I'd never put a knife through what knifetests.com does, I view it as something kind of like crash-testing a car. I don't intend to crash a car into a concrete wall, but the tests are designed to show you want happens if you accidently do so.

Knifetests.com calls their tests "destruction" tests. kc2ixe recently posted about a job he had in "environmental testing." It pretty much seemed to be trying things out to see if you could break them.

Knifetests.com take a knife and puts it knife through a bunch of crap to see how it takes the punishment, and in the end, the knife is probably going destroyed. Destruction testing an item may have some benefit, but it is not the end all and be all. Look at the tests, and take it for what you think it's worth. If you think they are worthless, don't look at them.

What do you all think of Doug Ritters fixed blade as a survival knife?
The Sock

I know I'm not really answering the question but the best survival knife is the one you have with you.

For that matter, exactly why would I want to split wood in a survival situation? Fuzz it up, sure. Split it? How about picking smaller sticks for kindling use?

FWIW, I carry one of those little wire saws. The way I figure it cutting may be critical, splitting? Notsomuch.

-john

It's not always possible to find appropriately sized sticks for kindling...depending of course on where you are.

If the outside of the wood is soaked, splitting can get you into the drier center and make it easier to build a fire.

Go use the saw, cut 15 pieces of wood or so, make a few traps with the saw. Then tell us what you think.

Seems like typically you can compensate with shavings.

In reality it seems like there is only a narrow window of wood sizes you are going to be able to baton anyway.

I guess I'd say splitting wood might be more useful in the case of wood that is wet externally.

Anyways, I think people should endeavor to be able to compensate for variance in the materials they have at hand.

-john

You mean like landing on an aircraft carrier? I don't think it's strong enough. :-p

-john

The only disappointment I felt was after realizing I wasted 40 minutes watching these "tests".

Actually, I take that back. At first I was fine with the slicing, cutting, chopping, second cutting, first baton, third cutting, and digging tests. I only started to think it was all a waste when the host started placing the blade on an angle, began to hit it with the three pound hammer and failed to hit the blade directly on the spine several times.

Friggin' shocker... Torque on the blade caused a relatively brittle steel to break...

I probably wouldn't have been so disappointed in these "tests" if they were undertaken with very strict protocols, but when you introduce the human element into testing there's going to be vast number of variations. He was holding both the hammer and knife in his hands and striking one against the other at different angles with variable force. You could counter with, "humans will be using these blades in the field, not machines." and that's valid to a point. However, it also negates any type of ranking system between various blades from different manufacturers. It could very well be an odd variable and not an attribute of the blade that allows one knife to survive longer than another.

You could argue that the first tests that I was OK with had a human element in them, and I'd agree. I'd also say that they were a little more forgiving of variation.

On a side note...

I neither own nor have any interest in Chris Reeve knives because they're beyond what I'm willing to pay for a blade. So, I don't have to defend him based on my experience. However, I feel the need to question your (ulfhedinn) motives when you state, "Since this is a different kind of steel than the last one now the Reeve factory seems to have a real problem." based on a "test" that shows obvious user error.

You also have a total of 28 posts, many of which (12 I believe) are within 2 threads started by you and with the titles "Chris Reeve Disappointment" and "Another Chris Reeve Disappointment"

Are you intentionally trying to slander Chris Reeve and his work?