and that the edge efficiently cuts through flesh and bone, even when protected by denim, leather and the occassional zipper or button. You can always sharpen the knife again after it has saved your life, but you're less likely to be born again while that still sharp blade is laying there in your dead hand. The performance of different blade and edge geometries against appropriate tactical targets just can't by synthesized or extrapolated from a blade's performance against artificial targets like wood, cardboard or rope.

3) Endurance. The blade must withstand a reasonable measure of abuse. If the edge rolls easily or chips with incidental contact that is not good (and likely the result of poor edge geometry even if the knife performs well in all other tests), but it is not fatal. If the blade breaks because it is too brittle, that is a death sentence. Short of destructive testing, this is likely the hardest parameter to measure. There are however some useful indicators. A flexible blade is less likely to fracture than one that is rigid, unless of course the rigid blade is 3/8" thick in which case it fails Test 1 above. Flexibility can be easily measured, just bend the blade with your hands and see if it snaps before you turn blue in the face. If you want to drop it point first on concrete, that will likely tell you something, but most knifemakers draw a line about there on their warranties. Chop a nail in two? Sure. Just keep in mind that the issue is not a chip or a ding, but catastrophic failure.

In the evaluations I've seen posted, few have addressed Test 1 issues at all, and only a couple have used appropriate target materials, as in Test 2. Test 3 is sometimes addressed, but quite reasonably most people don't really want to trash their new $500 knife. And for those who don't care about the cost, remember it is a knife and not a crowbar. Severe lateral stress doesn't really relect impact toughness.

Point last. The name or letters on the steel is probably less important than its heat treating. When someone says CPM-3V is better than 440C, that may or may not be true for any given knife, depending on the quality of the heat treating. I don't know how you measure this, but it is a vital element is judging the quality of a blade.

All the above is the strictly opinion of the writer, and I hasten to apologize to anyone who feels offended by the content.

------------------
Jerry Hossom
knifemaker
www.hossom.com




[This message has been edited by GaKnife (edited 02-08-2000).]

 

[Jerry Hossom]

Sorry, duplicate post. See below.




[This message has been edited by GaKnife (edited 02-08-2000).]

 

[Cliff Stamp]

To get fairly general, there are two basic types of cutting, push and slicing. The edges that perform optimally in one will not do so on the other so you will want both types of work done. Extending past edge testing and to cutting ability in general you will want deep cuts to evaluate the primary grind performance. There are lots of ways to do the testing, what you should be careful to do is to take some time and consider exactly what aspect of the blade you are evaluating and to think about the test and exactly what the results mean.

For example in general the more resistance an object offers to the blade the more it will hide the blunting effect. If you were to compare the performance of two blades, one very sharp and one slightly blunt on thick hemp rope and a slight roll of cotton, you would find that the performance ratio was much closer on the rope. Very basically a blunt blade will deform a material until the resistance to bulk movement is greater that the pressure needed to make the cut. Because the cotton is very flexible in comparision the cutting ability is much lower.

Beyond just wear resistance it may be useful to examine the toughness and ducility by raking the blade through sand / dirt. It might also be useful to examine strength by carving up some very hardwoods or some mild steel stock (1010).

In any case, exactly what you do is not really as important as how you do it and what you make of it. If at all possible have a reference blade to make the results meaningful. Saying you handled two deer with a blade means nothing as there is no way to evalute your technique for example so the stress level is unknown. However if you say I cleaned 2 with one blade and 8 with another, this is saying a fair amount.

Makers who it would be very good to talk to concerning this : R. J. Martin, Darrel Ralph, Jerry Hossom, and Phil Wilson.

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 02-08-2000).]

 

[Waxes Eloquent]

Marion,

One of the things that must be vital to your evaluation is the intended purpose of the knife. I would suggest that the parameters of the test be designed around the particular style of knife.

For example, if you have sharpened prybars you would like to test, (the types of knives where the makers exclaim loudly how tough their knives are) Cliff's suggestions seem quite apropos. Such a test I would read (and probably chuckle while doing so).

However, not all knives are built to be mattocks, stone chisels, axes, or crowbars, so the test must be different. If someone were to take a fine edged fighter (designed for interpersonal combat) and performed destruction testing on it, I'm not going to be very interested in the test.

