forged vs stock removal

I have always tried to stay out of this type of thread, but thought I would offer this suggestion......before you discount either method, test it. Take the same type of steel, go the stock removal route with one, and the forged route with another. Finish them out and test them.

I did this a number of years ago when a magazine article appeared, stating that 52100 was the least desirable steel for a blade. It took me some time and effort, but I made one stock removal, and one forged blade from each of the steels that the article listed, tested them, and got my answers. Not only did I physically test the blades, they were also spectrographed. For me, these tests proved/disproved many things.

A good knifemaker will develop theories, then follow through by testing those theories, and either prove or disprove them. When those theories are proven or dis-proven the results become fact to the individual.
A Knifemaker can either take the word of someone else and just jump on "the bandwagon", or they can see for themselves IF there is a difference.... it need not be proclaimed from the rooftops....its enough that the individual knows, and is confident in his/her findings.
The final proof is always in the performance of the end product.

OK, now I'll get my popcorn! Anybody got extra butter? :)
 
Steve Hayden said:
Not true...
I have to interject here that the blood of a virgin (menstrual?) would really work as a quenching medium much like other water-based liquids. Probably would be expensive and pretty hard to find these days.
Click to expand...


hard to find as unicorns blood?;)


and wouldn't that be more a more agressive quench...because of all the salt:D
Might break alotta blades:p
 
We need some discourse on the scientific method here.

Be back later, I need to go compact some molecules on my knife by pushing harder into the platen.
 
AcridSaint said:
We need some discourse on the scientific method here.

Be back later, I need to go compact some molecules on my knife by pushing harder into the platen.
Click to expand...


LMAO...

I know that Kevin hates being singled out like this, but I think his contribution to this forum and knifemakeing in general can not be over stated. Clearing up the myths surrounding forging vs stock removal, shining light on ridiculous concepts such as "compacting steel molecules" with "edge packing" and improving the grain of the finished blade with a hammer and removing some of these self defeating activities from today's smiths and makers work has helped most everybody here.

True, the information is out there for anyone to read. But his efforts to distill it and feed it to the masses (over and over again until he is ready for the funny farm) has been an important element in keeping the custom knifemaker's art at least equal to the factory knives, and very frequently much better.

wildmike said:
Part of the problem is the changes to the material due to the forging process. Forging compacts and breaks down the grain structure at the molecular level, these changes also affect the heat treat and how it affects the blade. These characteristics are what make a forged blade tougher and stronger in general.
Click to expand...


Wildmike, I'm sorry to put you on the hot seat here but... This is a case of bad information being worse than no information. Repeating inaccurate stuff like this as if it were fact simply perpetuates the myths. I'm sure you had the best of intentions joining in this conversation with this, but I think it is important to point out to anyone just learning this stuff that this "information" is inaccurate and perpetuating it is not helpful.
 
Don't make fun of us little guys Nathan, we can't all afford industrial molecule compactors like you have. ;)
 
AcridSaint said:
Don't make fun of us little guys Nathan, we can't all afford industrial molecule compactors like you have. ;)
Click to expand...


Jeez, Cap... Mine isn't an industrial unit. I compact molecules with a modified garlic press...







edit to add:

To the uninitiated: There is no such thing as "steel molecules". Rather than molecular bonds, metals are held together by metallic bonds where all the atoms share electrons freely rather than share electrons with specific other atoms. Therefore, there are no molecular chains of steel. This is why metal can be ductile and conduct electricity so well.

When someone talking about metals start's talking about "steel molecules", this is often a sign that they may be out of their element.
 
Last edited:
SShepherd said:
hard to find as unicorns blood?;)


and wouldn't that be more a more agressive quench...because of all the salt:D
Might break alotta blades:p
Click to expand...

I didn't say it would be ideal, just that is was a real possibility, unlike edge packing.

