cpms125v

[on_the_edge]

Phil,
Thank you very much for your information and the patience to respond thus far. As much (or as little) as I know about knife steel, I feel that I always take away something new that I didn't know before whenever I read your posts. :thumbup:

 

[Phil Wilson]

Vasili, I said I was done but can't help myself. A quote from you.:

But Endura with whatever ZDP189 there is outperform Military with whatever CPM S90V is there, and this is more practical and this is what I as a consumers prefer to know


Your statement above is true, you finally said it! Yes that is very good information. It is more practical than making a flat statement and claiming that based on your tests that ZDP 189 is a better edge holder than CPM S90V. It may or may not be --depending on a whole lot of variables.

One thing I have to comment on though is the idea that putting the rope in a box in the closet will control humidity. Unless the box is sealed and you put in Silica Gel the RH in the box will be the same as it is in the house and also outside unless you have a perfectly sealed house and continually run your air conditioning. The rope conditions can change with the weather, I have noted that as well. Only way to account for that is to have a "Control" knife. and to always cut with it when you are doing your tests. You compare the control results with the test knife or knives and that can tell you if the cutting media is changed. Phil


.

 

[Leadfoot2]

I hear by apologize to all for posting on this thread.

In a moment of indecision I thought I saw a windmill in the distance.

Leadfoot

 

[nozh2002]

Vasili, I said I was done but can't help myself. A quote from you.:

But Endura with whatever ZDP189 there is outperform Military with whatever CPM S90V is there, and this is more practical and this is what I as a consumers prefer to know

Your statement above is true, you finally said it! Yes that is very good information.

I am not sure if I finally sad it - it is there from the beginning - manufacturer/model/steel:

Yuna Hard II ZDP-189, Kershaw JYDII Sandvic 13C26, Benchmade 710HS M2, Benchmade Ares D2, ZT-302 CPM S30V, CRKT M1 AUS8 , Kiku Matsuda Tanto II OU31, Kershaw JYDII Ti SG2, Diamond Blades The Summit Friction Forged D2, G-Sakai Bosen Enkuto SRS15, Swamp Rat SAR Rat SR-101 (52100), Fehrman Piecemaker F3V (CPM 3V), Busse Game Warden INFI, РосОружие Утес 110x18, J.P.Holmes Drop Point Skinner CPM 10V, Dozier KS7 D2, экспериментальный булат Ивана Кирпичева (experimental bulat/wootz by Ivan Kirpichev), Buck 100 420HC, Kershaw Shallot CPM S110V, Buck 110 CS BG-42, Buck 110 CPM S30V, Buck 110 CPM 154, KaBar Dozier D2, Yuna Hard II ZDP-189, Spyderco CPM M4, Юкка Ханкала кованная вручную серебрянная сталь, 1095 by Jody Muller, Х12МФ Чебуркова, 1095 by Great Eastern Cuttlery, Farid Mehr T1, Spyderco Carpenter CTS-XHP, Spyderco CPM S90V, Kershaw CPM D2, Roselli UHC, ZT350 ELMAX, ZT350 ELMAX (second run), Spyderco Mule CTS-BD1, Spyderco Mule CPM S35VN, Spyderco Endura ZDP-189 в 0.1 oz (унци&#1080:

It is more practical than making a flat statement and claiming that based on your tests that ZDP 189 is a better edge holder than CPM S90V. It may or may not be --depending on a whole lot of variables

Well, let phrase this different way to be 100% correct.

Based on available test results from testing Endura ZDP189 and Military CPM S90V, we can say that ZDP-189 outperforms CPM S90V. ZDP-189 take 3rd place, while CPM S90V toke 13th place (together with non stainless version CPM 10V on 14th place). This is close but ZDP-189 better.

There is no indication, no available test results which may prove that CPM S90V is equal or better then ZDP-189.

There is opinion that CPM S90V may be as good as ZDP189, but there is no available test results backing this opinion up.