If, however, a fighter were subjected to tests designed around it's sole reason for being, that would be very interesting indeed. How does it cut through flesh? I've used big cow legs to test that, Gaucho cut right through a lamb's leg. How does it do against flesh wrapped in leather or denim? How well does it withstand incidental contact with other hard objects? (Nails, metal buttons, zippers, and perhaps even other knives might be used to test this.)

As for testing the "feel" of a knife, several ideas have been posited on this forum, and a few have been shot down. Makers often gain a following based on the feel and performance of their knives. Why not gather a group of blade lovers together, and have them rate each knife on a 1 - 5 or 1 - 10 scale for feel? This is the way Consumer Reports does some of their large studies. We're consumers, so let's get some reports on these knives.

Whew! I didn't realize how fast I was typing!

Matt

------------------
Waxes Eloquent, Leader of the Terrible Ironic Horde and Sarcastic Brain Spewer

 

[Don Rearic]

There is a distinct difference between a fighting knife that saves you on the street or on the battlefield in hand to hand combat and a knife designed to offer an extreme degree of toughness to save you in a wilderness survival situation.

A case in point would be Marines in WW2 (if I am not mistaken, I will have to consult William Cassidy's text on the Sykes/Fairbairn for clarity and accuracy) that were issued S/F Fighters. A lot of them broke. Because they were put to purposes other then what they were intended for, and this goes beyond even a fighting knife. The S/F was often used for surprise attacks, using treachery and speed to get the job done. At this, they were superb, put to other tasks, the knife could be referred to as miserable which is not fair to the knife as it is being judged to a standard and failure during a task for which it was never intended.

Often times, the more qualities a knife would show in the wilderness makes it a slower knife in actual combatives.

This is not apples and oranges, it is apples and Cadillacs...

Evaluate the knife only for the task assigned it. That is my opinion. If you think you have to cut through multiple saplings to make a shelter and then hack through other woods for kindling and then dig a hole for a firepit or a survival still...by all means, judge it by those tasks! Just my 2 pennies throw into the mix.

 

[Gaucho]

Greetings All!

I believe that some very important points have been brought up here.

First, and foremost, evaluate a given knife for the tasks that it was designed to perform. Test a machete as a machete- ie., how well does it clear brush- not as a skinning blade. Test a survival/utility knife as a survival/utility knife- ie., how well does it cut rope and small saplings; how well does it field dress game- not as a fighter. And, test a fighter as a fighter- ie., how well does it slash and thrust through flesh, bone, and body armor; how well does it withstand incidental blade on blade contact; how well does it move in the hand- not as an utility knife.

Secondly, Real World testing by experts is the Sini Qua Non of blade testing, IMO. Ideally, testing of a given type of blade should be performed by people who are experts in using blades of that type. Thus, when Ron Hood tests how well a new wilderness survival/utility knife performs in the jungle, for instance, we can be confident that his tests will be right on target for the uses that someone in the wilderness would actually put that knife to. Ron knows exactly what a survival/utility blade needs to be able to do.

Likewise, when Don Rearic, Matt Draper, or I test a new fighting knife design, you can be absolutely certain that we will put the knife through every critical test to determine its effectiveness as a fighting knife. We know exactly what a fighting blade needs to be able to do.

Finally, I think that Matt's idea of assembling a panel of experts for each of the various types of blades- eg., wilderness survival, heavy utility, light utility, fighting, kitchen, etc.- to do head to head comparisons of knives of a given type is outstanding. What could be more fair, more cogent, or more useful to potential buyers?

So, let's stop screwing around and get serious. I know that I for one- and I think that I speak for Don and Matt as well- would be happy to really evaluate new fighting blades for the other serious knife players among us out there the way that fighting knives should be evaluated- as fighting knives.

Mario



------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.

 

[Don Rearic]

I think part of the problem is that people want one thing/weapon/tool to do so many things that it ends up doing none of them very well. Or perhaps just one thing, yet it is sold as THE TOOL. THE WEAPON. Etc.,you cannot find a rifle that conceals as well as a good handgun and you can find a handgun that will hit at 500 yards that is concealable. And you cannot get multiple organ trauma out of either which is why the shotgun exists.

On the street, you need a hotrod. In the mountains a billy goat. You cannot have a hotrod billy goat that does both of them well.

 

[Marion David Poff]

Good Stuff.

