Removal vs Forging - Empirical Evidence?

Like the article says, that forging does not offer tangible benefits over stock removal. That the material is allready forged in a sense through its manufacture from an ingot and that given the non complex shape of a knife the structure of the metal wont be improved by further forging.

Im just trying to understand different methods of construction.
 
For gods sake cant we all just get along, a Knife by any other name is still a blade.
They both have their benifits and down sides.
I just like the benifits, with forging It only takes me about 9" of 1.25" x .25" stock to get a blade that has a 7"+ blade plus enough to have a long tang for a handle.
I have made some stock removal blades as well to be non biased.
and as long as the heat treat is done correctly there is nothing wrong with either.
 
This same argument had been going on for years when I got into knifemaking in the late 70's early 80's. It was Bullshiite then and it's Bullshiite now.
I also have no idea hat you mean by empirical evidence, nor do I think you do.
Make a knife however you see fit. Use good materials and proper heat treat and you won't be disappointed.Like was said above, "can't we all just get along"?
There's been entirely too much of this sort of mudslinging from one corner or another. Whole forums are dedicated to slamming stock removal. I for one am sick and tired of it and the people that spew this nonsense.

If people would learn to totally ignore this crap instead of kissing the ass of the knifemaker fools that spew it, the world would be a better place.:barf:
 
Its a reasonable question.

The cornerstone of any rational statement is having supportive data to show its truth. Im simply asking if there has been any empirical results to support the premise of the article.

It doesnt need to be controversial or personal at all, and I dont want that. As an aspiring enthusiast I am keen to learn. These sorts of things can be measured and objectively evaluated.
 
Mike Hull said:
This same argument had been going on for years when I got into knifemaking in the late 70's early 80's. It was Bullshiite then and it's Bullshiite now.
I also have no idea hat you mean by empirical evidence, nor do I think you do.
Make a knife however you see fit. Use good materials and proper heat treat and you won't be disappointed.Like was said above, "can't we all just get along"?
There's been entirely too much of this sort of mudslinging from one corner or another. Whole forums are dedicated to slamming stock removal. I for one am sick and tired of it and the people that spew this nonsense.

If people would learn to totally ignore this crap instead of kissing the ass of the knifemaker fools that spew it, the world would be a better place.:barf:
Click to expand...

Where would you suggest we "newbie/wannabe knife makers" go with such "bullshiite" questions?
 
Welcome to the Bladeforums.
Filling out your profile may help others know more about you, and thus answer better.

As far as empirical evidence, Kevin Cashen , and many others,have thousands of micrographs of the structures in blades made both ways. The article you read was a simplified (as much as Kevin is capable of simplifying anything) explanation of his findings and observations. Metallurgists worldwide study steel in manufacturing and produce volumes of empirical evidence.

Has anyone sat down and done an exhaustive research study on the merits and detractions of the two methods ??? - I doubt it - as there would be no need to prove what is already provable with current evidence. It would be like going to the head of research at Dow Corning and asking for $1,000,000 to fund an empirical study to prove that water boils at 212F SP.

The benefits and drawbacks of the two techniques are not in the final blades (which in most cases will be identical) but in the formation. Forging has many benefits to the smith in his ability to control thickness and shape as desired with the minimum amount of steel. The stock removal folks need less equipment. There are ,of course, more pros and cons. A search on this forum in this topic will produce much information. Use this search engine for best results: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=011197018607028182644:qfobr3dlcra

Finally, It is in understanding the metallurgy and the physical process involved in a blade and its construction that the decision on which way the blade is made should be determined.
In a drop point hunter, or a Bowie, there is no difference on way or the other.
In a pattern welded short sword with fullers, or an orikaeshi san mai kitae katana, there is only one practical choice - forging.
For a folder blade, or fillet knife, stock removal is advantageous.

Stacy
 
Nullack / Rayban I understand what you are asking. You want numbers, scientific data showing one better than the other. There is none to my knowledge. there are slicing tests, beating tests, destruction tests,... but all they show is superior geometry and heat treat. As far as tests showing the difference between stock removal and forging goes, there is none that I know of. The knife shape is not complicated enough to gain real benifit from forging, like say a crankshaft would with it's multiple 90º bends. For most of us it is our preferred method of knifemaking becuase it is less wastefull, we can take a small piece of 3/4" rod (say 6" long) and turn it into a large knife (10-12") given the right method.

Jason


Edited to add: What stacey said is true. he's much more knowledgable about testing in this area. Metallurgical testing is where it's at.
 
Last edited:
Thank you both Bladsmth and JS for your patient and intelligent explanations.
 
Thanks for the informed response guys :) I will get using the search tool.

A few minutes ago I found a company doing new things with forging - http://www.diamondbladeknives.com/frictionForging.aspx

I've so much to learn! :) I'll do my profile - Im a technically minded person, I do professional testing but have never done knives or gotten into the mechanics of solids / dynamics in relation to cutlery.
 
