Model 10 from R. W. Clark in Liquid Metal (LM1)

Hey, Don.

I was digging around in the LiquidMetal website, and found this page about medical applications for LM1 (the Be containing alloy).

LiquidMetal Medical Devices

I was looking for a more specific description of the hazards of LM1 machining, but, unless they are smoking crack, there in body applications for LM1 that don't seem to be problematic even given the Be content.

I'll look some more.
 
Cliff,

One of the characteristics of LM1 is its "bounciness" (I'm deliberately using a non-technical term because I can't find the proper numerical information on the LM website). This is why it was used in golf clubs, and more recently in tennis rackets and baseball bats.

Have you seen any evidence of this in terms of reduced vibration or other interesting behavior when using higher velocity swings with the Model 10? I'm just trying to figure out how this characteristic of LM1 would manifest itself in knife usage.

LiquidMetal Bouncing Ball versus Titanium and Steel Video
 
Gabe,

This is the sort of information I was wondering about. I also saw on their site the medical devices. So surely someone has done testing, but I have not seen any real information on this subject, and every time it it is brought up here (twice by me in this thread, twice by someone else in the other thread) it is pretty much ignored.

Even if medical devices are approved (possibly due to low corrosion rates in the body), machining metal is an entirely different situation. Lots of dust, very high surface area. With beryllium, the airborne stuff is the worst way to be exposed. So even with only 3% Be in the metal, there is a lot of potential for health problems, way beyond what you would see with any other typical metal. I just couldn't sit back while this issue is pooh-poohed and ignored, and those in the best position to know the specifics are not speaking. I think we deserve to know in this case.
 
Originally posted by Ebbtide
Rob, anyone who knows anything about handgun shooting knows that you have to hold the pistola on its side and keep your eyes shut!

Cobalt, I'm sorry that you didn't understand my statement about credibility. You see a knife. I see a piece of work that RW or Ed Fowler worked long and hard on. I won't use terms like 'labor of love' or 'a bit of their soul' But there is alot of pride in authorship.
If you've ever made anything from scratch, you know what I mean.
Without credibility what are the reviews worth?
Wouldn't you (as a reviewer) want as much credibility as you could get?

I see Cliff's comments reflecting on both knife making and knife using. If you tell me knife A made 150 push cuts on cardboard, that is knife using.
If you tell me knife A could make 200 push cuts if it was convex ground, that is a comment on how the knife is made...Comments on fit & finish, IMHO, are comments about how the knife is made, not how it is used.

"Hype is hype. I find it funny that the same people who complain about hype in one forum, promote it in the next."
Was that one for me?
About the cinder block comment?
I only brought that up because stuff like that only (again my own opinion) lowers Cliff's credibility. For all of the hard work that Cliff does, why take 2 steps backward with silly stuff like that?
The cinder block test, much like Cold Steels proof video is the answer to a question that no one asked.

Bend Over Here It Comes Again 2U,
What's your new puppy's name?
:D
Click to expand...

Ebbtide, forgive the misunderstandng, I was not trying to indicate that you were being a hypocrite in any way. If I was I would have made examples. I was just making a general reference that hype is all over the place not that it is done by anyone here, although it most likely is as that is the way of sales. You have to have hype to some extent.

Lets face it Richtig use to chop up car axels with his knives to show how tough his steel was, it was hype to an extent, but it showed that his knives were well constructed and heat treated. Same goes for guys like Strider and Busse and Cold Steel, who put their knives through serious abuse to show how they come out of it in relatively unscathed fashion. There is hype here, but there is also information I like in it.

You might think that smashing a cinder block with the spine of the CSTM is worthless, but to me it shows that if that blade had any stress risers anywhere near the point of impact, there would be cracks forming and possible premature failure. MAybe not, but it satisfies me. Would I do it, NO, not unless I had to for some strange reason. But whacking the spine of a blade to pund it through a log is doen quite often.
 
I got a quick "so why do you want this info?" response from Liquid Metal (Soo Buchanan) and should get detailed information in a day or so.
 
Her name is Sadie and I will try and post a pic real soon.................AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW (sorry, can't help it)
 
I hear about the concrete block chopping all the time and I would like you all to know that it was I that had asked Cliff Stamp to perform the cutting chore as the last item of testing when he did some cutting with a JS test blade made of 52100. It came about because some one had said that a knife that had chipped out "looked like he cut a concrete block with it". I stated that it wouldn't have looked like that if it had been heat treated properly. Cliff email me and asked me how I thought it would look and it went from there. It was not meant to be a test to destroy a knife, just extreme usage. If any of you have ever cut sprouts or other things that are close to the ground, you will hit a rock and that is exactly what Cliff did for me in the last test. It did confirm my ideas to what a knife should do.
I apologize to Cliff because he is the only one that any one remembers when it comes to the block. At least that set the standard for a large knife company to try emulate.
 
Originally posted by raker
I hear about the concrete block chopping all the time and I would like you all to know that it was I that had asked Cliff Stamp to perform the cutting chore as the last item of testing when he did some cutting with a JS test blade made of 52100.
Click to expand...

