Polished edge retainsion

[nozh2002]

Maybe your thread cutting test doesen't work as well as you think.

May be, however it works excellent in other cases.

But let see - it show consistent improvement when I change stone on all other steel. But in case CPM S90V it does not show any difference with what was after Medium stons and after Fine. Then I switch to same grit doamond powder (after raise this question here it was few years ago and got god suggestions). After I switch to diamond powder of same grit as Fine I see improvements right away - test shows better sharpness.

May be this is random and just coincidence but to me this is good prove that my thread cutting test works, and I use it since then a lot with good results. Actually only because of t I was able to learn how not to roll out edge, because I have good way to chech state of the edge.

What is you prove that Ceramic with 2400 hardness actually sharpen Vanadium Carbides with 2800 hardness?

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Broos]

I always manage to sharpen any steel I have to hair whittling sharpness. BTW I was not too much impressed with FFD2 (I have) - I think they impress everybody with their initial sharpness, whittle hair NIB, but in terms of edge retention etc, there is no too much magic and CPM S30V left it behind on my tests.

And I still trust the previously posted modified (cutting medium) CATRA testing, Wayne Goddard's hand testing, and Phil Wilson's hand testing more than your results. Their results cut the same medium as yours (manilla rope), gave similar results, and matched each other pretty close, yet your results do not match theirs. If it was me I would be looking for a bug in my test.

 

[nozh2002]

And I still trust the previously posted modified (cutting medium) CATRA testing, Wayne Goddard's hand testing, and Phil Wilson's hand testing more than your results. Their results cut the same medium as yours (manilla rope), gave similar results, and matched each other pretty close, yet your results do not match theirs. If it was me I would be looking for a bug in my test.

Well they tested it on the wood base, when edge hit the base rundomly which on my opinion makes results rundom as well. I am not sure which Phill Willson's test you reffering to - I am not aware of him testing FFD2. CATRA test published with FFD2 results does not show all other steels CPM S30V for sure.

If you provide details it will be something to discuss...

FFD2 shows good results but no magic and $10 zone tempered to 64HRC Finnish blade outperforms it as well as all CPM S30V, CPM S60V and BG42, but honestly this is best steels.

And again do you have first hand experience with FFD2?

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Broos]

The CATRA tests had S30V and S90V among the tested steels. FFD2 was also tested against D2, CPM-D2, CPM 154, and CPM10V by the previously mentioned respected makers and testers. If I recall they also ran a separate test against S90V (with the FFD2 edge being a little thicker than the S90V edge). Search for FFD2 and you can a link to the data from the CATRA tests. Their results have FFD2 near the top of the list.

Here's a post with some
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4705759&postcount=94

FFD2 stays with CPM-10V - that is pretty impressive (if you have any experience with Phil Wilson's 10V anyway).
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4768353&postcount=119

And yes I have experience with FFD2, even though I don't see how it applies here.

 

[hardheart]

the bickering between you two might be a little more useful if you even compared the same type of testing. Vassili wasn't cutting the manila on a scale, and Goddard/Wilson weren't cutting thread. When one test stops at ~250 cuts, and the other goes to 800, what are you guys even comparing. Phil Wilson has also explained his sharpening technique, his use of a combination Norton stone means his edges are not in the same ballpark as Vassili's as far as polish goes, and Vassili's won't match the slicing aggression.

you guys are comparing apples and air compressors.

 

[nozh2002]

To the fact they use wooden base which randomly affect edge, I also should say that measurement of weight needed to cut rope may vary a lot you do this several times in the row. It can not be single test - it should be constant measuring and some math applied otherwise results too variable so it will be valuable only on two very different steels.

I like to see those CATRA results you mentioned.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Broos]

the bickering between you two might be a little more useful if you even compared the same type of testing. Vassili wasn't cutting the manila on a scale, and Goddard/Wilson weren't cutting thread. When one test stops at ~250 cuts, and the other goes to 800, what are you guys even comparing. Phil Wilson has also explained his sharpening technique, his use of a combination Norton stone means his edges are not in the same ballpark as Vassili's as far as polish goes, and Vassili's won't match the slicing aggression.

you guys are comparing apples and air compressors.

