whose warranties cover unintentional abuse/breakage?

[wetdog1911]

If you didn't buy any Spyderco folders since mentioning how you were impressed with them, maybe a drug test is in order. Search the house and, if there are enough drugs to keep up with this modified deathchat, go for it!

Um, I mean, drugs are bad, m'kay?

Well, I HAVE been looking at a Spyderco, but not the folders. The kitchen knives. For some reason I've got the munchies really bad. LOL .... wonder if I can find my kids secret stash?

BTW, what drug do you want me to test? LOL

Rob

 

[JDBLADE]

Knifetester

Firstly, I refer to your post #310 and what I have said previously and that was if a manufacturer makes certain claims then it is up to the tester to test those claims – if the maker says it will chop concrete then the onus is on the tester to prove or disprove that assertion and if that involves destructive testing so be it. If you look at what I have written nowhere have I said that testers should not test the claims of the makers.

Also you would be aware that many makers will state that the knife should not be thrown, used as a screwdriver or as a hammer etc and that’s what I mean by testing a knife within the paramenters of what the manufacturer laid down.

Therefore I don’t see where we differ. But in relation to your post #312 I beg to differ it is not whether a knife can or can’t open a coconut it is a matter of whether that is relevant to that particular knife and in my opinion it is not. Whilst knives are used to carry out this particular task why is it relevant to the testing of a knife that the manufacturer declares was built the way it was for cutting tasks. It seems to me that there is a significant difference of opinion over what constitutes a knife review, now I don’t know if it is a cultural thing or not but I believe that you review a product to see if the makers claims are correct in the first place now in the case of the Blackjack Small the manufacturer states that “our knives are designed as cutting instruments” nowhere do they state that they are designed for any other purpose. I used Cliff Stamps review of the Blackjack as an example but there are many other examples of testers going overboard eg the test of a Buck Strider as a chisel at least in that case the tester acknowledged that he was overstepping the mark.

Thombrogan

By known limits I meant the claims of the maker in relation to a particular knife. The object of testing is to prove those claims to be correct or not. Again I am worried here on whether we have a problem of the use of the English language: Is a review and a test the same thing. I always felt so but it appears from reading posts in this thread that it is not. A review in my view is to give an unbiased report on the claims of the maker in the first instance on whether they are true or not. The use of the word test in the context of this thread seems to reflect what I would call Laboratory Testing to meet Industry Standards in other words you are not seeking to meet the claims of the maker but seeking to meet certain standards either imposed by the individual or some regulatory body.

Nowhere did I say or intend to say that in relation to the Blackjack Small that Cliff Stamp made any form of warranty claim in relation to that particular knife. If it has been read that way then it is my poor grammer and understanding of the English language. In relation to Cliff testing the knife beyond the parameters of the knife I refer you to the above claim by the manufacturer that the knife is a cutting instrument not a chopping instrument nor a pry bar.

Again I did not claim that Cliff was seeking to use the warranty of the knife but in my opinion the test went beyond the parameters of the knife that being a cutting instrument. I was simply using what I believe is a bizarre use of such a knife in attempting to open a coconut. The knife is obviously what I would term a small hunter yet no attempt was made to use it in this environment. For your information my test on the Blackjack Small did not differ much from Cliff Stamps. The mediums I used were leather, manilla rope, cardboard, and hardwood dowel as well as carrots, tomatoes and chicken thighs. In the field it was used on rabbits and kangaroos.

In my view lets have knife reviews for what they should be and if are to have testing of knives – who sets the standards. Who says at what level a liner lock should fail if it should at all. Who says a blade should only snap at a certain level. If knife testing or destructive testing is to be carried out then somewhere along the line standards have to be set.

 

[komondor]

Somewhere in cyberspace Tom Johanning is laughing and saying "My Tac-11 or Outrage will eat any Busse for breakfast and Strider for lunch."

Quit peeing on each other.

 

[Blop]

I sent Cliff the Chinook II and I also sent him a Manix, knowing they will probably be destroyed. It helps us learn about our products. Cliff suggested a stonger pivot, which we are looking into.



sal

CLIFF!!!

You received a Manix??? Where is the review??

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Where is the review??

It takes mail forever to reach me, it is the cold, I think it slows time.

To give an example if you read Cliff Stamps review of the Blackjack Small he in my view went beyond the parameters of the knife eg the knife lost 1/8" of the tip working on a coconut - now how does that assist in the evaluation...

