Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
brownshoe :
I actually ignore this as it is so slight its effect on the total work done isn't significant, this is also due to the difference in body mechanics between the two. I would agree however that it would be of benefit to determine it for the sake of completeness. This was mentioned in several reviews (and threads) talking about the efficiency on a slices of various finishes.
The draws should be done in a consistent manner, not because of the effect it has on the force, but because very fast draws induce blunting greater than slower ones, I am not sure if this is due to possibly overheating, or just the greater energies imparted on the blade (I keep meaning to look at this with M2 or similar which would rule out the heating). I have looked at the cutting ability as depending on speed of draw, generally is it best in a slow quasi-static manner for reasons of control.
Yes, when possible this is done. If you feel critical factors are being ignore then cite them and the nature and mangitude of their effect so they can then be considered and hopefully taken into account.
Why ignores critical factors which are induced when a knife is used by a person and thus violates the very principles you outline. I would however agree that materials testing should be done on knives, I would like to see hardness, yield and tensile strength, charpy values (notched and not), ductility and corrosion tests on all the steels used in knives. of course science is always restriced by money. Anyone who doesn't think so has never worked in a research lab. There are always improvements you could make if you had more money (and time of course).
shane justice :
Animals with hair long enough to contain dirt that you don't wash before you skin.
Seal, and small game like rabbits. I have done this in a very basic sense, I would not consider myself proficient at it. I have just done it to do it and look at the basic cutting mechanics. Techniques on this differ of course, many prefer to do little cutting and pull or flay off skins.
I used to fish a lot, salt and freshwater, from trout to eel to shark. I have caught small game mainly, usually with primitive means, sling, snare and the like, birds, rabbit and smaller. I intended to go up to Labrador for Carbiou last year, but was too busy, same for this year. Hopefully I will make some time next year.
The same comment in any case you can find all over bladeforums, how the hair of some animals will trap dirt and grit, which seems quite obvious to me. This was the case with most animals I have seen which were not washed on a regular basis. The town in which I live was one generation ago all farm land, so I grew up with plenty exposure to pigs, sheep, cows and the like, and saw the natural state of the skin, and this was with restricted behavior as they lived in barns which were constantly washed.
Even horses, which don't tend to be as dirty still need to be cleaned on a regular basis. The horses on the family farm were brushed every single day to prevent the excess buildup of dirt in the hair. Lots of people in my extended family also hunt on a regular basis, usually bear or caribou and I have talked to them about it from time to time. Usually showing them knives I have used. I keep meaning to send them knives to use.
In general though, my main interests are in utility knives, both large and small, which is the vast majority of the reviews. I have never actaully reviewed a dedicated skinning knife.
It would be obvious than any knife which is so labeled "XXX knife", is a speciality knife restricted to XXX type of use. This of course doesn't mean that I would restrict use to that for reasons described in the above.
None.
Fish plants are a large local business and they knives are cheap as dirt. Usually cheap production knives with plastic handles, stainless blades, ~440A class or less. However the same individuals responded very strongly to high quality knives I lent them. All tended to respond though they would not spend that kind of money for a work tool.
Alvin Johnson (a knifemaker who posts on rec.knives) makes knives for individuals who work in meat plants. His knives are either M2 or 1095 at full hardness, 64-66 HRC. The individuals who used his knives all commented that the edge retention and overally functionality was leagues better than anything else they have used.
His knives made *excellent* carpet cutters as well, he has used the same designs for that. This isn't surprising considering the qualities of M2 at that hardness.
No, the point was to show the difference in performance. Camp knives can be geared towards the heavy end or the light end. Joe Talmadges camp knife for example works almost as well as a turely optomized kitchen knife, as that was the area which he wanted the performance slanted towards.
I work in a lab, and every day discuss the methods used with those in my lab, and with those in other fields. I go to conferences on a regular basis to do the same thing, and publish articles in peer reviewed journals as well to get feedback on the work done.
The same general principles for robust analysis I use when working with knives, not nearly as strict of course, as it is a hobby. You are also without benefit of grants for funding which limits work.
Pen :
No, this is why I ask for suggestions on tests (always have even from the start), the reviews contain links to other work, why blades are sent out to other people, why I read other reviews, why I talk to makers, etc. .
db :
They generally don't because of posts like the above. Step back and look at ad hominem posts made by Shane and others :
Such a comment is not indented to be constructive and promote such commentary.
All blades (and other things like sharpening equipment) that I have used that were not destroyed or requested to be returned to the maker are all now in someone elses hands. Often this is made pubic in the reviews, some of them like Joe Talmadge, Will Kwan, Marion Poff, and Andrew Lynch, have commented about the knives and made threads on the subject. When they do bring up points that were radically different than mine they are discussed to determine the reason for the difference.