Welcome to the bickering, and I disagree. Like some other testers, Noz tests by inducing wear via cutting Manilla rope and tests sharpness by cutting a thread. The hand testing is using force required to make the cut.

At one time I questioned the validity of using a thread test to measure edge retention from wear caused by cutting manilla rope, but regardless of this difference in testing, the conclusion made from either will be the same - which knife has best edge retention cutting manilla rope.

Regardless, Noz says FFD2 has lower edge retention than S30V, and states it as fact whenever it is brought up. Call it bickering or whatever you want to, but I think there is benefit in occasionally throwing in the fact that all other testing seen on BF shows FFD2 with higher edge retention than S30V.

I am not convinced that the results will get turned upside down if one test uses 1" of slice cutting the manilla rope, and the other test uses 2.5" of slice.

 

[hardheart]

Except all the testing shows a change in rate of blunting as the edge degrades, and that change is different for different steels. The knives are not performing the same cutting tasks, and they are not starting at the same level of sharpness. They are different tests with different results, with different starting and stopping points.

 

[Broos]

To the fact they use wooden base which randomly affect edge, I also should say that measurement of weight needed to cut rope may vary a lot you do this several times in the row. It can not be single test - it should be constant measuring and some math applied otherwise results too variable so it will be valuable only on two very different steels.

I like to see those CATRA results you mentioned.

Thanks, Vassili.

I do not think that adding a wood cutting base to all test runs (versus no wood base) is going to affect the how different steels rank in edge retention. If you're a proponent of real world testing there is even some logic to leaving the wood in the test, if you plan on doing your cutting on wood...

Link in this post to the data from CATRA tests using manilla rope (not the normal CATRA medium) from the Professor.

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4650365&postcount=56

If you look around you will see some posts about how those gentlemen do their testing. They have explained their methodology pretty well in previous posts here.

 

[Broos]

Except all the testing shows a change in rate of blunting as the edge degrades, and that change is different for different steels. The knives are not performing the same cutting tasks, and they are not starting at the same level of sharpness. They are different tests with different results, with different starting and stopping points.

Did you take that right out of an old Cliff thread?

All these tests have knives are cutting manilla rope to induce wear. That is the same cutting task.

They all sharpened the knives to equal sharpness, however they determined that. They all explain their methodology, so I don't understand what the point is about unequal sharpness.

And regardless of whether a scale is used or a thread and a little scale is used, the results are given as edge retention.

Do you really think what you posted explains FFD2 going from roughly equal to CPM10V in one test to below S30V in the other?? I do not believe that the differences in these tests explain that kind of difference.

 

[hardheart]

They all sharpened the knives to equal sharpness, however they determined that. They all explain their methodology, so I don't understand what the point is about unequal sharpness.

Norton fine India gives the same edge condition as 9 micron DMT followed by loaded leather? Again, you compare and contrast Phil Wilson, Wayne Goddard's, and Vassili's results when they aren't even cutting with equal edges.

but go right ahead, I'm gonna go compare chainsaws to paring knives.

 

[nozh2002]

When I cut rope - and I cut 800 times each knife in my tests, I noticed very clear that from cut to cut force needed to do this vary quite a bit. Average force of course razing, but in 10 or 20 cuts results may be way different.

Thread is much easy to cut, but it shows quite a variations and so I had to make 21 cuts of thread to have good median which shows state of the edge. With manila rope this variation on that scales will be statistical nightmare.

When I cut rope on the wood base - and anyone can try this, speed and force which edge hits base will be very different especially if you does not pay attention to this focusing on rope.

I did try first cutting rope on the wooden base and results were 1000% worse, it get dull pretty fast (same as reported by Phill, however I made 800 cuts easy) - which means that impact from the wood was much more significant then rope. You may with same success just scratch wood without rope - it will be more controllable impact on the edge as well. Let say scratch the wood with some weight on the top and then measure it cutting rope on the scale same as I do it with thread (but why not to test it on the thread then).

FFD2 has initial polished sharpness NIB same as I am doing for all my testing knives. So thay starts from same state confirmed by thread sharpness test. I think this NIB sharpness is what differ FFD2 not some magical edge retention - it hsa huge advantage this way over every other knives.

