Ping Cliff Stamp... I got chips...Bad steel?

[bigjim]

Hello cliff or anyone else with a opinion....
I have a TOPS neck knife that had such a thick blade edge no matter how sharp I got it...it would not cut worth a dang.

So I thinned the edge WAY back with a very course stone then used several progressively finer stones..... Then stropped the edge on some card board with oil and JB Bore scub ( Super fine abrasive) Then used a VERY fine hard stone and did a micro bevel. It cuts its ass off now.... At least it does fingers....don't ask.

But if you look closely there seem to be very small chips in the edge...Why?

Crappy steel or am I a Idiot?

 

[djolney]

Maybe the blade contained some very big carbides, and by thinning the edge you’ve exposed them/torn them out?

 

[knifetester]

Where the chips there before or after you cut the micro-bevel?

Have you tried resetting the microbevel to see if that solves the problem?

Looks like you did a great job re-profiling the edge, very even edge bevel. Nicely polished too.

You could have a abad heat treat, Cliff discussed this in regards to a Benchmade recently.

 

[pogo]

Those are some bad looking chips. Looks like your in for a tough reprofile job there. Good Luck.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

...such a thick blade edge no matter how sharp I got it...it would not cut worth a dang.

Yes, sharpness is nice but you need a suitable profile for high cutting ability.

But if you look closely there seem to be very small chips in the edge..

Even an x-coarse hone doesn't usually leave micro-teeth so large you can see them, unless the angle is extremely acute, ~5 degrees or so. Even then it takes a really coarse abrasive like a 100 grit AO belt and the teeth are just barely visible at ~0.15 mm deep [that was a Mel Sorg custom in D2 if anyone is curious].

These teeth should be reduced as you work with finer abrasives and cut off immediately with any micro beveling. While I have seen some steels not be able to take a fine polish at very acute angles, it takes extreme angles, <10 degrees, and the edge irregularties are very small, you need a magnifier to see them. Is this the 1095 or stainless TOP's?

What could be the cause is simply too much of a jump from the abrasive which set the edge to the ones which finished it and thus not enough work was done with the finer abrasives. However when applying a microbevel it usually takes very little work. I can take an edge set with a 220 SiC hone and micro-bevel it smooth with as little as 2-3 passes per side on the medium and then fine Sharpmaker rods.

So yes I would be thinking bad steel. What I would do as a check (more work - hooray) would be reset the edge again with the coarse hone, form a full burr and clean it off with the x-coarse hone and note the condition of the edge. If the "chips" are consistent along the edge then you are seeing the teeth left by the hone, that is natural. However if they are focused in some spots and highly irregular in size then the steel is suspect.

Assuming they are consistent, use a slightly finer stone and raise the angle a couple of degrees and apply a micro-bevel. Immediately, as in after the first few passes you should note a massive difference in the edge finish, the teeth should decrease in size corrosponding the abrasive change. If this doesn't happen then the steel is likely faulty.

At this point I would vice the blade and crack it several times to check the flex limits and grain structure as since the blade is a write off you might as well learn something useful from it. But you would probably get a better responce from TOP's if you just sent it back to them in the as sharpened condition.

-Cliff

 

[bigjim]

Knife tester...thanks for the complements....This was my first total re-profile job. Normaly I just clean up the factory edge...this was just to blunt.

Cliff thanks for the Info....... I think I will send it to TOPS and see what they say..... Maybe I will send them a E-mail and link them to this thread.

Think they will respond?

My wife just told me it was my fault. She says my stones are to small. Then she ran off laughing...she is starting to piss me off.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

I would hope they do, but it would not surprise me if they didn't. I emailed Benchmade about a problem with a Skirmish which was being discussed here which was defective but they never responded here. Drop in an update regardless of what you try to do.

-Cliff

 

[bigjim]

Will do Cliff

I just spent a few mins with a medium then fine stone working the secondary
bevel....chips got worse. Seems like I may very well have a defect here.

I sent a E-mail to TOPS linking to this thread. Heck if I was a maker stopping in on a thread like this and not being defensive since nobody is attacking them..... Could be a GREAT chance for them to make lots of friends here. Heck I am not even worried about sending it back or getting it resolved. I have lots of sharp things to carry around.

I think this can happen to any knife maker once in a while.

By the way Cliff this is 1095.... not stainless.

Jim

 

[Keith Montgomery]

My wife just told me it was my fault. She says my stones are to small. Then she ran off laughing...she is starting to piss me off.

I like your wife's sense of humor.

 

[freddy1]

told her that your stones might be too small... but you use them as an expert !

 

[DEA]

it doesn't matter if the stones are small, all that matters is that you have a big sword

 

[knifetester]

I emailed Benchmade about a problem with a Skirmish which was being discussed here which was defective but they never responded here.

Benchmade is good about responding to customer concerns on their forum at www.benchmade.com
I think it is very reasonable for a company to confine its means of communications, for legal and practical reasons.

They do not maintain a presence here, and as you know their forum is one of the oldest knife forums on the web.

Did you try posting your concerns there?

 

[Blop]

I second that. Benchmade usually never comes in here. But they will solve any problem on a "face to face" or better "email box to email box" basis.

Cliff, you might remember my first post about a chipping 806 D2 blade, where you recommended to get a replacement or change over to Spyderco? Well, i never had to give my bad knife back but get a good one instead for free, just to accomodate the out of country customer, that´s what they were saying.

