BD1N toughness

[Bemo]

I rarely start topics, which is probably a good thing. After re-reading Larrin's article on best inexpensive steel, the omission of toughness testing on BD1N is really nagging at me. I recently bought another Cat in BD1N (gave my last one to a relative) and have used the UKPK in BD1N and I really like the steel, as others have stated as well. I'm hoping that Larrin will read this and chime in. I believe it was a lack of steel that prevented Larrin from testing it. What would it take to remedy that? Larrin how can we help? I'd be willing to buy another copy of your book if that would help (besides I can't find my other copy, lol). Thanks

[z1r]

Dr. Larrin's recent artcile shows BD1N with a toughness of 3.5 and same for edge retention. So, same toughness as 440C with less edge retention. BD1N has slightly more corrossion resistance though.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2021/10/19/ ... esistance/

[metaphoricalsimile]

Dr. Larrin's recent artcile shows BD1N with a toughness of 3.5 and same for edge retention. So, same toughness as 440C with less edge retention. BD1N has slightly more corrossion resistance though.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2021/10/19/ ... esistance/

I believe this rating is based on his models rather than on experimental evidence, for what it's worth.

[Wartstein]

Dr. Larrin's recent artcile shows BD1N with a toughness of 3.5 and same for edge retention. So, same toughness as 440C with less edge retention. BD1N has slightly more corrossion resistance though.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2021/10/19/ ... esistance/

I am no steel expert at all, my experience is only anecdotal, and I don´t know about corrosion resistance and toughness of BD1N.
But my total layman experience concerning its edge retention is just different to the tests and charts.
Seems to be a lot better in that regard in my use (and actually better than VG10), and still sharpens up extremely easy to a very keen edge.

EDIT: Just realized I am a bit off topic, since this thread is specifically about the thoughness of BD1N - can´t really weigh in on that, other than it has been always tough enough in my use.

[Matus]

Even though this forum is centered around pocket knives, we see a lot more discussion about toughness than edge stability … strange

[Gtscotty]

Dr. Larrin's recent artcile shows BD1N with a toughness of 3.5 and same for edge retention. So, same toughness as 440C with less edge retention. BD1N has slightly more corrossion resistance though.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2021/10/19/ ... esistance/

I believe this rating is based on his models rather than on experimental evidence, for what it's worth.

Why do you believe that? I don't think I've seen him state that anywhere, and that would be a variation from all the other steel results, so probably worth mentioning.

[Ramonade]

It's ran pretty hard, but without putting this in relation to the steel composition and behavior it's hard to tell.

From my experience, the edge stability is pretty good at low angles, but there's trade-offs, like with any steel. I've ran my M2 LW at 12dps and got some chips while cutting hard wood (certainly a lot of unwanted lateral force). This was the first edge I did put on it tho, so it might get better.

[Soulrack]

Not tough in my experience. Lots of chips and a broken tip in my Para 3 LW. Sharpened out easily.

[TkoK83Spy]

You can follow the science of it all you want, reading it all word for word and taking it to heart...but it's really not until YOU actually use your knife, cutting the way you cut, the materials, geometry, how you sharpen...that you really discover the traits on any steel. No disprect to Larrin, but I've seen links or quotes from his stuff posted and I 100% disagree or have had different experiences.

[Ramonade]

+1 for TkoK83Spy.
As soon as this is your knife, none of these informations can be taken for granted. We all use our hands differently, we all put different edges, and not only the angle or grits, there's variations in the sharpening etc. There's like a 1000 thing different from one knife/steel owner to another.

That must be the reason we see people swear only by Cruwear and others hating it (here, Cruwear can be replaced by any steel name, really, lol).

[Gtscotty]

Whups.

[JRinFL]

Certain steels may not meet what you need in a steel, but that does not change the facts as presented by DR. Larrin. Unless stated otherwise, Larrin is not presenting us with opinion. That’s not how science works. It reminds me of a knife maker way back claiming his 1095 steel was just as good as modern steels due to his heat treat. No facts could alter his opinion.

