Cutlery Science?

MVF said:
I also think there are always many willing to criticize the one who actually does something.
Click to expand...

No offense intended, but I think there are even more people who are willing to criticize critical thought without much effort to investigate the science behind what is being discussed.

You have to decide what you want - if you want unscientific "testing", and conclusions that are really conjecture, then I agree - don't allow criticism or suggestions for improvements to any testing posted. Could we at least post that this idea is the opposite of good science?

If you want testing that provides results that could help you improve any product or our knowledge of how it works, then the test must be designed to at minimum provide repeatable results.

When unrepeatable testing leads to threads with 100 unsupported conclusions, why would it surprise anyone that a few folks post their opinion that many of the conclusions posted are conjecture (or just wrong)?

We would still be living in caves if no one ever tried to improve our understanding of how things work, and critical thought is the first essential step in making anything better.

I gotta go - my cold fusion heat pump is on the fritz. ;)
 
Broos said:
When unrepeatable testing leads to threads with 100 unsupported conclusions
Click to expand...
Unrepeatable? Which one of those tests are unrepeatable? As far as I can tell there's no shortage of cardboard, rope and even canned food. If you mean unrepeatable because testing is done by hand and forces applied will vary, then that is one part of the equation anyway, because those knives are made to be used by hand, not clamped in a vise.

Broos said:
We would still be living in caves if no one ever tried to improve our understanding of how things work, and critical thought is the first essential step in making anything better.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Which is why we need those tests to see if claims made by manufacturers and makers can hold. It is no religion U see.
Besides most of the critics never suggest anything constructive, but putting down his tests as unscientific and stupid.
 
Gator97 said:
Unrepeatable? Which one of those tests are unrepeatable?
Click to expand...

I was not referring to CS there, sorry for the confusion.

I was just going off on the criticism of criticism heard occasionally in threads that are about steel/knife performance.
 
I was away in other lands when CS was banned. I had found his threads entertaining. I love scientific mumbo jumbo. Sometimes I agreed with him and sometimes I didn't. I totally missed the thread that did the trick and was saddened to learn of his fate. I still visit his web site (his and old jimbos are the only ones I have found with machete and ax function and destruction tests) and note the broken/empty links sometimes encountered. I view it all (including bladeforums) as educational entertainment. You are entertained, and every once in a while, you learn/see something new. Kind of like watching reruns of the Discovery channel. Be told this knife is best, and three posts down someone is complaining their version of that same knife broke. Some makers complain about the tests and comments, some say 'please don't tell anyone but us and we will replace it for free,' and others just find it all very entertaining and hope the tests and comments continue. Getting back to Cutlery science, lets also note that not every review and test is always done by the same person. He has helpers and sometimes one tests one thing one way, and the other guy tests the competing product. Sometimes he changes blade or handle profiles and you will therefore never have exactly the same results with your blade or handle that isn't reprofiled. It is usually buried somewhere in the text, but you have to catch it. If you don't then you wonder about the results.
 
Thomas W said:
Is there a first step one must take prior to worshiping a Dark Lord?
Click to expand...

Use the word "trivial" as often as possible, along with "nonsense" and "liar." BTW, those are precise scientific terms. ;)
 
Last edited:
KeithAM said:
Use the word "trivial" as often as possible, along with "nonsense" and "liar." BTW, those are precise scientific terms. ;)
Click to expand...
Don't forget propogate, significant, and my favorite the misuse of obtuse.
 
Don't forget so full of themselves they offer the truth on knives and steel they have never used or seen and so full of themselves that they can make up "facts" and pit one knife maker against another and then slink away once the "facts" are presented by the makers in question.

There is no science there for the most part. Just an ego and an agenda that will not back down even if wrong.

Of course there ARE suckers born every minute.
 
Bastid said:
Don't forget so full of themselves they offer the truth on knives and steel they have never used or seen and so full of themselves that they can make up "facts" and pit one knife maker against another and then slink away once the "facts" are presented by the makers in question.

There is no science there for the most part. Just an ego and an agenda that will not back down even if wrong.

Of course there ARE suckers born every minute.
Click to expand...

I could not have said that better.

Thank you,

Jim
 
Broos said:
And no scientist worth a plug nickel believes his own work is absolutely infallible.
Click to expand...

That has not been my experience, but maybe the ones I've dealt with werent worth that.

Cliff tended to support Spyderco because they listened to their customers and were willing to try new things, and foresaw some upcoming trends. There was demand for a balisong, and then they started shipping it. Low carbon, highly corrosion resistant knives were rare, so they made a whole series. They have some of the newest steels at reasonable prices, changed tips on the Endura and Delica due to tip breakage complaints (though I like the older, pointier ones), ground their edges thinner, shipped them sharper, and hardened their steels harder than most other companies, and have dedicated a limited run to all those steels you've ever wanted to try in simple, affordable knives.

