Kydex in Cold (again)
sst...@physics.mun.ca
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297396
I brought up my experiences with it under such conditions :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/machax.html#sheath_cold
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/steel_eagle.html#sheath_fractures
which had been discussed before :
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90837
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=89161
The main contention against the work I had described was from Normark, a
Kydex sheath maker who amongst insults did calearify he would not guarantte
the the performance of his sheaths under such conditions or even any such
testing by anyone.
Anyway, recently I took three more Kydex sheaths and did similar work. Again
they were subjected to cold in a basement freezer (it actually gets colder
than this here, but it is "summer" here now). I used The sheath from the Sog
Seal , a custom from Andrew Lynch, and the cordura sheath from a Becker
Bowie with a Kydex liner.
The Sog provides a low end baseline being the worse way to make a sheath
from a durability standpoint (geometry), and besides you would expect custom
sheaths to be much higher in quality control, etc. . Andrew's sheath should
give a decent benchmark for custom work. The Bowie sheath was used to see if
there was a signficant different with the cordura covering.
The sheaths were hit with 25 ft.lbs of energy via a lead weight, the CV for
the energy was small (a few percent). 25 ft.lbs by the way isn't an extreme
energy, it is five lbs dropped from five feet (a normal man when falling
down could easily generate impacts *many* times greater).
There is nothing magical about this amount of energy, it was chosen simple
becuase I knew it would break all the sheaths because it was significantly
higher than the energies used in the past, and besides it is a nice number
unlike 17.5 ft.lbs or whatever.
The sheaths were padded underneath with 1/2" of ridged cardboard as I didn't
want to chip the paint on the floor - this obviously vastly undercuts the
energy of impact by absorbing it somewhat so the actual impact is < 25
ft.lbs.
To clearify, this work wasn't to examine the break point, except in a gross
sense (as it being < 25 ft.lbs) the energy would need to be much smaller for
that, say start at 5 ft.lbs and go up in steps of 5, I might do that later
on. This was mainly to look at the difference in the nature of the sheaths
due to construction.
The SOG sheath was first, it shattered into bits on the first impact :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/sog_seal_sheath_fst.jpg
The raised front and flat back makes for no way to absorb the impact, the
energy goes directly into the sharp curvature and violently cracks it to
pieces. The sheath was non functional after one impact.
Andrew's sheath fared much better, the first impact was on the bottom half,
and you could actually see the sheath flex under the impact of the weight
and then return to true. It was only minorly damaged from the hit :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/al_sheath_fst.jpg
The second hit was above the half way point, and the damage was now
significant, enough to functionally damage the sheath :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/al_sheath_snd.jpg
The first impact on the Becker sheath was in the bottom half, on the pouch.
Nothing happened, all the webbing just absorbed the impact (the sheath was
cut open to examine the Kydex). However an impact on the top of the sheath
did functionally damage the sheath :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/images/cb_sheath_snd.jpg
It didn't surprise me that the SOG shatter as it did given the nature of the
construction, and Andrews sheath also did as expected, however I would have
bet that the pouch would have fared better since it is split on the back and
can thus open up and thus disipate energy in that manner. However it
obviously can't do this fast enough to prevent it from cracking.
What it does show however that even a small bit of padding such as the
webbing for the pouch greatly raises the durability, so it even a simple
cord wrap around a Kydex could greatly raise the durability in cold, as well
as providing the benefits of several feet of cord which could come in handy
on occasion.
For comparion, a cheap leather sheath (Marbles) was subjected to 100+ ft.lbs
with no problems besides minor scuffing, on an interesting side note such
high impacts (100+ ft.lbs) might be enough to break the knife in the sheath.
I didn't test the sheaths with the knives in them as I didn't have the
knives any longer - well not in one piece anyway.
Note Andrew Lynch makes laminate Kydex sheaths for those wanting high
durability.
--
Cliff Stamp
sst...@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/
The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long
Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Michael Koblic
>
>
>On Bladeforums someone recently asked about Kydex and Cold :
>
>
>Anyway, recently I took three more Kydex sheaths and did similar work. Again
>they were subjected to cold in a basement freezer (it actually gets colder
>than this here, but it is "summer" here now). I used The sheath from the Sog
>Seal , a custom from Andrew Lynch, and the cordura sheath from a Becker
>Bowie with a Kydex liner.
>
>
>Note Andrew Lynch makes laminate Kydex sheaths for those wanting high
>durability.
>
Nice work!
Three questions:
1) What was the acutal temperature the sheaths were at when tested?
2) Does laminating the Kydex or any other process improve their temperatrure
sensitivity?
3) Have you tested other sheath materials, e.g. Zytel?
Mike Koblic,
Campbell River, BC
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[Kydex and Cold]
> 1) What was the acutal temperature the sheaths were at when tested?
Standard deep freeze of -20 C, it gets down to -30 and below here. The room
temperature was ~25 C. But Kydex is an insulator and it was exposed to the
elevated temperature for < 30 s before impact so the temperature difference
from freezer level would be minimal.
> 2) Does laminating the Kydex or any other process improve their
> temperatrure sensitivity?
No, it just gives the energy somewhere else to go, keeping the Kydex from
taking the brunt of the shock, and keeps it together even when it cracks.
> 3) Have you tested other sheath materials, e.g. Zytel?
Not significantly.
I html'ed a version of the above :
http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/kydex_cold.html
I need to add in some more contact into on the laminates.
Chas
> [Kydex and Cold]
Another difficulty with Kydex sheathes, particularly custom made ones, is
that repeated heating of the Kydex weakens it significantly. I was getting
pretty frisky with it at first- add-ons, two part forming, close tolerances
achieved by repeated modeling, all that. I found it has a limited acceptance
for such things before getting brittle and starting to crack.
The other thing is don't waste money on the thicker stuff- the thin is far
more workable and does what it's supposed to do.
--
Chas
http://kuntaosilat.com/serakdjurus.htm
www.chasclements.com
http://kuntaosilat.net/
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> Another difficulty with Kydex sheathes, particularly custom made ones, is
> that repeated heating of the Kydex weakens it significantly.
It gets pretty cold here in winter (-20 -> -40 C), and I was using a decent
Kydex sheath a few winters ago and then when coming in out of the cold,
changing downstairs breaking off the frozen ice and such, next to the wood
stove (so expect a change to 30 -> 40 C).
After a brief period of this the sheath started cracking in multiple places,
and I was careful not to impact it off of anything. Works really nice for
some things though as it is very strong even when thin, but for heavy blades
that get banged around, and especially in temperatures extremes, there are
much better options.
The biggest two promotional aspects were that you could not cut it by
jamming a blade in incorrectly, and that it was resistant to being cut when
you fell and a blade could poke out throug the sheath again due to being
jammed around. These two though are not an issue for well made leather
sheaths, I have a few and unless I tried to jam the blade in sideways I
can't imagine cutting it apart and quite frankly the blade should not be
able to cut itself out if you fell on it.
Kydex does however resist surface scratchs well, I used a Reeve Project
extensively one summer cutting a lot of broken hardwoods, seasoned trees,
and the sheath did get cosmetically damaged from all the scrapes. That is
about it though, it would take a massive amount of work to poke a limb
through a piece of leather.
Chas
> Kydex does however resist surface scratchs well, I used a Reeve Project
> extensively one summer cutting a lot of broken hardwoods, seasoned trees,
> and the sheath did get cosmetically damaged from all the scrapes.
Kydex is good in slaughterhouses- very wet environments, animals won't chew
on it much, good for greasy situations- the simpler the construction the
better.
The alternative is using Kydex for parts of the sheath- using webbing,
leather, cordura, ballistic nylon and such for the specialty parts. Most
makers won't even buy the proprietary adhesive because it's very expensive-
thing is, it works- they try to get by with mechanical connectors (eyelets
and so on) and 1" tolerance.
Chas
Eric E. Noeldechen
Hey Cliff...
>The main contention against the work I had described was from Normark, a
>Kydex sheath maker who amongst insults did calearify he would not guarantte
>the the performance of his sheaths under such conditions or even any such
>testing by anyone.
First off,, lets get our facts straight Cliff.. I'm not a Kydex
sheath maker,, I'm a Concealex sheath maker.. However similar,, Not
the same thing.
Please point out to me where I expressly said I would not cover or
warranty a damaged sheath under Any conditions ?