I have read this in the past and you would think that all these people that keep bringing it up would have also read that it was you that asked Cliff to chop the concrete block. That part always does seem to get left out though.

Edited to tidy up a really sloppy post.
pat.gif
 
A bit off topic maybe, but seeing as how this thread's been hijacked several times already :) I'm thinking, what the heck ...

Purely by chance, last weekend I ran across and (re)read Cliff's review of a Bowie made by Ray Kirk:

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/bowie_ray_kirk.html

Curiosity piqued, I did a quick 'Google' search hoping to learn more about Ray's work, and ran across another review of Cliff's, this one a blind test of four blades provided by Ray, made from different steels:

http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/ray_kirk_test_blades.html

The reason I mention this ... at the time, the review didn't disclose which blade was which; through the whole thing, blades were only identified as A, B, C, and D. I e-mailed Cliff over the weekend to ask about this, and before long he replied, telling me that he'd been meaning to update that review, and went ahead and did just that after getting my e-mail.

Re-reading Cliff's review, I realized he had to do a lot of revising. I thought this was pretty classy on Cliff's part, going to all that trouble just because some nimrod calling himself ColoradoDave who Cliff doesn't know from Adam had asked about it. And BTW, this is a pretty interesting review, at least for anybody who's interested in real world performance of different blade steels.

So, my hearty thanks to both Cliff and Ray, because frankly, I doubt I'm ever going to have the chance to take four comparable blades made of different steels like this and subject them to such systematic, side-by-side testing.

Oh, and Ray ... if you've got another one of those Bowie's you need tested, keep me in mind, wouldja? I'll be sure to put in my will that it belongs to you. ;)
 
Andrew :

[purely subjective]

Oh, and if Cliff did this type of testing, he would get slammed for not being scientific enough.
Click to expand...

Yes, for example Shane Justice critized the use of the term "blazing sharp", and in the same thread he complained about the lack of the aesthetic appreciation of rainbows. You won't find a lot of coherent discussion in most of those arguements, those complaining can not agree on a cohesive viewpoint and in fact will even take on opposing ones. In the recent Fowler thread Buzzbait remarked that hard/abusive work would not add a positive element to a review, and yet Jose complained when I said the Pronghorn should not be used for hard work based on comments by Fowler on scope of work.

Ebbtide :

I see these custom knives as functional sculpture.
Click to expand...

I don't see them any differently than a can opener, it is just a tool.

Comments on fit & finish, IMHO, are comments about how the knife is made, not how it is used.
Click to expand...

Of course, but you don't need to make the knife to describe its condition. just like a knifemaker can complain about bar stock being not surface finished without ever making steel. As well, it is very rare for conclusions to be drawn about the fit and finish (or for any other property), it is up to the reader to decide if this is acceptable. Interpretations about the maker, if desired, can be made simply from comparisons of other work. Which of course is how this decisions are made in general, from TV's to shoes.

For example Joe Talmadge has made a lot of comments on the liner locks, including functinality, how it behaves, as well as particulars on construction, why the behavior is as it is based on the geometry of the lock. He has not I don't think ever made a liner lock, nor does he need to have made one in order to make such comments. All he has had to do is use a very wide range of them in order to be able to draw conclusions via correlating behavior with construction.

It is no more complicated than buying a custom suit. It is hardly the case that you need to be able to make one in order to judge its quality and function. Just like you don't need to know how to cook to judge the work of a chef (or whatever).

Keith :

most of the people reviewing knives are not knife makers
Click to expand...

You would hope not. When buying a TV do you phone up competing brands and ask them for information on each other. Do you go to one used car salesman and ask him about the cars on another lot. If I started making or selling knives then this would put a huge bias on what I said about knives from other people and whatever I was offering, just as it would in general for anyone selling anything.

gaben :

Have you seen any evidence of this in terms of reduced vibration or other interesting behavior when using higher velocity swings with the Model 10?
Click to expand...

No. This is however a really small knife so this isn't an issue anyway. It might be an issue with a large bowie, however I would be really concerned about impact toughness there. A golf club head has a *much* more robust geometry than a knife and can thus tolerate a lot more impact.

Ray :

[concrete block]

If any of you have ever cut sprouts or other things that are close to the ground, you will hit a rock ...
Click to expand...

Yes, swamper axes are for example designed to do this to preserve felling axes on thick bark and roots. I recently whacked a large custom into a rock while clearing some deadfall, minor impaction, forged 5160, very tough blade.

I apologize to Cliff because he is the only one that any one remembers when it comes to the block.
Click to expand...

I would not be concerned about it Ray, they would find something else to rant about. Hope you get back and healthy soon.

Dave :

... you would think that all these people that keep bringing it up would have also read that it was you that asked Cliff to chop the concrete block
Click to expand...

In general very little of the commentary actually reflects what has been done in the reviews. Some of the comments are just insane in this regard such as Blademan 13's comment that I don't give enough attention to cutting ability. This has pretty much been the primary focus of the work that I done. The reviews contain massive amount of such information including reprofiling work and cutting work at various grits. It vastly outshadows the durability work in regards to quantity.