One thing I have to comment on though is the idea that putting the rope in a box in the closet will control humidity. Unless the box is sealed and you put in Silica Gel the RH in the box will be the same as it is in the house and also outside unless you have a perfectly sealed house and continually run your air conditioning. The rope conditions can change with the weather, I have noted that as well. Only way to account for that is to have a "Control" knife. and to always cut with it when you are doing your tests. You compare the control results with the test knife or knives and that can tell you if the cutting media is changed. Phil.

This level of humidity control is beyond reasonable. I have it in the box in the closet and this is enough to have consistent results. Humidity variation in the box inside closed in the house minimal and does not affect testing.

I did repetitive test on Jody Muller knife and results was consistent - this make think that one test is enough. Cutting 200 times manila rope take one day testing and I would not damage my wrist doing this twice with control knife.

My method is open everybody can and will be welcomed to do same or better - keep rope canned or do test for each steel several times together with control knife. I will be excited to see results of this published here.

I myself do not have steel wrist and have to wait few days between testing until it got more or less healthy.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[guns_and_labs]

To do testing you need:
1. To be able to sharpen all you knives to same extra sharp level - whittle hair is good criteria.
2. Have solid sharpness testing method.
3. Cut only media you choose to test, not base where it lay down. If you cut butter on ceramic plate - all you knives will be dull very fast, but nor because of butter.

Without this results will be quite random.

Have you even read ISO 8442-5?

I'm no expert at steel, but I am supposed to be an expert at materials testing, and your methodology would NOT be considered "scientific". It remains somewhat systematic but still anecdotal.

This level of humidity control is beyond reasonable. I have it in the box in the closet and this is enough to have consistent results. Humidity variation in the box inside closed in the house minimal and does not affect testing.

I'm curious as to your testing methodology to assure consistent humidity. I control humidity and temperature with a $25,000 stability chamber. I measure humidity with a variety of multichannel sensors that are certified accurate within 1%. Our monitoring over the past eight years matches the results of other members of NCSLI -- a box in a closet does not control humidity.

Furthermore, our humidity and temperature control are all focused around the degradation of material - including such things as hemp and manila - and humidity variations of as little as 5% have a measurable effect.

 

[Josh K]

I find it funny that you say you're testing the steel yet you have ZDP-189 at 3 different places on your "list" of edge retention.

 

[nozh2002]

Have you even read ISO 8442-5?

I'm no expert at steel, but I am supposed to be an expert at materials testing, and your methodology would NOT be considered "scientific". It remains somewhat systematic but still anecdotal.

I am just curious about logic how does this three requirements you just quoted:

1. Equal Initial Sharpness.
2.Sharpness measurement.
3. Media isolation.

make my tests are non scientific? Also what is definition of scientific. Do you think Isaac Newton experiments scientific? He did not control humidity to 1% level (as well as Edison, Curie etc).

Now of course you may have you opinion that 5% variation may affect cutting, sure, but. Why do you think my way of keeping this under control in box in the closet in the house does not prevent little variation of humidity outside house to affect rope?

Any test results you can provide which demonstrate this - if you like to be scientific, of course. I have mine - I tested several time same knife to make sure that results consistent.

So in general again I am not surprised that anyone can came up with tons of way to criticize my tests as well as anything. I do not see value in this.

But if you do your test for edge holding with you fantastic humidity control it will be way more useful than criticize effort of others. I know for sure that this is hard work almost sacrifice, but this will be real deal not another criticizing which any teenager can do just fine.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[guns_and_labs]

I am just curious about logic how does this three requirements you just quoted:

1. Equal Initial Sharpness.
2.Sharpness measurement.
3. Media isolation.

make my tests are non scientific? Also what is definition of scientific. Do you think Isaac Newton experiments scientific? He did not control humidity to 1% level (as well as Edison, Curie etc).

Now of course you may have you opinion that 5% variation may affect cutting, sure, but. Why do you think my way of keeping this under control in box in the closet in the house does not prevent little variation of humidity outside house to affect rope?

Any test results you can provide which demonstrate this - if you like to be scientific, of course. I have mine - I tested several time same knife to make sure that results consistent.

