I got this link from SYKW and here's a guy who destructive tests many type knives ONTARIO RTAK II,FALLKNIVEN A1 and many more including one of my favorites the Scrap Yard Scrapper 6. Anyhow, I know it's not what you would normally do with a knife but it does give you an idea of performance.

http://www.knifetests.com

The only 'performance' here is the buffoonery of the testers.Anything can be stressed beyond tensile integrity by fools who don't even practise common safety, have been banned from both major websites devoted to cutlery and are rightly shunned by the manufacturers.

I have to admit that it was half interesting to see just what it would take to break my Gerber LMF II. If I ever need to drive it point first into a concrete block, I can now do so with confidence...I guess.

I was about to enter the website out of curiosity but you just said it all - so now I'm staying away from there. I always disliked the mall ninjas that would trash a knife on purpose and then say, "this knife is a piece of junk!" anyway.

If you wanna cut rock with steel, buy a chisel.

A good independent reviewer is Cliff Stamp: http://www.cutleryscience.com/reviews/reviews.html

He does often test knives to destruction but makes this clear when so (it may not be recommended practice, but it's nice to know that in an emergency a Spyderco Salt serrated folder using H-1 steel can cut up a steel-belted radial tire to use in a fire).

True, he has been banned from BF and other sites and the manufactures. If he wants to waste his money buying knives just to destroy them then more power to him. Especially if he is going to destroy a FBM which is a big chuck of change. Do I condole what he does, not really but failure analysis has been one of many parts of the job that I do and I always like to see what a product will perform under different scenarios. Is it performance testing, I would differ and say it is. He is testing edge retention, hardness, fatigue life, etc.. Is it a professional testing, not in the least. But if he's stupid enough to take it to the extremes then so be it. That's why we are in a free country.

To say we would never chisel or chop concrete is to say you will never be in California and get trapped under a fallen bridge of concrete or in Kansas when a tornado bury's you alive. If I'm in a aircraft or helicopter and it crashes, I'll be the first one to use my knife to cut through metal, concrete or what have you. Will it work, no one knows but I would like to have a all around tool to have that capability. All a knife is, is a tool and should be respected as such. I only carry knives that I would trust to perform it's job when needed and his video, though very crude, gives me an idea of the metrology and heat treatment of the various manufactures. Anyway this is my 2 cents and no disrespect meant. I see your point, but his videos are entertaining sometimes.

In a since the steel SYKW is from a concrete chisel blade. But I agree to use the right tool for the right job.

They are like "jackass" with knives. Using them to gauge performance is akin to entering a car into a demolition derby to see how well it handles.

I agree.

There's a big difference between being destructive and being able to qualitatively test the performance characteristics of a mechanism. Cliff's tests are bona fide because he understands the material and can relate metallurgical and physical properties to performance expectations. The boneheads offer nothing but anecdotal evidence that anyone can break something if they try hard enough.

This is not to say I agree completely with all that Cliff expounds, as some of his conclusions are subjective even still. However, his tests allow others to evaluate performance criteria objectively and reach their own conclusions, which is quite lacking in the boneheads' methods.