Don't put words in my mouth Clifford.
Do some proper testing, and I won't Rag on you about it.
I will not cover Abuse if it's been through your hands. Show me one
company that covers Anything that has been intentionally abused, other
than Busse.
As far as insults go.. When you say statements like this :
"The sheath on my Battle Mistress suffered stress cracks from winter
use just from being exposed to the cold, I don't even remember it
hitting anything."
Yaaa,, I do feel your full of crap, and a Self Appointed Wannabe
Expert. Trying to cut out a name for yourself, by baffling people with
your bullshit..
Tell me Cliff. Were these sheaths All made of Kydex,, or were there
some Concealex in there as well.
Do you even know the difference ?
What thickness of plastics were used in ALL of these sheaths. Were
they all the same, or are you mixing apples and oranges again ?
Break it down for us Cliff.
If someone falls off a horse, slips on ice, or generally breaks or
damages a sheath that I have made, Obviously I'm going to replace it
without question.
I've built a solid reputation on making high quality products, and
strive to give the best possible customer service possible... For the
few sheaths I've replaced over the time I've been in business, it
would be in my best interest to replace a product, that was damaged
however. Except Intentional abuse.
I have yet to replace a sheath that has had and structural damage, and
have only damaged one personally that was in constant use.
Every sheath has it's good points and bad. Picking the right one for
the job is the key. This includes Kydex,Concealex, Wood, Leather,
Hybrids, and now laminated sheaths
As far as what Chas has said about reheating of plastics... Yes,, that
seems quite possible, however I haven't experienced anything as of
yet.
Also what Chas has said is pretty much true with the thickness of the
plastics..In certain circumstances. Thinner plastic have more flex, so
in therory,, an impact across the face of a sheath could possibly work
in it's favor due to the flexibility of the plastic. Not always the
case, but sometimes.
As far as using glue on my sheaths.. I have used them in the past with
so so success.. Under certain circumstances,,I do use the glue,, but I
haven't yet found it needed. Mechanical fasteners is all thats needed
to keep the sheath together and working. I doubt that glue would make
much of a difference, and in some cases, hinder the proper function of
the sheath itself. I don't glue on belt loops because the belt loops
often need to be switched out, for different sizes,styles, and
positions.
Glue is Great when needed however...
ttyle
Eric....
Eric E. Noeldechen
On/Scene Tactical
===================
On/Scene Tactical
http://www.mnsi.net/~nbtnoel
Professional Quality Custom Sheathing
Canadian Heritage Leaves
http://www.mnsi.net/~ericn
Bringing you a little of the Outdoors,,Indoors!
alv...@xx.com
> Tell me Cliff. Were these sheaths All made of Kydex,, or were
> there some Concealex in there as well.
> Do you even know the difference ?
No. Do you? ;) Tell us the difference, start with the plastics'
chemical names please.
> If someone falls off a horse, slips on ice, or generally breaks
> or damages a sheath...
They can break? :/
> ...that I have made, Obviously I'm going to replace it without
> question.
> Eric E. Noeldechen
I'm one of those weird guys that's against lifetime guaranteed
tools. (materials and workmanship is another matter) Not trying
to tell you how to run your business tho!
Alvin in AZ
sst...@physics.mun.ca
>>The main contention against the work I had described was from Normark, a
>>Kydex sheath maker who amongst insults did calearify he would not
>>guarantte the the performance of his sheaths under such conditions or even
>>any such testing by anyone.
> First off,, lets get our facts straight Cliff.. I'm not a Kydex
> sheath maker,, I'm a Concealex sheath maker.. However similar,, Not
> the same thing.
In your own words from Bladeforums :
"... these materials are basically the same.. There are some slight
differences, but the end user will not really know the difference between
them."
> Were these sheaths All made of Kydex,, or were there some Concealex in
> there as well.
They were all described as Kydex, didn't get them materials tested. No one
argues they are significantly different anyway, even you.
I was going to add this, but didn't as it is just a red herring and would be
used simply to confuse the issue.
> Please point out to me where I expressly said I would not cover or
> warranty a damaged sheath under Any conditions ?
You even quoted my post and still can't reference it correctly. I'll repeat
it again to try and help you out this is what I said :
"... would not guarantee the the performance of his sheaths under such
conditions or even any such testing by anyone."
To spell this out, you failed to :
a) precisely describe and guarantee the performance of your sheaths as being
significantly different under such conditions as what was described
this refers to the
"... would not guarantee the the performance of his sheaths under such
conditions"
and you stated that
b) any such testing voids the one year warrenty on your sheaths
this refers to the
"or even any such testing by anyone."
Which means you are free to make all kinds of performance claims and no one
is allowed to try to test your products to see if they actually perform as
described. To be clear, they are allowed to do so, it just voids the
warrenty.
You also ignore the fact that other people, including sheath makers, have
tested the material and found it to be too brittle and progressed to other
materials. It is not like I am the only one who noticed the problem.
Then of course there are the direct materials tests which Dave provided
which also show the extreme decrease in toughness at low temperatures.
> What thickness of plastics were used in ALL of these sheaths.
That would be noted in the various reviews, there are differences, such as
the Steel Eagle sheath being thinner than the Basic, as noted, and it broke
faster as you would expect.
> Also what Chas has said is pretty much true with the thickness of the
> plastics..In certain circumstances. Thinner plastic have more flex, so
> in therory,, an impact across the face of a sheath could possibly work
> in it's favor due to the flexibility of the plastic. Not always the
> case, but sometimes.
More importantly, they all break readily under impact so it doesn't really
matter. So you simply use the thinner material as those sheaths are of the
type for which it is well suited. If you want a thick and heavy sheath which
takes impact well, then use something other than Kydex there are lots of
better options. Similar if you want something that works well in high heats.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[refering to me]
> ... a Self Appointed Wannabe Expert. Trying to cut out a name for
> yourself ...
This comes up from time to time, usually as do all ad hominem attacks when
logic and reason fail. A couple of points to consider :
1) It costs me about $1000 a year to do reviews, this doesn't include the
actual money to buy knives I own, but things like paying duty on blades
people ask me to review, shipping costs to return the broken blades to the
maker/manufacturer, shipping costs to get other opinions on knives, buying
materials for testing, buying materials to modify knives for the reviews,
etc. .
For example, I just got two kitchen knives to review, cost me $20 for duty
and taxes. It will cost me about $10 when I send them on to someone else in
Canada or the US once I finish with them. It will cost about 10-20$ for the
material I will use during the review, mainly rope, a lot of it I get used,
but some I like to buy clean for stock. When the review is over, I don't
have the knives, someone else does, and I am out about $40-$50, plus all the
time it took to do the review.
Or consider that after I did a review on a bunch of Martindale machetes,
they were split up, and send off to four different people. All of this
costs, the shipping on such large blades isn't trivial. But I enjoy the
interaction, and I do get blades to review because of what I have wrote and
I like to pass these on to other people who either appreciate the blades,
and/or who will add to the understanding of blade mechanics by doing
reviews.
2) I don't accept money for reviews, won't even take a discount on knives I
buy, don't accept free knives or related products. I won't even take funding
from outside people to finance the reviews, and I have been offered several
times, including multiple times on Bladeforums.
3) Because of what I have written, I have been constantly verbally attacked
(recieved emails which make Eric's look flowery in comparison), banned from
forums, and even subject to legal complications, having to recently consult
with a lawyer about freedom of speech issues.
4) I have no monetary connection to the industry, my reviewing hobby isn't
on my CV and has never come up and I can't imagine it ever would.
So yes, I spend all this time and effort, to not make any money, have it
cost me money, and be rewarded with idiotic posts like the above. Yes - its
a great reward!
Why do I do it then? Because not all makers are like Eric.
When I described the same problem with Kydex Eric started ranting and using
personal attacks.
When Carl had problems with Kydex and the cold he and discussed them with
Andrew, they worked on a solution and now we have laminate sheaths.
The difference should be obvious, one way leads to progress, and it is
makers like Andrew and Carl which walk that road.
There are lots of makers who I talk to on a regular basis and exchange ideas
on knives, testing, design, steels, etc. .
I am usually really negative with those makers, because that is all they
want to hear, you can only advance your design through the flaws, praise
does little except build your ego.
I also simply enjoy it for the most part, I just got another couple of
blades this past weekend and am itching for the weekend to try them out on
some brush.
