Brands comparable to busse

On one hand, publishing data is a good thing since it promotes transparency and honesty.

On the other, data is often misread, misunderstood, and misinformation is thus propagated to the point of being accepted as "common knowledge". Given this, one can understand a bit of hesitation.
 
Insipid Moniker said:
If he asks me to stop, I'll stop, until then I'll keep asking. And if someone other than Mr. Busse proclaims that INFI is much tougher than X I'll still ask them. Why does it bother you so much?
Click to expand...
Fine with me, just don't hurt your arm beating that dead horse ;)
I just think he's been a true gentlemen here and taken the high road to a lot of comments. If you'd like to continue running circles in this thread, by all means, have at it, I won't lose any sleep over it.
I guess I just don't see what you expect? Lets say he released the data, and a charpy test revealed that INFI is or isn't "tougher" than 3V, would it make it a better or worse knife either way? Jerry himself said that there are steels that are tougher, others that have better edge retention, etc,, but,, well.. here are his own words

Jerry Busse said:


Thoughts about steel.

There are many great steels on the market today. There are now several steels that can do better at certain performance criteria than INFI. There are tougher steels, more stain resistant steels, better edge-holding steels, better impact resistant steels, steels with a greater ease of resharpening, etc. . .

However, INFI is the best that we have found for great performance across the board in ALL of these categories.

Here's the bottom line,

I am a performance steel nut! . . . I am not afraid of finding a steel that can outperform INFI across the board, I'm counting on it! :thumbup::D
Jerry :D
Click to expand...
 
calc said:
On one hand, publishing data is a good thing since it promotes transparency and honesty.

On the other, data is often misread, misunderstood, and misinformation is thus propagated to the point of being accepted as "common knowledge". Given this, one can understand a bit of hesitation.
Click to expand...

Well then I guess all knife makers who are using cpm3v with their own heat treat and not the standard protocol, should be providing charpy values for their treated steel as well
 
sodak said:
Interesting. That happened here on BF several years ago also, if the threads referencing it are still around...


Fair enough.
Click to expand...

I wasn't a part of those threads...I bet they are interesting though. I've actually been pretty quiet about it all. I've got kids. :)
 
I just wanted to clarify something real quick.

No one is asking for the mystical/mythical/proprietary information composition/Heat treat on INFI to be disclosed (at least not the majority IMO). So the tests that most are asking for would not be revealing proprietary information to the public, rather the results of the proprietary HT (the performance bit). And since no one else uses/produces it, the values for charpy/catra tests would be "correct" because the samples would have to come from Busse directly.

I think if Jerry stopped in and said "Yes I have data like this, and no I won't make it available to the public" it would quell a lot of the asking. As it is right now, he's answered some questions from this thread, so I think there is a reasonable expectation that he might answer other questions posted here. So far he has ignored this one, which likely "is" an answer at this point. But a simple "I won't answer the question" or something like that would seemingly quickly shut things down. No answer either way just means people will keep asking.

So serious question here.

If this was asked in the Busse subforum, do you think he or a representative would answer one way or the other? The question being "if you have catra/charpy data, can you share it with us" (with the understanding that this does NOT reveal any of his trade secrets like steel compositions, HT info, etc). It wouldn't be a thread about if INFI/SR101 was better than steel "X", or if Busse was superior/inferior to competitor "Y". Just a simple question.

With a thread like that, you basically only have three outcomes that are possible.

Scenario 1: The response is "oh sure, now that we understand what you're asking for, here is the data" (seems unlikely, but possible).
Scenario 2: Someone official says "yep we have had those tests performed, but nope we won't share them, because we like the mystique around the steel as its part of our marketing" or something like that. No harm, no foul, and you have a documented response to quickly quell questions like it in the future.
Scenario 3: No response, which means its pretty likely the question will likely come up again sometime in the future, where we go through this whole thing again.

Anyway, its been an interesting thread. And for the most part, pretty civil. Nice work everyone :thumbup:.

And I guess it would only be fair if people are using fancy different HT on steels provided the same data, at least if it was meaningfully different in performance.
 
rcb2000 said:
Fine with me, just don't hurt your arm beating that dead horse ;)
I just think he's been a true gentlemen here and taken the high road to a lot of comments. If you'd like to continue running circles in this thread, by all means, have at it, I won't lose any sleep over it.
I guess I just don't see what you expect? Lets say he released the data, and a charpy test revealed that INFI is or isn't "tougher" than 3V, would it make it a better or worse knife either way? Jerry himself said that there are steels that are tougher, others that have better edge retention, etc,, but,, well.. here are his own words
Click to expand...

This is why I would always run to infi when I can carry only one knife its just a splendid allrounder. :)
 
Jens Schuetz said:
To whoever wants to test it.

Almost any size of Infy steel with a v notch should work for the test as long as you can compare it to the the same size of a v notched steel with known properties.