[Cl1ff]

Certain steels may not meet what you need in a steel, but that does not change the facts as presented by DR. Larrin. Unless stated otherwise, Larrin is not presenting us with opinion. That’s not how science works. It reminds me of a knife maker way back claiming his 1095 steel was just as good as modern steels due to his heat treat. No facts could alter his opinion.

I hate to get all that semantic, but what Larrin is doing is recording out of context data from scientific experiments born of his curiosity to better understand steels, specifically those found in modern knives. The charts and numbers and results he’s published are factual in that they represent a reliable quantification of the data gathered from those steel testing experiments.
The articles and books by Larrin are where he explains his logical interpretation of that published data and will prove very useful for others trying to do similar science.

Another aspect of what he writes is the attempt to apply this new data and his conclusions to better educate, and dispel myths created by, those interested in knives and what their knives are made of, whether an average consumer, afi, or maker.
I think this is wonderful and Larrin has done a really commendable job if you ask me.

However, when you quantify what is a qualitative subject, in this case I mean specifically how a knife’s steel performs in your individual use, there will be clear discrepancies (this also applies to things I’m more familiar with such as phylogenetic analyses using morphological characterists of fossil specimens).

To be clear, Larrin’s hypotheses and data should be plenty quantifiable and be totally applicable to the tested steel samples made especially for his tests. It is a fact those specific blades/steels have that level of edge retention, toughness, corrosion resistance, etc. And there isn’t anything wrong with the conclusions he draws from this data. The data should also answer the hypotheses he creates about these steels beforehand.

What isn’t easily quantified is our questions from the perspective of consumers and users. While we can and should use Larrin’s data to inform us, there is simply no perfect way to quantify the uncontrolled reality of us consumers actually using knife steels because there are too many variables.
Larrin’s charts are a guideline showing us the way things are when all these variables are stable. It’s a very useful reference helping us navigate the chaotic knife market. Take a hypothetical scenario where makers used those same heat treats, edges, geometries, and us users normally cut silica impregnated paper.
Larrin’s tests would reflect the reality of our experiences very accurately.
Ideally, the knife market sees Larrin et al’s guidelines for optimizing steels based on these tests and takes action to apply them. Similar to the hypothetical scenario, that would result in our actual user experiences being at least a little closer to Larrin’s results and probably a tad better overall because the steels we are buying and using would be more consistent.

…Phew, it’s way too hard to convey what I’m trying to say in this part I’m trying to do this on the spot to quickly move on and that’s just not my style. I’ll end up going in circles, so I hope I got things across well enough. Please excuse this intermission and on with it…

This is just like how the morphology of fossilized bones isn’t actually very consistent no matter how much paleontologists try to quantify them, to put it in the biological terms I know a little better.
A Triceratops, the famous dinosaur literally named “three horned face”, is easily distinguished from related dinosaurs by the number and structure of its three horns.
And yet one was recently uncovered that appears to be naturally missing a horn.
That specimen would become an outlier in a hypothetical phylogenetic analysis that uses the number and structure of horns to determine dinosaur taxonomy. It won’t quite show up as a Triceratops even though it is one in reality.

That’s a really complicated way of saying the same thing as Ramonade or TkoK83Spy.
For all of this over-explaining and semantic ranting on my end, this is still a pretty crude explanation in all honesty. Not sure if I contributed anything other than a lot more words, but I’m leaving it here regardless.
Forums are made for words. They don’t have to be smart

To be utterly cliché, I think things like this are very nuanced.

[chronovore]

Dr. Larrin's recent artcile shows BD1N with a toughness of 3.5 and same for edge retention. So, same toughness as 440C with less edge retention. BD1N has slightly more corrossion resistance though.

https://knifesteelnerds.com/2021/10/19/ ... esistance/

I believe this rating is based on his models rather than on experimental evidence, for what it's worth.

Why do you believe that? I don't think I've seen him state that anywhere, and that would be a variation from all the other steel results, so probably worth mentioning.

The issue is that Larrin's tests were not representative of the actual heat treatments you get on production knives. For instance, take a look at these ratings for edge retention and compare them to actual use in the actual knives people are likely to own in these steels. Do all the 3-rated steels perform the same for you?!? Does the average production knife in 440A out-cut any of those for you? Would any current-production knives in 440A keep up with a current-production Spyderco in BD1N?!?

