Flat grind with covexed edge is my favorite geometry for big knives,and I sharpened my knives with w/d paper and mouse pad.But convexed grind has existed for long time,long before the belt grinders,long before the mouse pad.I'm wondering how they did it.Any idea?Thank you.
How did people resharpen convexed edges in the old days?
- Thread starter lsstaipei
- Start date
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
With a flat stone, just work it freehand over the curve. A lot of people still do it this way. In addition, while mousepads are recent, leather is very old, and thick leather can be used in a similar manner as a strop.
-Cliff
-Cliff
Here's Mike Stewart's (of Bark River Knives, which are full convex ground) response when asked how to sharpen his knives:
http://www.knifeforums.com/ubbthrea...d=allposts&Main=286422&Search=true#Post286422
- Joined
- Apr 27, 1999
- Messages
- 6,117
Really old knives were mostly thinner than today's "tactical" blades. Knives were usually optimized for cutting rather than for maximum strength. I don't recall seeing reference to intentionally convexing edges before the last several years. It was done, but was usually considered a sign of incompetence (which it commonly was).
A professional sharpener would try and leave a clean bevel and minimize affecting the blade finish. It was a sign of an amateur if you had an indistinct bevel or if you degraded the finish with sharpening marks further up the blade. During the middle part of this century people would often chrome plate knives to make look classier. You really needed to be careful not to marr the surface of chromed or mirror polished blades.
When stainless blades first came out they were frequently mirror polished. These had the same issue of a finish that you wouldn't want to marr by stropping it on anything rougher than buffing compound. When less glossy finishes started to appear on commercial and custom knives the idea of a convex edge became more broadly pallatable.
The commonest accidental ways that convex edges have been produced for centuries are: using a circular motion on a hone, using a shorter hone, or by using a worn (dished) hone. My old cub scout handbook used to recommend that you use circular strokes on your oil stone working alternate sides. The natural randomness of the circular strokes tended to give a slight convexity to the edge. Using a really short hone also tends to give you a variation of honing angle in each stroke. You have to adjust your honing angle as you put your blade down and bring it back off the hone while avoiding the ends of the hone. A combination of a short hone and a circular stroke is exemplified by the old hocky puck shaped axe hones. With those you would move the hone instead of the axe in a swirling motion. Axes are one form of classical convex blade. The dished hone is pretty obvious. Oilstones would wear down pretty fast if used heavily. I probably put a 1/4-inch depression in the hone that I grew up with. A blade like that just naturally gives you a convex edge, even with edge-forwards honing.
By the way, I totally disagree with using only a stropping stroke to sharpen anything. For about my first 10 years of sharpening (say up to age 18) I always used a stropping motion when I finished an edge. I found that I could shave better when I did it that way. Eventually I found that my "stropped" edges had a tendency to be weak and fail by local folding. I was getting weak burrs at the apex of my edges (wire edges). I found that I got stronger edges if I finished up with some edge-forwards strokes. The best result was to do some edge-forwards strokes at a super-elevated angle to cut the burr off, then a few more at the desired final bevel angle. I would do that now as a final step even on convex ground blades.
A professional sharpener would try and leave a clean bevel and minimize affecting the blade finish. It was a sign of an amateur if you had an indistinct bevel or if you degraded the finish with sharpening marks further up the blade. During the middle part of this century people would often chrome plate knives to make look classier. You really needed to be careful not to marr the surface of chromed or mirror polished blades.
When stainless blades first came out they were frequently mirror polished. These had the same issue of a finish that you wouldn't want to marr by stropping it on anything rougher than buffing compound. When less glossy finishes started to appear on commercial and custom knives the idea of a convex edge became more broadly pallatable.
The commonest accidental ways that convex edges have been produced for centuries are: using a circular motion on a hone, using a shorter hone, or by using a worn (dished) hone. My old cub scout handbook used to recommend that you use circular strokes on your oil stone working alternate sides. The natural randomness of the circular strokes tended to give a slight convexity to the edge. Using a really short hone also tends to give you a variation of honing angle in each stroke. You have to adjust your honing angle as you put your blade down and bring it back off the hone while avoiding the ends of the hone. A combination of a short hone and a circular stroke is exemplified by the old hocky puck shaped axe hones. With those you would move the hone instead of the axe in a swirling motion. Axes are one form of classical convex blade. The dished hone is pretty obvious. Oilstones would wear down pretty fast if used heavily. I probably put a 1/4-inch depression in the hone that I grew up with. A blade like that just naturally gives you a convex edge, even with edge-forwards honing.
