Cardboard Massacre!!!!

Geez Cliff!!!! I must say that you have big brass cajones!!! :eek:

That was an awesome post, and scandalous to say the least. Talk about not mincing words!!! But thank you very much for saying things like they are. The knowledge really helps for those of us who just need to cut stuff.

I like aesthetically pleasing knives as much as the next guy, but now I know what to look for if I need to cut something. :D



Big cajones!!!
 
Sort of related, sort of tangental question:

If you're hoping to modify an edge from a "regular" ~20 degree V angle to a convex edge, how long would you expect to have to strop it?

-- PG (edited for spelling...)
 
ParaGlock :

If you're hoping to modify an edge from a "regular" ~20 degree V angle to a convex edge, how long would you expect to have to strop it?

It depends on the steel, the abrasive, , the width of the edge, and how much of the shoulders you want to round out. However even for a very easy to abrade steel (1095), using a very abrasive "strop" (SiC sandpaper), you are looking at ~ one hour to make a large difference. If I was you I would either use a file or a very coarse benchstone + lapping coumpound to grind the shoulders down. You could also do the initial step with a Dremel. You are only grinding off waste, so there is no need for precision, just hog off the shoulders until you get the rough bevel you want. Now just strop to cleanup and finish

Yvsa described a "power stropping" method awhile back on the HI forum which was a rather novel idea. He simple made a huge "superstrop" from a roll of sandpaper. Using a strop the full length of your arm span with heavy pressure would allow rapid profiling. The best method however is really to find someone close to you and get them to rip a new edge using a slack belt sander. It will take only a few passes, even on the worse steels to machine.

Note this metal hogging only has to be done once to shape the bevel, the sharpening is much easier, as Buzz described. Assuming of course you don't damage the edge, in which case you have to repeat the above process.


Buzz, thanks.

-Cliff
 
For cutting elastic materials like flesh and hide a hollow grind is very effective and convenient. I first noticed this in my teens when I bought a lot of bayonets and similar pseudo defense knives designed with a sabre grind. None of them cut nearly as well as kitchen knives or pocket knives. The story was much the same with sabre ground hunting knives. Even when I spent hours lowering the secondary bevel on the blades they just wouldn't slice or push cut like the thin blades of pocket knives.

Now what I was looking for was something that would allow me to seperate hide from meat and sinew from bone with minimal pressure (since the materials tend to slip away from you under pressure). The hollow grind allows you to get bevels under 10 degrees for straight razor perfomance. For my personal defense I never figured on more than about one quick defensive cut before I fled the scene. My priority there was something that would slice as deeply as possible through clothing, flesh, and maybe leather jackets with a quick slash. My experiments showed me that a hollow ground edge was one of the best ways to achieve this with a light yet somewhat thick blade (surprisingly, a file edge was the next best thing). Autopsy photos of guys attacked by straight razors reinforced that view.

So if the only thing you plan on cutting is meat or doing a little whittling with no regard to durability a high hollow grind works great and is easy to keep razor sharp. If you need a bit more durability you back the hollow away from the edge and get a more durable razor cutter. Stiff materials like cardboard work better with any real thin blade over any other contour. A razorblade box cutter works best.

For utility work I don't like the scandanavian full sabre grind. The reason is that there is no relief between the side of the blade (primary bevel) and the material you are cutting if you are whittling. These blades do poorly on my basic pencil sharpening test. You can't steer these blades easily in light whittling work. They like to go their own ways and it is hard to control the thickness of your chip. They dive tool steeply into the side of my pencil when I am sharpening the tip. So for me the choice of blade contour is either full grind (the whole width of the blade) with just a minor edge bevel, or hollow ground, or convex. I only like convex if the blade is tapered to a low angle. I don't like it if it is just a rounded finish to a sabre grind. It just doesn't work well on elastic tissues. I've never seen a convex grind on a scalpel.
 
I just want to say thanks to Cliff, (awesome tutorial!) Buzzbait, and everyone else that contributed to make this the most thoroughly enlightening cutlery bull session I've yet run onto! Great thread. Great forum.

