- Joined
- Oct 4, 2014
- Messages
- 76
deleted
Last edited:
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Cryogenics... do you care?
- Thread starter atavist
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 32,479
I've been making knives for going on 20 years and prefer Cryogenically treated stainless steels for my culinary knives. I have Paul Bos HT at Buck knives do all of my HTing of stainless steels and once any maker goes cryo they never look back.
Its repeatable proven science, not sales pitch.
Increased edge retention during regular use. You do not need to beat your knives to death to see the difference in edge retention.um. what?
got news for you...the Vlfberht or Ulfbehrt is a modern transcription of the inscription +VLFBERH+T, found on some Early Middle Ages Germanic swords of the 8th to 11th century.
[video=youtube;YVSsRunJ2K4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVSsRunJ2K4[/video]
....no cryogenics , internet, google, satellites or scientific dissertations were requested or even needed to make it. It took trial and error and especially hard work. The originals found are more than a thousand years old.
The only mumbo jumbo is people trying to reinvent the wheel.
Educate yourself.
------------------------
@ Rhino -
With respect, I disagree. Regardless of whether or not the "process" is repeatable and provable, I still maintain that someone's always looking for "easy street." By that I mean, just as a for instance, "Hey, get this cryogenic treated blade because its edge retention is such, it requires less sharpening!"
I still say it's man using science, and [to me] gimmicks, to promote and perpetuate lazy behavior. I don't buy into all these "super-steels" or even the cryo blades. My reasoning is in the Ulfbehrt post above. Use the [quality] blade as intended and maintain it properly and it should never fail in your lifetime. So we have to sharpen it....big deal. If a person is too lazy to maintain their blade properly, they probably don't deserve it to begin with.
BluntCut MetalWorks
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 3,462
** oopsy, I am rambling as usual **
It's true marketing can manipulate science to deceive customer on their GBU products. otoh, Kevin Cashen (the assistant in the depicted video above & actual metallurgist & his hypefreeforum) would agree, cryogenic has its role in ht, especially when dealing with high Cr and high alloy steels which hardening at high aust temperature. For these instances, Mf (martensite finish) usually in minus 120F to 200F. So Cryo utilizes to convert aust to mart, perhaps settle for reason low % of RA (retained austenite). Excess RA lowering edge stability and loss of toughness (aust converted to untemper mart, thus brittle).
My ht utilizes LN2 less and less but I will still LN2 quench (normal quench then continue to LN2 quench w/o snap temper) whenever hardening at high austenite temperature and steel has more than 12% of Cr or high percent of alloying elements. Given a choice between convert RA to mart using LN2 vs secondary tempering temperature range. LN2 is mostly gain, while high temper temperature has too many downsides. fyi - LN2 soak is when a blade submerge in LN2 for extended amount of time (hrs or even day). Will skip soak talk.
OK, can a - high Cr or high alloy or combine of both - non cryo (nor subzero) blade with high aust hardening and use low temper temperature range, perform as well (or even better than) of cryo counter part? YES but require more experty or resources than most heat-treater posses. It became a no brainer to use Cryo to capture 'low hanging fruit' benefits in this instance.
It's reasonable to ask, why not keep RA% low at Mr (martensite at room temperature) to start with? ... Well sure, we all want that and those other nifty attributes [ fine grain; fine carbide; better microstructure cohesion & coherent; stain resistant; uber tensile strength ]. Sometime high RA% at Mr is a cost, so one would use cryo as a way to alleviate/mitigate excess RA issue.
Cryo is cool; also a ht crutch; gimmick; blah blah. For those use it properly as a tool in metallurgy to produce better products, kudo :thumbup:
It's true marketing can manipulate science to deceive customer on their GBU products. otoh, Kevin Cashen (the assistant in the depicted video above & actual metallurgist & his hypefreeforum) would agree, cryogenic has its role in ht, especially when dealing with high Cr and high alloy steels which hardening at high aust temperature. For these instances, Mf (martensite finish) usually in minus 120F to 200F. So Cryo utilizes to convert aust to mart, perhaps settle for reason low % of RA (retained austenite). Excess RA lowering edge stability and loss of toughness (aust converted to untemper mart, thus brittle).