8Cr13Mov - 3
14C28N - 3
Nitro-V - 3
LC200N - 3
440A - 3.5
BD1N - 3.5

Just looking at Spyderco knives, does your VG-10 out-cut your BD1N by a substantial margin? How about the entry-level Kizers in N690? Both of those steels are rated 4.5 here...

[Wartstein]

Double post

[Wartstein]

.....

.....

…Phew, it’s way too hard to convey what I’m trying to say in this part I’m trying to do this on the spot to quickly move on and that’s just not my style. I’ll end up going in circles, so I hope I got things across well enough. Please excuse this intermission and on with it…

......

That’s a really complicated way of saying the same thing as Ramonade or TkoK83Spy.
For all of this over-explaining and semantic ranting on my end, this is still a pretty crude explanation in all honesty. Not sure if I contributed anything other than a lot more words, but I’m leaving it here regardless.
Forums are made for words. They don’t have to be smart

To be utterly cliché, I think things like this are very nuanced.

You actually said it perfectly well and I think casting light on this aspect of the matter (like you and Rick and Ramonade do) is not "just words" but to me more interesting and important than a lot of other topics that get discussed here (not trying to say that "other topics" are not interesting of course)

I think Larrins findings are a great reference point and certainly on the most top level concerning what one can get in objective, scientific data!
But, as you say, real life use and experience is always something else. I also know this from areas where I am more experiecned than with steels.
Could even go to the point that someone instinctively (so without really being aware of it) has "learned" how to sharpen a steel he likes closer to its optimum performance level in the main tasks it is used for, while this is not the case with another steel.

[metaphoricalsimile]

The issue is that Larrin's tests were not representative of the actual heat treatments you get on production knives. For instance, take a look at these ratings for edge retention and compare them to actual use in the actual knives people are likely to own in these steels. Do all the 3-rated steels perform the same for you?!? Does the average production knife in 440A out-cut any of those for you? Would any current-production knives in 440A keep up with a current-production Spyderco in BD1N?!?

8Cr13Mov - 3
14C28N - 3
Nitro-V - 3
LC200N - 3
440A - 3.5
BD1N - 3.5

Just looking at Spyderco knives, does your VG-10 out-cut your BD1N by a substantial margin? How about the entry-level Kizers in N690? Both of those steels are rated 4.5 here...

Larrin's tests and ratings are still more useful than any individual's subjectively reported experiences. There are simply way too many factors at play in one person's experiences, such that even if you rule out any cognitive biases (which we should not do, by the way) a person could have experiences that contradict experimental evidence but that, importantly, still would not hold true for other people or tell other people useful facts about the world.

[Ramonade]

Dr. Larrin's tests are meant to see the real potential and qualities of each steel imho. All results are true and scientificly obtained. We just have to remember that once this steel is used in a knife, there's a ton of new factors that enter into action and that changes a lot (not everything, but a whole lot).

[Gtscotty]

Dr. Larrin's tests are meant to see the real potential and qualities of each steel imho. All results are true and scientificly obtained. We just have to remember that once this steel is used in a knife, there's a ton of new factors that enter into action and that changes a lot (not everything, but a whole lot).

Of course production knives introduce a lot of variables that aren't present in the uniform engineering samples that Larrin produces and tests. That's exactly why Larrin's output is useful information and all the subjective opinions floating around, colored by variances in heat treat, knife geometry, use cases and personal preference are quite a bit less useful. Varying heat treats can trade some hardness and edge retention for toughness and vice versa, but any given steel only has a certain amount of potential to be traded back and forth, and Larrin's information gives us an idea of how the potential of each steel compares.

For subjective observations on steel to have even the aura of usefulness, they need to be tied to a specific model that the observations were made from. My subjective observation of my Spyderco Cat in BD1N is that it is not a very tough steel and tends to chip out before it deforms. Maybe another heat treat could result in tougher BD1N, but you'd be trading something else for that, like hardness and edge retention.

[Ramonade]

I totally agree with you @Gtscotty. It is just surprising (to me) when people say "That's not what I saw". Of course it's not ^^.