CR Project Got Pwnd

I'll add a little more. We need numbers. Is there a person or company that tests knives by the numbers? If so, is it possible to fund the testing of some of the common knives on the market. Have all the knives within spec of each other.
 
tsiloics, I cannot take noss4's test seriously enough to use it in any way to critique a knife. I don't know how else to say it. If someone posted pictures of a CRK knife being melted down and asked how CRK could improve his knife to withstand this, it would have as much validity -- none.

Taking your questions: Just to quickly imagine three, I would be quite interested to hear what Chris had to say about

1.) why this is not a reasonable use of the subject knives
With no measurements of forces applied and angles struck, we cannot even say what it would take to change the outcome.

2.) why he is disappointed in the CRK knives' performance
Since the knives weren't used for their designed function, critiquing performance is irrelevent.

3.) why it would not be practical to revamp the subject knives so that they would perform well under these circumstances.
Building a knife to withstand these conditions would fatally compromise its ability to perform its designed functions.

Beyond these specific questions, why would CRK have an interest in joining this discussion? To say what some people have already said and others are ignoring, that pounding on a knife with a hammer tells us nothing about how they actually work?

That point has been brough up in the past, and answered. I remember a thread on S30V and CRK knives, where Bill Harsey answered, and his technical expertise was ignored.

After all, just as some of us ARE fans of the CRK line, others seem bound to push anything to denigrate them. THAT'S not a profitable discussion for a knifemaker to support with his presence.
 
Xcel said:
Is there a person or company that tests knives by the numbers? If so, is it possible to fund the testing of some of the common knives on the market. Have all the knives within spec of each other.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you could have "all the knives within spec of each other."

However, knife companies do test, and test to destruction. And build their production knives within the envelope they develop by doing so. Outside that envelope is outside their vision for those knives.

Some companies also test other companies' products for them. It would be extremely poor policy to publish those results.

Comparing all this to car crash tests, the crashed cars are meant to "fail". Cars are then built to eliminate some degree of that failure. No cars are built to withstand any crash, any time, and secure their passengers from harm in doing so.

But car crash figures can be published for the cars that are actually built, with the companies mutual agreement, in part because safety programs like this this mandated. But also because all cars are built more or less to withstand the mandated levels of impact.

Cars are also subject to many chances for catastrophic damage that are not the fault of the driver and from which he expects to be protected.

Misuse of a knife in noss4's manner is the fault of the misuser.
 
Lycosa said:
Very interesting Thread!! And Away--- We Go!!
Click to expand...

Have you ever considered trying to say something which may be considered thoughtful or otherwise valuable when you post?

It's never too late to try. At least try. Please.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
why would CRK have an interest in joining this discussion?
Click to expand...

Generally, because it relates to the type of cutlery they produce. Specifically, because it relates to their product; both in terms of how it performs, and how it might be made to perform better.
 
BlondieAlmostEdge said:
not pertinent, plus not really cool with the eleventh tradition.
Click to expand...

I'm an alcoholic as well (no joking). Nice to meet ya. Oh I know whats happening here! When I first saw NOSS' videos I thought they were rediculous and had no real knife testing value...but now that i've just been watching them so much I am used to them and expect a knife to handle what I see on the videos more and more. But I remember the first time I saw him violently stab sheetmetal witha knife, I thought "of course its gonna break".
Now if a knife breaks stabbing sheetmetal im all like "what a POS"
 
Slatts---When I have something worthwhile to say, I do. On BF, I mostly enjoy reading the Posts by experts like you! ;)
 
There are many businesses that perform mechanical testing, stress rupture testing, and fracture & fatigue testing for R&D as well as quality control. They actually employ state-of-the-art equipment that's able to produce measurable and repeatable, realistic results. Some of the tests include. . .adhesion or bond, compressive, creep and stress relaxation, drop or shock, ductility, fatigue, impact toughness, shear, tensile, impact, and vibration. :eek: Tests can be performed under a variety of temperatures, rates, speeds, loads, and strain. :eek:

What an amazing idea and sure as hell beats Noss' backyard methodology. Why isn't CRK responding ? DUH ! :D


Artilary6 said:
Now if a knife breaks stabbing sheetmetal im all like "what a POS"
Click to expand...


Is the damage, a broken tip, caused by material or craftsmanship defects or is it the user's lack of understanding that the tip of most knives are thin and aren't known to withstand this type of lateral stress. Hmmmmm. . . .I wonder if the thickness of the sheet metal and it's RC play a part in the survivability of the blade tip ? :rolleyes:

Why would someone want to stab sheet metal with a knife ? Why would someone, after stabbing a slab of sheet metal, move the knife side-to-side ? In other words, what practical application does this type of [cough]"test"[cough] serve, besides cool looking fan fair on video ? I know. . . .while in a survivalist mode, stabbing a can of beans, as one is evading. . . . .zombies. Or. . . .simulate an escape technique after being locked in the trunk of a car. :rolleyes:
 
Within spec. - I was thinking thickness of the blade, material and heat treatment. They would have to differ on the design because they are from various manufactures. This would be as close as one could get to having all the same specs.
 
Would be of extreme interest if an independent party with scientific equipment would test all the knives Noss tested to see if the outcome differs by much. I was shopping with wifey the other day in Ikea and I saw a testing display showing their chairs being in a simulated-real-life type of test. A mechanical device like the butt of a person is being used to 'sit' on the chair for many many thousands of cycles.

Imagine if standardized tests with predetermined failure criteria etc was developed? Then we will all know for sure if a certain knife is suitable for harsh use or not. Interesting if someone could get the ball rolling. Perhaps different brands could send a sample for these standardized tests.

