Who verifies the tests that we see

[beera]

Who verifies the tests that we see floating on knife forums?

I am not trying to question the integrity of dependant knife testers but How do we know they have no special interests?

As a user, How do I know that what I get is real information ?

 

[beera]

Say I love X knife company, Isn't it possible that I might twist the truth consciously or unconsciously for the results to suite my football team? or my favorite steel or whatever?

Why isn't there an independent body of testers or something?
I read many reviews about s30v that were impressive and I know for sure that its crap.

 

[silenthunterstudios]

Not trying to be an ass, but I think you just answered your own question. I've been told by people that Robbie Robertson actually knows what he's doing, same as Kim Breed, as far as noted knife testers go.

Everybody else, just have to go on the strenght of their character on the forums if they don't have pics.

 

[beera]

Why isn't there a journal or something similar and people who are paid to be objective?

 

[Halfneck]

Kim Breed knows what he is doing. Retired 5th Special Forces and a Active Hunter and Fisherman.

 

[Ebbtide]

ymmv +++/---

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Say I love X knife company, Isn't it possible that I might twist the truth consciously or unconsciously ...

Yes, people do it all the time. It is extremely easy to spot though. People who fictionalize are very hesitant to offer additional information, there will also be lack of details and comparisons, and they will be extremely defensive (or offensive) when anything is challenged and be unable to debate the results. Fundamentally is it mainly a moot point because what is most important is will the maker/manufacturer support the results so just ask them.

Obviously there are other markers which are immediate. For example you take a guy like DaveH who is often accused of being biased about the Sebenza, but at the same time he actively participates in pass around of lots of knives including Sebenza's and the knives he has compared them to. Now if he was making all of what he says up, would he then send knives around so other people could verify it - not overly likely.

I read many reviews about s30v that were impressive and I know for sure that its crap.

There are many reasons for contradictory reports, the obvious one is not all knives from the same maker/manufacturer are identical. Less obvious but just as important is that most people use subjective statements of performance and often don't cite exactly what they mean. Usually they are comparing it do something they have used, or some expectation they have and thus if these are different from one person to another you will get different reports with the exact same experience.

For example take two people, one who has used a bowie similar to what are usually run in the cutting competions and another who has used the Ontario marine raider bowie. They both have used their knives for a long time for a lot of work. Now give both of them say a RD9 from Ranger knives and have them do some work and talk about it. You will very likely get two vastly different reports because you will have essentially RD9 vs two very different knives.

In reality, most people don't do the same work on the same materials and thus this further complicates the matter as does physical makeup. Again take two people and give them the same axe, but have one guy younger and much stronger and who is local to very dense hardwoods and the other guy much less physically capable and who works on very soft fresh woods. Again it is very likely that the same axe would be described very differently in regards to fluidity, edge retention and penetration.


-Cliff

 

[HoB]

Why isn't there a journal or something similar and people who are paid to be objective?

Well see, the moment they get paid, they aren't objective anymore. Do you actually think that those tests that you see of Cameras, Hifi equipment etc are objective? If they were, they would be published in a scientific journal WITHOUT advertisement....and even there you shouldn't believe everything you read!

As many people said: You have to go by the impression that you get over time and evaluate the character of the tester or the publication.

As they say: "A reputation is spun from a fine thread but the result is stronger than steel."

 

[fulloflead]

Everybody else, just have to go on the strenght of their character on the forums if they don't have pics.

That's what I was thinking. You just kinda get to know people on the forums and trust some people's opinions.

Besides, you should be more worried about the knife rags like Tactical Knives :thumbdn: than the forums. Good grief.

.

 

[Sword and Shield]

Tactical Knives? You mean the magazine that never does a negative review, and talks about 420 (not HC) like it holds an edge forever? That TK?

 

[fulloflead]

Tactical Knives? You mean the magazine that never does a negative review, and talks about 420 (not HC) like it holds an edge forever? That TK?

No, the TK that runs for an ADVERTISMENT for the product on the facing page from the glowing REVIEW of the SAME product.

.

 

[silenthunterstudios]

Kim Breed knows what he is doing. Retired 5th Special Forces and a Active Hunter and Fisherman.

Not a dig on the guy, I enjoy his column every month in Blade. Pretty much only reason I still get the magazine. When its bad, he says so.

 

[beera]

Why don't we have journals or forums that are like scientific journals of physics for example

With judges

with no politics involved?

 

[rifon2]

Why don't we have journals or forums that are like scientific journals of physics for example

With judges

with no politics involved?

To answer your question directly: I don't know.

