CPM-3V versus INFI

Brennanscott said:
Not really defending him but he did state that it was his "opinion". Not sure calling him a troll for it is gonna be productive.
Click to expand...

You're right, that is why I went back and edited my first post. Not sure if quoting me on something I changed my mind about is going to be productive.
 
Micro-Bevel said:
You're right, that is why I went back and edited my first post. Not sure if quoting me on something I changed my mind about is going to be productive.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, my foresight is not working tonight.. anyway it looks like baby wujuu is resurrecting this thread to fight his war with or without us. We are better off in other threads anyway.
 
Nobody in this century has ever tested a sword. Few in the last century. What would happen if a 19th century sword of the finest Toledo steel met edge to edge with the finest Katana from a Japanese master? Nobody knows. What would happen if the finest sword in Wootz steel, capable of slicing a falling silk scarf, met edge to edge with a sword in a modern, high quality stainess steel, crafted by a gifted maker? Nobody knows. I've pondered this very subject for many wakeful hours and never came up with an answer. If Mr. Cashen is correct, you could never say if 6 were enough. The Spartans at Thermopylae fought for three days with bronze swords. The Romans conquered the world with iron swords. Medieval swords of unknown steel hammered on swords and armor for hours and seldom failed. 19th century cavalry swords of questionable steel met sword to sword at closing speeds of 20+mph and survived. I'm sure a sword in D2 made my a competent knifemaker would do fine. At the end of the day, it's really more about what's at the other end of the sword (or a knife for that matter) than what's at the point - and who made whatever it is of whatever steel, and how well they did it.

My opinion, anyway,
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Nobody in this century has ever tested a sword. Few in the last century. What would happen if a 19th century sword of the finest Toledo steel met edge to edge with the finest Katana from a Japanese master? Nobody knows. What would happen if the finest sword in Wootz steel, capable of slicing a falling silk scarf, met edge to edge with a sword in a modern, high quality stainess steel, crafted by a gifted maker? Nobody knows. I've pondered this very subject for many wakeful hours and never came up with an answer. If Mr. Cashen is correct, you could never say if 6 were enough. The Spartans at Thermopylae fought for three days with bronze swords. The Romans conquered the world with iron swords. Medieval swords of unknown steel hammered on swords and armor for hours and seldom failed. 19th century cavalry swords of questionable steel met sword to sword at closing speeds of 20+mph and survived. I'm sure a sword in D2 made my a competent knifemaker would do fine. At the end of the day, it's really more about what's at the other end of the sword (or a knife for that matter) than what's at the point - and who made whatever it is of whatever steel, and how well they did it.

My opinion, anyway,
Click to expand...

I think you are quite right. And I hope my paraphrasing doesn't put Mr Cashen out of Context.

I think he was meaning from the context of building the indestructible sword type idea. As in.. if you only need a platform to hold 1000pounds under stress, then you may want to make it take 2000pounds, but 5000pounds is likely overkill.

I think the main point is that swords really are not used anymore in battle. so striving for the best of the best is moot anyway, because we dont have the same understanding of how swords were truely used. In the past, I think it was more important for a sword to not break, than for any other feature such as sharpness, or edge retention. Not Breaking so that you could keep hitting with it was key to survival. But like anything.. the person using the tool makes up a large factor of how well the tool itself will work and endure.


These days I think the quality of the steel probably surpasses what has gone before, but what is likely missing is the knowledge of what is necessary for the tools to do what they needed to do. A Modern sword really is designed for mat cutting practise.

One Teacher I spoke to (Taichi) told me that the problem with using a modern sword that is of superior steels and higher quality than a historical sword is that it may well be better, but that means that you cannot fully understand or learn swordsmanship as it was applied in the times where lives depended apon it. with any tool, a master has to make use of the tool within the known limitations. I guess the romans understood the limitations of others very well :D
 
Well..., as far asI know I never designed a sword to cut mats, but your point's taken. :)

I'm not sure I agree with the Taichi teacher. In the context of school and learning a method he may be right. Accommodating the limitations of your weapon is certainly wise, but not having to accommodate limitations might be wiser still. If nothing else is sacrificed, overkill is healthy.
 
Jerry Hossom said:
Well..., as far asI know I never designed a sword to cut mats, but your point's taken. :)

I'm not sure I agree with the Taichi teacher. In the context of school and learning a method he may be right. Accommodating the limitations of your weapon is certainly wise, but not having to accommodate limitations might be wiser still. If nothing else is sacrificed, overkill is healthy.
Click to expand...


haha.. I prefer the indestructible overkill sword too.. The Taichi teachers thought is in the learning of Historical Swordsmanship and understanding their techniques, which would inherently rely on the sword itself. Fighting effectively with a thin piece of bamboo is different from a thin rod of steel.. so his perspective is the reproduction of historical arts. Jerry, I am sure the modern sword is called a gun :D

I think I saw a huge Hollow grind S30v blade on your website.. I'd love to know how that performed because I know you use 3V and S30V. Although S30V is stainless. its qualities seem that it should be tough enough and then some to be a good chopper.
 
I think it's interesting and revealing that a Taichi master acknowledges the limitations of a traditional katana. That magnificent hamon creates a great edge but behind it is a long thin bar of relatively weak steel that can yield and be permanently bent. I'm told beginners are not allowed to cut with legacy blades for that reason, until they are disciplined and trained sufficiently to avoid bad hits on harder materials. I've often wondered how many samurai left a battle carrying their sword because it wouldn't go back in its saya. Even so, I have to think it would be useful to practice, knowing the weapon is invincible and the only limitation is yourself.

S30V makes a very serviceable chopper, but it doesn't do well with a rough edge. It needs to be polished. I'm certain the early reports of factory produced S30V blades chipping was due to the normal 220 grit edges that most factories put on their blades without a final strop on a polishing belt or wheel. One of the things that makes me a little crazy in these discussions is the idea of a blade snapping in two from any kind of normal use. The ONLY time I've ever seen a blade fail that way was when it had a significant stress riser in it prior to heat treating. I'm sure you can make a blade thin and weak enough for catastrophic failure to happen, but no rational maker would likely do that.

I'm often asked and have always said that if I needed to choose just one knife to have with me in a survival situation it would be a $20 Ontario Machete with a proper, convex edge. 1095 steel @ Rc53/54. If I could have a second it would be a small (~3-4") fixed blade, probably one of mine in 3V, or a Swiss Army Knife because I like all those useful gadgets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top