Karl B. Andersen said:
Only if you get your thumb in the way..........
Click to expand...

I think that's called blood spatter.

If you study the droplets, you can tell how big, a hammer was used to smooch your thumb.

I saw that on C S I.

Thumb packing is what I understand the experts call it.

I'll give that a big :thumbup:thumbs up.:D

God, I love this subject.

Its early and I can already tell this is going to be a funny day.





Fred
 
Nullack, rayban, the article is mine but the information is not since it is all based upon well established knowledge and principles used everyday in the steel industry. So much so that it can safely be called fact instead of theory, otherwise I would have avoided using it. You see too many bladesmiths that also write have no hesitation in using speculation or assumptions as if they were fact, partially because they know few will ever question them on it due to a widespread and strong desire to want to believe.

Don't let the impatience to your question discourage you too much, instead I would offer this insight into it, you see the "forging Vs. stock removal" thread is perhaps THE most often debated and clichéd argument on virtually any blade making forum. It often results in hard feelings due to threatening the sacred cows of many people, and thus it has become the equivalent of a political discussion, and can understandably put may people immediately on the defensive, or bring out the impatience of folks who are just plain weary of it.

I wrote the article in part to help alleviate this situation by giving a source, based upon fact, to which folks could refer instead of getting mired in that same old debate. I invite your questioning; I think it is a good thing to ask for solid source data, I am disappointed as to how seldom I ever see it done to the claims of forging superiority, however. I give much more in the way of explanation of cause and effect and reference to fact than virtually any claim I have ever seen on the other side. From my perspective the article is not theory but is based upon the accepted facts, while the speculation and claims surrounding the forged blade are perhaps theoretical at best. My challenge to the other side is to refute any of these facts while making their proclamations about the forged blade, if they do I am certain the entire steel industry, and the whole field of metallurgy will be VERY interested.

The saddest examples of attempts to support claims are the so called "tests" that bladesmiths have done. It is always in the form of highly subjective and inaccurately vague displays of performance that could be easily accountable to dozens of influences other than forging, with the daunting task of even attempting to trace if down to one due to the countless variables involved. Then there are the outright smoke and mirrors of misdirecting the entire question and subject into areas of testing that have nothing to do with a knife but will impress those not familiar with the underlying principles involved.

At the bottom of the article I list just a few of my sources:

Fundamentals of Physical Metallurgy by J. D. Verhoeven
The Inhomogeneity of Plastic Deformation (Papers presented at ASM Seminar October 16 and 17, 1971) ASM
Introduction to Physical Metallurgy by S. Avner
Metallurgy by B. J. Moniz
Physical Metallurgy by B. Chalmers
Plasticity of Metals by M. Kurrein

Now compare that to the sources of data that the folks who say forging can produce a superior knife:
…ummm… well… ummm…

Also I have added my own observations from 20+ years of professional bladesmithing, of which for the last decade has included not vague or general tests but very specific and standardized tests common in metallurgy and industry, in conjunction with a good percentage of my life in front of metallographs dissecting the steel micron by micron.

Please don’t get me wrong I am not taking you to task here at all, I am asking the manufacturers of the opposite information to provide 1/10 of the source data for their claims. Your questions I applaud and encourage, for if they are applied across the board it will be a win-win for everyone. Just let me know how I can contribute to the conversation.
 
Last edited:
Mike Hull said:
This same argument had been going on for years when I got into knifemaking in the late 70's early 80's. It was Bullshiite then and it's Bullshiite now.
I also have no idea hat you mean by empirical evidence, nor do I think you do.
Make a knife however you see fit. Use good materials and proper heat treat and you won't be disappointed.Like was said above, "can't we all just get along"?
There's been entirely too much of this sort of mudslinging from one corner or another. Whole forums are dedicated to slamming stock removal. I for one am sick and tired of it and the people that spew this nonsense.

If people would learn to totally ignore this crap instead of kissing the ass of the knifemaker fools that spew it, the world would be a better place.:barf:
Click to expand...

Mike, take a deep breath and have a cup of coffee :D

I would like to know which "Whole forums are dedicated to slamming stock removal"?

This debate is not near has bad as it once was.
 
popcorn.gif
popcorn.gif
popcorn.gif
popcorn.gif
popcorn.gif



:D

'nuff said"

Rob!
 
Perhaps sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.(not a phallic symbol, or fad).
As a mere mortal I make knives with stock removal and forging. It intends on the desired end result. The man in the field does not care as much about the process as:
Does the knife work?
Does it hold an edge?
Can I depend on it?
Perhaps I am to simple. Because these are the 3 things that matter most when I make my knives. Visual appeal is unimportant if the other 3 are not there. Does it matter what road we travel as long as we reach our destination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top