But many products - most - do not have that type of scientific journal about them.

For example - fishing rods. (Something close to my heart.)
Or fishing lures.

It's one of the reasons forums like this one exist. Spend time with the people who know (and the pretenders) on line and in person long enough and you'll
soon be able to tell them apart.

You'll know which reviewers & reviews are trustworthy.

There's plenty of disagreement and politics in the world of scientific journals, by the way.

 

[SteelDriver]

Who decides who gets to be a judge?

Knives are consumer goods and physics is a field of science. Two very different things. What you're looking for are scientists with PhD in "Knives", which doesn't exist AFAIK (otherwise I would have majored in it! ).

How many scientific journals can you think of that review cars or mp3 players? The market for those is far larger than for the knives we talk about here. Science gets the journals. We get magazines full of ads and sometimes a trustworthy review.

 

[dwatts67]

Why don't we have journals or forums that are like scientific journals of physics for example

With judges

with no politics involved?

check out Cliff Stamps reviews, I believe he is qualified in the physics department. Also, his reviews list all test methodology with photos and comparisons. Just check this out: http://www.physics.mun.ca:80/~sstamp/knives/blade_testing.html. What else do you want to know?

cheers,
--Dave

 

[Walking Man]

Why don't we have journals or forums that are like scientific journals of physics for example

To answer your question: Because there just isn't.
Knife making is a smaller industry than the whole of modern science, nor will there ever be a widespread impact of the entirety of the human race based on knife testing (as far as I can predict).
I know this might seem like a smart assed remark, but you're comparing apples and oranges here. IMHO.

 

[CUTS LIKE A KRIS]

I feel that TK gets a bad rap as far as its articles go. Can those detractors dispute that the knife is being used as the article says that it is. As far as I am concerned I am sick of knife articles where the only thing that the knife cuts is air as it is waved around. Articles such as what TK offers give the testers view on a particular knives performance. They have also addressed the fact that they do not put out bad reviews as: bad knives do not get press as that would be a waste of our space- why tell our customers what not to get when we can tell them what to get (read deeper into what they do not talk about). I do not agree with everything that is said- but then knowing what the tester says based on what they expect will allow the reader to get their own opinion of the topic. As well- is it TK that places the ads or could it be that the manufacturer would like an advertisement near the description of their product.
Say what you will but at least these people are USING the knives that they write about- which is more than I can say for some armchair knifers out there.
Sorry- my rant is done now!

 

[beera]

Yes, people do it all the time. It is extremely easy to spot though. People who fictionalize are very hesitant to offer additional information, there will also be lack of details and comparisons, and they will be extremely defensive (or offensive) when anything is challenged and be unable to debate the results. Fundamentally is it mainly a moot point because what is most important is will the maker/manufacturer support the results so just ask them.

Obviously there are other markers which are immediate. For example you take a guy like DaveH who is often accused of being biased about the Sebenza, but at the same time he actively participates in pass around of lots of knives including Sebenza's and the knives he has compared them to. Now if he was making all of what he says up, would he then send knives around so other people could verify it - not overly likely.



There are many reasons for contradictory reports, the obvious one is not all knives from the same maker/manufacturer are identical. Less obvious but just as important is that most people use subjective statements of performance and often don't cite exactly what they mean. Usually they are comparing it do something they have used, or some expectation they have and thus if these are different from one person to another you will get different reports with the exact same experience.

For example take two people, one who has used a bowie similar to what are usually run in the cutting competions and another who has used the Ontario marine raider bowie. They both have used their knives for a long time for a lot of work. Now give both of them say a RD9 from Ranger knives and have them do some work and talk about it. You will very likely get two vastly different reports because you will have essentially RD9 vs two very different knives.

In reality, most people don't do the same work on the same materials and thus this further complicates the matter as does physical makeup. Again take two people and give them the same axe, but have one guy younger and much stronger and who is local to very dense hardwoods and the other guy much less physically capable and who works on very soft fresh woods. Again it is very likely that the same axe would be described very differently in regards to fluidity, edge retention and penetration.


-Cliff

#

So we should have an independent body for testers. And all people who think they come up with something good, submit their work to this body and it should be totally on merit and qualities and categories, no politics

no politics

I don't think a knife with S30v would win but again, the personal is political

 

[fulloflead]

I feel that TK gets a bad rap as far as its articles go. Can those detractors dispute that the knife is being used as the article says that it is. As far as I am concerned I am sick of knife articles where the only thing that the knife cuts is air as it is waved around.

Wow. Just, wow. :barf:

.