I guess, there are some reasons for manufacturers not to come in here and BM has a own forum.

There are others that even don´t answer on questions. Last week, i asked Ka-bar about their heavy bowie and never get an answer.

@ bigjim, you should proof your wife your skills. If she keeps laughing about your stone, she maybe just wants more proof.

 

[knifetester]

Yeah, if you call their CS line, they are super helpful. Angie has hooked me up a number of times. I have lost screws and washers, they just sent out replacements. I had abent clip replaced in less than 24 hours!

I have never availed myself of the sharpening service (lifesharp), but it is cool they offer that for non-knuts.

Cliff:

What I would do as a check (more work - hooray) would be reset the edge again with the coarse hone, form a full burr and clean it off with the x-coarse hone and note the condition of the edge. If the "chips" are consistent along the edge then you are seeing the teeth left by the hone, that is natural. However if they are focused in some spots and highly irregular in size then the steel is suspect.

Why is resetting the whole edge bevel needed if the chipping is confined to the very edge? Wouldn't simply reseeting the bevel work just as well as a check and be hugely less work?

 

[Cliff Stamp]

Why is resetting the whole edge bevel needed if the chipping is confined to the very edge?

The problem will be magnified by a more acute angle and easier to verify/refute.

I just spent a few mins with a medium then fine stone working the secondary
bevel....chips got worse.

That seems like a steel problem, unless you are working with natural honing stones that have large segregations. But I assume the hones work on other knives.

..thiis is 1095.... not stainless.

It should not matter either way, but with stainless you could make an arguement for lack of ability to take ultra acute edges (~5 degrees) due to grain size and carbide segregation.

I think it is very reasonable for a company to confine its means of communications, for legal and practical reasons.

Consider the traffic Bladeforums sees and the possible promotional aspect, that alone should make any major manufacturer set up a forum here. I see it as the largest blade show running. Then you have the side issue of public complaints (on record) with no comment from the manufacturer. This is no different than having an article in Blade concerning a Benchmade and them refusing to comment. A magazine article would likely be a stronger influence than a post here but it is still the same basic influence pattern.

Did you try posting your concerns there?

The discussion originated here by someone else, I got involved later on and discussed the matter with Benchmade referencing this thread. I have asked several questions on their forum with no responce. Just recently about the edge profiles on some of their knives and quite a few years back about what the "200 lbs of negative pressure" they used to quote as a lock break point was actually measured asthe description is gibberish.

...just to accomodate the out of country customer

You can't ask for more than that.

-Cliff

 

[Cliff Stamp]

As an illustration of what I was talking about in the above, I recently honed two stainless steel blades and one 1095 blade at very low angles. All had very thin edges due to primary hollow grinds and my overlay of a full to the spine relief. The stainless blades were a S30V small Sebenza and a Bryd from Spyderco. The 1095 blade was a custom paring knife, full hard, made by Alvin Johnson.

Both of the stainless knives could not take the fine angle. The edge would just break apart. As the knives were honed they were checked under a magnifier and while parts of the edge would take a high polish, other parts still had huge chips (relatively speaking, they were not visible by eye) which were randomally distributed along its length. In contrast the 1095 blade took a smooth edge with no imperfections visible under x10 mag.

-Cliff

 

[bigjim]

I don't feel this is too damining for the company but still worth reporting......

The same day I started this thread I Sent TOPS a E-mail asking them to respond here and talk to us about this knife. No reply what so ever, not even a ....no thanks nothing in it for us to talk to the Blade forum folks.

I guess they are busy with those cookie cutters churning out billions of identical knives for sale. I am sure that is much more interesting and profitable than talking to the people that bought them.

oh well........

 

[Cougar Allen]

Most companies are still not set up to respond to email even if they have an email address posted. Try calling them on the phone or sending snailmail.

 

[Allen242]

Hey Big Jim, I gave a copy of this to Mike Fuller and he said sorry he didn't see your E-mail. They would be glad to re-sharpen any of their knives for free, just send them to TOPS Knives P O Box 2544, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83403, or call him at the office (208) 552-2945 and he would get you taken care of. Cougar Allen is right about E-mail, sometime the companies that process the internet orders don't always get the other E-mails to the manufacturers in a timely manner.

 

[MGF]

"This is no different than having an article in Blade concerning a Benchmade and them refusing to comment."

Actually, Cliff, there are differences ... editorial, business and legal.

A magazine has a staff of (one would hope) professional editors to screen and select what goes into the product, whereas a Web site is open for posting or publication to the general public. Further, one would hope BM -- or any other company or individual -- would have a chance to comment/respond for an article before it is published, if the publication is holding to any standards of fairness.

You may be correct regarding "patterns of influence" but there are both legal and business (cost) reasons not to respond to unsolicited commentary on a Web site message board.

In short, the amount of space on the Web (and the people willing to generate words to fill that space) is for practical purposes infinite, whereas the space on a printed page is finite and the contributors are selected by the editors.

Additionally, the Web is less policed or edited. Once you step into responding to an infinte world of posts/replies, you can go on forever airing your company's business/statements in public, whereas responding to direct contacts (mail, e-mail, phone ... from customers or journalists) is more manageable from the standpoints of cost, time and risk.