Gentle posters, please! Should this thread continue in the direction it is headed, perhaps it should be placed in a new forum, "Fiction." Or, "Alloys as I believe they will be."
Let me make sure I understand the basics here. You are comparing production Mad Dog knives to Busse knives which have not yet been produced. In fact, when Don G raised this very point, Cliff answered:
Many people have handled them at shows, and you could extrapolate from the performance of the regular line like the BM.
Cliff: you regard yourself as a scientist? While it is true that the above process might serve as the basis for a hypothesis, you are asking for a comparison; this requires real data, not conjecture or speculation, or even extrapolation.
I do commend you, however, for your post reminding Tom Carey that this thread was supposed to be about comparing knives, not the personality or character disorder of the knifemaker. It does seem to me, however, that poster Carey seems to have some difficulty staying on topic, witness this post:
Both points are very true. But we are in fact compareing INFI and O1 correct? I believe the MD is also more expensive. What it comes down to is you are buying a name and a reputation. Also I would hate to have o1 when I can have say cpm3v on a similar knife for the same or less cost of the knife with o1. Point being if I am spending the money I want one of todays high tech high performance blade steels.
I find this to be a curiously convoluted post. It seems to me that poster Carey could just have said: "I prefer CPM3V or another high tech high performance blade steel." This is his opinion, which he certainly has a right to state, but it does not shed light upon the INFI vs. 01 question. Tom did not say WHY he found the high tech steels to be superior. That is the very information this thread is supposed to be exploring!
I would find it much more enlightening if Tom Carey could provide factual data regarding 01, and INFI, if and when it exists. This, combined with Tom's knowledge of other types of alloys, would be valuable information indeed.
Cliff, regarding your agreement with Tom about having a high tech high performance blade steel, where you say:
I don't see why you wouldn't want it if the choice is there. It seems rather straightforward to me as well.
Well, I don't think that it is that simple. My understanding is that most high alloy steels are suitable for stock removal only. If this process is acceptable to you, then the CPM alloys or Talonite (r) are fine choices. However YOU CAN'T FORGE THEM. When you try to do that, you tend to force out the additives which make the high tech alloys so attractive to some people.
So, if you want a forged blade, you pretty much have to settle for a 'low alloy' steel. IIRC, the primary difference between M2 and M4 is the 2% and 4% V. The CPM process is required to manufacture M4.
Thus, to criticize a forger for using a 'low alloy' steel is somewhat foolish. Forging steel will make it end up 'low alloy,' at least compared to CPM and the like. The Japanese have used 'low alloy' steel for their forging for the past 1500 years or so. I think it is safe to say that their Nihonto are well regarded as far as the steel is concerned.
Cliff; I read at least twice your test of the Tusk, and could not find fault with your methodology as you reported it. However, I contacted Mad Dog (Kevin), and he reported that of his total production of about 6,000 knives, TOTAL return of knives for warranty was 6 knives, including the ones (like your TUSK) that he felt were abused and not really a fault of workmanship or materials.
I submit, Cliff, that there is some fault with your testing methodology, otherwise more knives would have been returned to Kevin. Remember the other poster who tested rust preventatives, only to find that the non protected control area was the least rusted? I think that something like that is at work here. When you obtain truly anomalous data from an experiment, which don't fit the experience of the real world, then the experiment is faulty, either in design or execution.
Let us redirect this thread to the topic: 01 vs. INFI. Another poster posted the elemental composition of INFI. I would welcome Tom Carey's or Ed Schott's, or other posters' opinion on what this composition MEANS. What are comparable alloys? What do the individual components do to affect the alloy? I believe that Mike Turber stated that the components weren't the things that gave the alloy its' exceptional characteristics. If this is the case, then what does? Heat treatment? Something else?
I think that this would be much more interesting reading than unsupported viewpoints, extrapolations, and character assassination.
Respectfully submitted, Walt
-RadarMan-(<