Dan
 
Originally posted by Cliff Stamp
In regards to heat treating, Bos has stated that Buck gets the highest quality heat treatment. Heat treating is a science, it is not some magical procedure which is effected by Bos being in the room. Bos can instruct someone to do heat treating to the same level that he can unless he is an incompetent instructor, which is a fairly harsh claim (or Buck hires imcompetent people besides Bos, which is also fairly harsh). Why would Buck tolerate their blades being inferior to the ones that Bos handles himself. The only reason that Buck's would be inferior is if Buck directed Bos to use a cheaper and inferior method so that they could cut costs; shorter temp times, no multiple tempers, no sub zero, quick and dirty soaks, sloppy quenches, overfilled ovens, etc. . However considering the way Buck treats performance in general this doesn't seem likely. I would however be interested in any actual facts otherwise.
-Cliff

I've been at the Vegas show and wasn't able to respond to this comment earlier, but I am a bit incensed at some of the implications here. It has nothing at all to do with "incompetence", "intolerance", or any other idiocy. It is a simple fact that thermal mass influences quench rates, and the thermal mass of hundreds of blades is far higher than the thermal mass of a few. With all high alloy steels, quench rate is a critical influence on the final structure of the steel. Heat treating may be a science, but if it were simply "science", Ed Fowler's blades wouldn't be any better than any rookie knifemaker's. Asserting the best control he can, Ed tempers each blade individually, often using different tempering temperatures on each, all using the same 52100 steel.

The tendancy here to pass judgements on or ignore the experience of those with years of relevant experience by someone who has never themselves tempered a blade nor tested several identical blades in the same steel, differing only by minor variances in heat treating is naive at best. While I agree that there is some excellent information in this thread, I doubt all all scorecards read the same, nor do all agree with the various conclusions.
 
Welcome back Jerry and well said. I was hoping you would see this thread and set some things straight. Check out that A-2 thread as well. ;)
 
Jerry Hossom :

It is a simple fact that thermal mass influences quench rates

One of the basic principles of quenching is that the medium should be a big enough heat sink in order for it to not significantly change temperature as it absorbs heat from the blades during the quench as otherwise the rate of cooling will decay as it is proportional the the difference in temperature between the quench and the blade. This is achieved by two basic procedures. First off all you use a large amount of the quenching medium, and secondly and more imporantly it is vigerously agitated. If the latter is not done then one blade alone will heat up the medium as it will super heat the quench material surrounding it which will vastly undercut the rate of cooling.

This is the same reason that you can be very warm even when it is cold out, but as soon as you move you skin gets cold. When you are still you heat the air around your skin and as it heats up it draw heat from you at a lower rate. However when you start to walk you are constantly being exposed to cold air and thus constantly losing heat at a high rate. This is also also what causes "wind chill".

In any case, I don't see why Buck would not be able to do the above. However assuming that they are not for what ever reason, I would be interesting to hear of how much performance loss is being induced. As even with very vigerous agitation and a large amount of the quench medium there will be some internal heating (obviously it has to go somewhere), and thus no quench is perfect. It is all a matter of degree of how consistent you can keep the medium, nothing is 100%. Saying Buck is inferior when the difference in performance is not in any way quantified is not overly helpful.

Another knifemaker for example could use a quench tank which has one drop more quench material in it than what Bos uses, and thus from your perspective he could now claim to do a "better" heat treatment (in that one area, assuming he used an identical method elsewhere he oculd claim an overall better blade) . From a strict point of view he is perfectly right. However, from a functional point of view there would be no difference in the blades produced. How much performance are you claming that Buck is giving up?


Heat treating may be a science, but if it were simply "science", Ed Fowler's blades wouldn't be any better than any rookie knifemaker's.

If they follow his procedure they will be, I have discussed heat treating with Fowler a few times and he has never put any kind of magical hype about him doing the heat treating, it is all about the method which he has gone at great lengths to describe exactly for the purpose of letting others get the same benefits. Anything otherwise puts heat treating into the realm of magic, which is fine if you want to go there, but at the same time you can't then use any scientific reasoning. You can't have the benefits of science in an argument without the drawbacks.