My ht utilizes LN2 less and less but I will still LN2 quench (normal quench then continue to LN2 quench w/o snap temper) whenever hardening at high austenite temperature and steel has more than 12% of Cr or high percent of alloying elements. Given a choice between convert RA to mart using LN2 vs secondary tempering temperature range. LN2 is mostly gain, while high temper temperature has too many downsides. fyi - LN2 soak is when a blade submerge in LN2 for extended amount of time (hrs or even day). Will skip soak talk.
OK, can a - high Cr or high alloy or combine of both - non cryo (nor subzero) blade with high aust hardening and use low temper temperature range, perform as well (or even better than) of cryo counter part? YES but require more experty or resources than most heat-treater posses. It became a no brainer to use Cryo to capture 'low hanging fruit' benefits in this instance.
It's reasonable to ask, why not keep RA% low at Mr (martensite at room temperature) to start with? ... Well sure, we all want that and those other nifty attributes [ fine grain; fine carbide; better microstructure cohesion & coherent; stain resistant; uber tensile strength ]. Sometime high RA% at Mr is a cost, so one would use cryo as a way to alleviate/mitigate excess RA issue.
Cryo is cool; also a ht crutch; gimmick; blah blah. For those use it properly as a tool in metallurgy to produce better products, kudo :thumbup:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2013
- Messages
- 1,483
Yes I care, keep pushing the envelope. Whether it is knife blades or breasts refinement is sought after and appreciated. God bless America
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2014
- Messages
- 76
deleted
Last edited:
I look that documentary because I educate myself before I chose modern powder steels to make some knives.
You talk about Crucible steel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucible_steel or wootz or bulat who came from the east and in western talks is mystical steel
but on eastern world as Russia etc. lot of blacksmith made that steel.
Example - https://www.facebook.com/pages/Arkady-Dabakyan-Wootz-Knives/305717482778765
And he says - Modern powder steel after correctly processing cut better as my bulat. Basically powder steels also wootz but made other ways in them matrix and carbides, as in wootz. But powder steel produced by industrial methods using expensive technology. No man with himself can not compete. It's just so.
But you need some mystical from past to make you special
no actually I posted that to make the point that over a thousand years ago, they were able to make some of the finest steels in existence.......without cryo...without the CRVonemillion, et al designations.
And if you actually listened while you watched, you would have heard the foundry president [who electron microscope-tested the pieces from the black smith] make the comment that this steel is difficult to produce and was impressed how it was made.
The point is it was done in antiquity and yet here we are, having a pissing match on the benefits of Cryo. Wasn't needed by warriors who hacked their way across the globe with 25" swords, it isn't needed now for someone's little 3" pocket knife or 8" combat knife that will likely see way less use.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2014
- Messages
- 76
deleted
Last edited:
Cryogenic treatment does not universally cause improvement. A member here named Hardheart tested several steels with and without cryogenic treatment and found the non-cryo treated blades held their edges better in the majority of tests. Cryo treated blades only did better in about 40% of the tests. Whether or not cryo benefits a blade is dependent on steel and overall heat treating procedure. There are cases where the cryo treated blades are actually softer than noncryo treated blades when the other steps in the procedure are held the same. So, just saying the blades are cryo treated doesn't really mean much. In the end, the maker has to decide if cryo works in their toolbox, and after all the theory and research, some comparisons are needed to make that decision.
Yes. thank you for pointing that out Capt. Obvious...oh wait, I've already done that...
....sit down and be quite....and that's what I'm alluding to when I call it a gimmick. There are going to be very few [not to include me] who care that much [or even at all] about blades to even bother researching [in detail] the benefits of cryo - and even then, the entire process seems subjective to:
1. not only the steels used, but
2. the maker and his actual [versus theoretical] knowledge on what he's doing with it.
Just because a knife maker makes awesome non-cryo blades doesn't mean he's going to make [even] better cryo'd blades. Some may but who's to say? Who's going to donate their $1500 knife for severe testing? not too many if you ask me...