As well I do it to add something back to a community which I have learned a
lot from, a lot of what I do is based on the writings of Mike Swaim, Joe
Talmadge, Alvin and others too many to count.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[Kydex / Concealex]
> No one argues they are significantly different anyway, ...
Correcting myself, awhile ago (years) Newt Livesay argued that Kydex was a
superior material, based on materials information he posted on his
discussion forum. It isn't archived however and is long gone. In general
most makers will interchange them, and there isn't a significant slant
towards one being better than the other that I have seen.
Eric E. Noeldechen
>"... these materials are basically the same.. There are some slight
>differences, but the end user will not really know the difference between
>them."
There are differences.. In this regard I was refering to costmetics,
and general proformance of the plastic, in regards to if worked
basically the same as Kydex The end user wouldn't know much of a
difference..
I never made claims that is was better in the cold than Kydex.All I
have said is that I have fractured one sheath in the cold by driving
over it with my truck, only after repeated hits with a ball pean
hammer didn't bring it to failure...
Maybe I'm not hitting them as hard as you...Many variables Cliff.
>They were all described as Kydex, didn't get them materials tested. No one
>argues they are significantly different anyway, even you.
Eveyone calls sheaths "kydex" it's like a generic term now,,like
Kleenex..
There are some differences, I'm not exactly sure what they are.. I
know the rockwell is different, and i know how it works differently
than Kydex....Spyderco cycle and rockwell tested my sheaths, I don't
have the results of those tests.I do know that they fared pretty well.
>I was going to add this, but didn't as it is just a red herring and would be
>used simply to confuse the issue.
>You even quoted my post and still can't reference it correctly. I'll repeat
>it again to try and help you out this is what I said :
Oh I understand it, and referenced it correctly Cliff..
It's real simple...
If you are using one of my sheaths, and you break it under normal
working conditions I'll fix or replace it. This includes someone
woking on a pipline in the Yukon that falls and break it.
If some jackass is swinging a 8 lb hammer at it, just to see how many
times it takes to get to the center,, I Won't...
If I have to make it any easier for you Cliff,, I'll have to get my 4
year olds crayons and draw you a picture.
If YOU buy one of my sheaths, and fall off a horse and it break..Of
course I'll replace it...
Stop trying to confuse the facts with double talk and babble.
>To spell this out, you failed to :
>
>a) precisely describe and guarantee the performance of your sheaths as being
>significantly different under such conditions as what was described
I didn't fail to do anything.. Again,, if you break one of my sheaths
while you are using it,,Not testing it,, i'll replace it..
>b) any such testing voids the one year warrenty on your sheaths
Exactly.. now you are getting it Cliff.
>this refers to the
>
>"or even any such testing by anyone."
That too.. Why should i be on the hook for some fool swinging a
hammer.. Absolutely Anything can be broken.. My sheaths can be broken
as well.. If it happens by accident, malfunction, improper
workmanship, or mishap I'll replace it.. I literally don't have very
many sheaths come back broken.. I'm not going to argue with anyone
returning a sheath unless it looks as if it was intentional or a
blowtorch was taken to it...
>Which means you are free to make all kinds of performance claims and no one
>is allowed to try to test your products to see if they actually perform as
>described. To be clear, they are allowed to do so, it just voids the
>warrenty.
Yaa I'm free to make Absolutely Any claim I want. Your free to claim
you know what you are talking about as well..
However at the risk of my reputation and business I Won't make any
claims that are false. I never have, and never will...
No one said you can't test my product.. Send me a MO,,and i'll sell
you anything you want to buy. However if you destroy it by swinging a
8lb hammer at it,, or bake it in your Easy Bake Oven,, you are shit
out of luck my friend..
Again tell me why I should be on the hook for your testing ? You want
to test..Feel free but it won't be on my dime...
And this statement somehow makes my warranty flawed ??, or somehow
makes me look bad because I won't fork over product for your fetish
LOL your a funny guy Cliff..
I already know what your tests outcome will be.
>You also ignore the fact that other people, including sheath makers, have
>tested the material and found it to be too brittle and progressed to other
>materials. It is not like I am the only one who noticed the problem.
Found what to be too brittle ?? LOL Synthetics ? Really.. Interesting
how most knife companies now offer a synthetic sheath in one form or
another(straight synthetics or hybrids,,Not Zytel)
Can't be that brittle if this many people are using it without any
significant problems...
Trust me,,if there was utter failure with synthetic sheaths,, it would
spread like wildfire over the forums. My business would be dead
overnight.
I think that your findings are somewhat along the right track, and
accrate,, I think you are seeing it only from your perspective
though....Ok,, so you've busted up a few sheaths. big deal, and it
proves nothing.
Between myself, Mike Sastre, and Survival Sheath Systems, I'd venture
a bet that there are literally Tens, upon Tens of Thousands of our
sheaths on the market,, used in Real world conditions 24 hours a day 7
days a week, all arounf the globe. I'd bet the total combined have
less of a problem with our sheaths then you do.
Not to mention any of the other makers that have been using the same
product, year after year after year,,without any problems....
Do you not think that at least some of these people with major
problems or concerns would come forward ??
Funny how they don't surface Eh Cliff! Because no problem Exists...
You sure hear about it though when someone snaps an Omega spring...
Who would these other sheath makers be ?
>Then of course there are the direct materials tests which Dave provided
>which also show the extreme decrease in toughness at low temperatures.
Not sure who Dave is,,so I can't comment.
No one denys the fact there is a decrease at low temps. Steel will
crack at low temp as well...
I just don't think it's a big a problem as You think it is.
I think it's more of a perceived problem, or you want to turn it into
a bigger problem than it literally is.If there were problems,, you'd
surely hear about it from bigger fish than you.
I certainly don't see a problem with it.. Out of the 15-20 thoudsand
of sheaths i've made,, I've replaced a handfull at best.
>That would be noted in the various reviews, there are differences, such as
>the Steel Eagle sheath being thinner than the Basic, as noted, and it broke
>faster as you would expect.
I'm sorry I didn't notice the thickness results..
>More importantly, they all break readily under impact so it doesn't really
>matter. So you simply use the thinner material as those sheaths are of the
>type for which it is well suited. If you want a thick and heavy sheath which
>takes impact well, then use something other than Kydex there are lots of
>better options. Similar if you want something that works well in high heats.
Yaaa anything will break Cliff,, thats understood...
I use a thickness of plastic that is suited for the job.If it needs to
be built more robust,,then thats the way I will build it.
Yes laminated synthetics would take more of an impact, this is true.
The same as it would if I were to wrap one of my sheaths in duct tape.
ttyle
Eric...
Eric E. Noeldechen
>[Kydex / Concealex]
>
>> No one argues they are significantly different anyway, ...
There slight differences,,mostly in working with them..
I know of a boltron that is made for cold climates though.
I haven't found the need for the extra cost though...
If I had sheaths coming back,, even a few that were damaged from
cold,, I would certainly be looking further into this.
>Correcting myself, awhile ago (years) Newt Livesay argued that Kydex was a
>superior material, based on materials information he posted on his
>discussion forum. It isn't archived however and is long gone. In general
>most makers will interchange them, and there isn't a significant slant
>towards one being better than the other that I have seen.
Yes I remember the claims by Newt.
Most makers don't interchange them.. Not custom makers anyway...
More people use Kydex than Concealex. The only large company i know of
that uses Concealex is blade-tech. Some of the smaller companies like
myself also use it, as it is preferred over Kydex.
ttyle
Eric....
>--
> Cliff Stamp
> sst...@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/
>
> The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
> is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long
>
> Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
Hey Alvin.
>Eric E. Noeldechen <*er...@mnsi.net*> wrote:
>> Tell me Cliff. Were these sheaths All made of Kydex,, or were
>> there some Concealex in there as well.
>> Do you even know the difference ?
Let me correct myself....
I was asking if Cliff could pick out visually the difference between
the two plastics,, Not if he knew the chemical formulations behind
them.
Yes,, I know the difference between working with Kydex or concealex...
No,, I do not know the chemical names,, nor do I care to. I'm a sheath
maker,, not a chemist.
>No. Do you? ;) Tell us the difference, start with the plastics'
>chemical names please.
>
>> If someone falls off a horse, slips on ice, or generally breaks
>> or damages a sheath...
