- Joined
- May 2, 2004
- Messages
- 6,848
These are with the blade sitting inside the lens can't get any closer.
-
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.
ERU sharpener review. Latest Feedback 2/14
- Thread starter Fred.Rowe
- Start date
These are with the blade sitting inside the lens can't get any closer.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 6,642
All in all a good design. I can't help but notice that the current carbide scrapers using crossed plates or rods could be capable of matching variable angles by simply twisting the widget till the plates both make steady contact, and working from there. Unfortunately none of the current crop seem to realize this and don't give enough clearance to make this method work.
Looks like it should have some success in the marketplace, though the $75 proposed price tag is a might steep maybe. There are a lot of options at that price, and a lot of superficially similar units that are a lot cheaper. Whether the ERU is a better choice or not might not factor in.
Best of luck, if the amount of interest here is any indication it should do A OK.
Looks like it should have some success in the marketplace, though the $75 proposed price tag is a might steep maybe. There are a lot of options at that price, and a lot of superficially similar units that are a lot cheaper. Whether the ERU is a better choice or not might not factor in.
Best of luck, if the amount of interest here is any indication it should do A OK.
- Joined
- May 2, 2004
- Messages
- 6,848
Superficially similar is a good observation I believe. That was something I kept in mind, when I was working on design. It could not be plastic, everything seems to be made from plastic today and I wanted something more than that. I was interested in durability and machinability as well.
The degree settings are dead on with this design. The machining of the disc and indicators are done using a cnc program with all aspects being connected. When you make a setting of 20 degrees the angle at the "V" is exactly 20 degrees, its the case with all settings. I've tested many of the variable set sharpeners out there and I did not find one that was accurate outside the Lansky and some other proven tools.
I agree that 75 dollars is not cheap but then again its not made cheaply. This is a refined precision tool and not in the same realm as the plastic sharpeners that have tolerances that are + or - .
No other field carry sharpener out there can accomplish what the ERU can when sharpening a scandi ground blade. The carbide strips on this sharpener are a full 1 inch high when set at 24 degrees. You can sharpen the actual bevels on even the larger scandi ground blades to factory set.
Its hard to compare this sharpener to those already on the market because there are none really like it. If you know of one, please post a pic or link. I've looked high and low for years and have nothing to compare it to, therefor the patent application. I surely could have missed it and would like to know if there is something.
I believe the complete package has cool factor as well, with its Wicket & Craig leather sheath and anodized and dyed aluminum disc. We were shooting for a tool that excelled in the field and that people would be proud to show and share its uses with their friends.
Someone noted above that the folks on here were not the market for this tool and that is probably true; but I wanted to post here first off because most people here no what sharp is and are pretty discerning when it comes to tools.
Thank you for taking the time to post. The input here has helped me.
Fred
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2011
- Messages
- 795
So are these the before or after pictures? I am a little confused.
You and I seem to differ greatly on the definition of smooth and even ,
In the 1st picture I see an uneven bevel (smiles and frowns...# , closer to the heel we see a jaggedness that is typical of the carbide pinch type "sharpeners". Lots of scratches leftover from the initial grinding are also visible , while these aren't a sin they aren't ideal either.
Moving on to the 2nd picture this one looks more even #from what we can see#. What I don't like is the chip about 1/3 of the way in from the right hand side. Moving along the edge we see that there is some light reflecting back at us right along the very edge of the edge , #look for the white reflection at the very edge of the edge on either side of the flash spot.# I initially thought this was a burr , but I'm not certain as this type of scraper would not leave a burr. Leaving me to wonder exactly what is going on there. While I have a theory , I would be interested in seeing this knife under a Veho...
The 3rd picture is slightly more difficult to analyze , but we see some "chipping" just left of the middle , and again about 2/3 of the way down the blade #moving heel to tip# I suspect that this "chipping" is actually the tearing that these pull through carbide products are so well known for. Again on this knife we see a white reflection right at the very edge of the edge. This interests me , once again I would like to see this knife under a Veho.
