Question for Kevin Cashen re. Goddard goop

A

Alden Sherrodd

Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
241
Kevin, in many recent threads you've expressed disdain for Wayne Goddard's steel quenching methods. I ask you this question not to stir up anything, but to satisfy my own curiosity.
Have you or anyone else to your knowledge tested objectively this and other quench mediums? If so how do they compare?
I understand that your chosen quench has been lab tested to work satisfactorily, but have other common quenches been tested to work unsatisfactorily?
I know from your respective writings both you and Wayne have chosen your quenches partially for subjective reasons.
I also know that just the conversion of a material from solid to liquid requires additional heat with no rise in temperature. So does the "Goddard Goop" extract a lot of heat right away just to liquefy?

Has there ever been a "quench off" using a variety of quenches and common knife steels with data collected showing the results?
Again I really am just interested in where to find the information or to know whether just conjecture is providing the answers.

I do appreciate the time you take to educate those of us that are less informed.

Thank You :)
Alden
 
Last edited:
As a very beginning blademangler (apologies to JDM ;) ), career engineer, and general hands-on kind of person who only reads the instructions when all else fails, I too would be VERY curious to see data from any "quench-offs" that may have been done in the past.
 
Problem is, different steels require different quench mediums. There is no one fits all. As far as I know, there are two basic commercial quenches "commonly available". A fast quench for like the 10xx's, and a medium for alloyed types such as 01, 5160, and others. There are different brands, but fall into one or the other catagory. Grocery store oils, or motor lubes just don't work as well, although some can get close for certain steels. It all depends on what you demand for your quality of blades.
 
JTknives said:
all i have to say is that warm vet grade material oil works great on 5160.
Click to expand...

I think that's the problem the OP is trying to solve. Everyone says whatever oil they use "works great" and no one is putting their money where their mouth is with controlled test results.
 
that's true. now i well say this if i had the 200-300 bucks extra i would buy 5 gallons of #50 and 5 of aaa. just because something works great does not mean it gets all the performance out of the steal possible.
 
JTknives said:
that's true. now i well say this if i had the 200-300 bucks extra i would buy 5 gallons of #50 and 5 of aaa. just because something works great does not mean it gets all the performance out of the steal possible.
Click to expand...

McMaster-Carr sells 11 second oil for $60/5Ga and 28 second oil for $53/5ga. There are middle grounds when it comes to using quality products.
 
Cap,

Yeah, but JT just recently broke his hands in an accident (seriously), and needs all the extra money he can get to pay someone to feed him. He can't reasonably be expected to part with both $60 and $53. You're just being unreasonable. :D


Alden,

I had never considered the latent heat aspect of the equation. Interesting idea, though I still have to think the vastly reduced conduction due to the high viscosity would put a wrench in things. Great question, though the fact that industry doesn't use it might hint at the answer to it.

While the "goop" goes against conventional wisdom of very low viscosity oils with anti vapor jacket type additives etc. - in my few years here, and the few years before that while lurking, I've never actually heard of an objective measurement of goop's performance.
 
Nathan the Machinist said:
... I've never actually heard of an objective measurement of goop's performance.
Click to expand...

Well, first you'd have to define "goop". Even in Goddard's book, IIRC, there's no set recipe or formula for it. It's a little of this and some more of that, so it's hard to say exactly how much of each "ingredient" there is. So how could there be an objective comparison test? Various other popular quenchants like canola oil, ATF fluid, etc could be compared effectively since they're reasonably consistent.

If someone had a lot of time on their hands and a penchant for note-taking, they could write a whole book and compare various "home-style" quenchants, but it would be a costly undertaking.
 
I thought he couldn't make knives anyways Nathan :D

In all seriousness, JT et al can surely use whatever they like, but mineral oil seems to run around $10/gal so for someone looking to purchase a quenchant I think it's something to consider.
 
JTknives said:
all i have to say is that warm vet grade material oil works great on 5160.
Click to expand...

It's mineral oil, not material oil...We don't want to lead a new maker astray. It would be frustrating for someone new to knifemaking to call a veterinary supply place for material oil and have them tell you that they've never heard of it...
 
First, I know that this thread has been specifically been addressed to Kevin, However it was posted on a public forum and I have been thinking about this all day and so here is my repsonse.


Using the MOST effective tool has been an unwritten rule of craftsman from the time man made his first tools. Our current society and lifestyle is only possible because of the efforts of millions of individuals that have contributed a small measure of new ideas. By taking the knowledge of those that went before us and building on that knowledge some of us may be able to move the bar ahead a bit. However, if some insist on ignoring that previous knowledge then they will not only not progress, but regress.
Quenching oils are specifically designed to take steels from Ms to Mf(correct me if I've got these backwards or wrong in some other way) with the greatest efficiency with the least amount of stress. Thousands of man-hours are devoted to designing and testing them. There is simply no way that any untrained individual with simple facilities can compete with that. Knifemakers as a group are individualistic by nature and stubborn as well, It seems that only among such a group can such an idea even be challenged. I also cannot see how using this tool properly is blindly following the crowd, as I have seen reponses to this topic before. It is using a tried and tested method for sucess. The heat treament of steel is the most important of all factors in the making of a knife, it is a tool primarily designed to cut, and to cut effectively, the steel must be heat treated. There may be many who will argue with this point, but everything else being equal, I would argue that the HT holds first place. This seems to be the most hotly contested of important characteristics. I am sure that bevel design will be brought up as an important factor, and I agree that it is, however, bevel design and angle are factors that may change dependant on the specific function of the individual knife reguardless of the steel. A straight razor and a steel chisel may be made of the same steel, but you certianly wouldn't want to shave with a chisel or cut off a bolt with a razor.
Thanks,
Del
 
Alden,
If you have read Kevin's posts over the years, you will know that it is not likely that he is going to reply to this post. While it may seem otherwise to the casual observer, Kevin actually tries to avoid a pointless argument.