It allows the users to bound the scope of work without risking the knife themselves. Lots of people don't have the experience to make such judgements. All of the knives I get for reviews are used to failure for two reasons :

1) it prevents me from biasing the review because I like the knife and want to keep it

2) it prevents me from looking at a lot of junk knives because people who hype knives tend to really run from seeing what their knives can't do, people with solid knives don't worry about what the knife can't do because they never promote that anyway, all they say is yeah, it can't do that, buy something else if you want a knife to do that, but look at all the stuff it can do well

So when I take a Blackjack small I will use it for everything that I can think on that the knife should be used for, the review contains a massive amount of work besides the one line you mentioned (it is also still in progress). Then when all that is done I will do work showing what the knife does not do well, where it fails, where you would want a different kind of knife. The coconut tip snap was unexpected also, the tip didn't flex at all, just cracked. It also isn't that difficult to do, just baton the edge into it, ork around, then force the entire blade in and pop it open, you can do it with a SAK.

For example if I had to compare a splitting axe, maul, and super wedge (20+ lsb triangular heads), I would take them from very light to very heavy wood and show where each excells and where each fails badly. This helps give the user some idea of what is a decent choice for them. If you wanted a knife for significant prying/digging in woods then the Black Jack Small probably isn't a good choice, however if you want a nice light cutting knife with an effecient edge profile which is easy to sharpen, nice ergonomics and fairly versatile, then it is a solid choice.

As for the folder thing, yeah, Strider was tested and it did well, and again, the known weakness of liners and integrals are torques not vertical and horiznotal loads. Joe has described this problem for years, I have seen it as early as '98 and I am sure he was aware of it before then.

Yes I have not used a Strider folder, because the maker indicated that the design of the Buck/Strider had a known weakness to torques and has never stated that his own folders are any different. Why would I then go out and buy one, that makes no sense. There are lots of locks which don't have that problem, I'll buy them instead.

If Mick actually stated that his folders don't have this weaknes to torques and are actually stronger and more durable than the Chinook I used recently then I would be interested.

And yeah if you promote your knife by throwing it around, beating it into concrete, hacking into metal, I do thin it is fair game for the consumer to do this and it should be covered under the warrenty without any reservations. if you don't want people to do it - then do NOT promote the knife by doing it.

Now of course if you break it in the demo, then that is different. However if at the end of the demo the knife is fine and you use this to sell "See how tough my blades are, they did all this without a scratch!", then that is a different matter. A knife should be able to do what it is promoted to do. It is abuse when you exceed this, and unfair when you expect the warrenty to cover it.

For example, lots of makers do flex tests, showing how far their blades can bend. If a user bends it and it breaks at the same point then it isn't reasonable to expect a replacement. The knife did what it was supposed to do. However if you promote breaks at 50, and it breaks at 25 then you better make good because the knfie did NOT perform as advertized.

-Cliff

 

[the45guy]

dam this thread is still going ? maybe instead of testing knives ya'll could test some airbags ?

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Cliff has proudly mentioned being published in 'peer reviewed' journals, but refuses to become a peer by making a knife of his own.

That is not what peer means. My peers in the review sense are others who use knives, not who make them. The funniest thing about this, is that I have never mentioned this *except* when people attack me for not being a scientist.

No where in the reviews does it list my background, Mick comes out, attacks me personally claims I am not a scientist, and I am at fault for pointing out my background. Yes, that makes sense.

-Cliff

 

[BrandonLeeMcKinley]

I really think I have a headache..... Lots of BS to go around. First I want to say I have never seen Mick or Duane try and chop concrete. Mild steel yes, i.e. table legs, folding chairs. As to the concrete, I have seen the demo and have performed the demo where in the tip is driven into concrete. I have done this with both my Buck/Strider (tanto) and my GB (tanto) also with my modified WB 10. I have also chopped mild steel and punched through a car door. I have not had a problem with doing this and the knife for the most part after multiple demos needed a touch-up on the tip and re-black oxide on my old WB-10. I am not an employee of Strider but I have known the guys for more then 10 years. As for Cliff and his claims well I doubt that it matters what you say as you get screamed down anytime you try and raise a flag of support for the boys, I know some of our more enthusiastic supporters can be quite the handful but I also know that their support comes from the heart. Whether Cliff has an agenda or not doesn't really matter in the scope of things because as I have said before and I will say again, for me and mine the knives will always be Strider.