... he'd been meaning to update that review
Click to expand...

Yeah, it only took me two years.

-Cliff
 
Originally posted by Cliff Stamp
In the recent Fowler thread Buzzbait remarked that hard/abusive work would not add a positive element to a review, [/QUOT

I did not say this. I said that, in a proper knife review, the level of abuse should not exceed the intended use of the knife. If a knife is designed to chop open automobiles, then go for it. There is a difference between a properly performed and written knife review and a simple test of blade material properties. If you do not care about the knife as a whole, and what it was made for, then abuse the knife and see when it dies. Just don’t call it a knife review. If the manufacturer does not disclose the intended use of the knife, then make your best guess or don’t do the review.

A knife reviewer has a certain responsibility to his/her readers, as well as the manufacturer of the knife. Pushing a knife beyond its intended use, and publishing the results, generally does a disservice to both the reader and manufacturer, implying that a knife should be able to perform duties to which it was not intended. You may say that the readers did not clearly understand your intentions, but that is a matter of your own responsibility. You ARE responsible for what they get out of your reviews, whether it be correct or not. If you review a bird & trout knife, and do things far beyond what the knife should reasonably be asked to perform, and write about it, it’s your fault if people start thinking that the knife is a piece of junk, which it may not be. The readers may have obviously misunderstood your reasons and findings, but they are your words. You are responsible for the conclusions that people draw from your words. And I do believe that people often draw incorrect conclusions from your tests.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Cliff Stamp


Keith :

most of the people reviewing knives are not knife makers
Click to expand...

You would hope not. When buying a TV do you phone up competing brands and ask them for information on each other. Do you go to one used car salesman and ask him about the cars on another lot. If I started making or selling knives then this would put a huge bias on what I said about knives from other people and whatever I was offering, just as it would in general for anyone selling anything.


-Cliff
Click to expand...

Thought my memory was going there for a moment. I had to go back to my original post just to check my recollection about making that exact point myself. I was very to happy to find that I wasn't losing it.
 
Originally posted by Buzzbait
You ARE responsible for what they get out of your reviews, whether it be correct or not. The readers may have obviously misunderstood your reasons and findings, but they are your words. You are responsible for the conclusions that people draw from your words. And I do believe that people often draw incorrect conclusions from your tests.
Click to expand...
Buzz, I usually agree with, and/or learn from, your posts. (can you hear the "however" coming up...?)

I believe I understand one of your main points... and that is in a knife review, be as clear as you can about what a knife's scope of work is intended to be, and then be clear in describing when you purposely take a knife past it's likely normal-use design limits so that you can find it's true limits. And then summarize your conclusions clearly and succinctly so there is a lesser chance for misinterpretation.

And I do think Cliff's reviews would be improved if he added his summary conclusions/findings at the end of a review. I certainly think that is good form... and it gets more important to summarize as the length of the paper/text/review gets longer.

However (there it is finally), when you said "You ARE responsible for what they get out of your reviews, whether it be correct or not."

...and ...

"You are responsible for the conclusions that people draw from your words."...

...I believe you have set the bar too high. I have had people very badly, and very egregiously, misrepresent or twist the message in my posts... I mean blatant mutation of what I wrote. Not some subtle error, not some obvious misinterpretation because my wording wasn't clear, but blatant misrepresentation. I've seen MANY people do this with Cliff's posts and reviews also. It happens to about anyone who is prolific on BF if they hang around long enough.

Some people will, either inadvertently, or purposefully to serve their agenda, misconstrue even clearly written prose. You can't possibly write so even the lowest common denominator will get the intended message. But you can try. There are simply too many people, too much variety in education and background, and/or too many agendas.

So, I'll eat my own cooking, and summarize my own post by quoting a notable quotable:
George Bush
"they misunderestimated me".
Click to expand...
 
I have found this thread to be entertaining and amusing. I think that it resembles a thread from number of years ago concerning Mad Dog Knives.

It is interesting that so many folks expend large amounts of energy creating their personaes in their posts.

I find that it best suits me to read a post of interest, and pass on those that aren't......ie. if you don't like Cliff's tests, don't read them and then rant on ad nauseum about his posted results, methods, scientific values, etc,etc,etc.

The one thing that that I learned from this thread is that even though I have a large collection of user knives, many of which made by makers that were serving loyal customers when a lot of today's makers of gimicky knives were in short pants, I Will Not Buy A Clark Knife! I don't care for his attitude and over defensive attitude.

I know he could care less, and that's OK. Makes me feel good that he won't get my money.

Zinn
 
Agreed. You can only do your best. You can't keep complete idiots from getting everything wrong; and you certainly can't keep people from intentionally taking your words out of context. I just believe that it's every reviewer's journalistic responsibility to properly communicate his actions, intentions, and opinions, which should be good enough for 99% of this forum's readership to understand. Failure to do so seldom hurts the reviewer, but definitely hurts the manufacturer and the reader.

Keep in mind that my posts have nothing to do with the heart of the current thread. I have not read it, as I currently have little interest in liquid metal. I just did a search for "Buzz", and Cliff's post popped up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top