Titanium (mission knives)

[Spark]

Wow, no need to be that hostile, Steve.

I agree that apples need to be compared to apples, not apples to oranges. However, when you are discussing the tangs of two knives, and how they are secured, that's apples to apples, IMHO. The application for a Mission Titanium MPK, BTW, is to be used in situations where a magnetic signature is a risk to the user. In those instances, it's better to have a knife which is going to perform well but not at the peak levels of the super steels, than having a wonder steel knife that had to be left back at base because you would set off a Magnetic Impulse mine or other such hazard.

There's no secret that the Titanium MPK is not the answer to every (or even most) situations, which is why they are developing the A2 version. Comparing the A2 version to the standard ATAK is more along the line of apples to apples.

Here's what I've gathered from both sources:

Mad Dog uses Hard Chrome as a surface protectant. We've all seen the post where someone found a pin hole in their hard chrome and the blade snapped because rust ate away like cancer inside of coating. While it may protect against abrasion, it doesn't help against rust, IIRC due to the capillary action of how it's on there. Of course, I could be completely wrong here, but that's what I *remember* at this time. But, food for thought: all it takes is that one hole and the rust spreads underneath it, and no matter how well you take care of the surface, if it's under the chrome, you aren't going to see it until the chrome starts coming off.

Mission uses

We are using an aluminum titanium nitride PVD (Physical Vapor Deposition) coating technology. How it works:

All material to be coated is enclosed in a vacuum chamber. This chamber is then gently heated to a specific temperature. Deposition material, in this case titanium, is vaporized by means of an electric arc. These now highly charged titanium ions are mixed with a nitrogen gas forming a plasma. This positively charged titanium plasma is attracted to the negatively charged part to be coated. Ion by Ion, the titanium bonds to the part, growing a thin, hard film on the surface. We can get up to 6 microns at between 3500-4000 Vickers hardness out of this coating. We ran a sample MPK last year and I could not scratch the tang even using a nail! Hard chrome has properties of about 1000 Vickers and 2.5-5 microns thickness. Based on all of our research, AlTiN should outperform hard chrome.

We'll see what real world testing shows to this, Mission has never been shy to share their test results and where they are making improvements. Without seeing any actual test data on this, and if everything about the data provided is true, it would seem that Mission's coating is superior, at least on paper.

As for how secure the tang is in the handle, haven't there been a couple cases of the handle of the MD knife coming off? Especially when the rust gets under the handle? Furthermore, I don't have to wait until it actually happens to express my concern for the possibility of it happening in the first place.

Not having some kind of securing pin and having a tang shape like that would lead any reasonable person to conclude that when the glue fails, the knife is gone. Right or wrong?

From what I understand, Mission decided the same thing, and they changed the tang construction so that there was no way the knife could go flying out of the handle. IIRC, their tang shape is such that it's tapered to prevent this sort of thing, and on top of that, the handle is injection molded around the handle, yet is hard enough to pound nails.

Given the choice, I'd rather not worry about the handle falling off, but that's just me.

Now if there was a way to combine MD's ergonomics with the tang shape of the Mission MPK, I'm sure a lot more people would be happy, but then, Mission is striving for a handle that will work for the largest number of people, and the largest number of situations (i.e. lowest common denominator).

You can make all the claims you want about towing a pickup with piano wire, but to tell you the truth, I never had to do that when I was in the field, nor would I think anyone else has either. I have had to pound nails, and I can easily see someone running over the handle with a tank by accident, or all sorts of other abuse because, quite frankly, Joe Snuffy sometimes doesn't care for his equipment.

So, handlewise, what does this all boil down to?

MD's handles are harder and have better ergonomics for certain positions, if I'm reading Cliff's postings/reviews correctly. They also pose a problem if the glue fails or the chrome comes off and the knife blade falls out, because there's no pin or any other device holding the tapered tang in, just glue.

Mission's handles are hard enough to pound nails, which is hard enough for me. Mission also injection molds the handles over the tang, so the tang isn't coming out of it, period.