-Cliff
 
Since the heat sink is air, it is not a terribly efficient conductor. Further, the major problem with very large batches of blades is that there is radiant exchange going on at the same time, so while the air is cooling the blades they are being radiantly heated by adjacent blades at the same time. Clearly blades in some areas of the batch will cool faster than others, and the more blades there are in the batch, the more time it will necessarily take for everything to equilibrate.

Some steels are extremely sensitive to quench rates, though all high alloy steels are to some extent. The problem some had in working with CPM-3V early on was that what worked fine for other steels was simply not fast enough for 3V, resulting in steel that never completely hardened. That's why a lot of folks are now using quench plates for 3V and other high alloy steels. Some are using interrupted oil quenches to bring the steel down to under 1000F, with air cooling to the point where the first temper will begin. The advantage of quench plates is that you can use them while the tool wrap is still in place. The disadvantage is that you can't using them with very deep hollow grinds and tapered tangs. They depend on most of the steel directly contacting the plate surfaces.

A lot of the bad press that ATS-34 originally got for being brittle was based on factory blades done is large batches which can never be heat treated as well as custom blades done in small quantities.

Even though I own my own heat treating oven, I can't do it as well as Paul Bos does. I've proven that repeatedly in testing. If I could it would obviously be a lot cheaper and faster for me to do my own. Of course, I suppose we can't rule out that I'm in competent... :)
 
Jerry Hossom :

Interesting about the air quench, I had assumed that they were using oil quenches for the stainless steels, most custom makers I talked to are to get a full hardening. Air hardening can be a problem even doing one blade at a time. Still, saying there is a difference is trivial, it is the magnitude of the difference that is important, or more importantly the deviation in performance you can expect, as it will vary from blade to blade. This exists for all knives, regardless of the heat treat methods.

A lot of the bad press that ATS-34 originally got for being brittle was based on factory blades done is large batches which can never be heat treated as well as custom blades done in small quantities.

Probably the biggest problem with ATS-34 was benchmade having their knives at 61-62 RC and then calling them tactical which had a lot of people using them for things that chipped them out. When you compared this to custom ATS-34 blades that were at most 58-60 RC, and some of the heavier blades ~55 RC, the production Benchmade came off as being fragile.

When Benchmade lowered the RC to 59-60, a drop of ~3 points, an improvement was noticed, and people who have tested them side by side with ATS-34 customs have noted no significant difference in performance. The main problem though is that many people who used the ~62 RC blades never came back and tried the new ones, and thus they have wrote off Benchmades ATS-34 as being brittle and attribute this to the customs being customs, when in reality it was a simple difference in RC.

In regards to heat treating, if you don't get the results that Bos does, you are simply not doing the same thing, or don't have the same quality of equipment. A simple dewar for example doesn't have the same abilities as a $50, 000 deep slow cryo / temper oven. Then again, there is hardly the case that such an oven gives a concrete advantage in any case, it doesn't if you listen to Crucible, it does if you listen to Nu-Bit (who sells them).

By the way, if Bos can influence the heat treat by doing it himself as opposed to another doing the same thing, then he can have $one million any time he wants by demonstrating this to James Randi as it exhibits paranormal ability. The properties of a steel are easily tested by standard materials properties which would reveal exactly to what extent he enhanced the abilities by being near the steel.

-Cliff
 
Cliff, I am not aware of anyone who is oil quenching stainless. I think you just revealed how little you know on the subject.

I never said Paul improved the temper by doing it himself. His results are a consequence of his equipment and the process he uses with that equipment. His equipment is very expensive, much better than what I have, and his process is more tightly controlled than I am able, largely due to that equipement. Each of his inconel retorts cost more than my whole oven!

I think this has ceased to be productive...
 
Jerry Hossom :

Cliff, I am not aware of anyone who is oil quenching stainless. I think you just revealed how little you know on the subject.

And this makes it untrue? That is an interesting perspective. For reference, Phil Wilson for one, does oil quenches on ATS-34 among others classified as air hardening steels and has described this before in various magazine articles. If you are using plates then you can't call it an air quench either as the plates are now the quenching medium.


