Who was it that said O1 would outcut any Damascus?

Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
2,045
This isn't the first time I read it, but I've heard the saying that O1 properly heat treated would out cut any damascus:

http://www.engnath.com/public/steel.htm

It's also mentioned in Bob Loveless' book "How to make knives."

Does anyone know the person (apparantly a well known Bladesmith -was it Bill Moran?) that made this claim?

I'm not doubting it, as I like O1 a lot, but I've heard it so much recently, I'm just kinda curious who was it that said this first?

Thanks!
 
It could have been any one who understands steels. But then, what were they refering to. Long lasting edge, agressiveness? Used in hard or tuff media. Abrasive media. There is all knikds of cutting. Not all steels excell in all areas. There is enough variables to write a book about. Not to mentinon all the disagreements it could cause.
 
From my limited learning, all I can say is... there are so many variables involved in what any particular Damascus might contain, that I think such a comparison is almost useless.
 
In the Loveless book, Bill Moran said that 9260 makes a blade that is even tougher than his O1/1010 damascus. Bill Bagwell was the "prophet" of the "Damascus cutting effect" as i recall. Remember that the stuff Moran was making back then was fairly low carbon...like O1 diluted to the carbon content of 1050 and high layer count, so the carbon would have totally migrated I would guess. Like the stuff that Don Hanson made with wrought iron and W2.
 
In the Loveless book, Bill Moran said that 9260 makes a blade that is even tougher than his O1/1010 damascus. Bill Bagwell was the "prophet" of the "Damascus cutting effect" as i recall. Remember that the stuff Moran was making back then was fairly low carbon...like O1 diluted to the carbon content of 1050 and high layer count, so the carbon would have totally migrated I would guess. Like the stuff that Don Hanson made with wrought iron and W2.

Just so ya'll know. I use 85% W2 and 15% iron, not a 50/50 mix.

The old 50/50 mix of high carbon/low carbon steels didn't cut all that well and I believe this is the damascus refurred to in the "01 out cutting damascus" thing. 01 is a very good steel.
 
I was at a blacksmith get-together once, and one guy said "1095 will outcut any damascus blade. It's just cute" his exact words. I didn't bother to contradict him, but it's not that difficult to make a damascus blade that will outcut 1095. Like mix O1 and 52100. Reasonably good contrast, and I'm sure it would cut great.
 
Just so ya'll know. I use 85% W2 and 15% iron, not a 50/50 mix.

The old 50/50 mix of high carbon/low carbon steels didn't cut all that well and I believe this is the damascus refurred to in the "01 out cutting damascus" thing. 01 is a very good steel.

i was referring to the total migration, not the hardness. Bill's original stuff would have been around .40-.50% carbon if the bars of steel he started with ere all the same thickness.
 
I don't mean to be too blunt but, I don't know who said it but they really didn't think it out too much as it is an extremely flawed statement to make. Aside from the always flawed position of making sweeping statements about a material that has infinite combinations, as Phillip pointed out, what about damascus that includes O1? While no where near exhaustive, the tests I have done comparing O1 with an O1/L6 mix shows very favorable results for the damascus.

The longer I am in this business the more I become aware of how many years some guys can play with this stuff and not really learn much about what they are doing. I often hear "XXX should know what he is talking about, he has been doing it for 20 years", well what if he has been locked into doing it wrong for 20 years, that would just be 19 more years than the rest of us of wasted time. If a person isn't asking questions and constantly verifying their assumptions and conclusions, it is very easy to spend 20 years simply believing hogwash.
 
I don't mean to be too blunt but, I don't know who said it but they really didn't think it out too much as it is an extremely flawed statement to make. Aside from the always flawed position of making sweeping statements about a material that has infinite combinations, as Phillip pointed out, what about damascus that includes O1? While no where near exhaustive, the tests I have done comparing O1 with an O1/L6 mix shows very favorable results for the damascus.

The longer I am in this business the more I become aware of how many years some guys can play with this stuff and not really learn much about what they are doing. I often hear "XXX should know what he is talking about, he has been doing it for 20 years", well what if he has been locked into doing it wrong for 20 years, that would just be 19 more years than the rest of us of wasted time. If a person isn't asking questions and constantly verifying their assumptions and conclusions, it is very easy to spend 20 years simply believing hogwash.

I have found a great test of a makers knowledge of damascus is how easy it is for them to make sweeping or generalized statements about a material with endless possibilites. If I were a consumer, the guy who spoke of damascus as if it were a single type of steel would be the guy I would not buy the stuff from.

You don't mean to be too blunt? yarite!!! lol...just kidding. It is also very easy to wander around in the dark for almost 2 years like i did with very basic stuff.....lol Mo' betta to get good info from the start.
 
While no where near exhaustive, the tests I have done comparing O1 with an O1/L6 mix shows very favorable results for the damascus.

Kevin's O1/L6 mix was the first thing I thought of while reading this post. I would think O1 alone would be superior to O1/1010 in any ratio, but who says damascus has to have an inferior constituent?
 