I still only see it as a added incentive *cough gimmick cough* to buy _this_ guy's knife over _this_ guys....
My whole point using the Viking Steel example, is awesome steel has been made in antiquity. They didn't need Cryo treatment to accomplish some of the best swords of all time - ALL time. The proof is in front of us....some are just dying to refute it by quoting every dogmatic piece of science they can find to support their claim. Mine is simple - start with the best steel in the first place and you don't need all the added bullshit.
Last edited:
ArabianKnight
Gold Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
- Messages
- 574
Just an excuse to charge more
BluntCut MetalWorks
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 3,462
I could start with an analogy example - symptom = intense headache. Old day cure/alleviate with willow bark or in conjunction with alcohol. But nice to have MRI for cases of brain tumor/etc.
Low Cr high carbon steels are my fav but I do tinker & appreciate HSS and variety of Particle Metallurgy steels. Cryo is a tool, it's useful when apply correctly. A generalization of negativity on all cryo uses because of cryo mis-use/gimmick/marketing-crap is not constructive. Read up on metallurgy and cryo, there must be reasons why many ppl/companies/researches/etc. are employing cryo in their works. Be inform, stay on science track, avoid/discard hyperbole/crapola.
My today thread - http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...f-high-strength-high-toughness-hardened-steel
This W2 chopper didn't use cryo. Does it needs cryo in the first place, NO. but for those screw up ht end up with excess RA, thereby cryo would help (yes, a crutch/bandage). If I make this chopper out of D2/psf27/3V/semi-high-alloy-stainless steel, I would most likely employ cryo to reduce RA. Since high RA would seriously reduce edge stability for intended tasks.
Low Cr high carbon steels are my fav but I do tinker & appreciate HSS and variety of Particle Metallurgy steels. Cryo is a tool, it's useful when apply correctly. A generalization of negativity on all cryo uses because of cryo mis-use/gimmick/marketing-crap is not constructive. Read up on metallurgy and cryo, there must be reasons why many ppl/companies/researches/etc. are employing cryo in their works. Be inform, stay on science track, avoid/discard hyperbole/crapola.
My today thread - http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...f-high-strength-high-toughness-hardened-steel
This W2 chopper didn't use cryo. Does it needs cryo in the first place, NO. but for those screw up ht end up with excess RA, thereby cryo would help (yes, a crutch/bandage). If I make this chopper out of D2/psf27/3V/semi-high-alloy-stainless steel, I would most likely employ cryo to reduce RA. Since high RA would seriously reduce edge stability for intended tasks.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 32,479
@ Rhino -
With respect, I disagree. Regardless of whether or not the "process" is repeatable and provable, I still maintain that someone's always looking for "easy street." By that I mean, just as a for instance, "Hey, get this cryogenic treated blade because its edge retention is such, it requires less sharpening!"
I still say it's man using science, and [to me] gimmicks, to promote and perpetuate lazy behavior. I don't buy into all these "super-steels" or even the cryo blades. My reasoning is in the Ulfbehrt post above. Use the [quality] blade as intended and maintain it properly and it should never fail in your lifetime. So we have to sharpen it....big deal. If a person is too lazy to maintain their blade properly, they probably don't deserve it to begin with.[/QUOTE]
People are welcome to think and believe most anything they wish in this country. I use Cryo on the Stainless steel knives I make like 440C , CPM-154 , CPM-S35VN and AEB-L and they have improvement with Cryo in edge retention.
If you don't like that for some reason? You don't have to do it.
Also I find that people that shun Cryo and are hung up with steels like 10XX series spring steels for instance are usually sharpening junkies and avoid Steels & Sciences that give improved edge retention cause they can wait to get the stones out twice as often Peace and have a nice evening.
With respect, I disagree. Regardless of whether or not the "process" is repeatable and provable, I still maintain that someone's always looking for "easy street." By that I mean, just as a for instance, "Hey, get this cryogenic treated blade because its edge retention is such, it requires less sharpening!"