So, looking at the handle and tang construction of the two knives, I prefer the Mission Knife, especially if you factor in cost, wait time, and warranty. Like Cliff, I too would prefer a bit more hardness in the blade, but if it's easy to maintain in the field, I'm willing to make that sort of tradeoff.

Long winded as usuall....

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Steve, first off your comment about Mission's Ti being on par with the cheapest stainless steels is in direct opposition with direct reports from those that have used them. Namviet Vo has made many positive comments about his MPK, and uses it as a dive knife in preference over his MD's, and when Hilton did a series of tests awhile ago, the MPK performed very strongly beating knives made out of several steels including 1095.

Of course it is a poor generalization to say "Ti knives" behave in a certain manner anyway. There are many different grades of Ti with widely different material properties just as there are many different types of steels. While 1010 mild steel would make a pretty poor blade, A2 makes a pretty good one.

As for it being necessary for having to leave a steel knife unprotected under the ocean to develop rusting problems, in some of the more corrosive enviroments on land you will notice significant edge degredation due to rust which can wear an edge much faster than actual use. As well you can see dry spotting (no fluids present) and it does not take days to happen in either case.

Spark :

[MPK]

I too would prefer a bit more hardness in the blade, but if it's easy to maintain in the field, I'm willing to make that sort of tradeoff.

I think the reason for this is probably the same thinking as the handle. A slightly softer blade will not work as well for some, however in general most will find it easier to work with. It will of course also be far tougher and thus much more resistant to impacts, which may be a consideration. For example Ontarios 1095 knives will fracture at the spine if they suffer hard contacts (have done this) while Missions would probably just indent.

For some detailed discussion on Ti, Sid Post makes some interesting points in the following thread :

http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000547.html

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 28 September 1999).]

 

[Aubrey]

Thanx for the post on the tang of the MD's. First time I have seen them. I assume that they are press fitted onto the tang with epoxy ....maybe if they were molded onto the tang as I see the taper on the tang the wrong way ...it should broaden towards the but end? Am I just ignorant or does it make sense.

Just a few comments on the MD that I have posted before .......

I agree with the edge being lost on bare steel but the Marine cloth helps. I have found that using the MD underwater for 60-90 minutes and cutting a lot causes a loss of edge holding but nothing that I couldn't fix quickly with my Spyderco.

The hard crome can disguise a rusted spot quite well and that is a concern if used around high corrosion environemnts continiously....more so if the tang is at stake.

On Mission ...great guys that are always willing to listen and help.

My A2 MPK is doing great and has seen some use although not what I would quintify as hard core ;-)

From Africa

Aubrey

 

[Samurai6]

With regard to edge holding, I don't have any personal experience with Mission's Ti knives. I was going by what Rick from Mission knives stated earlier in the thread that the edge holding was equivalent to 440A. I do have some idea about the performance of 440A.

I also have a lot of experience with knives of all kinds in salt water environments. My father was a commercial fisherman and I worked a lot of summers and weekends on the boat.

I am sure the Ti MPK is an excellent dive tool, though being only a fair cutting tool by the standards of $300 knives. What jacked me up was the suggestion that the handle design on one of Mission's competitor's knives was obviously inferior because it was epoxied on. Think of the millions of stick tang, hidden tang, and full tang knives out there with tool steel blades, and handles held on by pins and epoxy. The pins aren't there to hold the handle on when moisture penetrates the epoxy and rusts the tang away. I am sure that moisture could never penetrate the handle material and coatings on Mission's A-2 knives, though Hilton Yam discovered that the handle ends where the Kevlar fiber ends are exposed did absorb some solvents and gasoline in his test, enough to allow the handle to burn breifly when exposed to flame.

Another clinker is a .25" steel blade snapping because of a pin hole in the hard chrome. Just think about the kind of rust it would take to eat through a .25" piece of any kind of steel until you could snap the blade. It is ridiculous, and you only read that kind of thing about one maker's knives around here.

I am sorry for sounding hostile, Spark. That is an interesting pic that you posted. It takes a heck of a lot of curiosity to destroy the handle of a $350 knife just for grins. I don't see any rust in that pic.

Nor do I see anything there to convince me that the handles of my Mad Dog knives are any less firmly attached to the blades than they have demonstrated themselves to be.