------------------
Thank you,
Marion David Poff aka Eye, Cd'A ID, USA mdpoff@hotmail.com

"We will either find a way, or make one." Hannibal, 210 B.C.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Jerry :

The performance of different blade and edge geometries against appropriate tactical targets just can't by synthesized or extrapolated from a blade's performance against artificial targets like wood, cardboard or rope.

I remember awhile ago someone critizing another for describing the performance of "tactical" blades on hemp rope saying they are not meant to do that. Joe Talmadge commented that he has never seen a blade do poorly as a rope cutter and be useful for utility work. Neither have I.

I don't in general get into knife fights, but I have cut a fair amount of flesh from lots of different types of animals (including my own accidently) and lots of other material and have never seen any evidence that flesh was so radically different to cut that extrapolation from other materials was impossible.

If you have experience with profiles that cut through wood, cardboard, and rope lousy and yet went through fabrics and flesh really well I would be very interested in the profile, finish and blade geometry as that makes little sense at all to me.

-Cliff

 

[Jerry Hossom]

Cliff,

Tactical knives are not utility knives.

On the geometry point, we once discussed the issue of hollow versus flat grinds in their respective performance against hard and soft targets. No question, you can cut yourself with any decent knife. However, a hollow ground blade experiences entirely different dynamics against hard versus soft targets. Once the hard target encounters the top of the grind the hollow ground blade will stall in its penetration of that target. Similarly, a flat ground blade will experience constant friction along its sides as it passes through any target. This is sometimes useful. With hard targets, the flat ground blade provides a wedge effect that assists the cutting edge in penetrating the material. A hollow ground blade does not offer that benefit. But that same friction is not beneficial against soft targets like flesh. It causes the blade to drag, diminishing penetration. Conversely, a hollow ground blade offers substantially less resistance against soft targets or even hard targets like bone that are thinner than the hollow of the grind.

The tactical knives I make are not intended to cut wood, but they are pretty good with tomatoes or people. Still, the measure of a tactical blade is not just its capacity to cut, but also it's maneuverability, speed, and power. Sawing through a piece of hemp or moving your blade quickly enough to prevent an opponent from slashing your throat are matters of entirely different dimensions. Flicking your blade in a millisecond long maneuver so as to amputate your opponent's fingers has little to do with chopping 2 x 4's. Virtually all of the tests you have described can be efficiently performed with a 1/4" thick chunk of steel with a fine edge, even if that blade weighs 5 pounds. A very light, fast fighter might perform poorly in the wood and roping chopping tests, yet in the hands of a competent martial artist will slice and dice the guy with the 5 pound cleaver. Different agendas.



------------------
Jerry Hossom
knifemaker
www.hossom.com

 

[Marion David Poff]

Jerry

Tactical knives are not utility knives.

That may be correct, from a certain point of view, but if you are slicing people all day, your tactical knife is your utility knife

And, realistically, how many times are people in fights that end in someone getting cut? With a quality knife? Made for cutting people? So, to me, one is selling fantasy if one is selling knives based on 'tactical' considerations only. In the world I understand, utility is first, daily non-people cutting chores. And I practice martial craft and science. I train to use a knife in a confrontation, but I know that if I have to go for that knife I have made a string of very bad mistakes. Like leaving my telescoping baton at home.

On the geometry point, we once discussed the issue of hollow versus flat grinds in their respective performance against hard and soft targets. No question, you can cut yourself with any decent knife. However, a hollow ground blade experiences entirely different dynamics against hard versus soft targets. Once the hard target encounters the top of the grind the hollow ground blade will stall in its penetration of that target. Similarly, a flat ground blade will experience constant friction along its sides as it passes through any target. This is sometimes useful. With hard targets, the flat ground blade provides a wedge effect that assists the cutting edge in penetrating the material. A hollow ground blade does not offer that benefit. But that same friction is not beneficial against soft targets like flesh. It causes the blade to drag, diminishing penetration. Conversely, a hollow ground blade offers substantially less resistance against soft targets or even hard targets like bone that are thinner than the hollow of the grind.

That may be.

But I have been cut, and I have cut. I cut someone with an AFCK. And it did all the damage I would ever need, in fact the only thing I could imagine that would cut better, would be a light saber. And I was using 1/8 power, hardly no contact, and he opened up. My brother opened my hand up, the inside, the meaty part, hardly any force, and it went right to the bone, the knife was a Wicked Little Pecker, flat ground. A knife, dynamic, in motion is an efficient thing.