Wayne has his procedures and the reasons for them.
Kevin has his.
Best let it sit there.

If you are really curious about Wayne's goop, give him a call. He is a pleasant enough fellow, and will probably share his expertise and experimentation with his process.

Stacy
 
Thank you to all that have replied to my questions.
My original question remains, Is there someone that has data comparing different oils which are used as quenchants.
Stacy, I have no specific interest in the "goop quench". Kevin has referred to it and that is why I asked about it. I wanted to know if it had been shown to not fully harden knife blades. I hope that my question is neither pointless nor argumentative. Many knifemakers use the other oils and steering them to easily obtainable good quenchants isn't pointless.
The reason I addressed Kevin is that he is the most vocal proponent of quantative testing and I felt he would be the most likely source of the information. Either his own tests or writings he knew of.
Much has been written on this forum praising the commercial quenchants. But which of the other commonly used materials work well and which do not.

Thanks again to all that have responded. Please just keep it to the verifiable facts.:)

Alden
 
Last edited:
Alden, as someone who admires your ingenuity and resourcefulness (Alden has made some great stuff for his shop and has the coolest grinder set up I have ever seen, post pics of your coote some time alden), let me just add one point. I don't remember whether it was Mete or Kevin who posted them but there have been microscope images (I'm sure that I'm probably using the wrong term, microscopy... I dunno) of 1095 I believe that had been hardened using mineral oil. It was not fully converted and the pictures made it quite clear. This made a big impression on me and spoke to the idea that not all quenches work for fast steels. Now if it had been O-1 perhaps the results would have been better. However since the goop has no set formula it would be hard to test at all. Even if you did test it, the process for examining steels structure seems brutal. I think you have to slice of a thin piece and bring it to some crazy high polish (like in the ten thousands) to even see anything. While I don't mean to slight anyone, I would think anyone methodical enough to do this with there steel and have access to such expensive lab equipment probably isn't the personality type that the goop appeals to. I would think if anything they would be quite anal, no offense to anyone. So while the goop itself may have not been tested, I know other quenches such as mineral oil have been examined.

The biggest problem I can see is that even vet grade mineral oil is not a set viscosity and formulation (if I'm not mistaken its more about its purity and what cut of oil is used), so just to test this one type of mineral oil would take perhaps hundreds of tests. I don't know anyone willing to go to that length to prove a point. I would say that if you want to know if your quench is working for your steel, then you could send a random selection of blades quenched in your medium at different times to be RC tested. If the blades come back to be the correct hardness range for the heat treat and temper you had used and are fairly consistent from one blade to the next you must be awfully close. On the other hand, if data sheets are saying you should have several more points of hardness for the heat treating specifics you are using then you are probably not getting full hardening. If your blades are fully hardened consistently then no one can really fault your methods.

When I first jumped int a heat treat thread several years ago I expected a fairly straight forward discussion. Boy was I wrong. Unlike the density of a certain wood or the best use for a specific steel, there seems to be very little faith placed in answers to HT questions. I'm hope this post doesn't offend anyone. I have learned that we all have our own equipment and shop setups and you cant judge a knife maker by there methods. Only by there knives.
 
Alden, I am fairly certain that Kevin will not comment directly on the efficacy of the techniques and materials of another named knifemaker.

I would suggest mixing up a batch of goop, and getting a "known good" quenchant, and trying both with your favorite steel, then test them and post.
me, I'm sticking with thin oil

-Page
 
I beleive the test for quench oils is they place a thermocouple in a nickel ball that is 1 " round, and then measure the cooling rate?

When Kevin says "goop" I believe he is referring to the many different concoctions that beginner's come up with after reading Wayne's book, or maybe after that beginner has spoken to they're grandpappy who "used to make knives back when he was a kid", or after they talked to this so-and-so who has a reputation for tough knives who recommended it. So Alden, your question is not really easily answered. That and Kevin usually will not answer forum questions directed specifically to him :D.

I could have swore we had this discussion already?
 
I make it a rule not to post in threads with my name specifically in the title so you will find that this conversation was hashed out exhaustively and to the standard stalemate of "agreeing to disagree" in another thread.

I do have more than a couple of micrographs of steel that obviously was not quenched properly, just not with the methods specifically discussed here. It was only in the last 5 years or so that I equipped myself with camera equipment for such images, and I settled this issued quite conclusively for myself with such testing very long ago in my career. When I found excellent and well formulated quenchants that achieved my ends without the need for continued testing I embraced them and never looked back. Taking time out to step backwards to continually repeat that testing for those who have not and reject my findings, would be... well rather counter productive for a guy who has to make a living at all this silly blade business.

Once again please see the other thread, and many of its companions dealing with the issue, that do not have the limiting factor of being specifically addressed to me, and I felt more inclusive freedom for all to contribute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top