Moving along to the 4th picture , initially this looks like the best of the bunch. We see scratches running both vertically #from the original grinds# and horizontally #from the ERU# , with the crosshatching near the tip you could almost play checkers there. Looks to me like the carbide blades are uneven , using the same carbide blades to do multiple angles in this type of application would cause uneven wear on the carbide. IE the bottom of the carbide will wear faster than the top. Using a tool like this to try and do an entire Scandi is a poor idea anyways , you would be much better off applying a small microbevel and leaving the main bevel well enough alone.
Given the cost of the ERU it appears to me that the results are not ideal , especially given all the superior options out there in this price range.
I think that you can afford a Veho to give us all a better look at what is actually going on at the very edge of the edge , if not I am sure someone will document it if this goes to a passaround.
Im not trying to trash you or your product , but so far I am seeing the same results I see with every other one of these. Its just a well documented fact that the ceramic ones work much better. And to be honest I'm not even a fan of those.
Your definition of smooth and even is to a higher standard than the target audience of this device if those bevels are not satisfactory to you. Not that I'm saying there's a problem there, just that those sure look "good enough" to me, and I'd venture to say I know a thing or two more about keeping a knife sharp than a lot of kinfe consumers out there. Now that's not to toot my horn, what I'm saying is that being of slightly-above average discretion when it comes to edges, I would gladly call those "even and smooth", but if I was tryign to be a prefectionist about it probably not.
To me the "chip" looked more like a "dent" or a "roll" from usage, he did say it was 1084... This type of sharpener wouldn't actually remove a deformation like that. Either way there's really no indication that the sharpener caused this over just normal use so I don't think it's exactly fair to attribute it to the EDU. Saying that's the classic symptom of pull-through sharpeners ignores that the execution is not actually the same. I'm also not quite sure I follow what you're saying about uneven wear. To be honest, having worked with carbide a lot in machining, I'm not really all that convinced wear is actually an issue when we're talking about pulling knife steels through it at what are probably going to be low hardness levels, low pressure and low speed movements. I very highly doubt that any knife enthusiast will take a very hard heat-treated knife blade merely on the basis that if they actually have a knife that's heated harder than most, they are probably going to be a bit picky of their field sharpener for it. Again we have to keep sight of the target audience here...
Honestly the idea that appeals to me the most about this is the notion that you could get an edge that's a working, serviceable edge--meaning it cuts things--within a matter of seconds, and not cause damage to your edge that is commonly associated with thise pull-through carbide type of sharpeners. The key difference that's been discussed a lot here is that the faces of the carbide inserts are meant to be flush with the faces of the bevels. This is a huge difference because so many of the pull-through types I have seen and observed tend to have two things going on 1) They are very coarsely ground, with machine marks you could fild your fingernail on 2) They are cut at such angles that they actually "cut" and "attack' the steel. It makes sense too that in this type of action, the carbide on those particular syle of units will wear, because you're wearing on a fine point of the carbide. What we're seeing here is using the carbide as a flat, broad surface to actually polish and buff the edge bevel's surface, versus burnishing and shearing the edge.
In all honesty I can't say that this picture is promising though. There's a lot of "chatter" or "buffetting" marks you can see, they appear as verticle stripes going down the bevel. Then you can also see some horizontal scratches in about the midpoint of the bevel (going from edge to spine) which is evident of uneven contact. The problem is, this looks a lot like what pull-through sharpeners do to a small bevel, but on an enlarged scale. The horizontal scratches aren't so telling, because those could be from a lot of differnt things, even if they were from the device it could just mean the angle wasn't set just right.