I'm pretty shure William Henry's ZPD-189 dammascus will destroy O1 on all levels. Now if Devlin would just send a batch to play with. (Starts holding breath)
 
You are so right Kevin. Big, ZDP-189 is only clad in Damascus. The cutting edge isn't Damascus at all. It is ZDP-198 only, in the core. Sorry I'm having a brain fart at the moment. But this type of construction isn't normally called Damascus. It matters not at all what the outer layers consist of. as long as they can protect the core from fracturing. The Scandinavians have been doing it this way for a very long time. An remember Morseth?. In this case. The Damascus is just for looks. Mike
 
Thanks for all the replies! :thumbup: So it was Bill Bagwell that said it, one of the mysteries of the universe solved! :)

I don't mean to be too blunt but, I don't know who said it but they really didn't think it out too much as it is an extremely flawed statement to make. Aside from the always flawed position of making sweeping statements about a material that has infinite combinations, as Phillip pointed out, what about damascus that includes O1? While no where near exhaustive, the tests I have done comparing O1 with an O1/L6 mix shows very favorable results for the damascus.

The longer I am in this business the more I become aware of how many years some guys can play with this stuff and not really learn much about what they are doing. I often hear "XXX should know what he is talking about, he has been doing it for 20 years", well what if he has been locked into doing it wrong for 20 years, that would just be 19 more years than the rest of us of wasted time. If a person isn't asking questions and constantly verifying their assumptions and conclusions, it is very easy to spend 20 years simply believing hogwash.

I have found a great test of a makers knowledge of damascus is how easy it is for them to make sweeping or generalized statements about a material with endless possibilites. If I were a consumer, the guy who spoke of damascus as if it were a single type of steel would be the guy I would not buy the stuff from.

Just wondering, what if O1 was not allowed to be a constituent of the damascus -what combinations of pattern welded steel would cut as aggressively as O1 (if any)?
 
If we have assigned the quote to one person, allow me to make it prefectly clear that I had no idea who said it at the time of my previous post. I myself have no idea who may have said it.

Now, allow me to explain my reaction here. It is a fun hobby for some lurkers on the internet to set up human cock fights between well known makers. Ad hominem attack has never been my style, it is a false argument and thus I have no use for it, a review of any posts I have made will show this, yet a combination of malicious cronyism and political correctness in this business can make almost any position one takes a personal attack. One can say that they prefer S7 in larger blades over 5160 and invariably somebody in the crowd will think “hmmm my friend John Doe uses 5160, what does this guy have against John?” Now even though around a bazillion people use 5160, word will get out that you personally have it out for John Doe.

For a while, around twice a year I would get a message or phone call from one very well known smith, because some scumbag was playing games and pitting us against each other. The method was often along the lines of a factually weak statement unconnected to anyh one person being made in a forum thread, I would post and give contrary facts, then several posts later the other smiths name would be mentioned and in some way connected to the original position. Then the other smith would be informed that Kevin Cashen was saying that they were full of !@# and that folks shouldn’t buy their book, knives, widgets or whatever, when that smiths name wasn’t even mentioned until a week after I had left the thread.

As this continued I started to be certain that I said very complimentary things about that smith and his stuff whenever his name was mentioned. Now this is no joke, but I then got a phone call from him after he had been told that I was claiming he had underworld connections and was saying nice things out of fear for my life! I am not making this up, this really happened. Of course the other smith was smarter than this and we now find it all humorous and wait to see the next wacky thing the knit wits can throw our way. But if I ever find out who the weasel was that was doing it, my Christianity will be sorely tested.

Now that smith does not post here, nor I believe does the game playing scumbag, but it has happened with a few other smiths to a lesser degree. Why me? I believe it is a way that the field has of policing unpopular thought. I make no secret of the fact that I have an agenda to hold intense factual light up to all the hype, myth and hooey this business has been shackled with for so long. I like to present facts, but when one threatens the B.S. that too many hold dear with facts that they cannot deal with one way to fight back is to make it personal and use peer pressure. If you can turn enough of the heretic’s peers against him, the personal pressure may be enough to silence him; the problem is the facts still remain.

Flaming is a cowardly way out of an internet conversation when you realize your position is too weak to stand. When your position is strong and your facts are good, you can afford to be a gentleman and calmly rely on reason. One has no use for ad hominem tactics if they have facts.

Now before I end up getting a call from yet another smith, I have never met Mr. Bagwell, his knives are very well known and appear to be very collectible and thus worthy investments. I have no idea if he said anything like the above statement, I don’t care because it is irrelevant. My comments, as always were directed at the premise not at a person.

I took time out for this long winded post to nip yet another bit of silliness in the bud. I hate this sort of crap, but I will not be silenced by these techniques. It is safe to say that political correctness has achieved total victory when it even reaches bladesmiths.
 
...Just wondering, what if O1 was not allowed to be a constituent of the damascus -what combinations of pattern welded steel would cut as aggressively as O1 (if any)?

That was exactly my point, damascus being nothing more than a combination of any number of steels one chooses, can be on par with any steel you like. Pick any two steels that can equal or surpass O1 in cutting and you will have it.

It may be a play with semantics, but one can make a distinction between edge hold and edge agressiveness. DIfferential wear of layers will result in many damascus blades being more agressive in the cut than a monosteel on many materials from the start or as the edge wears. Having the edge stay unchanged on the microscopic level over time is a different matter, and straight steels will undoubtably perform better here. Unchanged smooth edges will perform quite well in some operations while toothy edges will cut better for other tasks.
 
So sawblades and wood chisels are a good combo, right? L6 and O1?????? :D

For those that wouldn't realize....that's a joke.
 
Kidding aside, this thread illustrates a couple good points:

1) "Damascus steel" is a generic term, much like "mineral oil" or "sawsteel." Specifics cannot be inferred from a generic description.

2)Historical context makes a big difference when discussing abstracted quotes.

Well said regarding the consequences of misattributions, Kevin.

Sorry for my digression......
 
Back
Top