By the way, I totally disagree with using only a stropping stroke to sharpen anything. For about my first 10 years of sharpening (say up to age 18) I always used a stropping motion when I finished an edge. I found that I could shave better when I did it that way. Eventually I found that my "stropped" edges had a tendency to be weak and fail by local folding. I was getting weak burrs at the apex of my edges (wire edges). I found that I got stronger edges if I finished up with some edge-forwards strokes. The best result was to do some edge-forwards strokes at a super-elevated angle to cut the burr off, then a few more at the desired final bevel angle. I would do that now as a final step even on convex ground blades.
I appreciate these replys,thank you.I grew up with sharpening with stones,but I tried stroppong motion/flatstones technique a couple times without any success.It became some kind of legend to me.All I got is wire edge.I have to use a strop with compound to remove the burr.The sharpness of the edges produced in this way is not good enough.(Maybe my sharpening capability is not good enough.)
Mr. Stamp and Mr.Clark,thank you for your input.Your posts always give me a lot of material to think,to try and remind me a lot of people and good times,my great grandfather,his dished stones,the mountains he lived in.Thanx.
Mr. Stamp and Mr.Clark,thank you for your input.Your posts always give me a lot of material to think,to try and remind me a lot of people and good times,my great grandfather,his dished stones,the mountains he lived in.Thanx.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Jeff Clark :
Many traditional knives were convex, khukuris, bolos, goloks, parangs, etc., the people who use such blades tend to put convex edges on the smaller knives they use as well.
As noted however it has come on very strong as of late, mainly due to over hype about its nature, on smaller knives, a suitable double bevel is more functional.
The main advantage of the convex bevel when sharpened by sandpaper on leather or similar is the forgiving nature of the angle tolerance, of course double beveling with the sharpmaker or similar removes this problem completely.
-Cliff
Many traditional knives were convex, khukuris, bolos, goloks, parangs, etc., the people who use such blades tend to put convex edges on the smaller knives they use as well.
As noted however it has come on very strong as of late, mainly due to over hype about its nature, on smaller knives, a suitable double bevel is more functional.
The main advantage of the convex bevel when sharpened by sandpaper on leather or similar is the forgiving nature of the angle tolerance, of course double beveling with the sharpmaker or similar removes this problem completely.
-Cliff
- Joined
- Jan 4, 1999
- Messages
- 3,000
I agree with Cliff. Overhyped, though, is only part of the reality, in my opinion. I think convex bevels are pointless. Their purpose, presumably would be to make a stronger edge (like an axe has) but the trade off is less sharpness due to a more obtuse effective bevel. If the steel is soft enough that it needs a fairly obtuse bevel angle then one can put the same effective angle with straight sided double bevels as Cliff says. The real effect of convex bevels, I think, is simply to make the edges imprecise and harder to maintain. I've had a couple of convex beveled knives. I fixed them both quickly with my Edgepro and they work better now. Fashion marches on but basic edge geometry really doesn't.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,675
I'll reserve my opinions on this subject for a couple weeks. I have a couple of sharpened Dozier blanks (no handle slabs, rough finish) on the way to me for testing. They are both the same model, but one is convex ground. The other is hollow ground. Testing of both knives, side by side, should provide quite a bit of insight.
Big congrats go out to Bob Dozier for creating pass-arounds like this. It's not often that custom makers are willing to present such opportunities to their customers. Bob really does everything he can to help customers decide on the right knife for their uses.
Big congrats go out to Bob Dozier for creating pass-arounds like this. It's not often that custom makers are willing to present such opportunities to their customers. Bob really does everything he can to help customers decide on the right knife for their uses.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Knife Outlet :
Yes, you can have a very wide relief grind and still have a durable edge as the convex curvature near the edge steepens to give the necessary strength, of course you can get the same effect with a double v-grind as popularized by JJ of Razor Edge. Convex bevels have a slight advantage cutting wise over a similar dual flat bevel due to a lower drag profile as they don't have the sharp corner intersection, however this is a really minor effect on edge bevels and can in general be ignored.
However a some people find sharpening convex bevels on a slack medium much easier than honing v-ground bevels. This is usually due to equipment mismatching like using rods with heavy pressure on soft steels.
When the subject is extended to convex knives, meaning the whole blade is convex, that is a different matter than just edge bevels. For large chopping knives, convex grinds can induce a necessary splitting action on soft woods. Of course this is nothing new, this is how soft wood axes were always ground. On harder woods convex bevels are replaced with hollow grinds to get better penetration.