Point of fact, most homicides committed in America with a blade are with kitchen knives (and dull ones at that, probably), and it seems that they aren't having too many problems killing people. In places like Africa and Central America, people are getting killed by cheap machetes, same story.

And, who needs to butcher a guy? There are multiple targets, easily accessible with a 2 inch taiwan crap blade. Or no blade at all. Give me a Bid Pen.

Still, the measure of a tactical blade is not just its capacity to cut, but also it's maneuverability, speed, and power.

Most Tactical knives are sold for one reason, too bolster the confidence of the buyer. An attempt to buy competence.

That mythical fighter again. The day in day out knife use is against far more mundane things.

Sawing through a piece of hemp or moving your blade quickly enough to prevent an opponent from slashing your throat are matters of entirely different dimensions.

Yeah, but cutting the rope will tell you something about cutting the person, or more accurately cutting through the tough fibrous things that people wear, like Carhartt jackets, and leather belts, and leather jackets, to get to the person, so that he doesn't cut your throat.

And, given nine tenths of the population, proper training will negate his blade.

Flicking your blade in a millisecond long maneuver so as to amputate your opponent's fingers has little to do with chopping 2 x 4's.

Why are his fingers being amputated when cutting his wrist, the tendons and blood vessels therof, will start exsanguination and make the hand unusable?

Virtually all of the tests you have described can be efficiently performed with a 1/4" thick chunk of steel with a fine edge, even if that blade weighs 5 pounds. A very light, fast fighter might perform poorly in the wood and roping chopping tests, yet in the hands of a competent martial artist will slice and dice the guy with the 5 pound cleaver.

Yes, that may be so, but the situation you describe is so out of the pale, that one would have to troll biker bars for a fight, go looking for that fight, to test and or need to rely on a blade made for those situations.

I agree with you about the feel of a well made fighter, but I see no reason why a knife cannot be made that will excel at the regular stuff, and still be more than acceptable in the martial realm. A utility knife with that kind of fell would make the regular stuff a breeze, and you would still have that, just in case, potential.

------------------
Thank you,
Marion David Poff aka Eye, Cd'A ID, USA mdpoff@hotmail.com

Talonite Information and Resource Page, including other cobalt materials.

"We will either find a way, or make one." Hannibal, 210 B.C.

[This message has been edited by Marion David Poff (edited 02-12-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Marion David Poff (edited 02-12-2000).]

 

[Jerry Hossom]

Cliff, there is a big difference between "murder" and Filipino Martial Arts. There are likely similar differences between the sylvan bliss of Newfoundland and the reality of America's inner cities. I will answer you in greater detail when I return from a knife show tonight.

Or you could address your concerns to the martial artists who responded to you earlier.

------------------
Jerry Hossom
knifemaker
www.hossom.com

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Jerry :

Virtually all of the tests you have described can be efficiently performed with a 1/4" thick chunk of steel with a fine edge, even if that blade weighs 5 pounds.

I noted that you need to do deep cuts so as to evaluate the primary grind performance. It is necessary to do this in a variety of mediums as elastic materials offer different dynamics as rigid ones. Very thick spined blades fail on elastic mediums with high elastic constants for example regardless of the actual edge profile.

Still, the measure of a tactical blade is not just its capacity to cut, but also it's maneuverability, speed, and power.

None of which Marion asked about, his question was about an evaluation of cutting performance. If he had asked about issues of balance I would have commented on it. If you are looking for maxium speed and control you will want the balance point right at the point at which you focus your grip, which for me is at my index finger. This presents the center of mass at the point at which you exert force so it eliminates blade rotation which if generated you have to produce a counter torque to eliminate. This is why it is very hard to control a bar of steel if you hold it by the end but very easy if you grab it in the middle.

However that is not of primary value to me as it is not the purpose for which I use a blade. I want a handle heavy balance on my precision blades so they are stable in my hand and I can relax my grip without fear of them falling out. For my heavier blades I want them blade heavy so as to promote performance in regards to chopping. Ideally there should be an allowance for a grip transition which shifts the center of mass, most larger blades have this.

The only large blade that I would want a more neutral balance on is on something for light brush work as I want control and speed over maximum power. I would currently prefer my Tramontina machete over my Battle Mistress in this area for example. Of course the basic reason for this is that I currently don't have the grip/wrist strength to use the battle mistress in this manner for an extended period of time which I am working on.