Harv

 

[Spark]

Sorry Harv, just calling it like I see it.

We have had some reported cases of people losing the handles off their MD knives due to rust forming under the hard chrome and causing separation. In my book, that ranks as a flaw, if not a call for a look at redesign.

I agree with Aubrey, maybe it would be more sound to have the tang taper in the opposite direction, with the interior shape of the handle being designed so that the tang was secured by the handle material itself, since that's less prone to failure than the glue / hard chrome bonding. It wouldn't even take that much of a taper, just enough to prevent the knife from going forward. Heck, maybe the tang could be machined so that it interlocks with the handle, forming mechanical security.

Please note, I'm not claiming that the materials used by Mission are superior to the G10 and O1 used by Mad Dog. I am suitably impressed by the bullet resistant handle and extreme edge holding that he can achieve, and I fully give him credit for the simplicity and intelligence behind the designs, because they do show a good mind at work. However, for all the elegance and material strength, it doesn't do any good if the handle falls off, and that is IMHO a serious flaw in the design, a very real weak link.

Let's face it, can the handle fall off the Mission Knife? No, they recognized that problem and they took measures to correct it, instead of saying that the knife was perfect as is. Can the handle be set on fire? Sure, if you immerse it in gasoline, but then when the fuel goes out, it goes out as well. It may be singed, but it's not like it's going to melt away or burn away like Kraton. Is it resistant to DEET? Yes. Is it bulletproof? I don't know, but is that really a mission requirement? I mean, if it can take a tank driving over it without damage, and can hammer nails without a problem, how much harder does it have to be? If the trade off for having a harder handle is having the possibility of it falling off, I'll won't be making that "upgrade"

I'll be the first to admit it, I'm not an engineering genius. But, if you want to compare this to a car, it doesn't matter how fast your car goes around a corner, or how long the exterior paint job lasts if the wheels fall off because of a scratch letting water in. I'd feel a lot more secure if there was a bolt holding the tires on instead of glue, I don't know about you.

Anyhow, this shouldn't even be that hard to accomplish, correct? All it takes is a redesign of the handle so that this super tough material actually helps hold the blade in. Maybe have the handle built in two pieces so that they interlock with the blade, preventing the knife from falling out should the glue fail. I mean, what's tougher, the handle, the steel, or the glue? The tang already has a hole in it, so it's obviously not that much of a structural worry. Drill another, or two more, and put pins through them. Have the handle go through the holes, and use the glue as a back up. Bore a hole all the way through the handle, pin the tang in place and then plug the holes with the super epoxy. Figure out a solution.

But as it is right now, the problem remains: When rust gets under the hard chrome, the hard chrome separates from the metal. The hard chrome flakes off. And since the glue isn't stuck to the metal, guess what's no longer secure. It's happened, it's not a myth, so lets figure out how to fix it. Hiding behind "it's the only knife ever to get sole source justification" doesn't solve the problem. Saying it's up to the user to properly maintain it is a cop out, especially if the manufacturer is aware of the flaw. What, the user is expected to see what's under this ubercoating that's been purported to be so tough? Yeah, right. Remember, it doesn't have to rust through the tang for the handle to come off, if that was the case then it would be a tang failure. Instead, all it has to do is rust enough for the hard chrome to seperate from the metal, weaking it to the point where the handle falls off. That's a lot less rust than the tang rusting straight through, and given what we've learned about the capillary action of hard chrome, this isn't such a difficult thing to consider.

Anyhow, as for destroying the handle, actually, it was forwarded to me in that condition. And no, I didn't get it from Mission Knives. I did find it interesting to look at though... besides, Cliff destroyed two TUSKs each costing $900 for his tests, right?

What I find more interesting is that this issue is actually being discussed without resorting to name calling and insults and people are actually man enough to admit when they were wrong. Mission seems to be much more proactive at solving the problems, I will give them that. Looking through the <a href="http://www.missionknives.com/articles/index.html" target="_blank">articles on their site</a> you can see the evolution that the MPK has gone though and is continuing to go through, instead of resting on what's been done way back when and calling it good enough. I find the <a href="http://www.missionknives.com/articles/design_behind_the_mpk.html" target="_blank">Design behind the MPK</a> article a very interesting read indeed.