>They can break? :/
Of course they can break.. Anything can break.
>I'm one of those weird guys that's against lifetime guaranteed
>tools. (materials and workmanship is another matter) Not trying
>to tell you how to run your business tho!
I take it you don't buy Snap On, Mac or Craftsman tools then.
I have bought all three and haven't had any problems with tools that I
have broke...
I don't offer "lifetime guarantees"
However being the generous, business minded person i'am.. I won't
refuse a warranty even from my very beginnings as a sheath maker...
I simply don't like products of mine on the market that don't work,
I've even replaced sheaths that have found their way back to me, Just
Because. Maybe i didn't like the look of it,,or found something else
wrong with it...
Warranty just isn't an issue with me...
ttyle
Eric....
>Alvin in AZ
Eric E. Noeldechen
>> ... a Self Appointed Wannabe Expert. Trying to cut out a name for
>> yourself ...
That's how I see it,, and i'm not the only one my friend....
You got some followers,, I will give you that..and not all of your
testing is bad..
I thought your M2K review was good and pretty much Spot On.
We all have our critics Cliff... This is what keeps us honest.
>This comes up from time to time, usually as do all ad hominem attacks when
>logic and reason fail. A couple of points to consider :
The thing is Cliff,, I don't see the logic and reason in some of your
testing,,or the way you do testing.. I will say this though,, you have
seemed to stop doing some of the childish testing you use to do...
>1) It costs me about $1000 a year to do reviews, this doesn't include the
>actual money to buy knives I own, but things like paying duty on blades
>people ask me to review, shipping costs to return the broken blades to the
>maker/manufacturer, shipping costs to get other opinions on knives, buying
>materials for testing, buying materials to modify knives for the reviews,
>etc. .
No one is questioning your reasoning for doing it Cliff.. It does cost
a lot of money...
However I think that some of your tests can be taken the wrong way by
some people,
>3) Because of what I have written, I have been constantly verbally attacked
>(recieved emails which make Eric's look flowery in comparison), banned from
>forums, and even subject to legal complications, having to recently consult
>with a lawyer about freedom of speech issues.
Obviously Cliff..
When you mess with people's lives and livelihood Expect it.. I know I
would.
>So yes, I spend all this time and effort, to not make any money, have it
>cost me money, and be rewarded with idiotic posts like the above. Yes - its
>a great reward!
My post is idiotic ?? LOL
>Why do I do it then? Because not all makers are like Eric.
Yaa and i'm the only one that disagrees with you Cliff...:)
>When I described the same problem with Kydex Eric started ranting and using
>personal attacks.
Personal attacks.. LOL
God Cliff calm down, you've been in the cold too long.... :)
>When Carl had problems with Kydex and the cold he and discussed them with
>Andrew, they worked on a solution and now we have laminate sheaths.
Excellent.. Like I said,, I wish I had thought of it....
>I am usually really negative with those makers, because that is all they
>want to hear, you can only advance your design through the flaws, praise
>does little except build your ego.
I always ask for input from my customers, both positive and negative.
One does not grow, and generate a good product without negative input.
Any issues that come up, get addressed and fixed if possible.
That's why I'm in the position I'am as a sheath maker.
>I also simply enjoy it for the most part, I just got another couple of
>blades this past weekend and am itching for the weekend to try them out on
>some brush.
Looking forward in reading them.
>As well I do it to add something back to a community which I have learned a
>lot from, a lot of what I do is based on the writings of Mike Swaim, Joe
>Talmadge, Alvin and others too many to count.
Yes Cliff,, you have given an enormous amount to Bladeforums and
such.. Even if i disagree with you on some points, it doesn't mean all
of your reviews are bad or badly written.
I do have the right to disagree don't I ??
As far as your Cold Weather tests are concerned.. I don't agree with
all of your points,, and find your statement of your Busse sheath
basically crumpling from the cold to be Very Odd...
Yes,, sheaths can be broken..Yes, mine will break along with the
others. However I think that you think it is a much bigger issue than
it really is.....
That's All I'm saying..
Chas
> sheath maker,, I'm a Concealex sheath maker.. However similar,, Not
> the same thing.
C'mon.
'Concealex'?
Kydex is designed and provided as a wall board- generally suited for
hospitals, commercial kitchens and so on. There is a real use for it by the
millions of square feet- that's why they produce it in the first place.
'Concealex' sounds like a made-up name for some sort of Kydex(r) presenting
as suitable for some sort of concealed carry usage.
So what is it, actually? Nobody is going to produce a kydex sort of material
solely for the concealed carry holster/sheath market- simply not feasible.
Chas
Carl.
news:C66dnRnui8A...@comcast.com...
> C'mon.
> 'Concealex'?
> Kydex is designed and provided as a wall board- generally suited for
> hospitals, commercial kitchens and so on. There is a real use for it by
the
> millions of square feet- that's why they produce it in the first place.
> 'Concealex' sounds like a made-up name for some sort of Kydex(r)
presenting
> as suitable for some sort of concealed carry usage.
> So what is it, actually? Nobody is going to produce a kydex sort of
material
> solely for the concealed carry holster/sheath market- simply not feasible.
Whatever the reason for its existence, I have some Cold Steel models with
"concealex" sheaths. I did a google and it sounds like you can buy
concealex sheets.
The stuff I have just looks like molded plastic, but I think it's better
than some other forms of plastic that tend to crack. If it's better for a
particular purpose than mystery plastic, there is no reason they shouldn't
attach a name to it. It doesn't feel as tough as Kydex, but I prefer it to
the unspecified plastic used for other knives I have (cheap stuff).
I am sure somebody had to "make up" the name Kydex at some point too. It
might be better stuff, but why is Kydex the only material that has a right
to be named?
---
Update your PC at http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.699 / Virus Database: 456 - Release Date: 6/10/2004
Cowboy
If I recall I think the name Concealex in the describing of a material was
prior to any name of Kydex in the description of a material. I may be wrong
though.
Cowboy
Eric E. Noeldechen
Yes it is a made up name...
Concealex is the trade name that Blade-tech uses, or used. Not sure if
they still use the name or not. It is actually called Boltron, and is
a competitor of Kydex.. Very similar properties.
Both Kydex and Concealex are thermal forming plastics, and yes,,wall
board for clean rooms is one of it's uses.. It's also used in
chairbacks, guards,displays and anything else a molded plastic can be
used for...
ttyle
Eric....
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
I believe that Cold Steel is now using the term "Securex" or
somethingl ike that..
I'm not sure if it's concealex,,or what it is...
There are different forms of it,,sheet, and injection molded. I Think!
ttyle
Eric...
Eric E. Noeldechen
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> I never made claims that is was better in the cold than Kydex.
Exactly, which is why it isn't of consequence.
> ... why I should be on the hook for your testing ?
Because you should support the performance you claim.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> .... your statement of your Busse sheath basically crumpling from the cold
> to be Very Odd...
That would be very odd indeed, but then again I never said that. This is
what I said :
"The sheath on my Battle Mistress suffered stress cracks from winter use
just from being exposed to the cold, I don't even remember it hitting
anything."
This may be due simply to the repeated thermal shocks of about +/- 80
degrees. I should cycle a few pieces from next to the stove to the freezer
to check this out.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[in reply to the post I made about Kydex and cold]
> Every sheath has it's good points and bad. Picking the right one for
> the job is the key.
Consider the following :
"There are three main classes of sheaths, Kydex, Leather, and
Cordura/Kydex. Kydex is very abrasion, cut and puncture resistant and
strongly resists chemical attacks however gets brittle when cold and
deforms when hot. Leather has a very high resistance to fracture from
impacts or distortion and is not significantly effected by extreme
temperatures but is much easier abraded, cut or punctured as compared to
Kydex. Cordura sheaths with Kydex and have properties of both systems, but
can suffer from stitches fraying.
All sheaths can give a tight fit to the blade and can offer secure
retention without straps, though Kydex is superior in this regard as it is
much stronger than even the stiffest leather. This also means that any
contaminant in a Kydex sheath is most likely to scratch the surface of the
blade than the same happening in a leather sheath. Kydex sheaths are
however easier to clean out, but can hold oils and similar to help protect
the blade."
This is the blurb I link to in reviews to give an outline of sheaths, then I
talk about that specific sheath.
