cpms125v

scrappy said:
Sal did comment on the spyderco forum once I thought. I read it there first.
Click to expand...

Can you give a link? What are those numbers? Do you remember what he sad?

From other hand why can not he comment on this himself one more time?

Thanks, Vassili.
 
nozh2002 said:
So There I can understand what the numbers are. This is bit different then this:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see you want the official looking graphs. Here's where that comes from:

http://www.catra.org/pages/products/kniveslevel1/slt.htm

"Computer Hardware/software

The test machine and control software is designed to operate on the industrial quality PC system built in to the equipment. The operating software interlinks with Microsoft Excel and Access to provide data analysis, reporting and database facilities, it has Windows XP capability. The software is optionally available with on screen information and reports in English, German, French, Spanish, and Japanese."

The data is the data, you can make all the reports and graphs you want in Microsoft Office. Here's some examples:

http://www.dynamettechnology.com/Knive Brochure.htm

http://www.finelife.ca/knife/zina_knife_catra_data.htm

http://www.catra.org/pages/products/kniveslevel1/comparisons.htm

I suspect if you want an official test report of CATRA's Blade and Knife sharpness testing to ISO 8442-5 ( ISO 8442.5) you're probably going to have to pay some money to CATRA for all that which I'm sure doesn't come cheap. Generous ISO charges you for even a copy of the 8442-5 standard.

nozh2002 said:
And there is no any comment from Sal or Phil about this numbers. Until this will be clear - this numbers is just a legend, rumor, whatever...
Click to expand...

"The test produces two indications:
- ICP (Initial Cutting Performance) representing the cutting ability (sharpness) of the blade as supplied
- TCC (Total Card Cut) which represents the life of the blade by giving a measure of its total cutting ability."

What Phil and Sal were talking about was the Total Card Cut data. It's reasonable for the context of Phil's post. I called it hearsay, you call it rumor and urban legend. If Sal wanted to share what's proprietary R&D with all his competitors, I'm sure he'd post lots more info in a massive .pdf format for us. If Phil hasn't commented more on the issue it's possible Sal asked him to keep it between them for the same reasons.

I agree with you that it would be nice to know more but that's the way the cookie crumbles. :)
 
Last edited:
shunsui said:
Yeah, I see you want the official looking graphs. Here's where that comes from:

http://www.catra.org/pages/products/kniveslevel1/slt.htm

"Computer Hardware/software

The test machine and control software is designed to operate on the industrial quality PC system built in to the equipment. The operating software interlinks with Microsoft Excel and Access to provide data analysis, reporting and database facilities, it has Windows XP capability. The software is optionally available with on screen information and reports in English, German, French, Spanish, and Japanese."

The data is the data, you can make all the reports and graphs you want in Microsoft Office. Here's some examples:

http://www.dynamettechnology.com/Knive Brochure.htm

http://www.finelife.ca/knife/zina_knife_catra_data.htm

http://www.catra.org/pages/products/kniveslevel1/comparisons.htm

I suspect if you want an official test report of CATRA's Blade and Knife sharpness testing to ISO 8442-5 ( ISO 8442.5) you're probably going to have to pay some money to CATRA for all that which I'm sure doesn't come cheap. Generous ISO charges you for even a copy of the 8442-5 standard.



"The test produces two indications:
- ICP (Initial Cutting Performance) representing the cutting ability (sharpness) of the blade as supplied
- TCC (Total Card Cut) which represents the life of the blade by giving a measure of its total cutting ability."

What Phil and Sal were talking about was the Total Card Cut data. It's reasonable for the context of Phil's post. I called it hearsay, you call it rumor and urban legend. If Sal wanted to share what's proprietary R&D with all his competitors, I'm sure he'd post lots more info in a massive .pdf format for us. If Phil hasn't commented more on the issue it's possible Sal asked him to keep it between them for the same reasons.

I agree with you that it would be nice to know more but that's the way the cookie crumbles. :)
Click to expand...

I see that we are in agreement - this is all what we have and it will not be any more comments or anything. Now should we consider it as reliable source of information about steels edge holding? Sure - we can not.