Jerry you are also being a bit too focused in your defination of tactical or fighting blades. There are people who use large blade heavy knives for those purposes they just have a different style which takes advantages of the abilities of such a blade, Bando being an example, and yes they chop wood with those blades.

-Cliff

 

[Waxes Eloquent]

If the darn point would just sit still, I guess people would stop missing it.

Bottom line: Structure your test around the purpose of the blade. If you want to test a knife that's a mattock, stone chisel, wedge, and bone splitter, then test it as such. Take a hammer and drive the blade into a hardwood log, smack it against concrete, sit and chop bone with it. If you have a filet knife, cut fish with it, not wood or rope. A machete, cut vines and wood, etc.

The rest, it seems, is moot to finding testing materials. Jerry's offering an excellent (not overfocused) definition of a fighting blade for our purposes (those of us outside of the Bando community would tend to agree with Jerry). Test a general utility knife like a general utility knife. If you want to test a fighter as a general utility knife, please state that in your review. That way, those who do not know the difference will not be confused.

I agree that 90% of knife users use their knives for everything. 10% of us don't. This odd little group of us would like to see knives (like Jerry's "over focused" knives) tested to their design purpose. If you're not interested, that's fine, me, Don, and Guacho apparently are.

Matt


------------------
Waxes Eloquent, Leader of the Terrible Ironic Horde and Sarcastic Brain Spewer

 

[Don Rearic]

When I carry a knife for self-defense, that is the purpose of it. If you want to carry one for utility and have your defense fail because it is not as sharp as it should be, that is entirely your business. And yes, sharp knives do make a difference, and yes, flea market trash is still trash.

It is 2000, I still do not need a knife to open up the top of a car.

You bet your life on what you carry, remember that.

Exsanguination? Man, I am just glossing over all of this stuff...at the wrist? Fifteen plus minutes, next?

Keep cutting & pasting...good stuff.

 

[Gaucho]

Marion and Cliff,

Gentlemen, pardon me but what the hell are you two going on about? This stuff is not rocket science!

First, it would seem obvious that one should judge any tool solely on the basis of how well it performs those tasks for which it was designed. A hammer is not a toothpick and shouldn't be judged on its ability to clean between your teeth.

Second, why this insistence on one knife to do every cutting task? Should we then strive to design a hammer that does clean your teeth? I don't think so. Each of you surely must own more than one knife. Some are meant for chopping trees, others for dicing tomatoes. This level of specialization in design is certainly not a crime. In fact, its a wonderful thing that we don't have to suffer with just one knife that may do many tasks more or less adequately, but none well. This is especially true in the case of a fighting knife- where your very life may depend on its performance.

Yes, Marion, you are right. I could certainly maim or kill you with a $5 throw-away knife or a credit card or a pencil or a wine glass stem or a sharpened stick or whatever. But that is not elegant- nor is it the point.

Think of it this way. Imagine that you are going into the Olympics and that your sport is say...knife fighting. You are going up against the Very Best in the World. You have but one chance to come home with the Gold Medal. What blade would you rather bet your medal- and your picture on that Kellogg's Wheaties Box- on? A ten dollar Taiwanese boxcutter or one of Jerry Hossom's Millennium Black Fighters? The answer is simple right? You'd want the very best knife you could get in order to maximize your chances of coming home the Olympic Champion Knife Fighter.

OK, stay with me now boys.

Every single time that you draw a blade to defend yourself against a blade wielding opponent, you simply must assume that your opponent is Olympic Caliber. He is Gaje, McGrath, Cuesta, Canete, and Keating all rolled into one. To go into a knife fight assuming anything else is beyond stupid. Why???? Because in this contest, its not the Olympic Gold Medal that's at stake. Its your Life!

Marion, you yourself pointed out just how easy it is to hurt someone badly with a knife- any bozo is transformed into a dangerous killer with a knife in his hand. The Blade is the Great Equalizer, My Friend.

So, now you tell me, which would you rather bet your life on? That $10 Taiwanese boxcutter? Or how about a utility folder maybe? Or perhaps a butcher knife? No, I think that you'd want to bet your life on the finest fighting blade you could get your hands on. That's what I do. And I thank God every single day that there are knife makers out there like Jerry Hossom who are committed to designing and perfecting blades whose sole purpose is to fight. That's not over specialization gentlemen. That's essential specialization.

Mario

------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.