The work I did with Kydex and cold and impacts is only a small part of the
picture that I present about knife sheaths, and of course, I never argued
that Kydex doesn't have its strong point, etc., as I have always noted, it
does some things very well - it however like all materials does other things
not so very well.
Leather can rot, Kydex can shatter / deform, Cordura can suffer stitching
fraying, there are things you can do to reduce the problems in all of them,
but generally if the enviroment poses such a large stress then you are
better off switching to another material.
Chas
> a competitor of Kydex.. Very similar properties.
Thanks; appreciate the information.
Chas
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> We all have our critics Cliff... This is what keeps us honest.
> Personal attacks.. LOL
Like :
"Personally Cliff...
I think your full of crap..."
Yes, it is easy to see that your motive here is to provide information about
Kydex.
> God Cliff calm down ...
Don't give yourself any credit here, your rantings upset me about as much as
the rain does in fall, it is the expected behavior.
All it does is encourage me to do more work, becuase the hype and
disinformation still exists, one of the main reasons I put up the recent
webpage on Kydex and cold was because of your recent rantings on Kydex, and
comments like :
"I have tested my own Concealex sheaths in the dead of winter by hitting an
empty sheath repeatedly with a ball peen hammer,as well as Stomping on it,,,
Without any more damage than scuff marks."
Note very clearly "
"Without any more damage than scuff marks."
But of course, if a user was to try to duplicate these performance claims
and have the sheaths shatter, you would not replace them, and you see no
problem with that. To be frank, so do a lot of other manufacturers, there
are lots of "I can do this - but you can't check it".
As for your comment that it must not be an issue beause there are still lots
of people using Kydex - sure and the most popular knife steel is 440
stainless, popularity is no sign of performance.
I have think of a half dozen makers who have commented on not using Kydex
because of problems with cold. But in general who cares if it is only one,
you just use those products obviously.
Carl and Andrew have addressed the issue significantly and they will
continue to improve.
>>When Carl had problems with Kydex and the cold he and discussed them with
>>Andrew, they worked on a solution and now we have laminate sheaths.
>
> Excellent.. Like I said,, I wish I had thought of it....
First you would need to admit there was a problem, as Andrew and Carl did,
then take steps to move beyond it as they did. I have no doubt their
products will continue to improve with this perspective.
With all your rantings about what I do, you again gloss over that Carl
prototype came directly because he did similar work which showed a problem
with Kydex and impacts and then had a maker address it which is radicially
different from your perspective which completely prevented the evolution.
> I do have the right to disagree don't I ??
Lets be honest, your personal rantings have no intention of actually trying
to improve the reviews I do, or in general. You don't attack someone like
that any expect benefit to some from it. If you want to critize the reviews
in a productive manner then :
1) decribe clearly the problem with the test, in regards to what is being
done (method flaws) and the potential for misinformation, problems with
logic, deductive reasoning, etc. .
2) suggest an alternate method - this really isn't necessary, but it helps
3) and this is most important *** apply such criteria uniformly to all such
work being done
For example, some drops a sheath and it shatters and make a post that this
seems to be a problem you come in with
"That is a pretty crappy test"
and then someone else notes at another time that they dropped a sheath and
it held up fine thus the material is a good one, you are obglitated to make
the EXACT SAME COMMENT, because is the *method* that you are supposed to be
critizing if you are UNBIASED.
What is even more ridiculus, is that with all your comments on
"unscientific", the work that you describe (which again you don't warrenty)
is far more vague.
Here is how a sensible person would respond to your hammer comments if they
wanted more information :
"Hey interesting work, that seems to be a decently tough material, any
chance you could provide some details, how cold was it, how hard were the
swings, where you hit the sheaths and so on. You might want to try dropping
a weight on them next time because that gives a pretty ease estimate of the
strength of the impact and its easy to repeat."
Your comments go towards :
"Hey that is a crappy test, my eight year old labrador could do a better
test than that, why don't you go out on play."
The difference in intention between the two should be fairly obvious.
Eric E. Noeldechen
>> ... why I should be on the hook for your testing ?
>
>Because you should support the performance you claim.
See you've got me between a rock and a hard place here Cliff.. Check
Mate...
If I don't support your testing by giving you product, then Obviously
in your mind, I'm not holding up my end of the warranty.. Is that how
it works Cliff ?
I do support the claims I make. If you've bought it from me, and break
it while "In Use" I'll fix or replace it.. It's simple....
Buy one of my sheaths,, strap it on, and throw yourself off a cliff..
If the sheaths break or fails in Anyway.. I'll make you another.
Intentional damage is not covered. Nor is it covered in any other
warranty Anywhere in the world..
The fact that you don't understand why I won't something that is
intentionally damaged is beyond me.
ttyle
Eric...
>--
> Cliff Stamp
> sst...@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/
>
> The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
> is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long
>
> Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
Yes,, that is what you said,Exactly....
You never mentioned that it could be caused by "repeated thermal
shocks"
>"The sheath on my Battle Mistress suffered stress cracks from winter use
>just from being exposed to the cold, I don't even remember it hitting
>anything."
If you would have said that,, I won't have said you were full of Crap.
>This may be due simply to the repeated thermal shocks of about +/- 80
>degrees. I should cycle a few pieces from next to the stove to the freezer
>to check this out.
This I would be interested in seeing...
ttyle
Eric....
>--
> Cliff Stamp
> sst...@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/
>
> The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
> is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long
>
> Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
I agree entirely with the below post...
ttyle
Eric...
Eric E. Noeldechen
alv...@xx.com
> >> Tell me Cliff. Were these sheaths All made of Kydex,, or were
> >> there some Concealex in there as well.
> >> Do you even know the difference ?
> Let me correct myself....
> I was asking if Cliff could pick out visually the difference between
> the two plastics,, Not if he knew the chemical formulations behind
> them.
I want to know. Why distinquish between them if they might be the
same friggin thing, other than just different salesman's names for
the same material? To understand a base of knowledge needs to be
gathered, right? :)
> Yes,, I know the difference between working with Kydex or concealex...
> No,, I do not know the chemical names,, nor do I care to.
Why would a guy -want- to hide from knowledge? :/
> I'm a sheath maker,, not a chemist.
I personally have never seen either and knew it!
Got that? I know nothing about any of it. :)
But still I -want- to know. :) I tend to like to work/think from a
base of knowledge as opposed to -guessing- from a base of bullshit.
You prefer the "bullshit" way of thinking do you, Eric? :/
Hmmmm... a self proclaimed "sheath-maker" that doesn't want to know
about the materials he's making sheaths from? Sounds instead like a
"bullshit-maker" to me. ;)
Prove me wrong about you, please...
> >No. Do you? ;) Tell us the difference, start with the plastics'
> >chemical names please.
> >> If someone falls off a horse, slips on ice, or generally breaks
> >> or damages a sheath...
> >They can break? :/
> Of course they can break.. Anything can break.
Leather breaks?
You are speaking in absolutes that might be ok when protected by
hiding out on forums it won't fly here this is a newsgroup not a
"website forum" it is open, not moderated or of limited access.
Bullshitters get hounded here. :) "barrruuu barrruuu" I think this
dumb-ass hound dog just found a bullshitter track. ;)
> >I'm one of those weird guys that's against lifetime guaranteed
> >tools. (materials and workmanship is another matter) Not trying
> >to tell you how to run your business tho!
> I take it you don't buy Snap On, Mac or Craftsman tools then.
You see? You assume-shit. Just ask (I'll tell you) then you
could be thinking from a base of knowledge! :) Easy huh? ;)
Are you seing how you are coming across yet? ;)
I buy -used- Craftsmen (mostly made by Vlchek, right?:) Snap-On and
Mac, and many other brands that are just as good sometimes better
in certain ways. Want a list of used tools I've owned and used and
given away? :) Not sure if I still have the file but I posted the
list on a couple different automotive newsgroups when tools were
being discussed as if there were only three brands. I'll type it
out again if you want. ;)
Years ago a guy could buy Indestro brand that had "Not Guaranteed"
etched right on it for about half of their guranteed counterpart.
There is my own personal problem with guarantees... I don't need or
want their insurance, I'd rather take care of myself. I feel like
I'm on my own, and I -really- like that. :) I know, I'm weird. :/
A friggin guy that likes taking care of himself... weird huh? :(
> I have bought all three and haven't had any problems with tools
> that I have broke...
