Thoughts on Ankerson's cut testing results

[Dabblerinred]

Don't feed the troll and he will go away.

Oh that has worked splendidly. Havent you said 'you were done' several times already? Great example you are setting there. Treating the symptom not the cause.

[Dabblerinred]

Ill take the blame. Im batmaaaaan!

[Blerv]

Don't feed the troll and he will go away.

Hey Bear,

The intent is noted but IMHO its best to literally ignore this one.

[Dabblerinred]

This is good advice. Tell him to practice what he preaches. He's been replying to my posts on several threads. Im like, "why is this guy talking to me". Now its dont feed the troll lmao.

More will come. Some, much more subtle. Some, more... To the point. As needed.

[Evil D]

Too real huh Sal. I know you have your duties. You shouldnt let some take advantage of your kindess IMO (including me). It had to be done, Im an outsider and from the outside looking in that Cliff fella has way too much clout for a 'visitor'.

The only clout Cliff or anyone has is whether or not you believe everything you read. Lots of people can post walls of text, we aren't obligated to read any of it. Some people also debate much better than others

[DougC-3]

As Evil D implies, Spyderco forumites are not blind ideologs. They are intelligent and educated people who read and understand various viewpoints and learn from them all, making their own decisions about which steels, testing techniques, sharpening techniques, and knife designs work for them.

[Cliff Stamp]

To this date, I've seen number of good folk complaining about Cliff's testing, but I do not recall a single event when somebody actually went for the trouble and tried to replicate one of his tests, got disagreeing results and discussed them somewhere.

This is an interesting point and it hinges on what you mean by disagreeing results. A lot of people have shared information with me, asked questions and/or raised criticisms which have caused me to change how I interpret data and as well other things which should be done to generate a better picture/understanding. Scan through this : http://www.cliffstamp.com/knives/forum/read.php?3,37143" target="_blank . There are multiple points at which questions/comments are made and through further experimenting conclusions are modified significantly. I am fairly careful about how I measure things and I tend to be specific about how well I am confident of the answer so I would not expect the data to be casually shown to be false, but how to interpret them exactly is a different matter.

[JNewell]

What on Earth are you trying to achieve?

This is good advice. Tell him to practice what he preaches. He's been replying to my posts on several threads. Im like, "why is this guy talking to me". Now its dont feed the troll lmao.

More will come. Some, much more subtle. Some, more... To the point. As needed.

Too real huh Sal. I know you have your duties. You shouldnt let some take advantage of your kindess IMO (including me). It had to be done, Im an outsider and from the outside looking in that Cliff fella has way too much clout for a 'visitor'.

Oh really! Oh wow! I dont like Cliff's test results? You are even stupider and more clueless than I thought.

"Needs shiny footprints all over his backside"

Whoa did you just physically threaten me? Truth hurts huh.

Says the fella with the dunce hat. You've proven as much with your threads. On here and on BF.

I know right? Always about others with Cliff and his followers.

You are this you are that. Keep sloppin boy.

Anways. For my next trick: I will get this forum shutdown due to trolling unless Cliff gets off this powertrip. Thats all I ask. Muahahahaha

You guys are really gonna let Cliff run this forum. Command Sal to do over the top tests for his friend's knives etc etc

Why dont you just let him **** your wife while youre at it.

Oops ban hammer.

[Cliff Stamp]

What Cliff misses with his invaluable tests is that many of us admire knives for reasons ...

It is a bit of a jump to go from the fact that I often present one type of information to assume that is the only thing I am aware of. For example I don't tend to buy/support knife makers who engage in hate speech or censorship yet I don't make it a point to talk about that specifically if someone asks about a knife because it is something that is a personal preference for me. I tend to only reference if it someone asks why I have not used it. Similar just because I don't make it a point to talk about my aesthetic preferences constantly doesn't mean I don't have them. It is hardly the case that I am an unaware of those aspects in this knife I own :



As well a lot of what I do is simply using knives, not strictly quantitative comparisons such as breaking down and reusing things like this :



The reason that I don't talk about that work in general is that it is very difficult to know things from that work because it isn't done in a way which produces knowledge, hence why I do the other work.

[Cliff Stamp]

Does the knife enthusiast lack access to sufficiently accurate information about knife wear?

Roman and others argue this is true which is why he and others like Cashen have invested significant time and money into specialized equipment and testing, but you have to keep in mind what question is trying to be answered. This is the part which is ignored and why people often just run around in circles not disagreeing with each other but just saying different things as they are actually looking at different questions.

Has CATRA testing completely dominated the knife testing market? Is CATRA testing giving a comprehensive understanding of knife edge wear?