I still say it's man using science, and [to me] gimmicks, to promote and perpetuate lazy behavior. I don't buy into all these "super-steels" or even the cryo blades. My reasoning is in the Ulfbehrt post above. Use the [quality] blade as intended and maintain it properly and it should never fail in your lifetime. So we have to sharpen it....big deal. If a person is too lazy to maintain their blade properly, they probably don't deserve it to begin with.[/QUOTE]
People are welcome to think and believe most anything they wish in this country. I use Cryo on the Stainless steel knives I make like 440C , CPM-154 , CPM-S35VN and AEB-L and they have improvement with Cryo in edge retention.
If you don't like that for some reason? You don't have to do it.
Also I find that people that shun Cryo and are hung up with steels like 10XX series spring steels for instance are usually sharpening junkies and avoid Steels & Sciences that give improved edge retention cause they can wait to get the stones out twice as often
Peace and have a nice evening.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2006
- Messages
- 1,389
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 44,314
If you cannot research the topic due to time constraints, lack of interest, sheer laziness or any other reason, that is okay. Don't insult people, don't be abrasive, and don't drift the discussion to personal attacks. I'm not a knife maker, but. I am going to go out on a limb and say that it's just a tad bit more complicated than you are making things out to be. You're statments follow the causal reductionism fallacy, almost to the letter. My point is simple, discuss the topic respectfully or stop posting and take a break or educate yourself on the topic before arguing yourself into a hole.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2014
- Messages
- 76
deleted
Last edited:
And what is your accomplish for knife making, drawing some mustad on blade
Pretty much nothing and you are lucky I even did that. I don't don't profess to know it all and in fact, I initially asked a question based upon my lack of understanding of Cryo. Upon reading some of the answers, I am still unconvinced that the process is even necessary.
You decided to chime in after not reading the previous 3 pages, to include my quote of myself. Don't get mad when I point out that perhaps you should read the entire thread before failing at trying to insult me.
You can't insult me because you are unrelevant person with big mouth
It's "Irrelevant" - and yes..I am a strongly opinionated person with as much right to state that opinion as anyone else.
I don't say that cryo is some uber perfect...but for some steels it's huge difference and benefits...I make my choice to make best possible knives because I like that
and I try to feed my knife passion that is all :thumbup:
I'm not saying it either - in fact, I'm questioning whether it's needed at all. I've asked my questions and was unconvinced of the answers. I then proved that it wasn't necessary for thousand + years and still, people "swear by it" because "science says so." The fact is, there's a division among those providing answers and yes, boiled down in a "casual reduction fallacy" answer, the entire process is 1. subject to the steels used, and; 2. whether or not the knife maker can make positive use of the process.
...but even after all that, historical fact has proven blade makers didn't need Cryo to make the best knives or swords. Their 'quest' began by FIRST making the best steels they could and then their weapons from that.
----
Sir, I respectfully say that I was not the one to initiate "a personal attack" - only rebut one. However, I will try not to.
...and people tend to make things "complicated" on their own because "simple" sometimes isn't good enough. I stand by what I said, that Cryo is little more than a crutch/gimmick because even with all the information they've provided me, I'm still unconvinced it's at all beneficial when you 1. make the knife properly; 2. use the knife properly, and; 3. take care of the knife properly.
As far as the rest, I question the "need" for it and based upon only one [of many] historical references. I believe I've made that clear in the Viking Sword / Crucible Steel video...and yes....I'm from the "school of K.I.S.S." - so if you want to associate that to a 'contrived symptom definition' of "casual reduction fallacy" then so be it. "If it ain't broke......" has served me for over 35 years. I doubt anyone's 'opinion' is going to change that.
I'll bow out now. Have a nice morning fellas.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2014
- Messages
- 76
deleted
Last edited:
Well now, I didn't say that. It is a factor, but it is considered on a case by case basis. Someone using AEB-L and saying they cryo treated the blade might get my interest. Someone saying they use 1055 carbon steel and cryo treated it won't have much influence on my decision. I may still buy it, but the cryo treatment won't be a factor.