His results are a consequence of his equipment and the process he uses with that equipment.

Which is what I said in the beginning. Anyone doing the same thing with the same equipment should get the same results. The benefits of additional equipment are to a large degree not well quantified either. Some of the hardest use blades, held to the highest standards, get heat treated with really "poor" equipment like used kitchen ovens, tea kettles etc. . Most of these though are on very forgiving steels, not a lot of people using M2 like that.

-Cliff
 
I'd really like to thank all you people for making this forum what it is. I'm trying to rebuild my collection the right way and all this info. is going to prove invaluable. Thank you all very much!
 
Jeff Clark :

[sabre ground flat vs hollow]

Even when I spent hours lowering the secondary bevel on the blades they just wouldn't slice or push cut like the thin blades of pocket knives.

Yes, but this isn't flat vs hollow as much as it is full vs partial height grind. I have seen hollow grinds that are so shallow it took 200+ lbs of force to cut through a piece of 3/8" hemp. For reference, an Opinel does it in about ~10 lbs.

The hollow grind allows you to get bevels under 10 degrees for straight razor perfomance.

Flat or convex primary bevels can achieve the same thing. I have two EDC flat ground knives that have bevels at 7-8 degrees per side, an Opinel and a small custom from Lynn Griffith. I could easily take the Opinel down to ~5 without excess difficulty.

[full flat grind, no secondary edge]

You can't steer these blades easily in light whittling work.

Yes, it is the same reason that people often put a secondary edge on the back of a chisel. Just a few light passes to create a hair of a micro bevel which directly addresses the problem.

The only real advantage of a hollow grind vs full flat in regards to cutting, is when there is a high force of friction on the blade. Very few materials do this because most tend to open up when cut. Cheese is probably the worst which is why most dedicated cheese knives have hollows on the flats.

The high force of friction is also supposed to make dual convex grinds outperform flat ones on soft but thick vegetation. I have seen no evidence of this, but the vegetation around here doesn't get that thick when soft. You would want really thick vine like material 1.5"+ .

Jerry :

NOBODY hardens ANY steel in a kitchen oven...

I said :

... heat treated with really "poor" equipment like used kitchen ovens, tea kettles etc.

There is more to the heat treat process than hardening, specific to the above kitchen ovens are commonly used for tempering. Though I do know a knife maker who used to forge blades in the same oven he used to cook, it wasn't electric though. It was used as a barbeque (one of those cheap tripod deals) and also as a forge when the help of a fan to drive up the temperature.

The blades were heated, forged to shape, reheated for a final time and then left to air cool. They tried quenching but this left the blades too hard. tempering was actually never used. The blades were very large and used for very high impact work, parangs and heavy swords. The parangs would be sharpened fully about once a week. Last I heard he was experimenting with more modern methods and steels.

-Cliff
 
Originally posted by Cliff Stamp
Some of the hardest use blades, held to the highest standards, get heat treated with really "poor" equipment like used kitchen ovens, tea kettles etc. . Most of these though are on very forgiving steels, not a lot of people using M2 like that.

DANG, Cliff! What kind of stuff do you cook in your kitchen?! :eek:

Otherwise, I wish I had known this a LONG time ago. I could have saved myself a bundle by just throwing a shape in my oven and doing my own knife. Who needs factory knives, even.

Don't get me wrong, I respect your evaluations of knives; no doubt. But, I'm starting to sorta wonder about some things.....

{edit - After reading further, and seeing your response, I have to try to extract my foot from my mouth. For some reason I had forgotten that it could be possible to temper steel in a kitchen oven. My apologies. :rolleyes: }
 
Cliff, Note that I was contrasting sabre ground and hollow ground blades particularly. Flat ground blades (particularly if wide and thin) do allow lower sharpening angles. Sabre ground blades (particularly narrow and thick ones) don't. In general flat ground blades are my favorites. But there are cases where hollow ground blades excel. This is with thin, sticky, elastic material. For these materials the ideal would be a knife that was simply the edge with nothing behind it (at least for the first quarter inch or so). This is the case for seperating elastic tissues in the body cavity of game animals. The adhesive drag is extremely high compared to the strength of the materials. They tend to stick and bunch up. You put them under tension and lightly brush them with your edge. For that critical quarter inch your hollow ground blade functions as if it were only .05 inch thick (much like a scalpel blade).
 
