How do you interpret Noss' ratings?

[psy-ops]

What factors do you take into account after looking at Noss' test?

For me, I would say that 4 factors concern me the most.

1. How long did this knife last?
2. how much did it cost?
3. What would I use it for?
4. What kind of steel is it? and is there any inferences I can make about a steel type?

So the BJ Grunt, which I own, received a rating of 3.5 swords. It cost $27. with shipping. It handled the tests reasonably well. I was kinding of hoping it would perform better. I wouldn't mind if I had this in a survival situation but it would not be my first choice.

I am curious about how others use the ratings.

[G. Scott H.]

I look at many of the things you do. Also, I pay special attention to the flex and tip aspects. WIll the blade flex and return, flex and take a set, or flex and snap? Will the tip bend easily, snap of, or just be slightly blunted with maybe a tiny bend? WHen I buy a hard use knife, I want to make sure it's gonna be damn hard to break. I also want it to hold a reasonable edge and be relatively easy to touch up, too, so I look at the web cutting that Noss does after batonning also. It's often a compromise with many knives between edge holding and toughness, so I look for knives that perform well in both areas, like Cold Steel's GI Tanto (though Noss snapped the very tip off it while digging through a 2x4, no more damage was done in subsequent tip work, and the rest of the knife proved to be damn near bomb proof, plus held a decent edge).

[Madnumforce]

In fact, for me, Noss rating counts only for hard use survival knifes. His tests are really pushing a knife to the limits, but for a simple everyday knife, for about 9 to 12cm blade, that strenght is not that important, IMO. I own a Roselli Grandfather and a CGFBM, and i reall can't ask the same toughness from the terribly sharp and incredibly comfortable and fast Roselli than from the Busse. But i bought the Busse after Noss rating's, cause that's the kind of use these tests are intended to rate: breaking concrete and batonning through metal tubes. But if Noss ever test the Roselli, i wouldn't really care about the rating. In fact, the Mora have allready d-tested, and the score is not very high, but in my opinion, it's not consequent, as it's not the kind of use i would ask from a knife of this kind.

Anyway, for knives whose submitting to D-test is consequent, i look at the very lasts moments before breaking: can it be predicted? Cause if not, it can be a problem, if the kinfe just snap in you hands without any notice. If it bends, cracks, etc... you know it won't last very long, and be carefull, not using it for useless things if you're in an extreme survival situation. But if it breaks without notice after having destructed a fighter jet thrown at it on supersonic speed, it's not the same if it breaks without notice during hammering through wood :rolleyes:. That's the second point, the overall strenght. Third thing is the edge (decent edge) holding. If the knife resists to metal, but edge is 1.5mm thick, it's almost useless. Very important is the toughness of the handle: what is a knife good to, if the tang just skin your hand as much as it penetrates the log you're batonning? And considering all theses aspects, i allways keep in mind the price. I can admit some flaws from a 40$ knife, not from a 300$ one.

But Noss' ratings are important in another kind of way, it's how you feel the knife when using it to it's very end. The videos are one thing, the pure report of facts, but the feeling is equally important, and i take Noss rating as a reflection of this aspect no video or measure can tell.

[psy-ops]

Magnum force,

I agree that there are certain knives that the kind of durability we would expect is not high. I have some SAKs that I carry but I know I can bust one of these with little effort but still I would consider it a "survival" knife as part of a combo.

But for fixed blade as your main knife in the woods to depend on, I have higher expectations.

Take the Strider test many of us expected this to be bit more solid knife for $350. Then when the GI tanto performed better at $15 or so. Now I am sure if you had a strider you wouldn't die with a broken knife in the woods but when you add price as a factor of comparison then it is not so much about knife failure as which knife will perform the best for the money then you have a different set of criteria.

Money is a big factor for me right now. So I look for a solid knife with a great price. Fallkniven is my top choice. It has been tested tough as nails and at an affordable price. I am saving for an A2. The test really sold me.

I was curious if other people used the tests in their knife purchasing.