Brandon McKinley
Strider Knife Owner

www.fotoasylum.com

 

[zinn1348]

Good Reply Cliff,

I like your reviews, not that I would use any of my knives in the manner that you test them, unless there were extreme unforseen circumstances.

In reference to the oft mentioned concrete block chopping tests, I seem to remember a recent thread involving Swamp Rat Knive's big knife which is similar in dimensions to the Battle Mistress.

As I recall, the tester described some parameters as to the age of the block as an indicator of the hardness or strength of the block, as well as the type of chopping motion used. Photos were posted, showing the blunted edge, but no chipping out or major damage.

I was impressed to the point that I almost ordered one, changing my mind only because I live in a suburban area, having deforested everything within my reach with a Mistress.

I am surprised that this thread hasn't been mentioned as I believe the product has a warrenty similar to that which is beign debated.

As far as the name calling, it is my opinion that for the most part, the forumites in BF are good polite respectful folks.

The ones that appear with their disrespectful attitudes shouldn't be acknowleged, and should be banned by the moderator.

In regards to the name calling by Mick, I am disappointed in the way this thing as gone, I have had great respect for him and his product in the past.

I would not like to think that he is evolving into a personality that resembles Lynn T. or Kevin M.

Keep up the testing, it is informative.


Thomas Zinn

 

[Barry McKokiner]

In regards to the name calling by Mick, I am disappointed in the way this thing as gone, I have had great respect for him and his product in the past.

I would not like to think that he is evolving into a personality that resembles Lynn T. or Kevin M.

Keep up the testing, it is informative.


Thomas Zinn

That's so off base, it's not even in the same sport, let alone league.

 

[thombrogan]

Nowhere did I say or intend to say that in relation to the Blackjack Small that Cliff Stamp made any form of warranty claim in relation to that particular knife. If it has been read that way then it is my poor grammer and understanding of the English language. In relation to Cliff testing the knife beyond the parameters of the knife I refer you to the above claim by the manufacturer that the knife is a cutting instrument not a chopping instrument nor a pry bar.

You stated that wrecking a knife and then seeking a warranty claim irked you and then immediately followed by offering Cliff's Blackjack Small test as an example. You typed "For example" followed by a reference to Cliff's Blackjack Small review. How else could that have been construed?

Also, several varieties kitchen knives are used for slicing, chopping, and push-cutting. They're all cutting instruments. Are they being misused? If you want an item that is purely for push-cutting, an extremely strong, thin, and taught wire would trump all knives. For slicing, sharpened chainsaws can be better than knives with coarse edges. For chopping, you have to decide whether you're making a felling chop or a splitting chop and go from there.

Again I did not claim that Cliff was seeking to use the warranty of the knife but in my opinion the test went beyond the parameters of the knife that being a cutting instrument.

You have yet to define what you mean by cutting instrument, and by omitting chopping from cutting, remove lots of knives from ever being in that definition when you do state it. The manufacture didn't define parameters and you won't define your definitions, so Cliff's use may or may not have exceeded those parameters. Then again, if you want to know what something can or can't do, you try to find out and not expect the knifemaker, or anyone else, to be omniscient.

I was simply using what I believe is a bizarre use of such a knife in attempting to open a coconut. The knife is obviously what I would term a small hunter yet no attempt was made to use it in this environment.

What would you use to open a coconut? If you mention something with a larger blade, please note that Blackjack's Ken Warner says: "This is a small knife that cuts big."

You yourself said: "The object of testing is to prove those claims to be correct or not." Using the Small as though it were a larger knife be testing the maker's claim.

Also, though it is used by hunters for hunting, Ken Warner also claims: "it is the right size for your everyday companion knife..." For every day, it would either have to be used for more than hunting or its primary market would be game poachers.

In my view lets have knife reviews for what they should be and if are to have testing of knives – who sets the standards. Who says at what level a liner lock should fail if it should at all. Who says a blade should only snap at a certain level. If knife testing or destructive testing is to be carried out then somewhere along the line standards have to be set.

Well, we'd have to agree what knives should be and I don't think you'll get anywhere near a consensus on a diverse forum such as BFC, KFC, or USN. Many of us have been spoiled by khukuris, Benchmades, Spydercos, CRK Sebenzas, Strider SnG's, Dozier hunters, and all kinds of other knives. In the meantime, if I get a chance to know what a knife can or can't do, regardless of what its maker says, I welcome that chance.