However, the chatter marks are concerning because I think it shows that the carbide inserts while not intending to, can still produce that shearing effect on the edge. It starts to "skip" and "catch" and so it makes this little pattern, and on pull through sharpeners you can really feel it and almost hear it. My question is whether those marks are accidental (not pulling through the inserts at a good 90, perpendicular offset) or if they are a function of the intended design. In other words, say you put a small chamfer on the very edges of the carbide inserts to get ride of the hard edge. This would allow a certain margin of error for the user to not have a perfect 90 degree angle of the blade to the device, but would it still actually produce a sharpening action? If the goal here is to have the faces of the carbide themselves polish/buff/steel the edge, then having a hard edge which is still doing the "shearing" effect may be producing false-positives by still producing a good edge, but also mitigating or at least making the damage less obvious. I think it would be a real benefit for you to be able to send this device to a member who is able to produce high mangification images of the edges after use... If ANY such a person is reading this, maybe they could volunteer *hint*hint*
The price point and the target audience and everything... Well, personally I feel I'm a reallllllly cheap individual so I can't comment haha However I do think it's trying to straddle two markets maybe. I mean, the idea is that you have this convenience and quick sharpener that's simple and easy to use, and works. Problem is most people who use those already, are going to go for the cheapest possible one, and don't give a crap what damage it does to the knife--knives are virtually disposable to these types. So you can pretty much forget selling them a $75 sharpener of any variety realistically. Then there's the market of I guess "savvy" and "discerning" knife enthusiasts, but in this realm talking about "sharpness" is very principled, philosophical almost. There are no shortcuts to "true sharpness" when you find someone who really cares about how good an edge a device creates, or if it does damage to their knives, basically the more considerations a person is going to make about this, the more likely they're going to go the traditional route with stones and strops and all that great DIY stuff.
But when comparing it to stuff like the Lansky, I have to think about it in comparison to the Sharpmaker for example... I haven't used it, but from what I know the price-point is about the same. One would say, "Well, why should I buy the ERU for more than the Sharpmaker, when it aheres to the accepted philosophy "abrade the bevels until the apex meets". People will suggest that the Sharpmaker, you can just do a couple of passes on the fine hones and have your knife back to razor sharp and not damage it and so on and so forth. It's not untrue but personally I think that it still involves a little more skill than what's implied. I have a little credit-card sized hone I carry with me to do my touch ups, and it works great as described too and was $10, try to convince me the Sharpmaker is better than that.
I think having the cermaic and carbide inserts will be a huge difference over the carbide though.
BluntCut MetalWorks
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 3,462
IMH2CO (exactly 2 cents)
Best looking edge among images. Fairly nice smooth carbide abrade&burnish bevel, except:
Groove line entire length of the edge could suggest carbide face irregularity. Groove line depth from A is more than B, which could mean ERU didn't reached the apex in the tip area.
minor point - i. & ii. original grind lines at different depth (from apex upward to spine) which could mean this edge bevel is mostly even from heel to around the belly, then bevel angle deviate where eru might miss the apex. Especially if the knife pulled straight back without lifting the handle near the tip. Worth looking into whether the edge belly radius (curvature) and the carbide v gap (1/32) could interact differ than as planned/designed.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2011
- Messages
- 795
My biggest complaint about the smoothness and eveness was with picture #1 , the bevel varies quite a bit based off of what we can see. While I would agree that my standards would be much higher than the target audience , people will notice that much differentiation.
In regards to the chip I would say it is possible that the "chip" could be from normal wear and tear , but the OP is trying to show us what he calls a great edge and to be frank im just not seeing it. In regards to the uneven wear im saying that with time the user would see the bottommost portion of the carbide "dish" or "hollow". While for the target audience I would definitely see this as being a moot point , for the OP this could explain why we see scratches midway up the scandi in pic #4 but not at the top or the bottom as he is using his personal unit which I would assume has quite a bit of wear with treating his edc knives for 3...? years I believe he said.
My question to you as someone who as more experience with carbide in an industrial setting than I do , can solid carbide be produced in a rounded shape like a ceramic or maybe chamfered as you go on to say? I feel like that would be an upgrade? But then again maybe it would lose the "bite" required to dig into the metal....