But the main point of confusion is that a lot of people are promoting convex bevels as having a certain level of cutting ability when in fact all that is been seen is the effect of a relief grind. The other advatantages of convex bevels are minor for small knives.
On the disadvantage side, the main one is sharpening time. Convex bevels take much longer to sharpen than dual v-ground bevels due to a *massive* increase in contact area. A dual v-grind has a secondary edge bevel <1 mm wide, a convex bevel can be ten times this wide easily which means that much more metal needs to be removed for each and every sharpening, even for minor touchups. The inherent speed difference is vastly magnified when a v-rod system or something similar is used to set the secondary bevel, the time difference can now be 100:1 .
-Cliff
Yes, you can have a very wide relief grind and still have a durable edge as the convex curvature near the edge steepens to give the necessary strength, of course you can get the same effect with a double v-grind as popularized by JJ of Razor Edge. Convex bevels have a slight advantage cutting wise over a similar dual flat bevel due to a lower drag profile as they don't have the sharp corner intersection, however this is a really minor effect on edge bevels and can in general be ignored.
However a some people find sharpening convex bevels on a slack medium much easier than honing v-ground bevels. This is usually due to equipment mismatching like using rods with heavy pressure on soft steels.
When the subject is extended to convex knives, meaning the whole blade is convex, that is a different matter than just edge bevels. For large chopping knives, convex grinds can induce a necessary splitting action on soft woods. Of course this is nothing new, this is how soft wood axes were always ground. On harder woods convex bevels are replaced with hollow grinds to get better penetration.
But the main point of confusion is that a lot of people are promoting convex bevels as having a certain level of cutting ability when in fact all that is been seen is the effect of a relief grind. The other advatantages of convex bevels are minor for small knives.
On the disadvantage side, the main one is sharpening time. Convex bevels take much longer to sharpen than dual v-ground bevels due to a *massive* increase in contact area. A dual v-grind has a secondary edge bevel <1 mm wide, a convex bevel can be ten times this wide easily which means that much more metal needs to be removed for each and every sharpening, even for minor touchups. The inherent speed difference is vastly magnified when a v-rod system or something similar is used to set the secondary bevel, the time difference can now be 100:1 .
-Cliff
This is very interesting. In my opinion I kind of do both cnvex and v grinds on my edges. First I grind in a v edge, I truely think the v edge is the sharper edge. Then I round off the sholder witch is more like a convex upper edge bevel. I also get most of the edge bevel as polished as I can, however I do like a caurser edge so the very edge I keep pretty caurse. Sounds like alot of work but it's easier than it sounds like. Just about anything can be used to convex an edge as long as it's not to soft. Sandpaper and a phone book is what I have used alot.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
No matter what bevel or grind you put on a knife, if you strop it at the end of your sharpening process, you are making the final edge convex. 
People think convex edges are hard to sharpen, or too bulky to slice well, etc. It all comes down to this: "Is the knife in question appropriate to the task at hand?"
There are certain tasks that a convex grind does better, period. The same can be said of the other grinds. Can't get stuck in this "do-it-all" mentality...
Buzz - I'm very interested in your testing results. Please make a big stink about it when you're done so I can find the thread.
People think convex edges are hard to sharpen, or too bulky to slice well, etc. It all comes down to this: "Is the knife in question appropriate to the task at hand?"
There are certain tasks that a convex grind does better, period. The same can be said of the other grinds. Can't get stuck in this "do-it-all" mentality...
Buzz - I'm very interested in your testing results. Please make a big stink about it when you're done so I can find the thread.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2000
- Messages
- 1,537
I too, find this discussion of interest. I recently got a Bark River knife with a convex grind and am dreading the day when I am asked what the advantages are of this blade.
Originally posted by pendentive:
Could you give an example? I love the looks, but if there are certain things it will do better (or won't do at all) maybe this will make more sense to me
Originally posted by pendentive:
Could you give an example? I love the looks, but if there are certain things it will do better (or won't do at all) maybe this will make more sense to me
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
As Jerry Fisk put it recently at an ABS Hammer-In, "Cutting is all about material displacement".
A convex edge - by nature of its shape - displaces material more effeciently then a flat or a hollow grind. Since the angle of the bevel is constantly changing (the definition of an arc) the material it displaces in constantly moving. No opportunity to "bind".
A convex grind is thicker than a flat or hollow grind - even in thinner blades. Because of this, there is less of a tendency for the edge to chip or deform (the object deforming the edge has to move more steel).