[This message has been edited by Gaucho (edited 02-13-2000).]

 

[MrG]

Whoooo-doggy!! I like this thread! Good stuff everybody...

but now I'd like to throw in my two cents, if you don't mind.

Marion, Cliff...it's called a fighting knife because it's supposed to be used for...

FIGHTING!!

Who cares if the odds of you getting into a knife fight is the same as you making sweet love to Jennifer Lopez tomorrow morning?

(Who knows? Maybe Ms. Lopez has a thing for, ahem, knife fighters) IF, and I admit it may be a big if, you do get into a life and death tussle, and some guy wants to cave your head in with a hammer or a baseball bat, I'll bet you a million kazillion dollars that any of you would want a genuine bonafide FIGHTING knife in your shaking trembling hand, and NOT a UTILITY knife.

Sure, your utility knife will do in a pinch. But will it slice through that BG's leather jacket, sweatshirt, and FLESH?? Huh? Will it? Oh sure, it'll peel apples, cut cardboard boxes, and open envelopes...but will it do as good a job as a fighting knife? A knife designed for 'gasp' protecting yourself?

Gentlemen, if you want a utility knife, then buy one. And test it as one, cause that's what it's made for. If you want a fighting knife...

call Jerry Hossom. And tell him I sent ya!

Oh yeah...how about another test for a fighting knife: How well does the knife carry/conceal??

Gonna go and dream about Jennifer Lopez now...

 

[Marion David Poff]

Jerry-

Cliff, there is a big difference between "murder" and Filipino Martial Arts. There are likely similar differences between the sylvan bliss of Newfoundland and the reality of America's inner cities.

I think you are addressing me, not Cliff. And with that in mind I don't live in rural Canada. And I still contend that a Telescoping Baton is better than a "fighting knife".

Waxes Eloquent-

If the darn point would just sit still, I guess people would stop missing it. Bottom line: Structure your test around the purpose of the blade. If you want to test a knife that's a mattock, stone chisel, wedge, and bone splitter, then test it as such. Take a hammer and drive the blade into a hardwood log, smack it against concrete, sit and chop bone with it. If you have a filet knife, cut fish with it, not wood or rope. A machete, cut vines and wood, etc. The rest, it seems, is moot to finding testing materials. Jerry's offering an excellent (not overfocused) definition of a fighting blade for our purposes (those of us outside of the Bando community would tend to agree with Jerry). Test a general utility knife like a general utility knife. If you want to test a fighter as a general utility knife, please state that in your review. That way, those who do not know the difference will not be confused.

No one is disagreeing with the idea of stating what you are testing compared to what a knife is made for.

I agree that 90% of knife users use their knives for everything. 10% of us don't. This odd little group of us would like to see knives (like Jerry's "over focused" knives) tested to their design purpose. If you're not interested, that's fine, me, Don, and Guacho apparently are.

Who are you addressing, and based on what?

Are your throwing the word 'overfocused' back at Cliff for a reason?

And I contend you are wasting your time.

Don Rearic-

When I carry a knife for self-defense, that is the purpose of it. If you want to carry one for utility and have your defense fail because it is not as sharp as it should be, that is entirely your business. And yes, sharp knives do make a difference,

How many times have you defended yourself with a knife? And why would you choose a knife over a baton, given that you are not going to use your knife for utility?

and yes, flea market trash is still trash.

No argument.

It is 2000, I still do not need a knife to open up the top of a car.

How does this apply?

You bet your life on what you carry, remember that.

Then why are you wasting your time, and risking your life by depending on a knife for defense? If your life is that important to you, why not carry a gun, unless of course a law is more important than your life?

Exsanguination? Man, I am just glossing over all of this stuff...at the wrist? Fifteen plus minutes, next?

Maybe you could re-read what I posted, I said "-start- exsanguinantion".

Gaucho-

Gentlemen, pardon me but what the hell are you two going on about?

'

We are having a conversation, thank you for contributing to it.

This stuff is not rocket science!

WOW, you are good.

First, it would seem obvious that one should judge any tool solely on the basis of how well it performs those tasks for which it was designed. A hammer is not a toothpick and shouldn't be judged on its ability to clean between your teeth.

Well, if we were talking about hammers I would agree with you. But, since we are talking about cutting tools, then the tester should evaluate the knife on as many levels as possible, especially since it the foundation tool for all humanities achievements.