"To the uninitiated: There is no such thing as "steel molecules". Rather than molecular bonds, metals are held together by metallic bonds where all the atoms share electrons freely rather than share electrons with specific other atoms. Therefore, there are no molecular chains of steel. This is why metal can be ductile and conduct electricity so well."

Actually you should qualify this statement. The pure Iron part of steel is non-molecular, metallic bonded, but the Carbides are molecular with the outer shells at least partially sharing the metallic bond.
 
Steve Hayden said:
Actually you should qualify this statement. The pure Iron part of steel is non-molecular, metallic bonded, but the Carbides are molecular with the outer shells at least partially sharing the metallic bond.
Click to expand...

True, but that complicates an otherwise simple concept.

Fundamentally, plain 'ol simple steel has no molecules, and the things we do with steel are not chemical reactions. But yes, you are correct. There frequently are carbides and other molecules dispersed in the steel. Though I'd argue that is missing the point...
 
"The things we do with steel are not chemical reactions" is not a correct statement.

In the simple FeC system the Martensite transition is a simple shear process, a physical chemical reaction that does not involve diffusion, but the addition of any alloying elements, including the transition metals that form carbides changes this to a more complex state. Just because we ignore the presence of molecular reactions does not mean they do not occur.

This is why the soak is critical to hardening.
 
I stand corrected.

Let me correct myself and say that the mechanism where carbon and iron interact to form hard steel is not a chemical reaction, but is a function of the physical dislocations in the crystalline structure of the iron caused by the presence and location of carbon atoms, rather than chemical reactions forming a different material. Meaning: it is not a chemical molecular mechanism that makes steel hard. It is carbon and iron interacting in a physical sense rather than chemically. In hard simple steel, the iron and carbon are not sharing electrons and are not molecules and to think of steel as being composed of molecules is missing the big picture. I'm trying to illuminate that big picture, and if I'm missing minutia, I'm sorry. I'm getting over my head debating this, so I'll close by acknowledging that what I said is only accurate in basic simple steel, where soak is of no consequence, and is an oversimplification in general, but it is a useful way of understanding the concept of how iron and carbon interact to make steel. It is fundamentally not molecular.
 
Steve Hayden said:
"The things we do with steel are not chemical reactions" is not a correct statement.

In the simple FeC system the Martensite transition is a simple shear process, a physical chemical reaction that does not involve diffusion, but the addition of any alloying elements, including the transition metals that form carbides changes this to a more complex state. Just because we ignore the presence of molecular reactions does not mean they do not occur.

This is why the soak is critical to hardening.
Click to expand...

Τα πράγματα που κάνουμε με το χάλυβα δεν είναι χημικές αντιδράσεις» δεν είναι μια σωστή δήλωση.
Στο απλό σύστημα FeC η μετάβαση μαρτενσίτη είναι μια απλή διαδικασία κουράς, μια φυσή-χημικός αντίδραση που δεν περιλαμβάνει τη διάχυση, αλλά η προσθήκη οποιωνδήποτε στοιχείων ανάμιξης, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των μετάλλων μετάβασης που διαμορφώνουν τα καρβίδια αλλάζει αυτό σε ένα πιό σύνθετο κράτος. Ακριβώς επειδή αγνοούμε η παρουσία μοριακών αντιδράσεων δεν σημαίνει ότι δεν εμφανίζονται.
Γί αυτό ενυδατώστε είναι κρίσιμος για τη σκλήρυνση.

:D

Craig
 
C L Wilkins said:
Τα πράγματα που κάνουμε με το χάλυβα δεν είναι χημικές αντιδράσεις» δεν είναι μια σωστή δήλωση.
Στο απλό σύστημα FeC η μετάβαση μαρτενσίτη είναι μια απλή διαδικασία κουράς, μια φυσή-χημικός αντίδραση που δεν περιλαμβάνει τη διάχυση, αλλά η προσθήκη οποιωνδήποτε στοιχείων ανάμιξης, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των μετάλλων μετάβασης που διαμορφώνουν τα καρβίδια αλλάζει αυτό σε ένα πιό σύνθετο κράτος. Ακριβώς επειδή αγνοούμε η παρουσία μοριακών αντιδράσεων δεν σημαίνει ότι δεν εμφανίζονται.
Γί αυτό ενυδατώστε είναι κρίσιμος για τη σκλήρυνση.