None of the above personal attack have any effect on me or what I do with knives, it is laughable to think anything constructive comes out of such commentary. In many of the posts it is clear that nothing could be done to please the individuals involved. In the recent Pronghorn thread I got attacked for both abusing the knife by using it for heavy work (before the review was competed), and saying it should not be so used. It isn't difficult to thus realize that no matter what was done the attacks would still be made.
I also got heavily attacked in the same thread for being biased. Yet this thread is evidence of me changing a test because of internal skew which lowers the performance of the Pronghorn. Note absolutely no comment by the posters who made statements that I would in fact intentionally chose tests to do the opposite. Those types of personal posts hardly improve reviews, mine or otherwise, they are not intended to be constructive.
The reviews however have evolved through many interactions with people actually interested in performance, such as the posts Jeff Clark has made in this thread, this is one of the main reasons I make these threads. This is usually noted in the review when a test was suggested by someone, or it was altered due to comments they made which indicates how it can be done better. If anyone reads a review where I have left this out drop me an email.
stich, sph3ric pyramid, swede79 and others, this is the goal. I am glad to see they have helped you in some way.
To address a comment Jeff made in the above about the volume of work I do. I tend to cover a lot of ground with knives, this got started because I was interested in the effect of various aspects so need to gather a large pool of knives to work out the details. It then became habit, and interesting as I would predict peformance based on what I had done in the past and refine my understanding.
There are lots of people who do as much work as I do, possibly even more when reviewing a knife. The obvious example is on the HI forum. These are serious users who do vast volumes of work on the khukuris, Pen for example has done lots of work I always intended to do, which I am very grateful for because now I don't have to do it. There are lots of excellent reviews being written, and they continue to improve, inspite of rants such as the above.
The HI forum is a model for how to encourage reviews. Bill Martino doesn't promote his blades at all, he has tested them extensively, but instead has always encouraged those interested to ask other users. He is not afraid of any feedback as he has done the work and is confident of the abiltiies of the knives. The reviews are never attacked, even when the performance of the knife is less than stellar.
Recently Pen reviewed khukuri which suffered some blade damage during use, the performance was discussed, the problem was fixed with some modifications by Pen. The reviews are hardly all positive hype, yet there is absolutely no movement to attack them at all.
-Cliff
I actually ignore this as it is so slight its effect on the total work done isn't significant, this is also due to the difference in body mechanics between the two. I would agree however that it would be of benefit to determine it for the sake of completeness. This was mentioned in several reviews (and threads) talking about the efficiency on a slices of various finishes.
The draws should be done in a consistent manner, not because of the effect it has on the force, but because very fast draws induce blunting greater than slower ones, I am not sure if this is due to possibly overheating, or just the greater energies imparted on the blade (I keep meaning to look at this with M2 or similar which would rule out the heating). I have looked at the cutting ability as depending on speed of draw, generally is it best in a slow quasi-static manner for reasons of control.
Yes, when possible this is done. If you feel critical factors are being ignore then cite them and the nature and mangitude of their effect so they can then be considered and hopefully taken into account.
Why ignores critical factors which are induced when a knife is used by a person and thus violates the very principles you outline. I would however agree that materials testing should be done on knives, I would like to see hardness, yield and tensile strength, charpy values (notched and not), ductility and corrosion tests on all the steels used in knives. of course science is always restriced by money. Anyone who doesn't think so has never worked in a research lab. There are always improvements you could make if you had more money (and time of course).
shane justice :
Animals with hair long enough to contain dirt that you don't wash before you skin.
Seal, and small game like rabbits. I have done this in a very basic sense, I would not consider myself proficient at it. I have just done it to do it and look at the basic cutting mechanics. Techniques on this differ of course, many prefer to do little cutting and pull or flay off skins.
I used to fish a lot, salt and freshwater, from trout to eel to shark. I have caught small game mainly, usually with primitive means, sling, snare and the like, birds, rabbit and smaller. I intended to go up to Labrador for Carbiou last year, but was too busy, same for this year. Hopefully I will make some time next year.
The same comment in any case you can find all over bladeforums, how the hair of some animals will trap dirt and grit, which seems quite obvious to me. This was the case with most animals I have seen which were not washed on a regular basis. The town in which I live was one generation ago all farm land, so I grew up with plenty exposure to pigs, sheep, cows and the like, and saw the natural state of the skin, and this was with restricted behavior as they lived in barns which were constantly washed.
Even horses, which don't tend to be as dirty still need to be cleaned on a regular basis. The horses on the family farm were brushed every single day to prevent the excess buildup of dirt in the hair. Lots of people in my extended family also hunt on a regular basis, usually bear or caribou and I have talked to them about it from time to time. Usually showing them knives I have used. I keep meaning to send them knives to use.