Look at the Emerson Wave. Look at it! I don't see looking....

Okay, that started out as a blade-catching feature from close-quarters combat and duelling on one of his folding knives. Many people noticed that, by using it outside of its defined parameters, it was a great device for quick blade deployment. Now it's one of the many features that make Emerson Knives famous. Were knife-users to do only as instructed, Mr. Emerson wouldn't have gotten a chance to know how clever he is nor would future customers have been able to reap the benefit once found only on one, highly specialized knife.

Well, I HAVE been looking at a Spyderco, but not the folders. The kitchen knives. For some reason I've got the munchies really bad. LOL .... wonder if I can find my kids secret stash?

BTW, what drug do you want me to test? LOL

I've got one of their KX06 knives and it's awesome. Unfortunately, I suck as a cook and it stays in a drawer.

Don't know what your kids use as a secret munchies stash, but most folks reading this thread have been munching popcorn.

While it's not listed as a drug per se, some folks say that kudzu extract (the vine, not the forumite) curbs alcohol cravings. Maybe you could see if it curbs INFI cravings?

 

[knifetester]

For slicing, sharpened chainsaws can be better than knives with coarse edges.

Sure makes a mess of a tomato though. Also, your wife will probably get real pissed if you bring a chainsaw into her kitchen.

 

[k_randomfactor]

wow, i guess some people have even less of a life than i do.

i can't believe this is still going.

chris

 

[the45guy]

I don't know the answers, but these Striders are wicked:

bro that would so match my M.Strider NM WP Damascus

 

[Neko2]

... The "Ginsu Knife" Warrantee is better than yours or mine. I would not take that as an indication of pride....

I'm sorry but that made me laugh.

Excellent post.

ANd I'm quite the fan of your knives.

N2

 

[Neko2]

Jedi, what? no push-ups?

While I do not wish to get invoved in the argument over Cliff's opinions, nor do I want to be in the pissin' match, I will say that I do advocate destructive testing.

A wise man told me, "you can't know the limits until you exceed them" (Dick Newick).

We break / destroy about 1/2 % of our production. We do so to make sure that the standards that we set for our products are being maintained. In addition to RC, edge angle, etc, we dull 'm, break 'em, rust 'em (except H-1) and dissect them. becasue of that, we know what our products should and shouldn't do.

I sent Cliff the Chinook II and I also sent him a Manix, knowing they will probably be destroyed. It helps us learn about our products. Cliff suggested a stonger pivot, which we are looking into.

This thread seems to be going nowhere.

Words of wisdom, of which there have been many, seem to fall on deaf ears.

too bad.

sal

That is one of the reasons that I really respect Spyderco as a company.
Nowhere does Sal complain about "how" the knives fail or the testing methods done. Instead he is taking whatever info may help build a better knife.

Classy all the way.

Oh, and if I keep just using the manix to cut cookies and fruit it *will* last the rest of my life. Although i did pry.... into an apple to get a big bruise out of the way

In all seriousness I think that all knife makers should destroy some knives now and again to make sure they will do what they say they will.

N2

 

[Blop]

Some warranties cover defects in material and workmanship.

If you pry little and the blade snaps and you can proof that this blade style, profile, shape must resist this prying, regardless any exclusions. It is a good thing if you know what a blade or steel of particular profile, shape style can do.

But this is one of the most hidden secrets. Besides any promotion i would like to share some results of what a blade can do and what it can´t. I don´t like to stay surprised by a snaped blade not knowing whose fault this was.

I have seen some thin blades that do a lot. Thinking about some of those thick babes on market i always thought a liitle more knowledge would give us lighter but most effective knifes.

So if your warranty covers defects in material and workmanship there is no need for more as long as you know the performance a steel can do.

 

[Blop]

Any idea, where or how i can find those mentioned tests over there in the USN forum?

 

[doorkicker]

im staying out of this one, i got a lot of heat from people who jumped the gun and misunderstood me on the last thread with a strider topic. but speaking of warranties and such, dont go with the extended warranties at best buy and circuit city. my sister had one on her laptop that didnt cover atmospheric condensation that screwed up the computer and voided the warranty at best buy and i had car speakers at circuit city that when i tried to return them i found out that the warranty plan is pro rated over time that decreased after day one. both were billed as no questions asked. this is my only experience with guarantees.

 

[Mongo-man]

:footinmou