:D

Craig
Click to expand...


exactly.....greek
 
C L Wilkins said:
Τα πράγματα που κάνουμε με το χάλυβα δεν είναι χημικές αντιδράσεις» δεν είναι μια σωστή δήλωση.
Στο απλό σύστημα FeC η μετάβαση μαρτενσίτη είναι μια απλή διαδικασία κουράς, μια φυσή-χημικός αντίδραση που δεν περιλαμβάνει τη διάχυση, αλλά η προσθήκη οποιωνδήποτε στοιχείων ανάμιξης, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των μετάλλων μετάβασης που διαμορφώνουν τα καρβίδια αλλάζει αυτό σε ένα πιό σύνθετο κράτος. Ακριβώς επειδή αγνοούμε η παρουσία μοριακών αντιδράσεων δεν σημαίνει ότι δεν εμφανίζονται.
Γί αυτό ενυδατώστε είναι κρίσιμος για τη σκλήρυνση.

:D

Craig
Click to expand...


:rolleyes:
 
SShepherd said:
exactly.....greek
Click to expand...

no, . . . Geek :eek::D

(and the blood used for the quench was actually chicken blood 'cause life is a carnival )

-Page

(quoting the wikipedia link below)

The word geek is a slang term, noting individuals as "a peculiar or otherwise odd person, especially one who is perceived to be overly obsessed with one or more things including those of intellectuality, electronics, gaming, etc."[1] Formerly, the term referred to a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken, bat, snake or bugs. The 1976 edition of the American Heritage Dictionary included only the definition regarding geek shows.

This word comes from English dialect geek, geck: fool, freak; from Low German geck, from Middle Low German. The root geck still survives in Dutch gek: crazy, and in the Alsatian word Gickeleshut: geek's hat, used in carnivals[2].

(from the wilipedia link below)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geek
 
Thank you sunshadow. Now I not only have entertainment from this thread but useful information - much of which I intend to spring on some 'geek' friends.

kfc.jpg


Rob!
 
cjd1980 said:
i've been forgeing knives from coil and leaf springs for quite awhile now and resently started making stock removal knives (i got a bandsaw:))anyway I used 5160 for some of the knive because thats what I was always told coilspring are made from. I have noticed that the forged knives seem to be more rugged and hold an edge better then the stock removal ones i heat treat and temper them both the same any ideas?
Click to expand...

cjd1980

Just in case you or anyone else missed it...

Forging vs stock removal is an ongoing huge debate with real scientific principles that are often confused with myths and BS.

The known 5160 barstock may have made better blades than the springs because the springs likely were not 5160. maybe yes...maybe no.

(think of this...if a car manufacturer could save 1$ per car by using a material of a lower (or just different) grade that still met their specifications - it saves them thousands of dollars a day - why wouldn't they?)

As JT mentioned, you could have each piece tested, but it's more expensive than buying known steel.


...and just to stir the pot...
forgers are just to cheap to buy good steel...

stock removal makers don't have any artistic aptitude...

:foot:
 
Steven Penner said:
cjd1980
...and just to stir the pot...
forgers are just to cheap to buy good steel...

stock removal makers don't have any artistic aptitude...

:foot:
Click to expand...

Wow...now that's straddling a very thin fence there :D Besides, I like all the steel dust piling up. It's kind of like creating my own Sahara desert of steel :) And I do forge on occasion...and then grind away the crud :barf:
 
and those greek verbs aren't conjugated correctly. einai, for example is the infinitive "to be" but is used in the above paragraph for "is," which may take multiple forms depending on the subject, such as eimi, ei, estin, este, ousin, etc.
Who's a geek now :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top