So obviously this relationship is a bit codependent... If you keep a consistent bevel width, then the angle of your edge will increase as the thickness at the edge shoulders increases.
Well, I got bored and decided to measure all my knives, their edge angles and the thicknesses behind the edges. What I started to notice was that on some knives that seemed like they had an edge angle way too acute ( 20 degrees inclusive ), by merit of the blade geometry and grind they were still about .035" thick behind the shoulder. Meanwhile, I also had knives that were considerably thinner behind the shoulder, somewhere on the order of .015", but were also between 20 and 30 degrees inclusive.
What I got to thinking was that, what if I thickened the part behind the shoulders out to .030" on one of these thinner knives? It would still be thinner than on the other two knives, so shouldn't it still cut as well? Meanwhile, in thickening out this dimension, it would be making the actual cutting edge angle more obtuse, which would give the actual apex itself a little more strength, all the while not really thickening things out that much at all?
It seems to me that the thickness behind the edge should be a bigger consideration than edge angle. My Izula and Buck 119 both are about .035" behind the edge for example, but one is at 20 degrees inclusive, and the other is at 30 degrees inclusive and have different blade grinds and thicknesses. Meanwhile, some of these other knives I have which are below .020" behind the edge, could have a more obtuse edge angle but still remain thin enough to cut well.
I realize the edge still has varying thicknesses below the edge shoulders, but the thickness at the edge shoulder is the maximum. So if you measure this and it comes to .030", one could think, "Is something .030" thick going to give me much resistance through this material?" To me that would make more sense than going, "Well, is 30 degrees inclusive too much for this?" because all you're considering is the angle, you don't really have a good comprehension on how much that thickens out the cutting parts, and then when you consider all the other factors--blade thickness, grind, bevel width, etc. then it becomes clear that 30 degrees inclusive on one knife might make things way too thin, when on another it might be just what the doctor ordered.
So meanwhile, it also got me to thinking about these others knives I had... If instead of a thickness of .015" behind the edge, I brought it up to .020" or .025" that would probably make the edge a good bit more stout, but wouldn't really increase resistance. I don't really know what angle it would bring it to, but would it really make a difference? I already know that if the edge is below .025" it's not going to meet much resistance, and I know that if it is over .015" thick it is going to have better edge-holding. At that point doesn't it make the actual angle inconsequential?
Does anyone get what I'm saying or am I just losing my mind? It almost seems like the angle is just a short-hand way of describing all of these other factors. I mean, I doubt most people have calipers to measure their knife down to the thousandths ( or have much experience in how easily something .020" will go through something versus something that is .030" ) so it makes sense to think of it in terms of an angle to get the right thickness. However, if you have the right tools and experience, wouldn't it benefit you more to pay attention to this edge thickness rather than the angle?
Well, I got bored and decided to measure all my knives, their edge angles and the thicknesses behind the edges. What I started to notice was that on some knives that seemed like they had an edge angle way too acute ( 20 degrees inclusive ), by merit of the blade geometry and grind they were still about .035" thick behind the shoulder. Meanwhile, I also had knives that were considerably thinner behind the shoulder, somewhere on the order of .015", but were also between 20 and 30 degrees inclusive.
What I got to thinking was that, what if I thickened the part behind the shoulders out to .030" on one of these thinner knives? It would still be thinner than on the other two knives, so shouldn't it still cut as well? Meanwhile, in thickening out this dimension, it would be making the actual cutting edge angle more obtuse, which would give the actual apex itself a little more strength, all the while not really thickening things out that much at all?
It seems to me that the thickness behind the edge should be a bigger consideration than edge angle. My Izula and Buck 119 both are about .035" behind the edge for example, but one is at 20 degrees inclusive, and the other is at 30 degrees inclusive and have different blade grinds and thicknesses. Meanwhile, some of these other knives I have which are below .020" behind the edge, could have a more obtuse edge angle but still remain thin enough to cut well.
I realize the edge still has varying thicknesses below the edge shoulders, but the thickness at the edge shoulder is the maximum. So if you measure this and it comes to .030", one could think, "Is something .030" thick going to give me much resistance through this material?" To me that would make more sense than going, "Well, is 30 degrees inclusive too much for this?" because all you're considering is the angle, you don't really have a good comprehension on how much that thickens out the cutting parts, and then when you consider all the other factors--blade thickness, grind, bevel width, etc. then it becomes clear that 30 degrees inclusive on one knife might make things way too thin, when on another it might be just what the doctor ordered.
So meanwhile, it also got me to thinking about these others knives I had... If instead of a thickness of .015" behind the edge, I brought it up to .020" or .025" that would probably make the edge a good bit more stout, but wouldn't really increase resistance. I don't really know what angle it would bring it to, but would it really make a difference? I already know that if the edge is below .025" it's not going to meet much resistance, and I know that if it is over .015" thick it is going to have better edge-holding. At that point doesn't it make the actual angle inconsequential?
Does anyone get what I'm saying or am I just losing my mind? It almost seems like the angle is just a short-hand way of describing all of these other factors. I mean, I doubt most people have calipers to measure their knife down to the thousandths ( or have much experience in how easily something .020" will go through something versus something that is .030" ) so it makes sense to think of it in terms of an angle to get the right thickness. However, if you have the right tools and experience, wouldn't it benefit you more to pay attention to this edge thickness rather than the angle?
