Discussion. Forging VS Stock Removal

There are plenty of forging-friendly steels used for stock removal that come from mills in a not-so-perfect condition for simply austenizing and hardening.
For the uneducated, this is a condition that lends itself to easy grinding, drilling, tapping, threading, etc.
But that condition is not one that is set-up to simply austenize and then harden.
For optimum performance, these steels need to go through numerous controlled thermal cycles of varying intensities that then puts them into a condition that the maker can use for hardening and tempering.
Simply because you have a mill-run steel does not mean that it's best to just do stock removal and subsequently harden.
Even many of the non-veteran forging knife makers know how to handle this, and they do it with their forges and ovens.
When we forge steel, the average and up forging knife maker knows these cycles and does so religiously with the steels that he forged.
Either way, those stock removal blade steels and the forged knife blade steels both mentioned end up in the same condition.
One is not better than the other.
They're the same.
 
I don't know but my some of my vintage forged straight razors (50 to 90 years old) feel real smooth and cut quite well. I am for sure no expert but I have have read the comments of an experienced razor maker who also agrees there is something different about the feel of a forged straight razor vs a stock removal and he uses both methods to make his straight razors.

Stock removal straight razors are also excellent but I am not convinced it's all the same in the end, nor am I saying one is better than the other.

Be aware science is always evolving and perhaps there are some things still yet to be discovered about the forging process and metal in general.
 
Karl B. Andersen said:
There are plenty of forging-friendly steels used for stock removal that come from mills in a not-so-perfect condition for simply austenizing and hardening.
For the uneducated, this is a condition that lends itself to easy grinding, drilling, tapping, threading, etc.
But that condition is not one that is set-up to simply austenize and then harden.
For optimum performance, these steels need to go through numerous controlled thermal cycles of varying intensities that then puts them into a condition that the maker can use for hardening and tempering.
Simply because you have a mill-run steel does not mean that it's best to just do stock removal and subsequently harden.
Even many of the non-veteran forging knife makers know how to handle this, and they do it with their forges and ovens.
When we forge steel, the average and up forging knife maker knows these cycles and does so religiously with the steels that he forged.
Either way, those stock removal blade steels and the forged knife blade steels both mentioned end up in the same condition.
One is not better than the other.
They're the same.
Click to expand...

This^^:thumbup:
 
I firmly believe that two identical knives, one forged one stock romoval with the same steel, heat treatments, geometry, etcetera would perform the same. So in discussing the benefits of one method over the other is more about shaping and materials use. Forging can allow for different shapes from the same size stock or a reduction in size to make more knives due to the method moving material vs removing material. However as Darcy pointed out some blades just call for one method over another. Like Darcy for the really thin blades I like stock removal. Using a hammer to make it fillet knife, barring that it not pattern welded steel, makes little sense. Conversely, making a 10" bowie from DHIII W2 rounds makes more sense to forge to shape. I would not say that there is a single answer that fits all the questions in the topic.

Chris
 
Good discussion guys. Knowledge equals more tools in the toolbox.


Darcy:)
 
I forge because I like it. I have yet to find another way to make Damascus without forging. I could buy it but then someone else has done the fun part. For that matter all steel has been forged at one point or another. We all know this. Can an inexperienced smith screw up a piece of steel?? Absolutely. But a stock removal maker can mess one up too. Knowledge is required to work steel properly. As Karl pointed out, the basics are taught to those who forge at an early point in their education. Well at least hopefully.

Someone else mentioned turning scrap/found/leftover steel into a usable tool. It can be done in the stock removal process. There are times when it is just plain impractical to do though. Here is a prime example.

huntersaxestartedas_zps9d7a15cc.jpg


I would love to see someone grind a hatchet out of the bar on top. That is what the hatchet was forged from.

I am with the majority here it seems. If you want to forge go for it. If not then grind or file or chew on it like a beaver. I really don't care how you get to the final product so long as you are happy with the outcome.
 