Thanks

[Paul The Brit]

Psy-ops, I'd already bought a Scrapyard S6 and Busse Basic before Noss tested them.. But if I hadn't I would have by now having seen how tough they are!

I think that really what Noss does is separate the wheat from the chaff of knives that claim to be SHTF knives. Bet my life on a CRK? NO WAY! S6 or Busse INFI? HELL YEAH!

The main things I look for in Noss's tests are does the knife give up gradually or just suddenly give up (I'd rather it bent a bit than snapped) and does it stay in one usable piece complete with handle to the bitter end? Handle repairs are a pain in the woods.. The edge retention after batoning is quite useful too to get an idea of how it copes with real every day usage.

[superc]

Well from having watched a few of them (hard with dial up, but it can be done), I feel safe in passing up any knife that is only two daggers. :)

On the other hand, it is clear that early on some knives were tested more brutally than others or placed in situations where their failure was already a matter of record. The K Bar Marine MK2 test is a good example. The very first complaints from the field during WW2 involved the tang and tip failures. At one point it was thought the tang failures were because of the stampings weakening the blade. It wasn't. It was the rat tail tang design with high stress (i.e., 90 degree) cuts that caused the failures. So why test the tang strength other than to show others the already acknowledged weakness? [I have no idea why K-Bar won't add a stress reliever to the junction of blade to tang. I mean really, 65 years of making knives all containing the same flaw?] Likewise no surprise the tip breaks off. Sharp tips tend to do that when leverage is applied or they are thrown, or they bend in prying.

There is also the chopping test. Many users chop with the ax or the machete not the knife. But for many of us, this is a small knife vs. big knife issue. Certainly a 6 inch blade knife that can also chop is nice to know about before you have to, and when the blade is more than that, we expect some chopping ability.

I believe baton tests are very valid. I often baton through a deer's pelvis. Some knives can take it and Cliff Stamp described one of the knives that failed on me as the worst blade chip he had ever seen. A shame as it was a pretty little knife (Case Pawnee), not cheap on my salary then either, and had I known it was worthless as a hunting knife I would have never bought it. Noss, where was knife tests back in 84?

Generally speaking though, I think the testing is both fair and informative (especially when it is a sudden failure on a routine field event). I used a CS SRK Carbon 5 as a hunting knife and was pretty happy with it (except when the grips got slick with blood) until I saw the test and panicked. That year I shelved my (30 deer used, but not yet damaged SRK (knowing Carbon 5 knives had suddenly become collectors items helped in the decision)) and replaced it with a 60 year old Cattaraugus Q knife (too heavy after 14 hours of walking), then a 60 year old Union Cutlery MK1 (tang issue and the blade is too thin for lateral stress or battoning through a rib cage, but otherwise okay), followed this year by a Dumpster Mutt (seems to do as well as any of the others above in the field).

These days before I buy a knife I do check knife tests, and if it is 5 (or more) daggers. I am fairly confident it will be a good buy.

[culpeper]

That was a nice write up and I like your choice of font and color. hint. hint. hint.

Easier to read. I give the default font one sword.

[Noss]

I don't know how to change the default font. I would love to do it but V bulletin is not easy to change around. I hate screwing with it because I'm afraid I'm going to crash it. :eek:

I can change it where you can view the regular template but many have changed their font colors for the black back ground and you can't read certain posts because of this.

The best thing to do is enlarge the text in your browser by hitting ctrl + or -

[G. Scott H.]

How's this? :eek::D

[Noss]

Big and yellow. :D

[G. Scott H.]

Sorta like a radioactive mutant banana, no? :p

[Noss]

Yep ! easy to read though. :D

[Noss]

To change the default font. I have to change a lot of HTML code and I don't know what the hell I'm doing !!! :eek:

[G. Scott H.]

Well, if I try to log in tomorrow and the site is down, at least I'll know what caused it. :thumb:

[Noss]

LOL ! I'm not screwing with it. I know better. I crashed one of the other forums I set up before this one and lost all the posts.

[G. Scott H.]

Wise choice! :thumb: