Cliff:
I was responding to your specific comment about the edge angles influence on chopping ability, it is actually very small and thus an inference that a ~25 degree angle gives "tree beating" performance isn't solid reasoning.
I was referring to cutting ability in general, not just chopping.
Also, a 25 degree included angle would be excellent, but you are talking twice that at 50 degrees included. Yes, "tree beater" is hyerbole, a literary device.
If the material isn't binding the cutting ability isn't very dependent on the geometry. The binding nature of the material is exactly what induces the dependance of geometry. To be very strict, the edge angle will still influence cutting ability on such materials because of the effect it has on how the sharpness of the blade induces the contact pressure on the medium being cut. However the quality of sharpening can easily effect such performance by several hundred percent. The effect of geometry is an order of magnitude less so it won't be noticed by many as it will be swamped out by how well the sharpening is performed.
As I indicated, I am a simple man, what I lack in formal education I try to make up for with common sense, and some real life experience.
I really don't understand your argument here.
A tomato is not binding. Cutting it is very dependent on having a thin edge. You can have a thin primary grind and a thick edge and the knife will not cut a tomato well; on the other hand, you can have a thick primary grind, but if the edge is ground thin, it will still slice tomatoes well. Same with rope.
Wood is a binding material, the geometery of the primary grind is very important here. If the primary grind is wrong, bindingwill occur.
Yes, you will get roughly 15% more work done, assuming of course that you take care not to let fatigue amplify the effects.
Fatiuge is exactly what I am talking about. A 15% increase in work load will tire a person out at a much faster rate than 15%. Take a person that can bench press 200 lbs. Have them do a maximum set with 25% of that (50 lbs) the set they can do is probably pretty high, at least 40 reps. Now add another 15% (30lb) for a total of like 80lbs if my math is right. The number of reps will go way down. Why, well I'm not a doctor, but I bet it has to due with muscle fibers and ATP and glucose and stuff. The laymans answer (for guys like me) is that if you have to do more work, you get tired faster, way faster.
So when you start talking about 35% increases in effort, over several hours, you are talking about a lot more work. When I worked construction, I knew what rate to carry dheets of drywall or lumber at, so that I had a pace and weight I could do for an extended period of time. Had someone added 25% more weight, I would have tired much quicker.
. As well see how efficient you can carry a 200+ lbs log on your shoulder which has these sharp cracked off knots pressing into your flesh.
Easy there Hercules, I am not a 19 year old navy seal.
Ok insert a rant on TOPS and on Ontario both of which have made stronger claims than Busse with much more vague and open ended statements.
Then you'd better add Busse to your list!!!
I don't doubt that those companies make extreme claims (though I doubt any are as outragous as "the undisputed leader in extrme performance knives"), but the whole point of me posting here is to help you realize that when Busse does the same thing, you encourage it, and support those claims. You shouldn't critisize TOPS, then slap Jerry on the back.
Incidently, although this whole mess started over Jerry, he has since explained himself (as far as the performance issues go), it is his company, and he can run it the way he chooses, he is making the knives the way the majority of his customers want.
The issue now Cliff, is that you support claims of high performance (cutting ability) based on these knives that are coming with thick edges, whereas Jerry is supporting his claim of extreme performance as highly weighted towards durability, and not cutting performance. Jerry has admitted that thinner edged knives, like marbles, will cut better than his.
. Mine was reduced down to a ~15-17 degree included edge and would out cut any large knife I had seen and in fact a number of smaller ones.
Yes, exactly. I am sure that you did see a high level of performance with that profile, which is exactly why I was unhappy with standard Busse porformance with edges over three times as thick!!
Some facts would also help to clarify your position, just how thin would you like to see Busse grind the edge on the BM. Where should the angle lie?
Easy, .025" thick behind the edge, with the edge ground convex at about a 25 degree included angle.
This edge profile is durable enough for chopping clear timber, should not be damaged by knots if proper technique is used. As well, this edge profile provides a very useable edge for a variety of cutting tasks, for food prep, utility like cutting cardboard, leather, is well suited for whittling and wood craft.
You are meking the case that thick edges are needed for duarbility. Consider this:
A mora knife is thin carbon steel (1/16" stock), quite hard too (60-62RC) with a single edge bevel under well 20 degrees included.
Jimbo, myself and many others have shown that a mora like this can be used for baton work with no damage.
You have made the claim that baton work is more stressful than chopping.
Certainly if these thin knives with very thin edges and hard steel, much more brittle than infi, can withstand baton stresses, surely thinned out infi is more than durable enough. In fact, I know that thin INFI is quite durable, as I have thinned out infi blades and they are very durable and cut well.
In regards to all that statist mumbo jumbo:
I have no clue what you are talking about. I'm sure I'm not alone.
I'm pretty sure that Hoodoo, being a professor of science has a solid understanding of statistics, and he seems to take exception to your methodology.
Speaking of Hoodoo, he is a very learned man, but he also has lots of life experience and common sense. Notice how when he writes about knives, pople understand what he is writing. He puts things in plain english, so that even dummies like me will understand.
I have found that people that try to dress up their arguments with flashy words, and baffling B.S., often lack a true understanding of the subject, they are too busy trying to make themselves look smart.
Hoodoo:
Would you please post the exact measurements of those knives ground by Ray Kirk and the standard deviation. Also, if you would, could you post the coefficient of variation and SEM
It would be interesting to see Cliff do this now, since he has already used the knives to chop up concrete. Now that is some real world, high relavent test.
If you want to see real world testing, the kind I respect, check out reviews by Buzzbait. There is a guy that combines knife knowledge, and woodcraft, explains things well, and after reading the review, you feel that you have learned something.
:barf:
Unless he is just willing to suck it up and admit that I am right and he is wrong 