(Just a thought, please don't nit pick on the finer points of my post, I'm not too knowledgeable on science...)
 
Cotherion said:
Imagine if standardized tests with predetermined failure criteria etc was developed?
Click to expand...

Won't matter. There will still be the excuse of, "it was designed more as a ...., of course it fails that test." I am big into Archery and hunting. The broadhead discussion is just like these.

Guys were doing destruction test, shooting them through phonebooks, 50G barrels, ballistic gel, etc. Some testers were even using Hooter Shooters and shooting weighed arrows out of the same dozen to eliminate the human element as much as possible. For those that failed, the fan group would come back with, "well, deer shoulders are a lot less tough than a barrel." etc. etc.

So one guy living in NY where there are a large number of deer hit by cars every day made an arrangement with local police and DNR and got scapulas off the deer for broadhead testing. He even got a bunch of broadhead manufacturers to send in broadheads and since the cost is relatively low, a bunch of folks sent him at least a three pack of almost every major brand and type out there. He started shooting the scapula's, thinking that it was as close to a live test as possible in fresh scapula of an actual deer.

Guess that happened. Some favorite types of broadheads failed and instantly the fan crowd and manufacturers started debating that no two hits were exactly the same, so the test were useless in measuring the effectiveness of one broadhead to another.

We had testing as close to automated testing as possible through measurable media as possible and we had testing through actual whitetail deer shoulders to measure toughness. In each case, SOMEONE had to bash the results when they were not what they wanted to see. People still do both, and people still try to invalidate the test.

While neither was full 'scientific' and the testing could be considered easier because the broadheads are expected to do nearly the same activity (kill an animal), there was wide variation in the results. But between my family of 3 bowhunters and a bunch of friends who bowhunt, I can tell you... The 'general' theme of the result from both testing types when overlaid with actual results in the field were pretty close. These types of test tend to show a trend, or expose a weakness. Something buyers can find useful, even if it never ultimately sways their buying decision.
 
Shaman said:
Won't matter. There will still be the excuse of, "it was designed more as a ...., of course it fails that test." I am big into Archery and hunting...

....wide variation in the results. But between my family of 3 bowhunters and a bunch of friends who bowhunt, I can tell you... The 'general' theme of the result from both testing types when overlaid with actual results in the field were pretty close. These types of test tend to show a trend, or expose a weakness. Something buyers can find useful, even if it never ultimately sways their buying decision.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can imagine that happenning. But if Bladeforum members developed a whole series of tests (imagine threads of discussions ultimately leading to an agreed test). I imagine this would be a juicy thesis for a post graduate study in a university don'cha think?

(I personally feel makers produce a blade and then sell it out to the world and some refine it based on customer feedback (be it good or bad feedback) and basically it's more or less trail and error with some experience thrown in)
 
Last edited:
Shaman said:
He started shooting the scapula's, thinking that it was as close to a live test as possible in fresh scapula of an actual deer.
Click to expand...

Shaman, Do you have a link to a results listing? I would really like to see whose product did what?
 
Fooj said:
The Green Beret and Project I were designed with the serrations being specific product requirements demanded by military professionals. Both knives have been successfully field tested by thousands in hard-use, mission-critical applications, with exceptional results reported.
Click to expand...

I'm glad this thread is getting some useful info. I have been convinced that hardened metal on hardened metal produces results that are not likely to be reproduced in field or survival use and not a good test. (Just my opinion.)

This quote up above is the one that I find most interesting. I've seen people say this repeatedly and not been able to find sources for it. I know it is traditional for Army SF to be issued this knife upon graduation. By the nature of what they do I've heard of none that actually carry it. (I have a very small sampling to be sure.) I know they were designed by pro soldiers, and I haven't seen any complaints, but I haven't seen any glowing reports either. Just the nature of SF I suppose. But I've not seen anything that makes it seem 'official' either or that it passed any mil tests. Just that CRK designed it for them and gives them as gifts to Q course survivors.

Maybe its something kept on the DL that people just sorta 'know' about here?
 
Fooj said:
The Green Beret and Project I were designed with the serrations being specific product requirements demanded by military professionals. Both knives have been successfully field tested by thousands in hard-use, mission-critical applications, with exceptional results reported.
Click to expand...

sirahren said:
This quote up above is the one that I find most interesting. I've seen people say this repeatedly and not been able to find sources for it. I know it is traditional for Army SF to be issued this knife upon graduation. By the nature of what they do I've heard of none that actually carry it. (I have a very small sampling to be sure.) I know they were designed by pro soldiers, and I haven't seen any complaints, but I haven't seen any glowing reports either. Just the nature of SF I suppose. But I've not seen anything that makes it seem 'official' either or that it passed any mil tests. Just that CRK designed it for them and gives them as gifts to Q course survivors.

Maybe its something kept on the DL that people just sorta 'know' about here?
Click to expand...

Sirahren,

I don't have any sources to support my quote. My comments are a result of my direct observation of several projects, watching Chris and Bill Harsey going through the development process with professional soldiers, discussing basic concepts, sending prototypes back and forth, mulling over the pros and cons, and finally arriving at the final implementation. In these last couple of years, I've had the rare and special honor of sharing several meals with some of the key soldiers collaborating on the various Yarbourough, 1st Group, and Professional Soldier knife designs. These gentlemen are all business, they know precisely what they need, and although talking with them about knife design, self-defense, and stuff in general is fascinating, you need to be on top of your game to keep up with them.

In contrast, I was not in contact with Chris as the Project I knife was under development. My reference to the Project I is based solely on my discussions with Chris after-the-fact, talking about the history of that knife design project.

Fooj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top