I really wish Cliff would provide references for some of the charts and graphs on his site. A considerable portion of the steel information comes directly from ASM, though the references aren't listed. Some if it does directly contradict what the manufacturer of the steel says. Also, dont forget the work of other researchers and knife testers he often links to, some of which does not agree with his view. As I see it, his basic path was to steer away from the latest fad steel and lean toward very thin edges with unusually high hardness in steels with relatively low carbide volume and wear resistance. Oddly enough, this is exactly what the Diamond Blade Friction Forged D2 did, which was developed by the BYU professor he disagreed with frequently.
 
me2 said:
....... Some if it does directly contradict what the manufacturer of the steel says. Also, dont forget the work of other researchers and knife testers he often links to, some of which does not agree with his view. As I see it, his basic path was to steer away from the latest fad steel and lean toward very thin edges with unusually high hardness in steels with relatively low carbide volume and wear resistance. Oddly enough, this is exactly what the Diamond Blade Friction Forged D2 did, which was developed by the BYU professor he disagreed with frequently.
Click to expand...

1. My favorite of that bunch was how he constantly quoted Phil Wilson as support for his "low alloy/high hardness/thin edge"(it was either 440A or 420HC, I can't remember)banner, UNTIL Phil switched to CPM154-because he felt it worked better) and then Dr. Stamp no longer quoted Phil.

2. Cliff did A LOT more than disgree......HE INSULTED...and vigorously....people who were really helping to understand some fairly complex conversation....and Cliff was arrogantly dismissive...it was off-the- charts rude, it was supremely combative, and it was patently laughable.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Last edited:
Kohai999 said:
it was either 440A or 420Jmod, I can't remember)banner, UNTIL Phil switched to CPM154-because he felt it worked better) and then Dr. Stamp no longer quoted Phil.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if Phil ever used 440A or 420J, I got his CPM-10V knife 2 years ago, and we discussed some other steel options for kitchen knives, the only thing that comes close to that was 440C, along with ats-34 and 154-cm, though that project was never finished. Currently he's making 2 blades for me, one CPM-10V and another CPM154-CM which he feels is better than 154-CM, thus he can harden it higher. Again, this time we also discussed few other options for blade steel, but nothing like 440A or 420J.
 
I think Cliff should apply to the Guinness Book of Records for the catagory of "Most post on a single forum site before getting banned".

17,000 + posts ( not many 1 liners ) before walking the plank, gotta be hard to beat.

I'm sure there were some pearls of wisdom to be found amongst all of the scientific steelyknifeobabble. RIP
 
Gator97 said:
I'm not sure if Phil ever used 440A or 420J, I got his CPM-10V knife 2 years ago, and we discussed some other steel options for kitchen knives, the only thing that comes close to that was 440C, along with ats-34 and 154-cm, though that project was never finished. Currently he's making 2 blades for me, one CPM-10V and another CPM154-CM which he feels is better than 154-CM, thus he can harden it higher. Again, this time we also discussed few other options for blade steel, but nothing like 440A or 420J.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it was 420HC, I'll mod my post to reflect that...from his website:

"As new steels are introduced I have discontinued the use of some of my old favorites (ATS 34, 154CM, 420HC.....)"

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Cliff was getting his PhD in Material Physics or similar - testing materials to destruction. I don't why you need a PhD for that. I know a couple high-school dropout laborers who will do demolitions for a very reasonable hourly wage.
 
Gator97 said:
Unrepeatable? Which one of those tests are unrepeatable? As far as I can tell there's no shortage of cardboard, rope and even canned food. If you mean unrepeatable because testing is done by hand and forces applied will vary, then that is one part of the equation anyway, because those knives are made to be used by hand, not clamped in a vise.
Click to expand...

Just so long as there is no allusion to the tests being scientific, then yes, his tests are repeatable. They are not repeatable using scientific methodology. They are also not reproduceable, other than that I can swing a knife at a board, and Cliff can swing a knife at a board. By calling his site "Cutlery Science", I think that there is an allusion to his tests have some kind of scientific merit. They do not. They do however contain useful information.
 
Wow, all this time has passed and the haters still have the fear in their hearts.:) Cliff must be one scary guy.

And by the by, how many of the makers that weren't coming here because of Cliff have showed up since his banning....:rolleyes:
 
Since Cliff was banned, the other members have wade through much less pseudoscientific bovine fecal matter. That's good enough for me.

Anyone who wants to find him--his website is available. I'm sure that it's about as interesting as watching paint dry, but anyone who likes can just type in the URL.
 
OilMan said:
Wow, all this time has passed and the haters still have the fear in their hearts.:) Cliff must be one scary guy.

And by the by, how many of the makers that weren't coming here because of Cliff have showed up since his banning....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Take a look around and see for yourself.

Oh I forgot... mod sas (and BFC owner sas) infraction issued; next fool please.

IF you are too stupid to realize that BFC is better off without the likes of him around maybe you will realize it the hard way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top