I think I scored. Just need help identifying this Parker Bowie.

[kamtheman]

This is making me want to take my aus 6 knives out for a spin and see how they do. I wouldn't be surprised if they dull a little more easily, as others have said, since it's definitely softer steel. But I just can't buy into that aus 6 blades might only be considered a wall hanger by some. I think that's a stretch. But hey, if that's the experience you've had then it is what it is. I'm a practical man myself, and if I had bad experiences with aus 6 not doing its job, then I'd probably feel the same way. I still think a proper heat treat is more important than the steel itself(from what I've learned from knifemakers), and I know the folks over in Seki Japan probably had that down pretty good. There's a thread on here specifically talking about aus 6 and how well it performs. I'll paste it below. To sum it up though, the general consensus seems to be it does just fine

https://www.bladeforums.com/threads...tougher,nice Japanese quality stainless steel.

 

[KenHash]

That sounds like a very interesting test and set of test parameters you mentioned. Do you have a link that describes what knives were tested and what the metrics were for each test? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
There's a reason the phrase "Good enough for government work" exists. The lowest bidder always wins.

The Knife test was held by the US Navy Special Warfare Group One in April of 1992. Read about it 10-15 years ago. If you google around you can find references.

 

[KenHash]

This is making me want to take my aus 6 knives out for a spin and see how they do. I wouldn't be surprised if they dull a little more easily, as others have said, since it's definitely softer steel. But I just can't buy into that aus 6 blades might only be considered a wall hanger by some. I think that's a stretch. But hey, if that's the experience you've had then it is what it is. I'm a practical man myself, and if I had bad experiences with aus 6 not doing its job, then I'd probably feel the same way. I still think a proper heat treat is more important than the steel itself(from what I've learned from knifemakers), and I know the folks over in Seki Japan probably had that down pretty good. There's a thread on here specifically talking about aus 6 and how well it performs. I'll paste it below. To sum it up though, the general consensus seems to be it does just fine

https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/aus6-steel-questions-pentagon.534866/#:~:text=In general AUS6 is tougher,nice Japanese quality stainless steel.

I doubt very much people whose lives may depend on their knives would carry "wall hangers".

Aus6 is the equivalent to 440A which was widely used by Gerber (before Fiskar).
GERBER MARK II™ IN VIETNAM (militarycarryknives.com)

Many of the knives carried in these photos are older SOG Seal2000 and Seal Pups with Aus6 blades.
Soldiers and Their SOG Knives | BladeForums.com

Aus6/440A was a perfectly acceptable steel at the time. Now there are other/better alternatives.

 

[kamtheman]

That sounds like a very interesting test and set of test parameters you mentioned. Do you have a link that describes what knives were tested and what the metrics were for each test? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

There's a reason the phrase "Good enough for government work" exists. The lowest bidder always wins.

I was interested as well, so I did a little digging. It seems to have been called the US Navy Knife trials, but is also listed as the Ground Zero knife trials, and it’s mentioned in a few places online. This was the most detailed info I could find on it:
http://tacticalforums.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000323.html

 

[tltt]

"Combat Utility Knife Questionnaire and Feedback Report" was one of the names given to the tests, but I can't find it online.

Blade Magazine's June and Jul/Aug 1994 issues cover some of the tests and the adoption of the SOG and Mission knives.

Some of the Tests mentioned -

1) 10 minute soak in gasoline.

2) Soaked in San Diego Bay for 1 hr per day, then resheathed for the rest of the day with no cleaning for a duration of 2 weeks to judge corrosion resistance.

3) 10 sec oxy-acetyline burn test on handle.

4) Torque wrench twisting test of up to 600 lbs on the handle. (SOG passed, and it was mentioned that many didn't survive this).

5) Blade chucked in vice at 1" and 4" from point and pressed with a ram at the cross guard to see how much psi the knife could take at these points without breaking. (Sadly, no numbers are given).

6) Mechanical Arm cutting test - Knife placed in mechanical arm and number of strokes needed to cut 1/8" nylon rope is observed, then the knife is given 50 strokes across a mild steel rod, and nylon rope test is repeated to test edge degradation.

7) Cut test on - 1 1/2" wet and dry hemp, wet and dry 2" nylon webbing, 1" nylon tube, wet monofilament, 3" Hawser rope (no type given), Spectra 1000 line, 1/2" shielded electrical cable.

8) Hole chipping test in pine.

9) Ammo Crate - pried open and pounded shut with pommel.

----------------------------------------

Models tested -

A1 A2 (Buck #1 Flat)
B1 B2 (Buck #2 Beefy)
C1 C2 (Buck #3 Regular)
D1 D2 (Cold Steel Recon Tanto)
E1 E2 (Emerson)
F1 F2 (Gerber)
G1 G2 (Larry Harley)
H1 H2 (SOG #1 Regular)
I1 I2 (SOG #2 Drop Point)
J1 J2 (Strider #1 Drop Point)
K1 K2 (Strider #2 7")
L1 L2 (Strider #3 6")
M1 M2 (Schultz MPK)
N1 N2 (Schultz SCU)

Did not show the actual models, just the names involved. Also made mention that the official reason for Mad Dog being excluded was lack of ability to supply the numbers needed. SOG was expected to deliver between 100 to 200 knives a month.