Getting a small Infi blade for the test should keep the cost down.
Click to expand...

it has been awhile since i was working in a lab where the tests were being done. as i recall the standard specimen is about 1/2" square x 2" long, the equipment wouldn't work on something smaller.
 
bdmicarta said:
it has been awhile since i was working in a lab where the tests were being done. as i recall the standard specimen is about 1/2" square x 2" long, the equipment wouldn't work on something smaller.
Click to expand...
http://www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/faqs/material-faqs/faq-what-is-charpy-testing/
Looks like the height could be smaller as long as it's still sitting secure in the anvil.
2 inch length and .4 inch width shouldn't be an issue with even a small Infi blade.
Then compare it to a piece of steel which you know the number of and at the same height. See how that standard compares to the normal height and calculate Infis number at normal height.
 
That will give you stats on a through hardened, heat treated blade, not raw INFI.
 
AntDog said:
Oh, cool. I was under the impression it was run pre HT.
Click to expand...

But the numbers are for the spec'd HT not some special proprietary HT like Fehrman and some others have. So individual numbers will vary
 
bdmicarta said:
it has been awhile since i was working in a lab where the tests were being done. as i recall the standard specimen is about 1/2" square x 2" long, the equipment wouldn't work on something smaller.
Click to expand...

You are correct sir!

Some folks think that we are hiding the impact toughness of INFI. . . . I can assure you that that is not the case.

Standard Charpy impact tests require a piece of raw stock near 1/2" x 1/2" square bar by 2.1" long. It would need to be ground down to approx. .400" x .400" and then notched. That doesn't mean that you must have that size in order to perform the test, it just means that you need that same size stock in order to compare to other published tests that used the standard size. We don't have 1/2" thick INFI, so running the test with the standard sample size at this time would be impossible.

We were given calculated Charpy impact numbers that were generated by the metallurgists we worked with from the mill. The numbers we were given were impressive, but they are, nonetheless, speculative and not based on standard sized stock.

We are currently working on a solution to this.:thumbup:

Let's Drink!:thumbup:

Jerry:D
 
Jerry Busse said:
You are correct sir!

Some folks think that we are hiding the impact toughness of INFI. . . . I can assure you that that is not the case.

Standard Charpy impact tests require a piece of raw stock near 1/2" x 1/2" square bar by 2.1" long. It would need to be ground down to approx. .400" x .400" and then notched. That doesn't mean that you must have that size in order to perform the test, it just means that you need that same size stock in order to compare to other published tests that used the standard size. We don't have 1/2" thick INFI, so running the test with the standard sample size at this time would be impossible.

We were given calculated Charpy impact numbers that were generated by the metallurgists we worked with from the mill. The numbers we were given were impressive, but they are, nonetheless, speculative and not based on standard sized stock.

We are currently working on a solution to this.:thumbup:

Let's Drink!:thumbup:

Jerry:D
Click to expand...
I'm starting to like this guy.....
 
Jerry Busse said:
You are correct sir!

Some folks think that we are hiding the impact toughness of INFI. . . . I can assure you that that is not the case.

Standard Charpy impact tests require a piece of raw stock near 1/2" x 1/2" square bar by 2.1" long. It would need to be ground down to approx. .400" x .400" and then notched. That doesn't mean that you must have that size in order to perform the test, it just means that you need that same size stock in order to compare to other published tests that used the standard size. We don't have 1/2" thick INFI, so running the test with the standard sample size at this time would be impossible.

We were given calculated Charpy impact numbers that were generated by the metallurgists we worked with from the mill. The numbers we were given were impressive, but they are, nonetheless, speculative and not based on standard sized stock.

We are currently working on a solution to this.:thumbup:

Let's Drink!:thumbup:

Jerry:D
Click to expand...

:thumbup:.

As one of the people you're likely talking about under the "some folks" umbrella, I'll say two things.

1) I apologize if I came across too strong, that really was never my intent
2) That semi-assumption that it wasn't being disclosed was somewhat stemming from the fairly well known desire to keep the INFI and SR101 steel formulas secret, so making the assumption seemed semi-valid without other data to guide us one way or the other

Anyway, the answer makes perfect sense :) And I'm glad to hear you're working on it.

Cheers :thumbup:.
 
Well, for those who advocate "stop asking for data and do your own testing" thing, may be you can elaborate or perhaps post a video of you lugging around 1/2x1/2x2.1", grinding it to 0.4, notching it and getting charpy value :)
And while at it, may be someone can share how to do "your own" composition testing which would be great. I still can't find acceptably priced lab in SF bay area to perform composition analysis on some of the steels I am interested in, 500$ per test sounds a bit too rich for my taste.
 
Gator97 said:
Well, for those who advocate "stop asking for data and do your own testing" thing, may be you can elaborate or perhaps post a video of you lugging around 1/2x1/2x2.1", grinding it to 0.4, notching it and getting charpy value :)
And while at it, may be someone can share how to do "your own" composition testing which would be great. I still can't find acceptably priced lab in SF bay area to perform composition analysis on some of the steels I am interested in, 500$ per test sounds a bit too rich for my taste.
Click to expand...

I have a local place that does it for me and I bring the knives thru the back door and pay them cash, lol. They charge me very little per knife compared to your number. I think I paid $80 to have my knives tested 2-3 years ago and I am sure they would not charge me much more than that today. But they do not typically offer that service. It's only because I schmooz them and bring pizza

That was $80 for two knives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top