In general though, my main interests are in utility knives, both large and small, which is the vast majority of the reviews. I have never actaully reviewed a dedicated skinning knife.
It would be obvious than any knife which is so labeled "XXX knife", is a speciality knife restricted to XXX type of use. This of course doesn't mean that I would restrict use to that for reasons described in the above.
None.
Fish plants are a large local business and they knives are cheap as dirt. Usually cheap production knives with plastic handles, stainless blades, ~440A class or less. However the same individuals responded very strongly to high quality knives I lent them. All tended to respond though they would not spend that kind of money for a work tool.
Alvin Johnson (a knifemaker who posts on rec.knives) makes knives for individuals who work in meat plants. His knives are either M2 or 1095 at full hardness, 64-66 HRC. The individuals who used his knives all commented that the edge retention and overally functionality was leagues better than anything else they have used.
His knives made *excellent* carpet cutters as well, he has used the same designs for that. This isn't surprising considering the qualities of M2 at that hardness.
No, the point was to show the difference in performance. Camp knives can be geared towards the heavy end or the light end. Joe Talmadges camp knife for example works almost as well as a turely optomized kitchen knife, as that was the area which he wanted the performance slanted towards.
I work in a lab, and every day discuss the methods used with those in my lab, and with those in other fields. I go to conferences on a regular basis to do the same thing, and publish articles in peer reviewed journals as well to get feedback on the work done.
The same general principles for robust analysis I use when working with knives, not nearly as strict of course, as it is a hobby. You are also without benefit of grants for funding which limits work.
Pen :
No, this is why I ask for suggestions on tests (always have even from the start), the reviews contain links to other work, why blades are sent out to other people, why I read other reviews, why I talk to makers, etc. .
db :
They generally don't because of posts like the above. Step back and look at ad hominem posts made by Shane and others :
Such a comment is not indented to be constructive and promote such commentary.
All blades (and other things like sharpening equipment) that I have used that were not destroyed or requested to be returned to the maker are all now in someone elses hands. Often this is made pubic in the reviews, some of them like Joe Talmadge, Will Kwan, Marion Poff, and Andrew Lynch, have commented about the knives and made threads on the subject. When they do bring up points that were radically different than mine they are discussed to determine the reason for the difference.
None of the above personal attack have any effect on me or what I do with knives, it is laughable to think anything constructive comes out of such commentary. In many of the posts it is clear that nothing could be done to please the individuals involved. In the recent Pronghorn thread I got attacked for both abusing the knife by using it for heavy work (before the review was competed), and saying it should not be so used. It isn't difficult to thus realize that no matter what was done the attacks would still be made.
I also got heavily attacked in the same thread for being biased. Yet this thread is evidence of me changing a test because of internal skew which lowers the performance of the Pronghorn. Note absolutely no comment by the posters who made statements that I would in fact intentionally chose tests to do the opposite. Those types of personal posts hardly improve reviews, mine or otherwise, they are not intended to be constructive.
The reviews however have evolved through many interactions with people actually interested in performance, such as the posts Jeff Clark has made in this thread, this is one of the main reasons I make these threads. This is usually noted in the review when a test was suggested by someone, or it was altered due to comments they made which indicates how it can be done better. If anyone reads a review where I have left this out drop me an email.
stich, sph3ric pyramid, swede79 and others, this is the goal. I am glad to see they have helped you in some way.
To address a comment Jeff made in the above about the volume of work I do. I tend to cover a lot of ground with knives, this got started because I was interested in the effect of various aspects so need to gather a large pool of knives to work out the details. It then became habit, and interesting as I would predict peformance based on what I had done in the past and refine my understanding.
There are lots of people who do as much work as I do, possibly even more when reviewing a knife. The obvious example is on the HI forum. These are serious users who do vast volumes of work on the khukuris, Pen for example has done lots of work I always intended to do, which I am very grateful for because now I don't have to do it. There are lots of excellent reviews being written, and they continue to improve, inspite of rants such as the above.
The HI forum is a model for how to encourage reviews. Bill Martino doesn't promote his blades at all, he has tested them extensively, but instead has always encouraged those interested to ask other users. He is not afraid of any feedback as he has done the work and is confident of the abiltiies of the knives. The reviews are never attacked, even when the performance of the knife is less than stellar.
Recently Pen reviewed khukuri which suffered some blade damage during use, the performance was discussed, the problem was fixed with some modifications by Pen. The reviews are hardly all positive hype, yet there is absolutely no movement to attack them at all.
-Cliff
You donno any anymals with hair?
. I guess that's what I like least about this test 
.