-Honestly the idea that appeals to me the most about this is the notion that you could get an edge that's a working, serviceable edge--meaning it cuts things--within a matter of seconds, and not cause damage to your edge that is commonly associated with thise pull-through carbide type of sharpeners. The key difference that's been discussed a lot here is that the faces of the carbide inserts are meant to be flush with the faces of the bevels. This is a huge difference because so many of the pull-through types I have seen and observed tend to have two things going on 1) They are very coarsely ground, with machine marks you could fild your fingernail on 2) They are cut at such angles that they actually "cut" and "attack' the steel. It makes sense too that in this type of action, the carbide on those particular syle of units will wear, because you're wearing on a fine point of the carbide. What we're seeing here is using the carbide as a flat, broad surface to actually polish and buff the edge bevel's surface, versus burnishing and shearing the edge.
Well that's the idea anyways , we still aren't seeing any evidence as such. I truly believe that with ceramic and a better price point this device would be a much stronger contender for what your saying we would use it for. Hell if it had a ceramic comparable to the Spyderco UF stones I would buy one.
- I think having the cermaic and carbide inserts will be a huge difference over the carbide though.
As I have already said if this was ceramic I would be behind it 100%. Maybe even make 2 or 3 different "grits" , but even then they would have to be in the 15-20$ range just to be competitive.
FWIW I have a veho , and am working on my microscopy skills. Its a learning curve but I am getting there. The challenge would be adequately documenting it. You use certain techniques to to pictures of the scratches a waterstone leaves , you would have to develop new different techniques to properly document the scratches this leaves behind.
Roughly 380x Magnification.
The lateral scratches are from wiping the blade off for the pictures , been carrying this knife for 3 days since sharpening.
Edited to add: I owe a big thanks to Tom Blodgett of JendeIndustries for helping me take this picture. With some advice from him I was able to drastically increase my capabilities with the scope.
Last edited:
Hmm, here's my questions for Fred as a machinist: You say it's more of a burnishing action, does this mean that there is no sharp cutting edge on the carbide surfaces? What is the angle of the face of the carbide to the edge as it is pulled through? If the angle is 90° to the knife on the leading face this would be considered a "neutral" angle, if the leading edge is angled toward the tip of the knife it'd be "positive," and if angled toward the heel, "negative." Then there's the "clearance" angle at the point of contact. If it has clearance behind the point of contact, it will in most cases cut, not burnish. If it is parallel to the knife blade with no clearance it would be more proper to call it burnishing.
As far as the pics, they aren't very helpful. Most of the edges are pretty obscured by glare, and they would be much better closer in. I would be interested in seeing some better pics as well as seeing some good close-up shots of the sharpening surfaces on the sharpener that show the angles presented to the blade.
As far as the pics, they aren't very helpful. Most of the edges are pretty obscured by glare, and they would be much better closer in. I would be interested in seeing some better pics as well as seeing some good close-up shots of the sharpening surfaces on the sharpener that show the angles presented to the blade.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,743
I'm with bluntcut.
As for the Veho, I'd absolutely love to see some too. Even some shots through a decent loupe with good lighting will be far more telling.
I'll refrain from further speculation on market positioning and so forth. I AM aware of Freds contribution to knife makers with the advent of the bubble jig. Hopefully this will be as successful and useful.
Carbide can be made in any configuration, round or sharp edged. I'm doing my best to completely separate this product from the pull-throughs that I'm familiar with. The angle of the carbide faces being the most intriguing to me after the bevel angle adjustability.
I'd prefer to see pics of a production knife with the factory edge, followed by images of that unused edge having been sharpened with the sharpener.
If you do decide to do a pass-around, or would like a perspective using the method that I outlined let me know. My first offer stands.
As for the Veho, I'd absolutely love to see some too. Even some shots through a decent loupe with good lighting will be far more telling.
I'll refrain from further speculation on market positioning and so forth. I AM aware of Freds contribution to knife makers with the advent of the bubble jig. Hopefully this will be as successful and useful.
Carbide can be made in any configuration, round or sharp edged. I'm doing my best to completely separate this product from the pull-throughs that I'm familiar with. The angle of the carbide faces being the most intriguing to me after the bevel angle adjustability.
I'd prefer to see pics of a production knife with the factory edge, followed by images of that unused edge having been sharpened with the sharpener.
