A few thoughts concerning producing knives in different steels.
If this is indeed an effort to give everyone (who's interested anyway) a chance to taste unusual or exotic steels I think it's a neat idea. As DoW mentioned, we've tried to do that in the past with multiple patterns. It was important to us as a company to expand our knowledge of steels, and push our R&D a bit. Composite blade combo's (14C28N/CPM-D2, 154CM/CPM-D2, 14C28N/ZDP-189) , S110V, SG2, 14C28N, CPM-154, and solid ZDP-189 were a few of the directions we headed. There will be more and different offerings from us in the future. From a production standpoint, I think we have come a long way in the recent past, maybe to some we should be doing more. If that is the case, you should know that the factory pushes capacity monthly, and I am unsure if we could crank it up too much further. This type of production also goes against the grain with our volume manufacturing, which of course makes it even that much more difficult. In truth, there are no real monies to be made with all of this, but we understand that not always to goal. I'm also unsure of another company that has pushed as hard as we have to bring forth some steel variety, but possibly there is.
If the effort is to test one steel against another, and rank them accordingly, then IMHO, this boarders on a shear waste of time. There are just too many variables with each individual steel to make this kind of assessment.
If you just take a heat treatment, and consider it with one individual steel, the range you could take it is vast. For instance 13C26, we've cooked that steel about every way possible, and have it on the market done up in multiple hardness's. There were performance changes with each blade when HT'd differently. Which was better (I know that "better" word gets thrown out here a lot)? There wasn't a definite answer.
Sometimes the steel performance of 13C26 was dependent on the geometry of the blade, sometimes it was the media being cut that made a difference, other times it was a reprofile that changed it all up. Grinds, edge geometry, HT, all play a part in how the steel preformed. I also feel bias can take place with this whole scenario, whether one's conscience about it or not. This is the case for every steel and tester.
I know you have done a lot of work with different steel Vassili, and I find your stats interesting, and appreciate your passion with all of this. The problem I have, is that there is no specification data that preempts your findings. You don't really even know something as simple as the true Rc in the knives you test. You also bring edges to a sharpness that is impressive, but is the geometry for that particular steel optimal for the tests you're conducting? How can accuracy and conclusion really be identified with such variance and especially with the lack of precise specs?
It's just hard for me to take seriously, a steel done up one way, and draw an overall conclusion. Sure it shows you a snapshot of the steel presented in a specific way, but to take that as gospel and shout out this steel is better than another is...well not completely accurate.
Just thinking out loud.
Whatever you say, boss. You accuse some of this forum's regulars of making discussion uncomfortable, but you are one of the most aggressive posters I know of.
