Chris Reeve Green Beret Video Desrtuction Test Completed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jerry Hossom said:
Maybe the best test you can use is the test of consumer experience. Forget all the experts. How many people have good experience with this knife, this steel, this kind of edge, this company? This and other forums might be the best indicators of quality, but even then you'll have people clamoring about how great this is that knife is because it is popular to do so, OR it's a knife they own and want their choice to be viewed as sound.
Click to expand...

This is very true. Consumer experience can be very biased. When someone pays a lot of money for a knife they may not be willing to look at the faults of the knife and be honest with themselves because they just paid 200 bucks on it. Many may not be willing to push a hard use knife hard because they don't want to scratch it up so feedback may only be limited to what the did with it instead of what they didn't do with it. If they even did anything at all.

When I started this I wanted to find the toughest strongest blades and separate what I was reading with actual hard use. I video tape it so people can see exacly what I'm doing. Instead of me just saying I did this and that in the form of a text review. video has been my best tool in relaying testing results. All my tests are video based and not text based. People complain that I do not do lengthy write-ups and I don't because this is not my method. Video keeps me the tester honest. I can't show a video of me beating up on a hard use knife for 2 hours through some very difficult tests and come back and say. "WOW that knife was just a week, fragile knife." When I have 2 hours of video that shows something completely different.
 
Jerry's comments are very interesting indeed.

I own a very large knife made out of S30V, but I'm not sure what temperature its heat treated to.

The guy who made it is a very respected knifemaker. If he's happy to use S30V in his large fixed blades, thats good enough for me. I trust he's heat treated the knife properly.

You can bet your ass I'm not going to subject it to the kind of punishment Noss does though. What I am willing do to as a 'test' is chop up some meat and bones for the mutts. If it can do that, I'm happy. And wood of course.

If I want to chop up a cinder block... actually, why the hell would I want to chop up a cinder block? So scratch that altogether.

I must admit though, I don't like serrations on knives other than Spydies and I hope this means we'll be seeing less of them.

That said, the serrations on my Project I are among the most effective I have ever used. And easy to sharpen to boot.
 
Thanks for doing these tests, Noss. They add a lot to the discussion. My sense is that tests of S30V are uncommonly variable because it requires more attention to heat treating and the manufacturer's final belt sharpening . I had some chipping problems early with folders, but not with every knife. Some held up just fine, even when I used them for chopping. At the time, there were a lot of people who had chipping problems and a lot more who didn't. It's hard to read that experience because most people don't actually use their knives to any meaningful extent. And the chipping now seems to have faded, making me think that makers have started to figure out this steel -- at least from the brittleness standpoint, but maybe not from the toughness standpoint.

I would like to see how Crusader Forge's fixed blades stand up to your testing, but I know they are expensive. The maker uses a triple quenching heat treat, and from light use (normal cutting and some chopping vines), his S30V steel seems amazingly better than any other I've tried.
 
Are you ever going to test any folders? I would love to see you test a Cold Steel AK-47!
 
I would like to see the Striders tested Custom and the ones from Buck.
Noss how do you get the knives for testing? You have some top dollar knives that you are destroying.
 
Twindog: Your welcome. I hope to test a Crusader Forge soon. I curious how one will hold up ?

SD76: I hope to test a folder or two soon.

redscorpion6: I buy some out of my pocket and some are donated.
 
wnease said:
Why won't this thread go away? Oh!
Click to expand...

Because a lot of us find it interesting. You could just unsubscribe from it and never have to worry about it again. That would be better than spaming all of with pointless posts. Just a thought.
 
What a lot of words and opinions! I look at the size of this thread, with the number of participants and viewings, and am humbled by CRK’s respected place in the market.

Those who know CRK know that we do not rush to comment on these volatile threads. We wait and let everyone have their say, all the opinions be stated, and allow the acrimony and criticisms run their course.

The Yarborough was designed for U S Army Special Forces with a great deal of care and with cognizance of the exceptional men by whom it would be used. The specifics given were simply that it had to be a 7” blade with a full tang and that the knife needed to accomplish the range of tasks an SF soldier may encounter in the execution of his duties. We have no knowledge of the testing process other than “rigorous evaluation criteria” – such information is not available to us. We have since learned from the Special Forces men we have come to know that CPMS30V passed all requirements relating to use in extreme climate conditions and terrain, from warm marine environments to desert; a critical feature is that the knife is light enough to be carried (vital – as the knife is combined with the multitude of other equipment a soldier requires to work self-sustained in an area where support is days or even weeks away); the serrations performed admirably when used to cut free the webbing/rigging used for airborne equipment drops; the knife is robust enough to do serious work and ergonomically sound for their unique purposes and situations, especially when used with a gloved hand. Special Forces are not loud mouthed about what they do, but they are not afraid to speak up if there is a problem with their equipment.

The Green Beret knife is identical to the Yarborough, except for the engraving. We have never had a Green Beret or Yarborough returned because it had broken or for any other performance or design reason. As an aside, in the 24 year history of the company and tens of thousands of fixed blade knives we’ve made, we have had +/- a dozen one piece knives returned for breakage – one had a flaw in the metal; in the early years, we had about 6 returned because the cutting edge had been ground too thin; the rest were being used abusively - used as a pry bar, thrown extensively against a tree, levered with a pipe, etc. All were replaced at no charge, even though our warranty says, “This guarantee does not cover natural materials, incorrect applications, neglect or abuse.”