Cliff,
I have found that adding a secondary edge bevel to a mora (with a single bevel, ie the primary grind serves as the edge bevel) also increases edge retention, and makes wood work easier.

As to heat treat: The vast, vast majority of stainless steels are air hardening (which is why they include Moly in the alloy,) I have seen people using big aluminum plates clamped on during air quenching (aka quenching plates), but I have never heard of anyone using an oil quench on an air harding steel, it seems that it would cool the metal too fast causing it to be brittle, also it would effect the depth of the hardening (only an issue on very thick blades).

I believe Paul Bos only works with air hardening steels, which includes tools steels like A2 and D2.

I am a little concerened that you were making an argument against "custom" heat treaters when you did not even know what type of heat treatmentis involved, it kind of reminds me of your assertion that the Busse folder is the best even though it has never been seen outside the Busse shop. (Which is not a problem if the rumors are true about you being Jerry Busse, but otherwise might pose a problem)

In regards to the opinel folder:
I agree that they offer incredible cutting performance, especially for their price point. With the edge angle taken as low as you have taken it, have you seen any drastic decreases in durability? What level of edge polish are you using? Any convexity added to the edge bevel? Do you find the steel fine enough grained to be able to use both very high levels of polish and very thin edges with out seeing tearouts?

Have a knife day,
Chad
 
Jeff Clark :


[thin, sticky, elastic material]

For these materials the ideal would be a knife that was simply the edge with nothing behind it

Yes, this is why the idea cheese cutter is simply a piece of wire, or even string. For knives, hollow grinds are a solution, but I prefer hollow relief and not traditional hollow as the latter bunches up badly and only works really well on a very small class of materials. I wish hollow relief was more common as its only drawback to flat is a lack of durability and that is no an issue on just pure cutting knives.

Chad :

[edge angles and edge retention]

In regards to edge retention, one of the things which really confuse the issue, is that people refer to edge retention as basically the lifetime of the cutting ability, when in fact it is the lifetime of the sharpness of the edge. Sharpness influences cutting ability, but is only one of many factors. Making them equal leads to really skewed conclusions. For example if you take a knife that has an obtuse edge grind and compare it to a knife with a very acute edge grind, the more obtuse one will cut worse - this is no surprise. This also means that given the same amount of edge degredation, the finer edge will outperform the more obtuse one. Thus the finer edged blade needs to suffer a much larger amount of edge degredation before its cutting ability is reduced to the ability of the thick edge blade. People often refer to this as "greater edge retention" and draw skewed opinions of steels because they attribute this difference to the materials involved when in fact it is the geometry.

For example, when I got the SOG SEAL 2000 I did the standard rope cutting tests for edge retention and found that the knife dropped down in cutting ability to below standard levels that I use (force to cut thread, length of edge to cut light poly, force to puch cut 3/8" hemp), in about ~14 cuts. The Twistmaster from Cold Steel, takes ~126 cuts to get to the same level of cutting ability. Most people would tend to write off the performance of the SOG as just being to a softer, lower class stainless steel as compared to a decent carbon tool steel. However after looking at this class of performance very carefully in the last few months I have come to the conclusion that this really isn't the case and the difference in geometry is the main effect. The influence of the geometry can be eliminated and thus produce an estimate of the edge retention, but its not trivial to do so. When this difference is eliminated, I have been surprised to note that the difference in edge holding (independent of geometry) is very small over a wide range of steels and in particular to hemp rope, is mainly dependent on RC hardness, and that the alloy makes only a minor effect.

Decreasing the angle is generally promoted as lowering the "edge retention", however I have found that as long as the edge is not reduced to the point where it breaks apart during the cutting, the lower the edge angle the greater the lifetime of the cutting ability simply because the cutting ability has been increased. In general you would expect that the edge would roll easier, but you use less force when you have a more acute angle because the cutting abliity is greater. However for a general "utility" knife, I would put a more obtuse secondary edge on the puukkos because they would get damaged on rough work, these really isn't knife class chores though. One of the things I have been meaning to look at is does the application of a small secondary edge bevel (~0.1 mm wide), effect edge retention as it has little to no effect on cutting ability thus it is far easier to make a direct comparison.