So it is just a rumor, about some unidentified numbers slipped through by mistake. What this numbers are can we trust it - up to everybody.

I do not accept this rumor as test results. For sure this can not be proove to me that CPM S90V performs same as ZDP189. Certainly it is not CATRA test results available for us - if you remember my original request.

I will not pay money for CATRA - why I have my own tests which works just fine for me and cost way cheaper then CATRA. CPM S90V performs worse then ZDP189 this I know for sure.

Thanks, Vassili.

P.S. The very idea that results of most interested for consumer property of the knife - edge holding is keeps secret is wrong.
 
scrappy said:
Yes, I believe his comment confirms he tested both and the results were similiar
Click to expand...

Yes, sure literaly "ZDP and S90 V seem to be similar in edge holding on CATRA tests". But he did not confirm that rumor - that numbers.

In my test it was on 3rd and 13th places among 40 tested so far. Depends on how you look at this - they may seems to be similar (while that numbers from rumor are equal).

Thanks, Vassili.
 
It could be that those numbers are a summary and possibly rounded off in some way. It wouldn't be hard to imagine sample to sample differences in S90V or ZDP-189 that might be more significant than the difference between the two steels when testing say 40 blades of each steel. Possibly the two steels run neck and neck, sometimes one wins, sometimes the other wins, but not by much. In such a situation, and I'm sure there are even more variables to consider, it might be reasonable to simply say both steels hit a certain number of cards consistently in conversation. I think the information given is more significant than you give credit for. The fact your test results are different just suggests different variables in methods.
 
Shunsui
I agree with your thoughts.
I only wish we had all of sal's results.
I guess I will just be content with all the steel he releases. :)
 
shunsui said:
It could be that those numbers are a summary and possibly rounded off in some way. It wouldn't be hard to imagine sample to sample differences in S90V or ZDP-189 that might be more significant than the difference between the two steels when testing say 40 blades of each steel. Possibly the two steels run neck and neck, sometimes one wins, sometimes the other wins, but not by much. In such a situation, and I'm sure there are even more variables to consider, it might be reasonable to simply say both steels hit a certain number of cards consistently in conversation. I think the information given is more significant than you give credit for. The fact your test results are different just suggests different variables in methods.
Click to expand...

Sure, I guess I just bit uncomfortable that Cutlery Manufacturers (not just Spyderco) hide this information from us and we had to invent something or relay on bits they make leak to us. So picture is always foggy and unclear, that no one can be sure.

Worst part is that in such environment it is only free will of manufacturers like Spyderco make them to to some testing. Many just do not test at all not for quality assurance of production, not for research and development.

In result nobody really now what they have and forced to believe rather then know for sure and this creates certain cults which I know for sure two or three...

This situations seems to be very comfortable for manufacturers and this is just sad.

Thanks, Vassili.

P.S. I hope that more people will take this in their hand and start testing so this "Dark Ages" of Knife World will be ended sometime in the future.
 
Vassili
Thank you for doing your tests. I appreciate all of the feedback from you and other users here offer from testingi
 
Shunsui, in your reply to Vasili

I think the information given is more significant than you give credit for. The fact your test results are different just suggests different variables in methods.[/QUOTE]

Yes I am working with a steel manufacturer now to prepare some samples for CATRA testing. As a result I have learned more about the test procedure. The company that does the testing takes the sample piece, does the finish grind and sharpening themselves to exactly the same criteria for each piece. They will also be provided with the heat treat process and the hardness of each sample to use in the report.

This is different than testing a variety of knives from different manufactures, with different geometry and unknown heat treat and hardness.

It is testing various steels for edge wear resistance only I think. Other qualities like toughness and corrosion resistance ect. are not considered but it seems like with a machine doing the cutting, it is about as pure as you can get and the best we have at this time to evaluate relative edge holding.

By the way my testing of the knives I make have pretty much followed the information Sal gave me on his experience with CATRA. CPM S90V and ZDP 189 work out close to the same in my rope cutting tests. CPM S90V works best at RC 61, is full of very hard carbides and this tends to offset the high hardness advantage (RC66) of ZDP 189. This is my opinion, some could call it hersay or rumor thats ok with me--- but for what ever it is worth.
.. Phil
 
Thanks, Phil, awesome news. Are those tests going to be made public one day, or will you be able to comment on them?
I think we should all look forward to a truly scientific wear resistance ranking.
 