These are very interesting questions, I would note that CATRA as it is commonly used here is only one actual piece of equipment that CATRA the organization uses and even that equipment is designed to run with various media though again usually only one is used.

Is knife testing a sufficiently specialized field to merit development of test methods beyond those that currently exist?

Again an excellent question, what specifically are you trying to measure/determine.

I would like to back track a little and say that there is a lot of specific materials testing we don't see for knife steels. Imagine if we had full materials analysis on all steels as used in knives. By this I mean :

-multiple strength / toughness / wear tests
-microscopy, carbide/grain size and volume

etc. .

[Cliff Stamp]

[...]

I'm afraid this is just one of those bench racing type subjects where people will always have conflicting opinions

This is the problem, and it is only so because of a perspective issue. It isn't the case that it is an opinion that increases in carbide volume cause a loss in apex stability, this is a measured fact you can go look it up. What tends to happen in these kinds of arguments is comes down to two very different approaches :

-The individuals can look at the justification for the claims and see if they are valid and sound

-It can all be chalked up to "That just like, your opinion man."

What is the benefit of abandoning rational argument and reducing everything to the point where it is all just opinion. If Sal decided tomorrow that on the next Sprint run he was going to no longer quench steels, just use them as rolled would anyone at all defend that as not compromising performance because you can't really say that, it is just an opinion.

--

As for variables, there are methods used to actual deal with the influence of variables both which are controlled in the experiment (dependent), those which are influenced by them (independent) and those that are ignored and thus contribute error to the result. This isn't the dark ages of witchcraft we actually know how to do these things now and actually obtain information accordingly. It is why it is very easy to do this :



With a blinded study and not only rank the knives by the hardness of the 1095 but quantify the influence the hardness changes had on edge retention. In fact these methods (or the fundamentals) are taught in any high school now, and in fact in junior high and less in more aggressive schooling.

If you want to see them done very well, and graphs/charts really are not your thing, the look at the work done by Mike Swaim in rec.knives in the 90's, Joe Talmadge and Steve Harvey in the early 2000's, how Alvin Johnston was able to come to the same conclusions as Roman Landes PhD work. How Jerry Busse discovered a very similar (but slightly different property) in regards to edge retention in impact work etc. .

What they all had in common was nothing more than basic scientific methodology and a willingness to participate in peer review.

[Donut]

It's tough to turn these test results into useable information.

Does Steel A being able to cut 20% more cardboard or rope equate to it being better for my EDC uses?

You can have charts and numbers, but those charts and numbers don't have an answer to anything outside of the question that was asked before the testing.


Maybe the conclusion we are all working towards is one that I've heard a number of times, that the type of steel really doesn't matter.

[Cliff Stamp]

It's tough to turn these test results into useable information.

This is a critical point.

Kyley asked a question awhile ago which made me change how I presented some information, or at least modify it. Lets assume that a certain steel/processing does mean you sharpen it in the kitchen 25% less but it takes 50% longer to do it and/or requires specialized equipment or skill. If you look at wood working reviews of chisels/planes for example a lot of people reject high carbide PM steels because of difficulty in sharpening. It has to be considered here as well that woodworkers in general demand high push cutting sharpness, very different from what you get slicing carpet or cardboard.

[Mike157]

It's tough to turn these test results into useable information.

I think this can be an issue, but I also think that it also depends on what one's "relationship" with knives is - if I may state it that way. Personally, my "relationship" with knives runs all over the place. I've purchased some fairly junky knives (no, not Spydercos) just because I liked the way they looked. I've purchased some fairly expensive knives because of the artistry and craftsmanship involved. And, I've purchased knives that I thought would be great performers for a given use. The point being, I buy, use, play with, and occasionally sell knives for a number of reasons but really like knowing all I can about them. I think the more we know, the more data and testing we have, the more repeatable results we accumulate....the closer we can come to actually specifying the best knife for a particular person and need. This could be done now if one has the time, resources and is diligent enough. Others wise, we can make our best decisions from evaluating the information others provide for us. We can control handle shape/ergonomics, steel chemistry, heat treat, grinding/finishing, and sharpening (primary and secondary angles, micro bevels, more toothy or mirror polished), and so on. One knife cannot be perfect for all needs but may be great for what one person needs it for. For someone else, a totally different design may be required.

I love and very much appreciate that both Jim and Cliff donate such huge amounts of time to testing and providing their results to us and have learned a lot from their efforts. I would hate to loose either one of them. Some of the presented data and results take more time and effort to understand than others. I say go as far as you want with it to keep yourself as informed as you want to be - just keep an open mind and we don't always have to be "righter" than the next person. Mike

[Ankerson]

It's tough to turn these test results into useable information.