Can you try cutting rope yourself, instead of pointing me to Google or second hand links. I think this will clear most of the issues without arguing with me. Just get soem first hand experience.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Greg]

I have a few D2 knives (including two I made myself) and they all sharpen up very well with diamond hones and a loaded paper wheel.

Micro-serrations are usually only better at aggression (like a saw blade), and this matters most on fibrous materials, or on items with a tough outer layer and soft inside--like tomatoes.

The serrations do wear more quickly than a smoothly polished edge, although the aggression can easily make the rougher edge cut better and longer. Strangely enough it can be duller (thicker edge) and cut better.

If you can't get this, think about that old, almost worn smooth bread knife that won't cut your hand at all, but will cut warm, crusty bread. No sharpness, but lots of aggression.

Because I maintain all my own edges, and don't mind keeping my knives VERY sharp, I like polished edges on most of them.

Greg

 

[Broos]

Norton fine India gives the same edge condition as 9 micron DMT followed by loaded leather? Again, you compare and contrast Phil Wilson, Wayne Goddard's, and Vassili's results when they aren't even cutting with equal edges.

but go right ahead, I'm gonna go compare chainsaws to paring knives.

So your assumption is that edge retention results could be completely turned upside down (FFD2 going from better/equal to CPM10V to worse than S30V in this instance), if you take the edge from a fine grit to polished.

My point is - there is no way this will happen. Not a chance. A steel that has good edge retention with a fine grit will not have poor edge retention polished, or vice versa.

Complaining about starting sharpness or finishing sharpness for the test is kind of a pointless exercise IMO when there is no clear definition of or standard testing procedure for edge retention, let alone what are the initial or final test parameters. I think complaining about intial or ending test parameters is kind of pointless when we cannot even agree on a definition for edge retention or a standard test. If you can't trust the tester to have the edges equal at the start of the test, than there would be a problem I agree - but I'm OK with relying on the tester to get the edges close or equal in sharpness - and I'm not going to assume there are differences in sharpening that will materially affect the results - that was Cliff's mantra...

And there is no way FFD2 has worse edge retention than S30V - when polished or at india fine. As previously stated my basis for this is CATRA testing and those gentlemen knifemakers test results. My personal experience with both steels also indicate it, but I trust the above referenced test over my experience, also...

If you want to believe that FFD2 has edge retention close to CPM10V's when at india fine, but worse than S30V when polished, that is OK by me, but in my opinion there is something wrong with these results. So you can choose who you want to believe, and I may periodically object when Noz states it as a absolute certainty that FFD2 has worse edge retention than S30V. And I like S30V!

 

[nozh2002]

So your assumption is that edge retention results could be completely turned upside down (FFD2 going from better/equal to CPM10V to worse than S30V in this instance), if you take the edge from a fine grit to polished.

My point is - there is no way this will happen. Not a chance. A steel that has good edge retention with a fine grit will not have poor edge retention polished, or vice versa.

Complaining about starting sharpness or finishing sharpness for the test is kind of a pointless exercise IMO when there is no clear definition of or standard testing procedure for edge retention, let alone what are the initial or final test parameters. I think complaining about intial or ending test parameters is kind of pointless when we cannot even agree on a definition for edge retention or a standard test. If you can't trust the tester to have the edges equal at the start of the test, than there would be a problem I agree - but I'm OK with relying on the tester to get the edges close or equal in sharpness - and I'm not going to assume there are differences in sharpening that will materially affect the results - that was Cliff's mantra...

And there is no way FFD2 has worse edge retention than S30V - when polished or at india fine. As previously stated my basis for this is CATRA testing and those gentlemen knifemakers test results. My personal experience with both steels also indicate it, but I trust the above referenced test over my experience, also...

If you want to believe that FFD2 has edge retention close to CPM10V's when at india fine, but worse than S30V when polished, that is OK by me, but in my opinion there is something wrong with these results. So you can choose who you want to believe, and I may periodically object when Noz states it as a absolute certainty that FFD2 has worse edge retention than S30V. And I like S30V!