You can totally make pretty much any MONOSTEEL knife you want via stock removal and/or machining, even ones like Erik is talking about. Of course, you will have to start with a huge hunk of steel and machine and grind away perhaps 80% of it. A number of dazzling integral knives have been made that way over the years by guys like Edmund Davidson. Where is gets dodgy is with Damascus. Of course, you can buy someone else damascus, but in he end THEY had to forge that product and you haven't totally "made" that blade in the artistic sense at least in the opinion of some. Personally, I forge because it is a fun exercise and I like the historical aspects.
 
Forging works if you want to use a smaller piece of metal and hammer out a wider shape rather than start grinding a larger piece of metal, but once you've hammered out the shape.

Don't you still have to grind the blade after to taper the edge and finish for polishing etc.?

Forging it seems is just a way of saving on buying wider pieces of stock. However one needs to make or buy a forge, hammer out the metal (or buy a press) which takes it's toll on arm and back.

I just like the overall look of the knife. Forged or stock removal.
 
paneraica said:
Forging works if you want to use a smaller piece of metal and hammer out a wider shape rather than start grinding a larger piece of metal, but once you've hammered out the shape.

Don't you still have to grind the blade after to taper the edge and finish for polishing etc.?

Forging it seems is just a way of saving on buying wider pieces of stock. However one needs to make or buy a forge, hammer out the metal (or buy a press) which takes it's toll on arm and back.

I just like the overall look of the knife. Forged or stock removal.
Click to expand...

Some guys, Tim Lively is one example, forge so close to finished shape that hardly any stock removal remains to be done. I forge the bevels, distal taper, and taper the tang, but leave enough meat at the edge to protect the final edge from decarb. I normally take my bevels down to 50 or 60 thou with the hammer before rough grinding......then grind to 30 to 40 thou before heat treat......and finish grind to final dimensions after that.

Darcy
 
I try to do the same thing Darcy. I personally don't enjoy grinding as much as forging, so getting close means more fun time. Lin Rhea is another that comes to mind on accurately forging to shape.

Chris
 
The discussion seems like a foolish one, to me, almost searching for a means of division among makers. Better? Worse? Hardly. This has been covered ad nauseum, and people that have decided to take a stance won't be swayed. I have friends that are forgers, and friends that are stock removal, and I learn from and appreciate both. I have, in the past, swung a hammer, and will likely return to it for the creative expression of it, but the steels I'm using now aren't exactly conducive to shaping with heat, and in fact would likely be detrimental to the structure of the steel.

Why is it so important to take a stand? I can grind a distal taper just as efficiently as I can hammer one. No advantage one way or another. Why not use both methods as a means of creative expression, rather than as a tool to look down your nose at others, and segregate those people that should likely be brought together through a passion for handmade knives?
 
What about stainless? A stainless steel helps preserve a knife through the ages, but few forge stainless. Some custom knife buyers collect stainless steel knives for that reason alone.

Some ABS MS use stock removal for folding knives, is a forging a folding knife blade not really practical or needed?
 
The problem i see on the subject is when a maker exploits the ignorance or the beliefs of the customers to his own advantage, advocating the shaping of the blade as a selling point.

A milling machine is a great tool to have, and forging it is also a "tool" ...we can do knives without both of them, but why?
 
In a similar discussion Joe Caswell dropped this knowledge on us.




oTESVKI.jpg
 
brownshoe said:
What about stainless? A stainless steel helps preserve a knife through the ages, but few forge stainless. Some custom knife buyers collect stainless steel knives for that reason alone.

Some ABS MS use stock removal for folding knives, is a forging a folding knife blade not really practical or needed?
Click to expand...

Not exactly, a stainless steel can rust when the external layer of chromium oxide is damaged by scratches and other injuries and it is exposed to aggressive conditions like salt water and similar. In the other hand a carbon steel can last thousands years, thinking about swords and other weapons preserved in museums.
 
Can this be made via Stock Removal? Or even if it could would forging be a better approach?

23244869252_4d6e6ef13a_b.jpg
 
I think that this extraordinary knife was made both via forging than via stock removal. Two methods together borught this special result.
 
That is a beautiful knife.

Was stock removal utilized or was that straight off the anvil?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top