You just paid for two tools (like insurance) up front and got handed
the second one you paid for -later-. What about all those you paid
double for that you won't ever break and/or return?
> I don't offer "lifetime guarantees"
Cool. :)
I have some stereo speakers that don't either but they do have a
lifetime warranty against materials and workmanship.
> However being the generous, business minded person i'am.. I won't
> refuse a warranty even from my very beginnings as a sheath maker...
I like materials and workmanship warranties, that shows the maker
cares about producing a quality product.
> I simply don't like products of mine on the market that don't work,
> I've even replaced sheaths that have found their way back to me, Just
> Because. Maybe i didn't like the look of it,,or found something else
> wrong with it...
The owner didn't mind giving up his cool old sheath? :/
Oh, I guess they are just plastic so there isn't any "real character"
to them individually that distiquishes them from others? Kind of
like a stainless steel knife that way? ;)
> Warranty just isn't an issue with me...
Me either really, you brought it up remember? ;)
> ttyle <---what the hell is that? ;)
> Eric....
Alvin in AZ (second dumbest guy on r.k)
Eric E. Noeldechen
>"Personally Cliff...
> I think your full of crap..."
This was address in an earlier post...
>All it does is encourage me to do more work, becuase the hype and
>disinformation still exists, one of the main reasons I put up the recent
Hype ???
I don't promote any hype.. I've never said synthetics are the Cure All
for the sheathing industry...
disinformation ??
Are you actually saying I'm disinforming people about my products ?
>"I have tested my own Concealex sheaths in the dead of winter by hitting an
>empty sheath repeatedly with a ball peen hammer,as well as Stomping on it,,,
>Without any more damage than scuff marks."
I have done these tests on my own products, maybe not to the extent
you have, they were done.
I was honest in my findings and truthful of the outcome and how it was
performed.
Are you accusing me of lying about my findings ??
>Note very clearly "
>
>"Without any more damage than scuff marks."
That is the honest truth.
The only way I brought the sheath to failure was to drive over it with
the truck, several times.
The only damage was a crack across the face.
>But of course, if a user was to try to duplicate these performance claims
>and have the sheaths shatter, you would not replace them, and you see no
>problem with that. To be frank, so do a lot of other manufacturers, there
>are lots of "I can do this - but you can't check it".
What performance claims ?
Because I stated I did a test on one of my products that doesn't
endorce a performance claim. If I was claiming anything it would be
listed on my website, with the other specs on my sheaths.
You cannot duplicate a test unless the test is done Exactly,,or as
close as possible to the original test.
I don't know how cold it was, the style of the sheath, and material
must also be the same...
Again duplicating a test if one sheath is made from Kydex and the
other Concealex is different.
A temperature change may have different results.. There are Many
variables that can change the outcome of a test.
>As for your comment that it must not be an issue beause there are still lots
>of people using Kydex - sure and the most popular knife steel is 440
>stainless, popularity is no sign of performance.
no,, returns and customer satisfaction are a sign of performance. you
would think after some 15,000 + sheaths I have on the market,, there
would be more then a handful of returns....
I guage how my sheaths perform by what my customers say, and adjust my
process or materials as needed.
>I have think of a half dozen makers who have commented on not using Kydex
>because of problems with cold. But in general who cares if it is only one,
>you just use those products obviously.
So what ???
>Carl and Andrew have addressed the issue significantly and they will
>continue to improve.
>>>When Carl had problems with Kydex and the cold he and discussed them with
>>>Andrew, they worked on a solution and now we have laminate sheaths.
Again,, thats great,, again,, I haven't found a problem, and again,, I
have No returns or complaints about it...
When I do, I will surely address the problem.
>> Excellent.. Like I said,, I wish I had thought of it....
>
>First you would need to admit there was a problem, as Andrew and Carl did,
>then take steps to move beyond it as they did. I have no doubt their
>products will continue to improve with this perspective.
Cliff,, whether there is a problem or not. I don't see any sign of it
in my products.
Can it happen ? sure it can,, and it does.. Like I said
earlier,,Anything can break in cold,,even steel...
It just hasn't happen to me yet. No one has come forward with this
problem,, and until there is,, there is No problem.
>With all your rantings about what I do, you again gloss over that Carl
>prototype came directly because he did similar work which showed a problem
>with Kydex and impacts and then had a maker address it which is radicially
>different from your perspective which completely prevented the evolution.
I'am aware of their sheaths, I'm not aware of what testing they have
done, and have not seen any of their tests results.
>> I do have the right to disagree don't I ??
>
>Lets be honest, your personal rantings have no intention of actually trying
>to improve the reviews I do, or in general. You don't attack someone like
>that any expect benefit to some from it. If you want to critize the reviews
>in a productive manner then :
You are correct Cliff.. To be honest I haven't read any other of your
reviews other than the M2K, actually to clarify,, i have browsed
them...
By the sounds of it,, you have moved your testing to something
different than what it was before..
As I recall from an early review several years ago,,something about
your brother in law doing pullups on a blade hammered into a tree...
>"That is a pretty crappy test"
I don't thikn I made this comment.
>and then someone else notes at another time that they dropped a sheath and
>it held up fine thus the material is a good one, you are obglitated to make
>the EXACT SAME COMMENT, because is the *method* that you are supposed to be
>critizing if you are UNBIASED.
>What is even more ridiculus, is that with all your comments on
>"unscientific", the work that you describe (which again you don't warrenty)
>is far more vague.
Again,, Yes I do not warranty testing, as I do not warranty leaving
the sheath in the sun,, or applying any form of heat to the sheath,
unless I have authorized it..
See if Walmart will let you return a Cd you've left to melt on your
dash...
>Here is how a sensible person would respond to your hammer comments if they
>wanted more information :
>
>"Hey interesting work, that seems to be a decently tough material, any
>chance you could provide some details, how cold was it, how hard were the
>swings, where you hit the sheaths and so on. You might want to try dropping
>a weight on them next time because that gives a pretty ease estimate of the
>strength of the impact and its easy to repeat."
and I would answer....
Yaa it is a decently tough material. Breakage can happen in cold,, and
it will change shape in heat or intense direct sunlight...
As far as dtails on my test goes.. no,, don't have any specs on the
temp. It was Freezing, but what the actual temperature was I'm not
exactly sure.
I used a medium size ball pean hammer,,not sure of the weight,,and I
can't give an accurate measurement of how hard I was hitting it.
Definately hard enough to dent the hood of a car.
>Your comments go towards :
>"Hey that is a crappy test, my eight year old labrador could do a better
>test than that, why don't you go out on play."
Again,,these are not my words.. Don't put quotations on them.
Well maybe the go Out and Play part..:)
Eric E. Noeldechen
>I want to know. Why distinquish between them if they might be the
>same friggin thing, other than just different salesman's names for
>the same material? To understand a base of knowledge needs to be
>gathered, right? :)
They have different properties..
What those chemical properties are I don't know, nor do I really care
how they are made, or whats in them. If I want to be an expert in it,,
then yes,, it would be important for sure.
The fact that I don't, doesn't mean its wrong,, or I don't know what
I'm doing or talking about.
I do know that I have worked with both plastics and prefer how
Concealex works over how Kydex works.
>Why would a guy -want- to hide from knowledge? :/
I'm not hiding from anything.. If I want to know about the chemical
properties of them,, then I'll inform myself about it...
It's not really that important, at this point.
>> I'm a sheath maker,, not a chemist.
>
>I personally have never seen either and knew it!
>Got that? I know nothing about any of it. :)
Got it..
>But still I -want- to know. :) I tend to like to work/think from a
>base of knowledge as opposed to -guessing- from a base of bullshit.
>You prefer the "bullshit" way of thinking do you, Eric? :/
Who is bullshitting ??
I haven't bullshitted about anything....
I told you I don't know,, and it's not really that important to me..
If in fact I find the need to know about it,, then I will...
>Hmmmm... a self proclaimed "sheath-maker" that doesn't want to know
>about the materials he's making sheaths from? Sounds instead like a
>"bullshit-maker" to me. ;)
I'm a sheath maker,,what do you want from me :)
>Prove me wrong about you, please...
Think what you will,, I could really care less.
>Leather breaks?
Break as in Fail. Yes leather will fail.