If you do decide to do a pass-around, or would like a perspective using the method that I outlined let me know. My first offer stands.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 6,642
FWIW I have a veho , and am working on my microscopy skills. Its a learning curve but I am getting there. The challenge would be adequately documenting it. You use certain techniques to to pictures of the scratches a waterstone leaves , you would have to develop new different techniques to properly document the scratches this leaves behind.
Roughly 380x Magnification.
The lateral scratches are from wiping the blade off for the pictures , been carrying this knife for 3 days since sharpening.
Edited to add: I owe a big thanks to Tom Blodgett of JendeIndustries for helping me take this picture. With some advice from him I was able to drastically increase my capabilities with the scope.
Best advice I can give for micrographs is to square the scope up to your viewing "stage". Depth of field is not great at those magnifications and any deviation on X or Y will blur the image. Take the knife and stab it into a chunk of styrofoam, use a wedge of same to elevate the handle so the blade is square to the objective. If possible, apply some backlighting or place a mirror or other reflective surface under the blade. Is that a true 380x or is most of that digital? Didn't think Veho went above 200x optically and the rest of the gain is blowing it up on screen. Even still you will see a lot of detail otherwise invisible. Fred should have higher magnification images of what the ERU is doing IMHO, many of these recent questions cannot be addressed without it. For a fraction of the cost of a patent, you can get a very nice microscope - fairly important when discussing cutting edges. Not to hijack the thread....
Fred, if you'd like a few higher mag images I could help with that.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 2,078
The older model went to 200x, the newest model goes to 400x. Trying to stay on topic, I would also be very interested in seeing a magnified image of these edges.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,743
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2001
- Messages
- 32,359
Fred, I have the ERU in hand and will be playing with it over the weekend.
First impressions, this is a solid tool, not your cheap pull through plastic, carbide or ceramic V sharpener, it has a solid feel in the hand and is machined to keep tight tolerances and an accurate angle while sharpening.
Sharpie should be included so as to determine pre-existing angle on the blade so as to match the current angle requiring less material removal to attain serviceable edge.
I'll take some pics over the weekend and give it a write up after testing it out.
First impressions, this is a solid tool, not your cheap pull through plastic, carbide or ceramic V sharpener, it has a solid feel in the hand and is machined to keep tight tolerances and an accurate angle while sharpening.
Sharpie should be included so as to determine pre-existing angle on the blade so as to match the current angle requiring less material removal to attain serviceable edge.
I'll take some pics over the weekend and give it a write up after testing it out.
- Joined
- May 2, 2004
- Messages
- 6,848
Your definition of smooth and even is to a higher standard than the target audience of this device if those bevels are not satisfactory to you. Not that I'm saying there's a problem there, just that those sure look "good enough" to me, and I'd venture to say I know a thing or two more about keeping a knife sharp than a lot of kinfe consumers out there. Now that's not to toot my horn, what I'm saying is that being of slightly-above average discretion when it comes to edges, I would gladly call those "even and smooth", but if I was tryign to be a prefectionist about it probably not.
To me the "chip" looked more like a "dent" or a "roll" from usage, he did say it was 1084... This type of sharpener wouldn't actually remove a deformation like that. Either way there's really no indication that the sharpener caused this over just normal use so I don't think it's exactly fair to attribute it to the EDU. Saying that's the classic symptom of pull-through sharpeners ignores that the execution is not actually the same. I'm also not quite sure I follow what you're saying about uneven wear. To be honest, having worked with carbide a lot in machining, I'm not really all that convinced wear is actually an issue when we're talking about pulling knife steels through it at what are probably going to be low hardness levels, low pressure and low speed movements. I very highly doubt that any knife enthusiast will take a very hard heat-treated knife blade merely on the basis that if they actually have a knife that's heated harder than most, they are probably going to be a bit picky of their field sharpener for it. Again we have to keep sight of the target audience here...