A convex edge will withstand chopping blows better.
Cutting cardboard and leather should be easier with a convex edge (hope buzz will jump in here with his data soon).
However, this has little to do with whether your knife will push cut better or slice(draw) better. That has more to do with whether or not you polish your burr, or leave it on when after sharpening.
On top of all that, a fat convex edge is quite different from a thin convex edge and that is why Fisk and the ABS are pushing a Flat Grind/Convex Grind combination - seemingly the best of both worlds.
Be default, most knives that are bench sharpened or stropped develop a convex edge. In that way it's the easiest edge to obtain.
However, creating a full convex grind can be quite difficult. Much easier to put on a flat grind and then "convex" the last 1/4" of it.
There is a rampant myth that a convex edge doesn't hold it's edge, or that it's more dull since it's "thicker". Another myth is that it can't handle fine cuts - since convex edges are found today only on axes, hatchets, cleavers, etc.
Check out these lil' videos I made with fat, heavy knives that have convex edges:
Bowie with a 1/4" thick spine - test
20" Khukuri - 40 sheets of paper
Edge Retention - 15" khukuri
Dan
- Joined
- Sep 23, 1999
- Messages
- 3,831
I just wanted to thank Pendentive for those great videos! Way to go, ya knife nut!
I know that Jerry Hossom is thinking a lot about the nature of convex edges, and he thinks that the shape of the bevel has a lot to do with cutting ability, namely how a convex edge helps displace what you are cutting.
For all of you who want to try a cheap experiment, go to the store and buy a few Mora knives, for like $7 each! Put a V grind, a zero gerind, and a wide convex bevel on different ones and go play.
I know that Jerry Hossom is thinking a lot about the nature of convex edges, and he thinks that the shape of the bevel has a lot to do with cutting ability, namely how a convex edge helps displace what you are cutting.
For all of you who want to try a cheap experiment, go to the store and buy a few Mora knives, for like $7 each! Put a V grind, a zero gerind, and a wide convex bevel on different ones and go play.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Crayola :
[Moras]
This is where the misconceptions start. Take a Mora which comes with a wide flat edge bevel and put it on a belt sander and convex the bevel, it will now cut much better and thus you have shown that convex bevels cut better than flat ones right?
No, you have simply shown that when you add a relief grind the cutting ability improves. If you took that same convex bevel and flat ground it right down it would again cut better. Then you could convex it again, flat grind it down again, etc. .
Eventually you will end up with a knife ground flat from spine to edge which has the maximum level of cutting ability on non-sticky materials. On high friction materials like cheese you can see a large benefit to hollow relief grinds, which will improve the performance slightly on most materials as well.
Note on large chopping knives, aside fromwedging convex bevels have durability advantages over flat bevels as the very edge is often shielded from lateral forces do to the fact that it isn't inline with the main body of the edge and thus can "roll" over the impact instead of sustaining a heavy impact.
Of course once again the same effect can be achieved to a large degree with the use of a secondary flat edge bevel. This is why in a lot of old axe books you will find comments like using the stone at a very obtuse angle (35 degrees per side for just 1-2 passes at the end of the sharpening).
-Cliff
[Moras]
This is where the misconceptions start. Take a Mora which comes with a wide flat edge bevel and put it on a belt sander and convex the bevel, it will now cut much better and thus you have shown that convex bevels cut better than flat ones right?
No, you have simply shown that when you add a relief grind the cutting ability improves. If you took that same convex bevel and flat ground it right down it would again cut better. Then you could convex it again, flat grind it down again, etc. .
Eventually you will end up with a knife ground flat from spine to edge which has the maximum level of cutting ability on non-sticky materials. On high friction materials like cheese you can see a large benefit to hollow relief grinds, which will improve the performance slightly on most materials as well.
Note on large chopping knives, aside fromwedging convex bevels have durability advantages over flat bevels as the very edge is often shielded from lateral forces do to the fact that it isn't inline with the main body of the edge and thus can "roll" over the impact instead of sustaining a heavy impact.
Of course once again the same effect can be achieved to a large degree with the use of a secondary flat edge bevel. This is why in a lot of old axe books you will find comments like using the stone at a very obtuse angle (35 degrees per side for just 1-2 passes at the end of the sharpening).
-Cliff
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2001
- Messages
- 20,978
A two-bevel flat grind will act differently than a convex grind. Having said that, the difference between a convex bevel and a multi-flat-bevel is slim to none. But that's harder to do, than to just convex it...
