Pinnah - very good comments. I've always had pretty good results doing everything at 20 per side.
Most other pocket knives I've carried the last view years are in "better" steel. ATS34, S30v, CPM154, etc. and they are always are reasonably sharp. Have many pocket clipped knives as well, but rarely get one out anymore.
In the last year or so, I've kinda gone back to Buck as from when I was a kid 45 years ago. And into the stockman pattern with the 301, 303, and the corresponding 701, and 703. Just a great timeless pattern. And the custom 3 bladed knife prices gave gone sky high too. And in actuality aren't really necessary for my needs, but they are cool. Lol.
After all that rambling, I'm getting to my point which is I just don't seem to get the impression that my knives are very good slicers, which I think these smaller profile blades, thin, sharp edge, in my mind should be. Even cutting up pretty thin cardboard slivers, like say from a pop 12 pack that I use to start the fireplace, it seems I end up pushing up a chunk of cardboard in front of the edge, rather than a nice clean slice all the way down the length. If that makes sense. And I've used knives a long time now, so I don't think I'm having a technique issue.
But I can grab a Spyderco Native and it'll slice through the light cardboard like nothing. So I dunno. Part of my many mental issues is that I spend a lot of time over thinking things and end up making my head hurt. Lol.
Thanks guys - Joe
Joe,
I'm a research scientist who has made his career in R&D in an engineering context, so you don't have to apologize to me (or anybody else, for that matter) about overthinking anything. Especially with knives. From an engineering and design perspective, they're fascinating and worth some thought.
Couple of comments...
What is sharp? - This was a question that was raised in one article on sharpening that I read. The author gave advice that corresponds to something I see in engineering work quite often. The author recommended picking a single easy to use sharpening test and just sticking with it because a) you can find a knife that excels at one test and fails in another and b) people's average use differs so its never clear which sharpness test, if any, will make a good predictor for any given user. For example, it's easy to find a knife that will excel at shaving arm hair that will fail quickly when cutting cardboard and it's easy to find a knife that shreds cardboard but won't shave arm hair and neither of these tests may be the best at predicting what is good for processing meat or making wood shavings.
IMO, sharp is as sharp does, which is to say, if a knife doesn't meet your average cutting needs (which may be different than mine), then it's not "sharp" for you. But (and this is where we start thinking harder), cutting performance is about a lot more than just the blade's apex. More on this in a second. All this to say that I wouldn't necessarily judge the sharpness of a blade based on its ability to cut light cardboard, nor would I necessarily look at apex as the single, or even primary issue with its cardboard cutting performance.
Cutting Cardboard - I don't cut down cardboard for a living (or for recreation) but I've done enough of it to think that a knife's ability to keep cutting is related to several factors.
Edge Line - Mors Kochanski observes that knives with an upswept curved edge line do a better job at making wood shavings as the curve imparts a natural slicing motion to the cut. Traditional Scandinavian puukos have this design feature, as does your Spyderco Native and as does my Buck 500.
Buck 500 Duke & Micra by
Pinnah, on Flickr
In contrast, a traditional stockman like the 301 has a significant amount of drop to the blade line, so much so that they're often essential recurves.
I have several knives with a similar edge line and find that when I cut cardboard, they tend to "plow" (my term) and stack up cardboard just as you describe. When I need to use such a knife, I find it helps to cock my wrist back considerably and to think more about trying to score the cardboard than slicing through it. Cocking the wrist in this way essentially tries to create an upswept edge line as the blade meets the cardboard.
I often test my blades by cutting standard printer paper and can easily notice how different a blade will cut through paper depending on the angle of the edge relative to the paper. I suspect this is the number one thing you're experiencing with the cardboard when comparing your Native to your 301.
There are other factors that I find help with cardboard cutting. I find that carbide rich steels do better with cardboard than low carbide steels (and I say that as somebody who prefers low carbide steels for EDC). Since cardboard doesn't self-separate, I find that a blade can bind easily if it wanders off to the side and correspondingly, I find it easier to control the blade with a knife that has a handle that is flatter and offers greater torsional control (like your Native or my 500) than a knife with small, rounder frame (like your 301). Lastly, I find that flat ground blades (like your Native) tend to bind less in cardboard than hollow ground blades.
All of this to say that you might get your 301 very, very sharp but still find that your Native out-performs it for cutting cardboard.
Sharpeners - You mentioned in your first post that your are a tinkerer. It may be that you are feeling the tug to tinker more with blades. My take is that a system like the Sharpmaker excels at doing fast touch ups of a blade but is not as efficient at reprofiling a blade. I find guided rod systems to be the exact opposite. Too much work to set up for doing quick touch ups but really excellent at reprofiling a blade. If you gave me a knife that was set at 20DPS and asked me to take it down to 15DPS, I would reach for my guided rod rig. Fast. Easy. Accurate. I don't use it for general touch ups though.
Hope this is helpful.
PS - How does a Coastie end up in Nebraska?