So in general again I am not surprised that anyone can came up with tons of way to criticize my tests as well as anything. I do not see value in this.

But if you do your test for edge holding with you fantastic humidity control it will be way more useful than criticize effort of others. I know for sure that this is hard work almost sacrifice, but this will be real deal not another criticizing which any teenager can do just fine.

Thanks, Vassili.

Because the relevant variables are not sufficiently characterized and the identified variables are insufficiently defined and controlled.

I'm glad you believe that you and your tests are on the same level as Curie, Edison and Newton. Good for you.

I don't know what part of California you inhabit, but several of the UC campuses offer excellent programs in materials research, and would me much more qualified (and patient) than I at educating you on scientific testing. UCLA, UCSD and UCSB come to mind. I have a couple of PhDs from UCSB that seem well educated in the science.

As far as publishing my company's research on materials testing for organic materials, no. It is commercially worth a great deal, and I have no reason to put it in the public domain. I do provide it to my regulatory agencies, and I am audited. I will tell you that humidity variations have a significant effect on organic material's instant workability. That's "ease of cutting", in case the term is unfamiliar.

I suspect that Spyderco and others also have reasons why they don't publish their research, but rely on providing their methodology and conclusions. I don't blame them.

 

[nozh2002]

Because the relevant variables are not sufficiently characterized and the identified variables are insufficiently defined and controlled.

This one is just cool - I'll treasure this wording for quite a while! Thanks! Would you mind if I will use it time to time too?

I'm glad you believe that you and your tests are on the same level as Curie, Edison and Newton. Good for you.

I don't know what part of California you inhabit, but several of the UC campuses offer excellent programs in materials research, and would me much more qualified (and patient) than I at educating you on scientific testing. UCLA, UCSD and UCSB come to mind. I have a couple of PhDs from UCSB that seem well educated in the science.

As far as publishing my company's research on materials testing for organic materials, no. It is commercially worth a great deal, and I have no reason to put it in the public domain. I do provide it to my regulatory agencies, and I am audited. I will tell you that humidity variations have a significant effect on organic material's instant workability. That's "ease of cutting", in case the term is unfamiliar.

I suspect that Spyderco and others also have reasons why they don't publish their research, but rely on providing their methodology and conclusions. I don't blame them.

So in short - you do not have any tests to present here on edge holding, as well as you do not have any test results which can prove your theory on how humidity affects edge cutting rope tests.

Here we are again have only mine test results and this is a bottom line of this. There is no test results to back up theory that CPM S90V as good as ZDP-189 and vanadium carbides may compete with high hardness. So wat differs it then from whatever theory I came up with? They both do not have test confirmation.

Actually I my tests confirms that ZDP-189 is better then CPM S90V. And this is only what available now.

And yes I know for sure that I have same or better lab equipment then Isaak Newton, Edison and Curie (as well as any scientists hundreds years ago). We had special mandatory class - "Science History" in Moscow State University.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[nozh2002]

I find it funny that you say you're testing the steel yet you have ZDP-189 at 3 different places on your "list" of edge retention.

Oh! I also has D2 in several places, CPM S30V in several places etc.
I may suspect that this may be due to different manufacturers doing heat treatment differently - what do you think?

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Josh K]

So in short - you do not have any tests to present here on edge holding, as well as you do not have any test results which can prove your theory on how humidity affects edge cutting rope tests.

Here we are again have only mine test results and this is a bottom line of this. There is no test results to back up theory that CPM S90V as good as ZDP-189 and vanadium carbides may compete with high hardness. So wat differs it then from whatever theory I came up with? They both do not have test confirmation.

Actually I my tests confirms that ZDP-189 is better then CPM S90V. And this is only what available now.

And yes I know for sure that I have same or better lab equipment then Isaak Newton, Edison and Curie (as well as any scientists hundreds years ago). We had special mandatory class - "Science History" in Moscow State University.

Thanks, Vassili.

Your testing is erratic (as shown), your methods are inconsistent (with everyone else's standards), and your behavior is rude.