First of all this is exactle what happend with 420HC which outperform INFI easy on high sharpness.

Second - I think that starting point fo FFD2 and other steels was differentr due to FFD2 excellent NIB sharpness - same as I do for my tests and in result in my case when they starts from same point it looks different.

However I did explain why that tests did not really show too much - did you understand that?

Also it will be better for you to came to same level of expertize and back up you opinion with some real experience some rope cutting I mean.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Broos]

Also it will be better for you to came to same level of expertize and back up you opinion with some real experience some rope cutting I mean.

So a test pilot has more expertise than a mechanical engineer to design an airplane? Or is it only the designers of the airplane have the expertise to fly one? I'm sorry, but that "you can only disagree if you have done your own test" argument has been previously reserved for exclusive use in the Noss threads.

Hopefully once I test some knives, I will have the "expertize" to point out that a couple guys with decades of experience testing knives have results that contradicts yours. And here I thought technical acumen would even be a better gauge for ones credibility in discussing knife performance testing.

 

[nozh2002]

So a test pilot has more expertise than a mechanical engineer to design an airplane? Or is it only the designers of the airplane have the expertise to fly one? I'm sorry, but that "you can only disagree if you have done your own test" argument has been previously reserved for exclusive use in the Noss threads.

Hopefully once I test some knives, I will have the "expertize" to point out that a couple guys with decades of experience testing knives have results that contradicts yours. And here I thought technical acumen would even be a better gauge for ones credibility in discussing knife performance testing.

Well, test pilot has more expertise to test airplaine and he is the one who judge result of designer...

On my opinion you just flashing you different opinion, whatever matter is. Personally I prefer someone who draw attention by doing something useful to others then just disagree and be known for this.

I have my results first hand, checked and disclosed, I point out what wrong they are doing, I doubt they have more experience in knife testing then I do. However it doesn't mattere we are not talking about whose experience is longer, I explained my point, who care if his experience longer if he is wrong and I am right?

Thanks, Vassili

 

[just10minreader]

who care if his experience longer if he is wrong and I am right?

Broos care? I think the point here is that he values their
reputation more than yours, so until someone confirms your findings
you're kinda stuck

 

[db]

Broos care? I think the point here is that he values their
reputation more than yours, so until someone confirms your findings
you're kinda stuck

Very good point. Not only that but... I don't think that 1 knife in a certain steel is a fair way to judge that steels performance. It is my opinion that allot if not most back yard testers seem to jump to conclusions way to freely, and report their findings as proven facts. I just think 1 knife by a single tester tested isn't any kind of proof. However I do enjoy seeing people useing "testing" knives and posting about it.
And some of the arguements that result from them can be very entertaining.

 

[nozh2002]

Very good point. Not only that but... I don't think that 1 knife in a certain steel is a fair way to judge that steels performance. It is my opinion that allot if not most back yard testers seem to jump to conclusions way to freely, and report their findings as proven facts. I just think 1 knife by a single tester tested isn't any kind of proof. However I do enjoy seeing people useing "testing" knives and posting about it.
And some of the arguements that result from them can be very entertaining.

I do not think I am backyard tester - if you say so I guess you do not know the matter. Here the link where all procedure disclosed and explained:

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=509097

It require some effort to read and understand.

And if you still think this is "back yard testing" - please, show me someone else, some backyard tester who did similar job.

I did some interesting finding during this testing, it may not lay with common knowledge someone comfortable with or someone carefully building up, but as I sad all procedures explained and disclosed and if you see something wrong in the procedures (which I developed in several years) please talk about what is wrong. If there is nothing wrong - why all this "backyard testing" and " experience not long enough" etc? This is looks like some PR to build another common knowledge that this tests is not serious enough, without actually bothering to prove it. Which only proves that there is nothing wrong with tests itself.

Now that FFD2 I bought for myself (paying full MSRP), it was one of the regular knife and I tested it. Yes it was not 10 or 20 knives, but are there any tests with 10 or 20 knives? Or that tests were done with also one knife? If so then statistical representation of results is same as in my case. And I already made my point on testing procedures.

Thanks, Vassili.