Case true sharp vs SAK steel?

That would be ideal... It would be expensive and time consuming... and there's no money in it so it will never happen. :p
 
The best trainer I ever had, when I played sports, used to say that numbers don't tell the whole truth, but they don't lie either.
I'm not an expert on the matter. To say it in Will's words, they're reasonable steels for reasonable tasks.
And yes, how you use your knife has a big influence on the perceived qualities of a certain knife and steel.
In my very personal (and relatively small) experience, I found no real difference between the results of controlled tests and my personal use of a steel. But, again, I don't consider myself an expert.

Fausto
:cool:
 
richstag said:
Pinnah,

I believe I am reading you correctly. Let me offer up my understanding. You would like to see testing where the optimal HT, edge geometry, edge finishing and etc are achieved for each individual steel. You would also like these parameters to be optimized for each individual steel for the media being cut. You would like to see testing for multiple medias and cutting methods.

Am I getting closer?

Thanks,

Kevin
Click to expand...

Kevin, that is closer but still too focused on the object (the knife or steel).

My preference is to start with use case scenarios and then to proceed qualitatively at first and then quantitatively second.

Here are 4 different cutting scenarios just to name a name a few: rope cutting (e.g. ships and boats), industrial meat processing, hunting/field dressing, whittling.

For each of these, I would like to see anecdotal and qualitative descriptions of what is done and what sort of edge grinds, sharpening and steels seem to produce the most rewarding experiences. For example, for rope cutting on the water, I would expect that corrosion will also be a consideration and that rougher blades do better. I suspect that corrosion is a primary distinction between industrial meat processing (knives can be cared for meticulously) and hunting (used hard and put away wet) and that in both contexts, a tough blade that can deal with bones and a course edge are helpful. Whittling may favor an entirely different set of issues, including the tendency to fold edges.

Another way to say this is that I would like to see more focus on traditional trade-craft and lore, stuff that tends to get washed away by reducing discussions of blades to compositions and tests.

Compositions and tests once the usage is clearly delimited and once the trade-craft points you in the right direction. For example, nearly all books on whittling and wood craft that I've seen favor easy to sharpen blades, frequent sharpening and polished blades with little to no consideration of corrosion. It's no wonder that thin blade and carbon steel are often favored. Once we a) focus on single use and b) take the traditional trade-craft seriously, then we can start thinking about tests and composition issues that might further illuminate things for that particular usage. But a test that deals with edge retention for whittling may have no bearing if you're a sailor who needs a reliable safety knife to cut rope in salt water.
 
Fausto, that seems like reasonable advice to me.

pinnah, One problem with anecdotal information is that it rarely provides much detail and that seems to be what you are after. The scope is often limited also. I suspect that the meat industry is primarily concerned with sanitation and expense.... I may be wrong. The experience of senior tradesman is valuable information. I'm not discounting it. But I don't know of many that have tested all the steels, blade shapes, and patterns.

We have drifted pretty far from the scope of Carl's question and I apologize for it.
 
pinnah said:
Kevin, that is closer but still too focused on the object (the knife or steel).

My preference is to start with use case scenarios and then to proceed qualitatively at first and then quantitatively second.

Here are 4 different cutting scenarios just to name a name a few: rope cutting (e.g. ships and boats), industrial meat processing, hunting/field dressing, whittling.

For each of these, I would like to see anecdotal and qualitative descriptions of what is done and what sort of edge grinds, sharpening and steels seem to produce the most rewarding experiences. For example, for rope cutting on the water, I would expect that corrosion will also be a consideration and that rougher blades do better. I suspect that corrosion is a primary distinction between industrial meat processing (knives can be cared for meticulously) and hunting (used hard and put away wet) and that in both contexts, a tough blade that can deal with bones and a course edge are helpful. Whittling may favor an entirely different set of issues, including the tendency to fold edges.

Another way to say this is that I would like to see more focus on traditional trade-craft and lore, stuff that tends to get washed away by reducing discussions of blades to compositions and tests.

Compositions and tests once the usage is clearly delimited and once the trade-craft points you in the right direction. For example, nearly all books on whittling and wood craft that I've seen favor easy to sharpen blades, frequent sharpening and polished blades with little to no consideration of corrosion. It's no wonder that thin blade and carbon steel are often favored. Once we a) focus on single use and b) take the traditional trade-craft seriously, then we can start thinking about tests and composition issues that might further illuminate things for that particular usage. But a test that deals with edge retention for whittling may have no bearing if you're a sailor who needs a reliable safety knife to cut rope in salt water.
Click to expand...

Pinnah,

I believe that what you are looking for is the type of testing that I worked in. I don't see that ever happening on a personal level here at blade forums. The testing I was involved with left absolutely no stone unturned. It could also cost billions on a SINGLE test item. Every aspect that you could dream up, was covered. To expect someone such as Frank to have the resources in his home to replicate this type of testing is a little silly. The best you would ever get would be when big time knife makers take their testing to a facility such as the one I have mentioned.

I believe Fausto said it best, in regards to the numbers don't tell the whole story, but they don't lie.

Kevin
 
Kevin, actually I'm thinking about something less like testing and more like requirement documentation. More akin to what product managers do.

It's very possible to do on forums provided enough stable long time members. Stickies, FAQs and "distilled wisdom" panels help but are not needed. All it takes is when a "which is better" question is asked that people repond with a "what are you planning on using for" request for more information.

I must triple emphasize that I have no problem with Franks test or method nor do I think he bears the burden of cost in documenting wisdom regarding usage. I think he did a great job when he said he thought his results corellated with his experience in everyday cutting.
 
Sorry, Pinnah, it took me a while to understand what you really meant. Thank you for your patience. Also, for the record, I never thought you were going after Franks testing, I just thought you wanted more. I know I would like to see more, but its so much to ask of an individual. I believe we just had our signals crossed, and I apologize for that.
 
None needed. I find it hard to talk about technical issues in the best of circumstances. I usually don't express things well.
 
Modoc ED said:
I believe Case's Tru-Sharp stands up just fine to most any other standard stainless steel. I'm not including exotic stainless as although I have some, I don't use them often.

I have several SAK knives - Victorinox and Wenger. I don't carry or use a SAK anymore but if my memory hasn't failed me completely,:rolleyes: when I did use SAK knives, I didn't notice any difference between SAK stainless steel and Case's Tru-Sharp. I wasn't consciously looking for any either. They both did the job at hand when I had either in my hand.

We've been down this Case Tru-Sharp comparison with other stainless steels from various makers on this forum many times with no clear winner - at least up to now.

The Case Peanut with Tru-Sharp is a very inexpensive knife. Pick one up and give it a try. That'll give you a better result than reading about it here. Heck Carl, our time is getting shorter.:eek: I'd rather use em and test em for myself than read about em.:)
Click to expand...
We just did a test recently. Between trusharp and cv with case knives 8 knives 4 of each. The trusharp was within 2 to 5 rope cuts of the cv. Every time some times more than cv some times less. I guess from that test. Ts is the same as CV except it dont rust so easy..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top