Why do people keep trying to correct you?

By the way, you are (in the above, bold, statement) discounting the CATRA tests done on ZDP-189 and S90V.

 

[Josh K]

Oh! I also has D2 in several places, CPM S30V in several places etc.
I may suspect that this may be due to different manufacturers doing heat treatment differently - what do you think?

Thanks, Vassili.

You're saying that Yuna's heat treat is so much worse then Spyderco's (with the same steel nonetheless) that one (Spyderco's) is at the very top of the chart and Yuna's is at the bottom?

Oh, and another Yuna in the middle somewhere.

 

[nozh2002]

Your testing is erratic (as shown), your methods are inconsistent (with everyone else's standards), and your behavior is rude.

Why do people keep trying to correct you?

By the way, you are (in the above, bold, statement) discounting the CATRA tests done on ZDP-189 and S90V.

As we already found out there are no CATRA test results available which shows this. So far it was only this was sad by Sal once: "ZDP and S90 V seem to be similar in edge holding on CATRA tests".

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Josh K]

As we already found out there are no CATRA test results available which shows this. So far it was only this was sad by Sal once: "ZDP and S90 V seem to be similar in edge holding on CATRA tests".

Thanks, Vassili.

And there were CATRA numbers to follow it up. You're not being very bright if you can't like what Sal said to numbers that were said by Sal.

 

[nozh2002]

You're saying that Yuna's heat treat is so much worse then Spyderco's (with the same steel nonetheless) that one (Spyderco's) is at the very top of the chart and Yuna's is at the bottom?

Oh, and another Yuna in the middle somewhere.

Yes Yuna was very first I tested, before test procedure was established, this is why after I decided to retest Yuna again - there is Russian sayings "First crepe always as a clot".

But I think I did mentioned this before many times already.

So to prove consistency of the tests I did test same knife (Sniper Blade mini LPC 1095 steel by Jody Muller) several times and had consistent results.

So I am convinced that my test results are consistent.

But once again there no too much other test results we have.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Josh K]

Yes Yuna was very first I tested, before test procedure was established, this is why after I decided to retest Yuna again - there is Russian sayings "First crepe always as a clot".

But I think I did mentioned this before many times already.

So to prove consistency of the tests I did test same knife (Sniper Blade mini LPC 1095 steel by Jody Muller) several times and had consistent results.

So I am convinced that my test results are consistent.

But once again there no too much other test results we have.

Thanks, Vassili.

So why keep it on the list then?

 

[nozh2002]

So why keep it on the list then?

To me this is like log. I feel I can not edit this. I think if I edit it it may compromise entire set. Can you imagine - edited test results? It will be like crafted. I simple can not do this. You may ignore it, but I can not remove it. After all what if I am in deed wrong? I can not craft results to looks better myself.

As well I like everybody to see everything and have their own conclusion. I am OK if you do not trust me, if you disagree, if you analyze this yourself and came to different conclusion - it does not mean of course that I will agree with you and accept it. But your conclusion based on same raw data may be different and better then mine - so I may benefit from this.

Some people already try to apply some statistical software to this raw data. But nothing yet breathtaking. But who knows may be you made some interesting discovery analyzing this tomorrow.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Karda]

At this point, some sage advice from Esav would apply here also

At this point, I think it is obvious that anyone who responds to nozh2002 at all deserves the non-answer he gets. Let it go: Do Not Feed The Trolls. Do not complain to the mods when you do feed the trolls and they spit it back at you.

Do not make this thread more trouble than it's worth. Continue the discussion with productive, cooperative members.

 

[guns_and_labs]

At this point, some sage advice from Esav would apply here also

Sorry, what was I thinking? Of course.

 

[Broos]

Have you even read ISO 8442-5?

Ha Ha - who is this ISO guy? And believe me, he won't be bothered by those ASTM, NIST, or ASME characters either! i gotta admit sometimes it is pretty comical from a nerdly engineer's perspective...

And I hope I'm not feeding the trolls - shouldn't be because spanky put me on ignore a loooong time ago....