Honestly the idea that appeals to me the most about this is the notion that you could get an edge that's a working, serviceable edge--meaning it cuts things--within a matter of seconds, and not cause damage to your edge that is commonly associated with thise pull-through carbide type of sharpeners. The key difference that's been discussed a lot here is that the faces of the carbide inserts are meant to be flush with the faces of the bevels. This is a huge difference because so many of the pull-through types I have seen and observed tend to have two things going on 1) They are very coarsely ground, with machine marks you could fild your fingernail on 2) They are cut at such angles that they actually "cut" and "attack' the steel. It makes sense too that in this type of action, the carbide on those particular syle of units will wear, because you're wearing on a fine point of the carbide. What we're seeing here is using the carbide as a flat, broad surface to actually polish and buff the edge bevel's surface, versus burnishing and shearing the edge.
In all honesty I can't say that this picture is promising though. There's a lot of "chatter" or "buffetting" marks you can see, they appear as verticle stripes going down the bevel. Then you can also see some horizontal scratches in about the midpoint of the bevel (going from edge to spine) which is evident of uneven contact. The problem is, this looks a lot like what pull-through sharpeners do to a small bevel, but on an enlarged scale. The horizontal scratches aren't so telling, because those could be from a lot of differnt things, even if they were from the device it could just mean the angle wasn't set just right.
However, the chatter marks are concerning because I think it shows that the carbide inserts while not intending to, can still produce that shearing effect on the edge. It starts to "skip" and "catch" and so it makes this little pattern, and on pull through sharpeners you can really feel it and almost hear it. My question is whether those marks are accidental (not pulling through the inserts at a good 90, perpendicular offset) or if they are a function of the intended design. In other words, say you put a small chamfer on the very edges of the carbide inserts to get ride of the hard edge. This would allow a certain margin of error for the user to not have a perfect 90 degree angle of the blade to the device, but would it still actually produce a sharpening action? If the goal here is to have the faces of the carbide themselves polish/buff/steel the edge, then having a hard edge which is still doing the "shearing" effect may be producing false-positives by still producing a good edge, but also mitigating or at least making the damage less obvious. I think it would be a real benefit for you to be able to send this device to a member who is able to produce high mangification images of the edges after use... If ANY such a person is reading this, maybe they could volunteer *hint*hint*
The price point and the target audience and everything... Well, personally I feel I'm a reallllllly cheap individual so I can't comment haha However I do think it's trying to straddle two markets maybe. I mean, the idea is that you have this convenience and quick sharpener that's simple and easy to use, and works. Problem is most people who use those already, are going to go for the cheapest possible one, and don't give a crap what damage it does to the knife--knives are virtually disposable to these types. So you can pretty much forget selling them a $75 sharpener of any variety realistically. Then there's the market of I guess "savvy" and "discerning" knife enthusiasts, but in this realm talking about "sharpness" is very principled, philosophical almost. There are no shortcuts to "true sharpness" when you find someone who really cares about how good an edge a device creates, or if it does damage to their knives, basically the more considerations a person is going to make about this, the more likely they're going to go the traditional route with stones and strops and all that great DIY stuff.
But when comparing it to stuff like the Lansky, I have to think about it in comparison to the Sharpmaker for example... I haven't used it, but from what I know the price-point is about the same. One would say, "Well, why should I buy the ERU for more than the Sharpmaker, when it aheres to the accepted philosophy "abrade the bevels until the apex meets". People will suggest that the Sharpmaker, you can just do a couple of passes on the fine hones and have your knife back to razor sharp and not damage it and so on and so forth. It's not untrue but personally I think that it still involves a little more skill than what's implied. I have a little credit-card sized hone I carry with me to do my touch ups, and it works great as described too and was $10, try to convince me the Sharpmaker is better than that.
I think having the cermaic and carbide inserts will be a huge difference over the carbide though.
The pictures of the scandi don't give a clear depiction of what is happening with the blade. Its a factory ground blade that has a heavy 100 or 120 grit grind marks running vertically the length of the blade.What is happening is the ERU is removing metal at the high spots on the bevels. Since the carbides are moving along the same plan with each pass there is a hit and miss action going on which gives the blotchy grind appearance. As I look at this blade in my lap I think it will take considerable work to remove the heavy grind marks this is not a task I would carry out wit this tool. But to show the results of using the sharpener for the task I will continue to work on it and see how it turns out.