>You are speaking in absolutes that might be ok when protected by
>hiding out on forums it won't fly here this is a newsgroup not a
>"website forum" it is open, not moderated or of limited access.
I'm not hiding out anywhere, and don't need to be protected..
This isn't my first day on Usenet
>Bullshitters get hounded here. :) "barrruuu barrruuu" I think this
>dumb-ass hound dog just found a bullshitter track. ;)
Really... LOL
Show me where i'm bullshitting ??
>> >I'm one of those weird guys that's against lifetime guaranteed
>> >tools. (materials and workmanship is another matter) Not trying
>> >to tell you how to run your business tho!
I do stand behind the materials I use and my workmanship.
I've been self employed for the majority of my life...
I've also based my entire work ethic on it. I have extremely high
standards of workmanship and customer service.
>> I take it you don't buy Snap On, Mac or Craftsman tools then.
>
>You see? You assume-shit. Just ask (I'll tell you) then you
>could be thinking from a base of knowledge! :) Easy huh? ;)
Ok,, then I assumed,, I stand corrected..
>Are you seing how you are coming across yet? ;)
No,,actually I don't....
I haven't been dishonest or an asshole about anything I have said,
other then a slight beef with Cliff,,who I don't hate or anything,, I
just disagree with some things he says...
If that makes me an asshole,, So be it..
>I buy -used- Craftsmen (mostly made by Vlchek, right?:) Snap-On and
>Mac, and many other brands that are just as good sometimes better
>in certain ways. Want a list of used tools I've owned and used and
>given away? :) Not sure if I still have the file but I posted the
>list on a couple different automotive newsgroups when tools were
>being discussed as if there were only three brands. I'll type it
>out again if you want. ;)
>Years ago a guy could buy Indestro brand that had "Not Guaranteed"
>etched right on it for about half of their guranteed counterpart.
>
>There is my own personal problem with guarantees... I don't need or
>want their insurance, I'd rather take care of myself. I feel like
>I'm on my own, and I -really- like that. :) I know, I'm weird. :/
Yaaaa.. LOL That is a bit strange....
>A friggin guy that likes taking care of himself... weird huh? :(
>You just paid for two tools (like insurance) up front and got handed
>the second one you paid for -later-. What about all those you paid
>double for that you won't ever break and/or return?
That is true,, but thats why it's insured so to speak.. It's a risk
you take....
>I like materials and workmanship warranties, that shows the maker
>cares about producing a quality product.
I do care about the products I make.. I believe they are well thought
out, and well made, and I take Absolute pride in them.
>> I simply don't like products of mine on the market that don't work,
>> I've even replaced sheaths that have found their way back to me, Just
>> Because. Maybe i didn't like the look of it,,or found something else
>> wrong with it...
>The owner didn't mind giving up his cool old sheath? :/
He didn't give it up,, I sent the original and the new sheath back
together.. It was his property,,not mine,so swapping it out wouldn't
be my place. I should have stated that more clearly.
>Oh, I guess they are just plastic so there isn't any "real character"
>to them individually that distiquishes them from others? Kind of
>like a stainless steel knife that way? ;)
Well, that is for the consumer to decide.. I believe my sheaths stand
out from others on the market, maybe they don't, but I sure would hope
to think they do. If they don't, Please someone tell me so I'm not
making a fool out of myself.
>> ttyle <---what the hell is that? ;)
Talk to You Later Eh..
Eric....
Eric E. Noeldechen
I do have a serious question for you though, not related to this
actual topic...
When you do a review on a knife,,such as the M2K for example, you
include another knife, and make a reference to knives that aren't in
the same class as the review knife.
Like an M2K and a Busse.Not saying these were in your review,just
trying to show the different classes.
Why not review say an M2K with something closer to it's class,,like a
Frosts,,or even a similar kitchen knife...
I'm not sure I understand your testing process, and why it's done the
way it is..
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> I do support the claims I make.
You claim to be able to hit the sheath with a hammer, and jump on it when it
is cold with no damage aside from scuff marks. You don't support these
claims under warrenty. No one, is arguing that intentional breaking should
be covered under warrenty, just that the sheaths should perform as
described.
For example if I make a knife and advertize it as being able to bend to 45
degrees without taking a set, then the customers should be able to check
this in a vice. It should be covered under warrenty. If they push it past
this, and it breaks, then this obviously would not be. Of course the maker
should clearify this in the promotion.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
>>"The sheath on my Battle Mistress suffered stress cracks from winter use
>>just from being exposed to the cold, I don't even remember it hitting
>>anything."
>
> Yes,, that is what you said,Exactly....
>
> You never mentioned that it could be caused by "repeated thermal
> shocks"
It is cold outside in the winter, houses are in general heated. To get from
one area to another you this have to pass through this sudden large gradient
- thus the sheath takes large thermal shocks. This really should not have to
be explained.
Now of course instead of coming back with "your full of crap" and the other
"critism" you apply, you could have discussed how the sheath could have
failed, exploring the possibilities. Until Chas mentioned the fact that
problems arise with Kydex from repeated reheating, this wasn't obvious to
me.
Of course as soon as Chas mentioned it, you posted you were aware of it as
well, if this was the case then the above should have been obvious as well
from the simply heating dynamics of winter housing. Or at the very least
explored as a possible source of failure, instead of simply making another
personal attack.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> I don't promote any hype..
I commented in a thread that Kydex broke easily in the cold, you responed
that you didn't agree (you do this constantly when the topic is brought up).
You as a maker have used as an arguement that :
"I have tested my own Concealex sheaths in the dead of winter by hitting an
empty sheath repeatedly with a ball peen hammer,as well as Stomping on it,,,
Without any more damage than scuff marks"
This is a performance claim, at the same time you make such claims you
constantly put up links to your website and advertize you are selling such
products. The claims are being used while you are promote your products and
argue against the problem of brittle failure with your type of product.
This is hype pure and simple because you won't support the claims.
As you noted the claims are also so vague that they would be difficult to
verify, this is hype as well because they are meant to convince and used to
try and do so, but in fact when looked at critically they have no ability to
do so because they are so vague they don't contain any information (but in
general are not likely to be viewed so by the general public as they sound
impressive).
It is also ironic that you again attack what I do as "unscientific", when
the tests that I have done are in fact much more readily repeatable because
anyone can but the exact sheahts I have ordered, put them to the same
temperatures (as I noted them), and drop them from the same height, or hit
them with the same weight at the same impact points and note the result. As
I described all these details, even the type of weight used.
[addressing the "silly" tests]
> As I recall from an early review several years ago,,something about
> your brother in law doing pullups on a blade hammered into a tree...
Yeah and I still do heavy leverage work, just recently with the Howling Rat
(weeks ago). People still want to see it. Makers still request it. Same as
heavy impact work. A. G. Russell wanted to see both with the Deerhunters.
It isn't done with all knives as they are not promoted for such work and the
results would be obvious based on other reviews, is necessary with others as
it is in their scope of work (Camp Tramp, khukuris, etc.), and for others as
makers or users want to explore limits of performance.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> When you do a review on a knife,,such as the M2K for example, you
> include another knife, and make a reference to knives that aren't in
> the same class as the review knife.
>
> Like an M2K and a Busse.Not saying these were in your review,just
> trying to show the different classes.
>
> Why not review say an M2K with something closer to it's class,,like a
> Frosts,,or even a similar kitchen knife...
>
> I'm not sure I understand your testing process, and why it's done the
> way it is..
There are two main reasons :
First, it isn't clear to everyone that some knives are actually different.
If I showed Joe Talmadge a Buck 119 and a Camp Tramp he would realize that
both were two very different knives, however the general knives user isn't
likely to and in many cases massively different knives are promoted under
the exact same claims (both of these are heavy duty tactical combat /
utility blades for example). Just look at all the posts on Bladeforums which
ask question like "Which is a better knife the Spyderco Military or
Buck/Strider".
Secondly, performance is only meaningful when described in a relative sense,
if you have a scale of 1:10 and nothing but tens it is a meaningless scale.
Thus when reviewing a Mora, I would use the Howling Rat to show not only
what is gained (cutting ability, lighter) and what is lost (strength,
durability) but how much of each. The high cutting ability of the Mora
stands out the most when compared to something like the Strider WB. The user
can then look at the knife (knives) and pick out what has the best
complement of features for them. It may be the knife being reviewed, or one
of the references.