I'll be the first one to admit it. Mad Dog makes a hellacious knife. His designs are very, very good, and they perform beyond what most people expect, including myself. But, that doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement, because nothing is ever truly perfect. Will we ever see a Mad Dog knife with an injection molded handle? Maybe, who knows, they are coming out with amazing materials these days, one day they will probably have something that has the same properties. It could even be out right now. Maybe then the whole glue / tang issue will be solved. But I don't doubt for an instant that if he did go to that sort of thing, the resulting knife would truly be a wonder to behold.

It's basic design, right? When you have a problem, eliminate the problem and move on to the next.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here


[This message has been edited by Spark (edited 28 September 1999).]

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Steve :

What jacked me up was the suggestion that the handle design on one of Mission's competitor's knives was obviously inferior because it was epoxied on.

It is. A non-flared tang could easily slip out once the glue bond has broken. Mission's tang cannot come out of the handle unless the handle material itself is torn through. It is obviously a stronger more stable design. Now the revelant question is is the extra stability and strength needed. For strength I don't think so. I don't know what kind of glue MD is using, but even the every day ones are very difficult to break assuming they are applied properly.

However the security issue is another matter altogether. If the glue bond is somehow broken there is nothing to keep the handle in place. This is the same for the HI khukuris and it is why they use a butt-cap on the end of the tang so that it will hold if the glue bond is broken. Now is this necessary on MD's knives? I don't know. I do know that handles rusting is a problem and there have been posts about it. Yvsa recently took off the Kraton handle on his Trailmaster and saw rusting all over the place on its tang. It would not be impossible for rust to work under the hard chrome on MD's knives and thus the possibility exists that failure could be thus induced. A security against this such as an end flared tang would prevent gross failure and thus be a direct improvement over the existing design.

Spark :

Cliff destroyed two TUSKs each costing $900 for his tests, right?

I bought one, one was a warrenty replacment. I don't think what I did was similar to slicing off the handles as may be implied. I did what I did so I would be secure that the knife would do what I needed it to do if such situations arose. Some people have a problem with you wanting to verify performance rather than waiting to see if problems could arise in the field. This makes no sense to me and I would consider such behavior irresponsible especially when you are in the situation of having other people possibly replying on your gear or relying on you - it is not something I will do, ever. I would much rather be out some money than the possible consequences of the other path.

It should be noted that not all makers/dealers are like this. There are some like HI, Busse, P.J. Turner, GH, Fällkniven etc., that have no problem with you verifying that the performance of the tools are what they should be. There are custom makers who are this way as well. I have worked with several after the MD incident and none of them have had a problem with my attidute. It was made very clear to them that if I stated I wanted certain performance levels and they said they would be there I would make sure of it or not be satisfied. Phil Wilson, Mel Sorg, Rob Simonich and recently Drew Gleason have all been a pleasure to deal with and are very open and honest about their knives and what they are made to do. This specific incident however has been covered in detail elsewhere so I will leave it at that.

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 29 September 1999).]

 

[Spark]

My mistake Cliff, thank you for your correction. What I drew away from your experiments was that each knife failed under typical use, I should have made that more clear, instead of making it seem like you destroyed them on purpose. My apologies.

Also, my thanks for stating what I was trying to say in a clear and concise manner. I have a tendency to run on if I don't watch it.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

 

[Samurai6]

Spark and Cliff, please don't think hostile, just think argumentative.

Do you have first hand knowledge of a Mad Dog knife handle failing due to the epoxy failing or the tang rusting, or are you simply speculating?

Speculating is OK, that's what the forums are for, right? But speculation and reality are sometimes two different things.

I hear a lot of talk about what could happen when moisture gets underneath the hard chrome, but I haven't read of that ever happening to a large enough extent to harm the performance of the knife.

Harv

[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 29 September 1999).]

 

[Spark]

I'll do a search on this and see what I can find. If it's here, then it should turn up. If it's somewhere else, it's probably not going to be there anymore for one reason or another.