Does Steel A being able to cut 20% more cardboard or rope equate to it being better for my EDC uses?

You can have charts and numbers, but those charts and numbers don't have an answer to anything outside of the question that was asked before the testing.


Maybe the conclusion we are all working towards is one that I've heard a number of times, that the type of steel really doesn't matter.

A lot of it really comes down to how you sharpen a knife, use a knife and what you cut with it and how you personally like your knives to perform at various tasks.

Now that can and will vary depending on the persons uses, like etc.

The steel does matter, but so does geometry, HT, edge finish, media being cut, and sharpening skill.

So in the end choices and compromises have to be made to get what we want or actually need based on the above.

That's why I always say it depends because in the end there aren't any solid 100% correct answers.

So I generally try and point someone in the right direction once I figure out what they really want to know or need and that's all we can really do in the end. I usually give them a few options trying to narrow things down to a reasonable level based on their needs.

Other than that it can be a crap shoot. :D

[paladin]

With a blinded study...

A simple question, from a simple man... :o

I'm sure you can distinguish between steels visually with a high degree of acuity & accuracy...

So, just from visual physical properties...not to mention using your other senses, ( touch & smell being foremost after sight )...

How can a trial be truly BLIND if you have a preconceived experiential notion of what a steel is (or may be) either consciously or on a subconscious level?

...

What is truth? Pontius Pilate

[Ankerson]

With a blinded study...

A simple question, from a simple man... :o

I'm sure you can distinguish between steels visually with a high degree of acuity & accuracy...

So, just from visual physical properties...not to mention using your other senses, ( touch & smell being foremost after sight )...

How can a trial be truly BLIND if you have a preconceived experiential notion of what a steel is (or may be) either consciously or on a subconscious level?

...

What is truth? Pontius Pilate

I have done more than one completely blind tests over the years, not knowing anything about the steel etc, it's always interesting.

Lately I did a few knowing what the steel was, but not the hardness so i had no real idea how it was going to perform and steels I haven't tested before, this was on a few different knives with like geometry and in the end the makers were surprised I could tell them what the hardness range was and other things based on my testing data.

But then I have a very large data pool to go by so and using a method that doesn't change and doing real actual testing and actual cutting.

Perfect, I wouldn't say that, but close enough doing things by hand.

[paladin]

I have done more than one completely blind tests over the years, not knowing anything about the steel etc, it's always interesting.

Lately I did a few knowing what the steel was, but not the hardness so i had no real idea how it was going to perform and steels I haven't tested before, this was on a few different knives with like geometry and in the end the makers were surprised I could tell them what the hardness range was and other things based on my testing data.

But then I have a very large data pool to go by so and using a method that doesn't change and doing real actual testing and actual cutting.

Perfect, I wouldn't say that, but close enough doing things by hand.

I agree, no tests or trials done by humans directly or indirectly can ever be perfect, and you always imply as much as a disclaimer...My point exactly :)

And Jim, I always take your trials as what they are: data derived from human efffort for consumption by human ELU's...much thanx :)

[Ankerson]

I have done more than one completely blind tests over the years, not knowing anything about the steel etc, it's always interesting.

Lately I did a few knowing what the steel was, but not the hardness so i had no real idea how it was going to perform and steels I haven't tested before, this was on a few different knives with like geometry and in the end the makers were surprised I could tell them what the hardness range was and other things based on my testing data.

But then I have a very large data pool to go by so and using a method that doesn't change and doing real actual testing and actual cutting.

Perfect, I wouldn't say that, but close enough doing things by hand.

I agree, no tests or trials done by humans directly or indirectly can ever be perfect, and you always imply as much as a disclaimer...My point exactly :)

And Jim, I always take your trials as what they are: data derived from human efffort for consumption by human ELU's...much thanx :)

I try and be as realistic as I can, I always have been more of a realist and that's one of the main reasons why I actually started testing knives back when I did. There were so many urban legends flying around back then, some of the same ones still are more or less as they do die hard so it seems.

But yes anything done by humans won't ever be perfect for various reasons. :D

[ChrisinHove]

Quote:

"I love and very much appreciate that both Jim and Cliff donate such huge amounts of time to testing and providing their results to us and have learned a lot from their efforts. I would hate to loose either one of them. Some of the presented data and results take more time and effort to understand than others. I say go as far as you want with it to keep yourself as informed as you want to be - just keep an open mind and we don't always have to be "righter" than the next person."

I wholeheartedly agree.