We do know that some SF men do not use their Yarborough knives and keep them for heirlooms – we have no idea which knives they use. We do know that some SF men keep their Yarboroughs for heirlooms and have purchased Green Berets to use instead. We do know that SF men use their Yarboroughs – SF men are not loud talkers, especially while still in the service – exactly why they are known as The Quiet Professionals. It was a few years before we heard any feedback from them as to how the Yarborough performed in the field (or sandbox, as the case may be) and all comments have been positive. We have received several Yarboroughs back for refurbish – a quick count gives three in the past six months – we consider that no more or no less than any other CRK model. Most recently, we had a Yarborough returned to be refurbished – the soldier had cut a live electrical cable with it. There was a decent size chunk of the cutting edge melted and a long gouge along the hollow grind. We chose to replace the knife. Two or three years ago, we were approached by the team mate of an SF soldier who had been killed in Afghanistan when his vehicle was blown up by an IED. He had retrieved the Yarborough of the soldier and wanted us to refurbish it for presentation to his family. We did this, even though the temper of the knife had been completely ruined by the ensuing fire. We wrote a letter saying as much, and both the knife and letter were presented to the soldier’s widow and young son at a ceremony at Ft. Bragg.

We constantly receive positive comments on the performance of the Green Beret – from military and non-military customers. We have no ability to estimate how many are being used in the Middle East right now – I only know we get several calls each month to the effect of “I’m deploying (or my son/nephew/brother-in-law) soon, how quickly can you supply a Green Beret......?”

I can understand Noss’s concept in wanting to find “the toughest strongest blades and separate what I was reading with actual hard use” (Noss’s post #322). The series of destruction tests compare how long different knives will survive being abused – this has no bearing on what the different knives were designed for or how the design features will respond to the abuse. The tests are not wrong; they are simply not the “final answer” as many of the contributors to the thread interpret.

Noss has returned the knife to us to examine. At first evaluation, there is nothing wrong with knife. The heat treatment (tested right in spec at 56Rc); the naked eye shows no irregularities in the grain structure; the knife has been forwarded to Crucible for expert analysis but we do not expect any different result.

Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.

Anne Reeve
For Chris Reeve, Bill Harsey, Dave Fujii and the Team at CRK
 
ANNE,

thanks for your contribution to this, I have been reading it off and on. I have several CRK's and in the back of my mind began doubting them a little bit. However, I would trust my life on them for sure. What they were designed and how they get used some times are 2 different things. Again thanks for your input from CRK.
 
This is letter you may expect from PR department, but from reading it - seem like you did not really done any testing in CRK and Noss4 probably first. Which probably many other manufacturers did not done too.

IMHO it is OK for regular utillity knife, but I expect more from elite force weapon, even side weapon.

Is it true? What kind of QA you are doing for it?

Because, what you saying in short is - "nobody complained yet".

Thanks, Vassili.
 
i think anne reeve's response here is appropriate and professional. exactly what i would hope to expect from a reputable company such as crk.

no bashing of noss4. no bashing of anyone here. the admission that the knife is properly heat treated and is exactly how it should have left the factory and no attempt to mitigate the knife's performance or make any excuses speaks volumes about their integrity.

i think this statement sums it up:

Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.
Click to expand...
 
I guess I was just hoping for a little more background on the selection process. Its been said that the GB was chosen over 100 other knives but its not clear whether that was still at the design phase or after the knife was produced. Were 100 other knifemakers asked to submit a design or was Harsey's design compared to 100 other commercially available designs? Were 100 other knives also run through the same battery of tests and the GB chosen for its overall performance characteristics?
 
Chris Reeve Knives: Thanks for the response.

In response to the design criteria. Does the knife cut yes. Does the knife stab yes. Is the knife tough NO.

The knife is sold as tough and it is not. This does not fit into your design criteria that you market the knife as. You said the knife is not flawed from the first inspection. If this is the case and you have verified this with you first check. Then the Green Beret failed your own deign criteria being a tough knife and sold as such.

I set out to separate fact from fiction and I think I accomplished what I set out to do here. On my toughness scale it is at the very bottom compared to many knives I have tested. This does not fit the model of the knife being sold as a hard use combat knife and being sold as tough.

Again thanks for the response. :)
 
were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

I have to say I'm disappointed in the final response.

If toughness is not in the GB spec, then what are the design specs of the GB knife? Other knives cut better, chop better, and are tougher. So what is the GB's purpose and design spec exactly?

(Edit, oops posted after Noss4)
 
Thanks, Anne, for showing us the respect of a response. I'm a big fan of CRK -- the company, its people and the Sebenza which I have and absolutely love.

And thanks to Noss for these tests. No losers here, just solid integrity and meaningful knife talk.
 
Thank you, Anne. I appreciate you taking the time and effort to answer, as well as the fact that you answered directly and honestly.

Chris Reeve Knives said:
Did the Green Beret perform as well as other knives destroyed? No. Were the design aspects of the knife considered? No. Do the Green Beret and Yarborough knives perform to the high standard expected of them in real world use every day? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

If I may, I still have a couple questions:

In reference to your statement, above: What design aspects are relevant to the Green Beret, which the other knives that performed better do not meet?

Specifically what is the high standard you expect of them?

Thank you, again, for your forthright participation.
 
Chris Reeve Knives said:
a dozen one piece knives returned for breakage – the rest were being used abusively - used as a pry bar, thrown extensively against a tree, levered with a pipe, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm a little disappointed that these things are viewed as being "abusive."

:(

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top