Anyhow, with all due respect, just as it's been said elsewhere, just because a person says one thing, doesn't mean it really happened that way or is the truth. That goes for returns as well. Heck, we've seen about that many claims that the person's knife came dull and had to be returned. So, with respect, I think 6 returns is probably not a hard figure. Besides, just because the knife isn't returned, it doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist. Check out the posts on dull Mad Dogs here: http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000355.html

Back to the main topic, Rick can probably provide a few examples on handles falling off, but I will be the first to admit that I don't have the person's name who first posted this information. It was over a year ago and my memory isn't that sharp even on it's best days. Maybe that person will chime in, who knows.

Regardless, the issue still remains:

Fact: Rust can and will get under the hard chrome and spread, given the opportunity. Once under the hard chrome, it is difficult to spot.

Fact: The Hard chrome can flake away from a variety of reasons, most notibly impact and rust. The hard chrome acts primarily as a wear proctectant, not a corrosion protectant

Fact: The shape of the tang is such that if and when there is a glue / hardchrome failure, the knife is no longer secured in the handle. As such, it's a valid concern and a good reason for a redesign.

Remember, the chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. In this case, the weak link is the glue / hardchrome and lack of a mechanical back up should there be such a failure. No more, no less.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Steve, I have heard the same complaints about the handle falling off but never from a direct source and always from someone who has had a problem with MD of some sort in the past, thus I never had much faith in them. However the fact remains that the design does allow such a situation to develop and it could be prevented without functional loss, and in doing so would produce a better design. Now the question remains is the improvement significant? For me no. I don't need to be able to leave my blades unprotected for the amount of time it would take for such a situation to evolve, however there are some that do and I would suppose they feel differently. It would however give me added security in knowing they would be able to handle that stress if the need arose. I don't think I would trade any significant functional ability for that, but I don't see why this would have to be the case.

As for not sending the knife in for replacement. That does not surprise me. MD is not easy to deal with if you are not agreeing with him and for someone to cut their losses and just pass on the knife is not that far fetched. It is not as simple as just "why not just return it". It costs money and time to do so and you have to deal with the people involved and the consequences of such actions. I personally know of two people who have had their MD's suffer damage in excess of what is reasonable and they have not returned the knife. Why? I don't know but I could easily understand possible sources of concern. They could easily end up in a similar situation as resulted to me and be out extra money in terms of shipping (which for me was over 100$), and further be out the knife (I have has of yet no sign of the TUSK I returned) which could have been of some use in whatever condition it was left in and have to deal with the consequences of returning it, which bothers some people.

Anyway the central point here is simply that the Mission handle construction is more stable. There is no arguing that. However is this added security functional or is it just over compensation? There is room here for debate as the stress necessary to over come the bonding and induce failure on the MD may not be something that would be a realistic concern under sensible use. Mission thinks that it is apparently and MD thinks it isn't. It is then up for the consumer to decide which one they agree with.

-Cliff

 

[Samurai6]

Sorry guys, I was editing my reply while you were responding to it, trying to figure out what it was I really wanted to say. And now I am editing this one.

Excellent repsonses from both of you.

Spark,

Fact? I don't think so. I have heard of, and give credence to, the hard chrome chipping when hit with something hard, and I have heard of it flaking, to an inconsequential extent at the edge when the edge was allowed to rust severely. I do not buy that rust can thrive under Mad Dog hard chrome, unknown to the user, until one day the user picks up his knife to find an empty shell of hard chrome with nothing but FeO2(rust) in it. These are not facts, only suppositions.

A flared tang might be a good idea, but then you would have to use an injection molded handle, the material of which wouldn't be as strong as the glass epoxy composite that Mad Dog uses. So Mad Dog, not getting any glue failures, or even if he got one or two in a thousand, would smartly decide that the stronger handle was the better solution. Why use a weaker handle material to solve a non-existent problem? That's illogical.

Cliff,

You are correct and reasonable as always, and only disagree with you slightly on one issue: if the handle fell off one of my Mad Dogs, I would send it back. When yours failed, you sent them back. I think just about any reasonable person would do the same.

