Cutting Test of My Folders

M

me2

Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
5,091
This was a test of ease of cutting, not edge holding. I used a bathroom scale and some cardboard from the same box and checked how much force it took to push the blade full depth and beyond into the cardboard. Past full depth, the force was pretty constant.

Here are the knives, in order from lowest to highest effort to push cut the cardboard. All were sharpened to high polish, no 220 grit edges or anything like that. There is a thread on knifetests with more detail. I did these 2 weeks ago and have forgotten some details.

Chinese Cheapie Slipjoint - sharpened on the belt sander with loaded leather. Very sharp, but with minimal edge holding, though adequate for daily use as a pocket knife. 2.5" blade, 1/16" thick, full flat grind with a fillet knife type point sweep. The lowest force to cut of any I had available.

Parker Cutlery Trapper - belt sander sharpened with loaded leather. Also very sharp. I havent carried it to see about edge holding, though it whittled a slingshot for my kids and still shaved. Responds well to a steel too. 3" blade, full flat grind, 1/16" thick. Second place.

Benchmade 805 TSEK, Benchmade 550 Griptillian HG, Gerber Drop Point folder - tied for third place. I couldnt tell the difference with the scale consisitently, though the Grip seemed to have a slight lead. Griptillian sharpened on the belt sander, tested for edge holding, touched up on Sharpmaker. 805 TSEK still has factory edge from a blade replacement from Benchmade, except for some stropping touchups on 0.3 micron lapping film. This one is partially serrated, so only the plain edge portion was tested. The Gerber edge came straight from the belt sander with leather.

Reground Buck Scoutlite - old enough that it still has a 425 Modified blade, flat reground to a 0.005" edge after sharpening. Regrind was necessary to keep using it after 20 years, but its ugly as sin. Slightly behind the group above for 4th place.

Spyderco Delica, Generation 4 - belt sander sharpened and touched up on the Sharpmaker. Very used and the edge has been resharpened a lot and thinned from the original factory edge. 5th place.

Byrd Cara Cara - used and sharpened a lot, sharpened on the belt sander and touched up on the Sharpmaker. Last place, but barely behind the Delica.

I was surprised the Delica was behind the Benchmades, but this also happened years ago when I did the same test between a Benchmade Ares and Generation 3 Delica. I figure its gotta be the saber grind that puts the Delica behind. I figured the Scoutlite would do better, but it seems that blade thickness has at least as much to do as edge thickness and sharpness.
 
An interesting test. Thanks for posting it.

Your results remind me of the Buck Edge 2000 development. Buck found that blade profile and edge angle had more impact on CATRA cutting performance than anything else. Sounds like you may have found the same thing.
 
Nice tests. Thin blade stock, thin grinds, and thin edges really help to lower the force to cut. That is one of the reasons I love Krein regrinds, they just cut so much better than stock. My Endura ZDP is night and day better at cutting with it's FFG and .010" edge than it was with the stock saber grind.

How much practice do you have with scale testing? I tried scale testing and it is tough for me to get consistent results. I'm sure I just need more practice, but I remerber cutting rope on a scale and having it bounce around too much to get consistent results. Maybe if I had 30 years of practice like Phil Wilson I could do better, but just initially trying it out I sucked and gave up on it. I need to try it again and practice until I can get consistent results.

Mike
 
knarfeng said:
An interesting test. Thanks for posting it.

Your results remind me of the Buck Edge 2000 development. Buck found that blade profile and edge angle had more impact on CATRA cutting performance than anything else. Sounds like you may have found the same thing.
Click to expand...

Good point but a better steel also allows a more acute bevel.
 
This is the 2nd or 3rd time. I have never been able to get repeatable results from rope cutting, and I now doubt the results I get from cardboard, until I can verfiy them another way. The cutting tests here were repeated a couple of times before a final result was given. The scales were not difficult to read, but is for people, and differences in less than 5lb dont mean much to it.
 
it's necessary to have = edge angles @ = blade profiles to accurately compare different knives @ different alloys.
 
DennisStrickland said:
it's necessary to have = edge angles @ = blade profiles to accurately compare different knives @ different alloys.
Click to expand...
No it is not. To compare knives to one another you don't need to alter them but the edges should be sharpened the same. Now if you are trying to compare something like steels, finishes, grinds, or something like that then I'd agree the knives should be the same.
 