There is much good comment and interesting points being made here on this thread, which shows me there is interest in the tool itself and the claims made.
There are not enough hours in my day where I can spend the time needed to comment and address all the queries. Please don't take offence, its that I wouldn't have enough time in the shop to produce what is needed to keep us in business.
If I can't some of the work load behind me we might get a pass around going. I have one going on BB but there is no time, at present, for me to run one here on BF.
If we can, lets discuss apples and apples and not how refined and edge can be. I make no claim other than this field sharpener will adjust to the sharpening angle of most knives with a range of 16 to 40 degrees. It is accurate and precise in settings. It does not chew up the edges of knives like most all carbide "V" sharpeners do and it possess a coolness factor that no plastic junk can claim. " I do quality work. "
I am not on this section of the forums much and am not well known here. I will say, I understand steel, its heat treatment and how to get the most out of it. I have been a full time knifemaker since 1998 and I know what sharp is and how you go about attaining that. Its like most knowledge it's such a matter of putting in the time and listening to those who know.
Thanks again for posting and your insightful comments, thats why I posted here, not to get head nods but interesting informed comment.
Regards, Fred
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 32,479
Fred's price point of $75.00 is more than reasonable for a domestic or non china made quality product that works in the field.
I am a full time, knife maker and sharpener and provyeor of production cutlery and knife accessories.
I have people showing me new crap sharpeners all the time. Whats more important than how much? is how well it works? The sharp maker is not a good comparison because you could use the ERU in the field while standing
Fred,
I for one would be interested in being a possible retail if you plan on marketing that way? Give me a email or PM.
I am a full time, knife maker and sharpener and provyeor of production cutlery and knife accessories.
I have people showing me new crap sharpeners all the time. Whats more important than how much? is how well it works? The sharp maker is not a good comparison because you could use the ERU in the field while standing
Fred,
I for one would be interested in being a possible retail if you plan on marketing that way? Give me a email or PM.
Ahh Yeah I was wondering if those were grind marks as I've seen scandis with some pretty coarse grind marks from the factory.
Rhino, I agree that the sharpmaker isn't really a good comparison. This would be much quicker and convenient than setting up the rods on the sharpmaker, finding a flat surface, etc.
As far as the price goes, I'm not suggesting that $50 wouldn't be reasonable--I'm just a cheapskate and practically never buy anything that's $75 haha I wouldn't suggest trying to take it down to the sub $20 and compromise the craftsmanship and build quality though.
- Joined
- May 2, 2004
- Messages
- 6,848
Some one could make them for 29.95 retail, but they wouldn't be this. They'd be a facsimile, another piece of worthless junk. Ask yourself this; whats a low end custom knife, with a quality leather sheath cost? This is a precision, hand made tool with a quality leather sheath. Which is the better value?
Thanks Lawrence; I will keep that in mind if I make that move. We are looking at the market and the investment involved; not money, you understand.
Thanks Lawrence; I will keep that in mind if I make that move. We are looking at the market and the investment involved; not money, you understand.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
- Messages
- 2,078
Some one could make them for 29.95 retail, but they wouldn't be this. They'd be a facsimile, another piece of worthless junk. Ask yourself this; whats a low end custom knife, with a quality leather sheath cost? This is a precision, hand made tool with a quality leather sheath. Which is the better value?
Thanks Lawrence; I will keep that in mind if I make that move. We are looking at the market and the investment involved; not money, you understand.
Is there any chance to get the tool for cheaper without the "quality leather sheath"?
I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but "I don't have time to respond" is kinda' lame. You registered in July 2013 and have 445 posts since then. Seems like you could easily respond if you wanted to. Aside from that, even just a response with better pictures would be responding to multiple persons at once. A response of "trust me I make quality stuff" is something I think too many people have been burned by before. No offense, just stating what would seem to be obvious to me. If we won't get responses because you are not willing to put in the work to answer, why on earth should we bother to ask?