For example, with the Green Beret review it will be compared to a Buck 119,
which is a different take on the same type of knife (hollow ground
tactical), and a Camp Tramp to show a radically different take on the same
intended usage (also a combat knife), as well as other blades (hatchet, saw,
mora 2000), to show how the blade could best complemented with other tools,
where its weakpoints exist and how to best support them.
The reviews were never meant to promote the knives, in some they come off
that way because the products are so solid, it gets very difficult to
critize them (Spyderco Temperance, Camp Tramp) and the review is almost 100%
positive - in such cases I give the knife to someone with a different
viewpoint than mine to try and get some negative perspective. They reviews
are meant to *explore* the performance, what is good and what is bad, what
could be changed (design / materials), how the knife could be different (bad
or worse) under such changes.
Eric E. Noeldechen
Ok.. I understand now.
Maybe I should actually read your reviews instead of just skimming
them, and biting your head off..
I realize that I don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to
testing. I know very little about it.
Back to the hot cold hot cold test..
How would you do something like this.?
Thanks Cliff for explaining these things.
ttyle
Eric....
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
>> I do support the claims I make.
>You claim to be able to hit the sheath with a hammer, and jump on it when it
>is cold with no damage aside from scuff marks. You don't support these
>claims under warrenty. No one, is arguing that intentional breaking should
>be covered under warrenty, just that the sheaths should perform as
>described.
Yes Cliff,, if I was claiming that it is capable of doing that.. Which
I'm not.. I've ver "claimed" that each sheath will past this test..
I only said, that the test I did the sheath didn't break until I relly
let loose on it...
No where in my warranty do I say it that one of my sheaths will not
break in cold..
>For example if I make a knife and advertize it as being able to bend to 45
>degrees without taking a set, then the customers should be able to check
>this in a vice. It should be covered under warrenty. If they push it past
>this, and it breaks, then this obviously would not be. Of course the maker
>should clearify this in the promotion.
The difference here is that I don't, and never have "advertised" that
the sheath will do this...
I do understand what you are saying though..
ttyle
Eric...
>--
> Cliff Stamp
> sst...@physics.mun.ca http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/
>
> The one unforgivable sin, the offence against one's own integrity,
> is to accept anything at all simply on authority -- Maureen Johnson Long
>
> Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm. -- Publilius Syrus
Eric E. Noeldechen
Eric E. Noeldechen
>It is cold outside in the winter, houses are in general heated. To get from
>one area to another you this have to pass through this sudden large gradient
>- thus the sheath takes large thermal shocks. This really should not have to
>be explained.
Well ya it should be explained, because it sounded as if you were
making a blanket statement. Yes, I probably should have asked you to
elaborate on this more. If I would have known that I would never had
said that to you..
I tend to fly off the handle when you make comments like that, and i
apologize for it...
>Now of course instead of coming back with "your full of crap" and the other
>"critism" you apply, you could have discussed how the sheath could have
>failed, exploring the possibilities. Until Chas mentioned the fact that
>problems arise with Kydex from repeated reheating, this wasn't obvious to
>me.
Yes,, never occured to me,, and I would be interested in seeing test
results specifically on this topic.
>Of course as soon as Chas mentioned it, you posted you were aware of it as
>well, if this was the case then the above should have been obvious as well
>from the simply heating dynamics of winter housing. Or at the very least
>explored as a possible source of failure, instead of simply making another
>personal attack.
>
Ok,, I understand now.. I was refering to repeated heating of the same
piece of plastic..Not to Hot/Cold Hot/Cold tests.. That to me is a
different beast altogther, and entirely possible....
ttyle
Eric...
Eric E. Noeldechen
Ok,, I'm starting to see your point. Until this post i don't think
you've explained it to me in that way...
I still don't see what i said as misleading,, however I do understand
where it could be...I honestly didn't talk about my test results to be
misleading or to hype anything. I can see where they are vague.I
myself don't know how hard I was hitting the sheath, or what
temperature it was..
I think the majority of it is that I feel I have to do damage control
when you make posts like this, and feel that you are bashing
synthetics in general.
ttyle
Eric...
Eric E. Noeldechen
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[hot cold hot cold test]
> How would you do something like this.?
Ideally, you have a temper over like Busse has and just cycle it from -40 to
+40 a bunch of times. For those of use who don't have the spare $60k on
hand, you can try a deep freeze (temp should be constant, can set, it, -20
C), and then some way of heating it. Even a normal electric heater is fairly
constant, just check with a thermometer. When handling it, try to use
something with a low conductivity (plastic or rubber), as metals would
induce large focused temperature gradients.
What would be interesting would be to see if repeated cycling would effect
the joint/bend strength (or even induce a crack), this is trivial to test,
just make a v-shape with a greater than 90 degree angle, clamp one end to a
table with the other portion extended over the side (with a hole to tie
weights on to). Now you can measure the force until it deflects to a certain
angle, or how much deflection is induced under a specific load. You could
also look at the number of cycles needed to produce a specific weakness,
and/or the extent of the gradient (ie -20 -> +20, vs -40 -> +40).
Make a half dozen of them (they only need to be small strips just a cm or so
wide) a few inches long, and test them without cycling and then make some
more and try some cycling. You can then look at the effect of cycling on
resilence, fatigue, impacts, raw strength, etc. .
sst...@physics.mun.ca
[damage to my BM sheath from regular winter exposure]
> ... it sounded as if you were making a blanket statement.
While I didn't outright state that all Kydex sheaths would be expected to
behave in that manner, it would certainly seem reasonable to conclude from
my perspective. The only alternative is that the Busse sheath is of inferior
quality to the majority of Kydex sheaths, and that seems more than a little
ridiculus.
To be frank, I have no reason to assume that other Kydex sheaths would do
better, the Busse sheath is as least good a quality as any others I have
seen, and in general they are better than most. Of course it could be flawed
because of improper heating, but given his perspective on quality control I
don't see it as likely.
In fact I would assume that it, like his knives tends to set a best case
senario not a worst case one.
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> ... and feel that you are bashing synthetics in general.
I can certainly see that, as I have not for example started any threads
pointing out the strengths of Kydex, but have made a couple that show a
relative weak point, and similar for just posts in threads.
The reason for this is that the strengths are relatively well known, the
makers in general have illustrated these well (cut and puncture resistance,
won't rot, very strong, etc.) however as recently noted on Bladeforums,
people still are relatively inexperienced with the impact properties.
The review commentary is in general not so one sided and tries to present a
more general viewpoint, if I have been overly biased in one perspective in a
particular review, by all means point it out, I am still cleaning up the old
ones and linking them to the recent sheath overview I posted above..
sst...@physics.mun.ca
> I've ver "claimed" that each sheath will past this test..
True, but just read it from a customer perspective, you are tha maker of the
product, making specific performance statements. You also never said there
was something special about that sheath. Why would a customer think it isn't
representative, if it wasn't why would you say it in the first place.
Consider an average dude who walks into Canadian Tire and makes a comment to
his friend who asks about a certain brand of chisels, that they are prone to
failure if you hammer on the back of them (a very common hillbilly use which
you are not in general supposed to do). A sales rep from that company is
standing near by and comments :
"I use those chisels myself, I have done a lot of cutting by hitting the
poll with a hammer, no significant damage."
Now how will this be taken by the guy interested in the chisels, and what is
likely to happen to them in use if he buys them. How would a regular person
in general view the above statement in context of it being a claim of
performance and if it should be supported or not by the manufacturer.
Of course if the other guy is just a dude himself, who doesn't sell the
chisels it is a different matter. In this case the comment however (if
unbiased) tends to go like :
"I use those chisels myself, I have done a lot of cutting by hitting the
poll with a hammer, no significant damage. What kind of hammer are you using
and what are you cutting. I generally run a 16 and do mostly finish work, if
you are swinging a 22 and doing rough framing / remodeling though the poll
might readily crack. You might want to look into a full tang model with an
end cap. The edge is likely to need to be thickened as well in that case."
While similar, the difference in perspective should be obvious. One is a
direct arguement against a point of contention, another is just providing
information and trying to investigate the problem and find a solution.
floydoleary
cover the initial "hook " to make a sale might not be illegal, but you will
not be in business very long.
Floyd
<sst...@physics.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:can9lb$n8u$1...@coranto.ucs.mun.ca...