Thanks,

Harv

[This message has been edited by Steve Harvey (edited 29 September 1999).]

 

[NamViet Vo]

There is nothing wrong with using adhesive to attach the tang to the handle. The separation of the tang from the handle in MD knives might not be because of the adhesive bonding failure, but could be because of the chrome plating coming off the steel due to subsurface corrosion. The adhesive bonds to the chrome plating and not the steel underneath. A flared tang does not have to have an injection molded handle because a handle can be glued to the tang in pieces.

Base on my time as a researcher at 3M laboratory in Mendota Height, Minnesota, there are composite adhesive available that are stronger than the materials being bonded once it is cured. I highly doubt that my MD MirageX Hunter's handle will come off in the future due to corrosion or bonding failure.

 

[Spark]

Nam, that's exactly what we're talking about. Create a handle made of interlocking pieces, that lock onto the handle so that when the whole assembly is glued together, there's no way that the knife will be leaving the handle, hard chrome seperation or no.

Spark

------------------
Kevin Jon Schlossberg
SysOp and Administrator for BladeForums.com

Insert witty quip here

 

[missionknives]

Thanks for all of your support.
Spark hit it on the head when he said that Mission believes in continuous improvement. We take our time and design and build the best product we can, but, once built, if it needs tweaking, or etc., we have no problem modifying it to make it better. For example, we saw the inherent weakness of a tang design that gets smaller at the butt end, so we designed ours so it gets bigger at the butt end. How do I know about the "other" tang design? Because I personally saw one at the Teams that the handle had fallen off. The epoxy rivot failed on the other design causing the handle to slide off the butt end! This was proof enough to seriously look at injection molding, and with the help of DuPont, we were off and running with a KEVLAR loaded HYTREL mixture for the handle that is just plain TOUGH! We also cut extra "hooks" into the tang to ensure that the handle NEVER came off. In fact, we have the original report from the NAVEODTECHCTR that shows their testing of the MPK. It took 3 guys about 4 hours using a chisel, hammer, and a hacksaw to get the handle off of the MPK!

At our next show (SHOT SHOW), stop by our booth and we will show you our tang vs the "other" tang. You be the judge.

Rick

 

[NamViet Vo]

Rick, I will see you at the show this year. BTW, why did those guys at NAVEODTECHCTR not just shoot the handle off? I would really like to know how bullet proof my MPK is.

 

[Samurai6]

Rick,

Correct me if I am in error, but I believe that modern epoxies have yield strengths in the thousands of pounds per square inch. With that in mind, I am curious about the circumstances that might have resulted in the failure of the epoxy pin in the knife you saw with the handle off.

I also wonder why somebody spent hours chiseling and sawing the handle off your knife? They must have thought they were gaining some useful information. If they had wanted to see the tang, you certainly could have showed them a blade with no handle.

With a fully enclosed tang it is difficult to see how adequate shearing forces could have been generated between the blade and the handle to break the epoxy. Did the handle come off the other knife as a result of the same quest for information, in other words, were there hammers and chisels, or some other force multiplier involved?

To be clear, I have no opinion about whether Mission handles are superior to Mad Dogs or not. The Mission method sound like an excellent solution. Too bad a picture of a Mission handle in cross-section wasn't posted in this thread instead of a Mad Dog handle. I am specificly questioning whether it is reasonable to speculate about Mad Dog handles falling off as though it were a regular occurrance, when in fact it is equally likely to have never occurred except under very unusual circumstances involving Military intellegence testing.

Thanks,

Harv

 

[Cougar Allen]

"We have had some reported cases of people losing the handles off their MD knives due to rust forming under the hard chrome and causing separation."

That's the central point in question here. There are a number of users of MD knives active on the forums and none of them have ever posted any such report; in fact a number of forumites use MD knives for salt water diving and they report very little trouble with edge corrosion and no handles falling off.

Statements from a maker about his own knives don't carry the same weight as a report from a user with no product to sell, and neither do statements from a manufacturer about a competitor's knives. Unless we see a report from a user someday....

-Cougar Allen :{)