Phil Wilson said:
Shunsui, in your reply to Vasili

I think the information given is more significant than you give credit for. The fact your test results are different just suggests different variables in methods.

Yes I am working with a steel manufacturer now to prepare some samples for CATRA testing. As a result I have learned more about the test procedure. The company that does the testing takes the sample piece, does the finish grind and sharpening themselves to exactly the same criteria for each piece. They will also be provided with the heat treat process and the hardness of each sample to use in the report.

This is different than testing a variety of knives from different manufactures, with different geometry and unknown heat treat and hardness.

It is testing various steels for edge wear resistance only I think. Other qualities like toughness and corrosion resistance ect. are not considered but it seems like with a machine doing the cutting, it is about as pure as you can get and the best we have at this time to evaluate relative edge holding.

By the way my testing of the knives I make have pretty much followed the information Sal gave me on his experience with CATRA. CPM S90V and ZDP 189 work out close to the same in my rope cutting tests. CPM S90V works best at RC 61, is full of very hard carbides and this tends to offset the high hardness advantage (RC66) of ZDP 189. This is my opinion, some could call it hersay or rumor thats ok with me--- but for what ever it is worth.
.. Phil
Click to expand...

This may be very true and wise - but so far we are about things do not exist.

Show me test results and then I will be able to see everything myself, but instead we are talking a lot about thing does not exist for us, but only for chosen knife elite or something.

So far without rumor, proven results (for us little people), only:

1. Spyderco Endura ZDP189 - 3rd place
2. Spyderco Military CPM S90V - 13th place
3. Custom CPM 10V - 14th place.

You may talk about this or that , but without test results - this will be just talks.

I can talk as well. Let me try:

"High volume of vanadium carbides of CPM S90V, CPM 10V - which is about 9% plus other carbides with total contents over 15% weaken steel matrix to the extent it is not steel any more but some kind of ceramical stone.

Which of course show high abrasive resistance useful for certain industrial application but but for cuttlery means only high price for grinding without too much benefits to cutting ability, because steel matrix polluted by so many carbides is too weak to hold edge.

It is like concrete with too many sands - edge just can not hold proper angle."

Well I just unleash my fantasy, however this sound pretty good, as i am know what I am talking about. I can produce things like this a lot, just for fan. And I do not value this - is such thing produced by me or someone else. I know - talks are cheap.

I saw even more excited writings about shell-like cementit formations which line up to form sharp and strong edge being as flexible a spring. Or diamond particles created inside blade body out of high carbon volume due to extreme pressure happening during crio quenching. Steel molecules being shaped in oval by forging. And even 77HRC hardness. Etc, etc, etc....

So in short - any theory is just theory until proven by testing.

Until test result disclosed - talks about testing is again just talks.

So if you did some testing - please, provide results, as well as description of procedure. Otherwise - it will be one more rumor.

Thanks, Vassili.
 
Lorenzol, Yes I hope the results will be made public. This is a manufacturer (mill ) that I have a lot of respect for. Their approach is to first make sure that the claims they make about their products are substantiated before they make public statements. I am just the heat treater here so would leave the all the information they disclose to them at this point. I checked my records and I have made about 300 knives in CPM S90V, fillet and hunting. This is a great steel but needs special attention in heat treating. Spyderco has and excellent heat treater so their stuff should be very reperesentive of this steel. My experience with ZDP is limited to 4 blades and I did the heat treating so I am comparing my work to my work. Cpm S90V will stack up against ZDP 189 any day at least in my shop. Others may have different conclusions based on a test with only one knife. Hitachi makes if very difficult to get ZDP 189 so it is not a steel many customs makers use. When my tests showed equal performance to CPM S90V I lost intrest in working with it. The manufacturer (new in their offerings) I am heat treating the CATRA samples for wants to work with the custom guys so that is a refreshing approach. Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top