12 or 14 yrs. back ka-bar brought out 2 soft plastic handles small skinner patterns with a high thin profile grind . these knives wre tested % reviewed in blade mag.author was a well known maker, & the entire storey was emphasis on import. of how a thin blade from yery mediocre alloy cut still cut better than blades with better steel but a wedgee profile.i tessted it on cardboard @ this blade from 440a outcut blades in 06,154cm, d2 & ats 34.the results proved his point tottally.have a bussee combat would"nt cut worth a damn till i reprofiled the blunt edge . one test is worth a 1000 opinions.
 
db said:
No it is not. To compare knives to one another you don't need to alter them but the edges should be sharpened the same. Now if you are trying to compare something like steels, finishes, grinds, or something like that then I'd agree the knives should be the same.
Click to expand...


Cutting performance is more about the blade geometry than the edge, no matter how you sharpen the shape and finish of the blade will always determine the overall cutting performance of the knife.
 
Thats what I've found. One of my favorite folders lost every cutting contest I put it it. It was a CRKT Crawford Kasper folder, large version. Every knife I had at the time would cut the cardboard with less force, but it was still my favorite.

Still, this test does bring back the idea of 1/32" thick O1 or A2 blades at 63+ HRc. Lateral strength, no. Toughness, no. Stiffness, no. Durability, no. Cutting ability, yes. Edge holding, yes. Availability, no.
 
me2 said:
Still, this test does bring back the idea of 1/32" thick O1 or A2 blades at 63+ HRc. Lateral strength, no. Toughness, no. Stiffness, no. Durability, no. Cutting ability, yes. Edge holding, yes. Availability, no.
Click to expand...

Bingo. I agree with others, that the geometry helps the cut, but having the correct steel and heat treat for the intended application can allow you to alter the geometry in a more "extreme" way.

I have really gone over to ZDP for all my thin cutters after a trip to Tom Krein. I can get them thinner than other steels, allowing for more cutting and edge holding. Certainly VG 10 and other steels do well when thinned, but the high hardness in my ZDP blades gives the blade the strength for superior edge stability. Just don't put lateral stresses on the blade... BTDT...

For my thicker/more robust edges, I'm still liking steels like VG 10, Carbon V, etc. There's no advantage that I can see in using a super steel, and sharpening takes just that much longer with a thick edge.

It's nice, however, to see a "different" type of review, thanks for doing this one!
 
I don't understand your configuration. Did you have a stack of cardboard and push the entire edge length into the cardboard until the blade spine was even with the surface of the cardboard? Did you take a single sheet of cardboard and push the edge into the edge of the a cardboard until the spine was even with the edge of the cardboard?

If you are trying to force a blade through the middle of something as stiff as cardboard much of the resistance comes from wedging the material apart. In that case your ultimate force depends greatly on the thickness of the blade and the angle of the blade bevel (this is the simple mechanics of wedges). If you want to observe the effects of your sharpening more than the blade geometry you want to reduce wedging effects. Try doing all of your cutting close to the side edge of your cardboard. Instead of slicing into the middle of the cardboard try slicing off about 1/4-inch slices from the end of the sheet. That will tremendously reduce pinching effects.
 
Thanks for posting your results. While cardboard may give a premium to thinness beyond some other media, a premium exists when cutting almost any material. I think this reinforces the intuitive notion that if everything else is equal, the thinner edge/blades will cut best. You'd have to convince me that the shape (convex, straight, or faceted) has a lot to do with it.

That leads to the intuitive assumption that a steel comparison should start with equal cross sections.
 
This was a test of cutting ability for each of the knives I had at the time. I did not intend to test the sharpness, I just put it in so everyone would know where I started. All were shaving sharp. I just put one piece up on edge and cut straight down into the carboard parallel to the corrugations in the middle layer, no slice. I cut more than the width of the blade deep, but after the spine went in, the force was constant as far as I could measure with the scale. I've been on jobs and had to cut wall board with a Schrade peanut, but my Benchmade 805 couldnt do it. I was just looking to see which of my knives could cut with the least amount of effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top