- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 5,015
Good, I was getting a little worried about whatever I've been saying lately.Cliff Stamp said:
That's interesting, I didn't know that My father/Me/Verhoeven had such an affect on your thinking. Verhoeven's writing taught my dad a lot, and I learned from Verhoeven's book as well as my dad for a long time before I got to the point where I could learn on my own. We got copies of the Verhoeven book chapters as it was being written, and occasionally there is information in older drafts not included in the final release that is sometimes interesting. My dad was using AEB-L before he began speaking with Verhoeven, but Verhoeven backed up much of what my dad had learned and experienced with the steel. Originally my dad wasn't impressed with the composition, the same as others that looked at it, but he wanted a very thin material to use in making damascus to cut down on the number of welds that have to take place, and someone (can't remember who, maybe I'll ask my dad), referred him to AEB-L. After using AEB-L for a while he was quite surprised when people would call him up wondering what this great, mystical steel was, with the slightly unusual name of AEB-L. And those people were using it with around 8-11% 302 in it (because, of course, it was damascus), which may lower the cutting ability (this affect is still interesting to me but it is hard to tell how much of a difference there is in general use, another reason to test). There are a few custom makers that use AEB-L, all of them that I know are those that learned, at least some things, from my father, and all of them continue to use it because of the collection of properties and good feedback.Cliff Stamp said:
As a side note, though some people (there's my general reference for you
, though there is evidence of it on these forums, especially from a few years ago) have said my father makes only "pretty" damascus with no regard to performance, my father has made AEB-L/ATS-34 damascus for years, but few have ever purchased it, and the amount made has been relatively low to go along with it. People seem to prefer the ease of finishing and the huge contrast in the nickel or 302 combinations, and I've heard of few (OK, so I personally have heard zero) performance complaints. One day we'll send a blade with alternating carbide sizes such as AEB-L/ATS-34 to someone who can photo micrograph it for us, and also test a knife with it to see if any detectable performance difference is found. There is going to be some reduction in carbide size of the ATS-34 from all of the reduction in forging, but I think the carbides will still be considerably larger than the AEB-L. Oh, and also in regards to performance damascus, my father was a major force in the popularity of using 15N20 in damascus, specifically 1084/15N20. Though that, of course, is hard to prove, just look at Blade's Guide to Making Knives, who does Rick Dunckerly say recommended 1084/15N20 to him? My dad recommended 1084/15N20 because they are just about the two easiest steels to weld together for damascus, and because it's a double high carbon mix. Back then, people were using all sorts of unusual combinations that were difficult to weld and often not even compatible. Now 1084/15N20 is the standard.Sorry for hijacking the thread.