Second, why this insistence on one knife to do every cutting task?

Would you point out where someone insisted on that?

This level of specialization in design is certainly not a crime. In fact, its a wonderful thing that we don't have to suffer with just one knife that may do many tasks more or less adequately, but none well. This is especially true in the case of a fighting knife- where your very life may depend on its performance.

Why one would rely on a knife to defend themsleves given the multitude of tools out there is beyond me. For instance, pistols, rifles, shotguns, batons, oh and awareness.

And here is a quote for you on specialization....

""A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." -- Robert A. Heinlein

Yes, Marion, you are right. I could certainly maim or kill you with a $5 throw-away knife or a credit card or a pencil or a wine glass stem or a sharpened stick or whatever. But that is not elegant- nor is it the point.

If I ever have to maim or kill, I never want it said that I was elegant.

Think of it this way. Imagine that you are going into the Olympics and that your sport is say...knife fighting. You are going up against the Very Best in the World. You have but one chance to come home with the Gold Medal. What blade would you rather bet your medal- and your picture on that Kellogg's Wheaties Box- on? A ten dollar Taiwanese boxcutter or one of Jerry Hossom's Millennium Black Fighters? The answer is simple right? You'd want the very best knife you could get in order to maximize your chances of coming home the Olympic Champion Knife Fighter. OK, stay with me now boys. Every single time that you draw a blade to defend yourself against a blade wielding opponent, you simply must assume that your opponent is Olympic Caliber. He is Gaje, McGrath, Cuesta, Canete, and Keating all rolled into one. To go into a knife fight assuming anything else is beyond stupid. Why???? Because in this contest, its not the Olympic Gold Medal that's at stake. Its your Life! Marion, you yourself pointed out just how easy it is to hurt someone badly with a knife- any bozo is transformed into a dangerous killer with a knife in his hand. The Blade is the Great Equalizer, My Friend. So, now you tell me, which would you rather bet your life on? That $10 Taiwanese boxcutter? Or how about a utility folder maybe? Or perhaps a butcher knife? No, I think that you'd want to bet your life on the finest fighting blade you could get your hands on. That's what I do. And I thank God every single day that there are knife makers out there like Jerry Hossom who are committed to designing and perfecting blades whose sole purpose is to fight. That's not over specialization gentlemen. That's essential specialization.

Well. I would never plan to rely on a knife to get me home. I would stack the deck in every way shape and form. I have no romantic fantasies about Knife Fighting Olympics.

MrG-

It's called a fighting knife because it's supposed to be used for... FIGHTING!!

Who is deciding this "supposed to"? And why are you allowing yourself to be limited to a blade?

Who cares if the odds of you getting into a knife fight is the same as you making sweet love to Jennifer Lopez tomorrow morning?

I will never be in a knife fight. I may be involved in a conflict, where my attacker has the lack of sense to pull a knife. I care about the odds of a life threatening confrontation, my life is the important part of that equation. I only carry nukes when I feel it is justified given the tactical situation.

IF, and I admit it may be a big if, you do get into a life and death tussle, and some guy wants to cave your head in with a hammer or a baseball bat, I'll bet you a million kazillion dollars that any of you would want a genuine bonafide FIGHTING knife in your shaking trembling hand, and NOT a UTILITY knife. Sure, your utility knife will do in a pinch. But will it slice through that BG's leather jacket, sweatshirt, and FLESH?? Huh? Will it? Oh sure, it'll peel apples, cut cardboard boxes, and open envelopes...but will it do as good a job as a fighting knife? A knife designed for 'gasp' protecting yourself?

I will already have a utility knife on me. And if I get into that sort of thing, I want something far more powerful than a 'fighitng knife'

Gentlemen, if you want a utility knife, then buy one. And test it as one, cause that's what it's made for.

See my earlier comments on this subject.

OK, this applies to all those who rely on knives for defense.....

1) I don't believe that you are living in an area that would necessitate your defending yourself with a knife day in and day out.

2) Because I have respect for your natural faculties, and trust that you would be smart enough to implement the Nike Technique on the largest scale, by moving elsewhere. The battle you never fight is the best victory.

3) And, if due to some strange freak of culture, you absolutely need to live in an area like that, I find it beyond all rationale that you would trust your life to a knife.

WOW, this is a good discussion, thank you all for contributing and I hope this continues...

[This message has been edited by Marion David Poff (edited 02-13-2000).]