I have never heard of anyone using an oil quench on an air harding steel

Oil quenches are a standard option on many steels commonly air hardened, some makers are familiar with this and some are not. There was a dispute on Bladeforums awhile ago on water quenching 5160, it was put down by a number of well respected makers as a horrible mistake, yet it is used on the HI khukuris which are a very high standard for extreme use knives (it is common in many places where they can't afford oil). In general oil induces a greater hardenability. For example oil quenched M2 is 2-3 points harder than air quenched M2 when tempered above 1000F even though after quenching they are both at full hardness ~66 RC.

I am a little concerened that you were making an argument against "custom" heat treaters when you did not even know what type of heat treatmentis involved, it kind of reminds me of your assertion that the Busse folder is the best even though it has never been seen outside the Busse shop.

In regards to comments on the "inferior" nature of production heat treat, my statement was one of skepticism. If you want to make the arguement that your methods are better than production then you should be backing that up with actual data, either yours or someone elses, not just vague comments without even an estimate of the order of magnitude of the effects involved. It is the people making the claim that have the burden of proof, not the other way around.

In regards to the comments I made about the Busse folder, I have discussed folder specifics with Busse, referencing the problems I have had with many current mechanisms, before he even mentioned they were making a folder in fact. Based on these conversations, his attitude towards performance in general, and my experience with his knives, I would be willing to bet heavily on a folder coming out from Busse Combat in regards to durability and overall functionality. It is that simple.

Is it possible that Busse would come out with a lousy folder - yes. But I don't think it likely, not even a little considering the whole promotion of the knives is performance based. And if this does indeed turn out to be the case, then I will be one of the first ones to critize the knife.

[opinel folder]

With the edge angle taken as low as you have taken it, have you seen any drastic decreases in durability?

I would not cut hardened metal or bone with it, but anything else would be fine. In general modern cutlery edges are far too thick, a generation ago they were all ~1/3 of what is common now. This makes no sense as we should be building better knives, not worse ones. As an example of what it takes to damage such an edge, I recently reprofiled the edge on a MPK-Ti down to 9-11 degrees per side. After several hundred chops through wood including scrap lumber and several year seasoned felled wood, the edge showed no visible damage. I then split a dozen small knotty rounds using a 1.5' piece of fir as a mallet. I was using enough force to on occasion cause the wood to shatter and the mallet would also be destroyed periodically in the process. The edge was again undamaged. I only managed to put a small ripple in it when I went to split one last piece and it broke in the middle and I ended up hitting the knife in such a way to induce a lot of lateral strain across the edge. This induced a small ripple about ~1mm long and half as deep. It was easily steeled out.


What level of edge polish are you using? Any convexity added to the edge bevel? Do you find the steel fine enough grained to be able to use both very high levels of polish and very thin edges with out seeing tearouts?

For the general edge testing work I run it with a 22 degree microbevel (0.1mm wide) for no other reason than I have a v-system that is preset to that angle and it fits a ceramic, diamond and steel rod. When I am not doing this I leave it as finished on sandpaper. That edge bevel I would assume has a small bit of convex curvature induced because the leather compresses, from other blades with larger bevels I would assume this is only ~1 degree of so of additonal angle. For the edge I usually run it stropped at CrO for most work. I do experiment with more coarse finishes, when just means leaving it at 5 micron SiC. These work a lot better for rope and such, but even at a high polish, the blade will put cut through even 3/8" hemp with only ~10-15 lbs (don't have the numbers on me right now), so it can simply push cut most materials well enough that slicing is not really needed. In regards to the steel, from what I have read it is just ~1075, no large alloy carbides to break up the edge. I have checked the edge under magnification (20x) at a high polish and it is smooth, unlike for example ATS-34 which breaks apart at that angle.

-Cliff
 
Back
Top