Imagine your knife as the bow of a boat pushing through the water.
Here we have 6 different boat/knife shapes:
1 - Hollow
2 - Full Convex
3 - Full Flat
4 - 2 bevel Flat
5 - 2 bevel Flat/Convex
6 - complex grind
As #1 is going through the water, the front pierces the water very easily, but it has to work harder and harder the further it goes because the shape is displacing the water more and more (bow to stern).
#2 does the most work right at the edge, then the job gets easier as it goes bow to stern because the angle is decreasing.
On #3 the angle is constant, so the work/effort is the same along the entire edge, neither easier nor harder.
#4 has advantage over #3 because more of the harder work is done first, making it easier to push deeper.
#5 has even more advantage because there is not abrupt change in angle where the bevels meet. It is smooth and allows material to be displaced more easily. However, at the spine, the abrupt angle keeps the knife from displacing material completely - this only matters if you intend to pass the entire knife through a material.
#6 is a complex grind that I am working on right now. It also happens to be very similar to the grind of the knife that Charlie Snale used to win the Cutting Contest at the Moran Hammer-In. Jerry Fisk also brought up this idea in his cutting test class. You start with a #5 grind (Flat/Convex) and then smooth over the spine, starting by flattening the bevel at least 1/2" from the top and then rounding over the spine. You could take this further and make it one smooth arc from edge all the way around to edge. In my mind that makes the most efficient cut (and is the only one that actually starts to look like a boat capable of cutting the waves).
Now, it should be obvious that we don't use our knives to cut water... This serves more as an analagous demonstration of the idea of "material displacement" - which applies in general to all materials. Granted, some materials act differently than others under the knife. However, across the board, those are the exceptions and not the rule. Your "average Joe" knife needs to be able to handle many different materials, both soft and hard, both firm and fluid.
Imagine your knife as the bow of a boat pushing through the water.
Here we have 6 different boat/knife shapes:
1 - Hollow
2 - Full Convex
3 - Full Flat
4 - 2 bevel Flat
5 - 2 bevel Flat/Convex
6 - complex grind
As #1 is going through the water, the front pierces the water very easily, but it has to work harder and harder the further it goes because the shape is displacing the water more and more (bow to stern).
#2 does the most work right at the edge, then the job gets easier as it goes bow to stern because the angle is decreasing.
On #3 the angle is constant, so the work/effort is the same along the entire edge, neither easier nor harder.
#4 has advantage over #3 because more of the harder work is done first, making it easier to push deeper.
#5 has even more advantage because there is not abrupt change in angle where the bevels meet. It is smooth and allows material to be displaced more easily. However, at the spine, the abrupt angle keeps the knife from displacing material completely - this only matters if you intend to pass the entire knife through a material.
#6 is a complex grind that I am working on right now. It also happens to be very similar to the grind of the knife that Charlie Snale used to win the Cutting Contest at the Moran Hammer-In. Jerry Fisk also brought up this idea in his cutting test class. You start with a #5 grind (Flat/Convex) and then smooth over the spine, starting by flattening the bevel at least 1/2" from the top and then rounding over the spine. You could take this further and make it one smooth arc from edge all the way around to edge. In my mind that makes the most efficient cut (and is the only one that actually starts to look like a boat capable of cutting the waves).
Now, it should be obvious that we don't use our knives to cut water...
This serves more as an analagous demonstration of the idea of "material displacement" - which applies in general to all materials. Granted, some materials act differently than others under the knife. However, across the board, those are the exceptions and not the rule. Your "average Joe" knife needs to be able to handle many different materials, both soft and hard, both firm and fluid.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,675
I don't know if I really have much to add to the conversation. I do agree with Pendentive that the combination flat grind/convex grind could indeed give the best of both worlds. Ive conversed with Bob Dozier briefly about this on his web board. I may end up ordering such a knife. I did convex a large bevel on the end of my flat ground 440V Spyderco Military, and it worked out quite well. Cutting efficiency improved slightly as I thinned out the edge, and I saw zero loss of edge durability from the operation.
One thing common to most peoples convex grinds is a high degree of edge polish. This is great for push cuts, thus excellent for outdoor work. A convex grind is also, IMHO, much easier to control when whittling, thus adding to the outdoor flavor of the grind.
What many people dont realize is that a polished edge is not mandatory. Its very easy to put a coarse edge on a convex grind by using a coarse grit wet/dry paper. Lets face it. Slicing isnt the forte of convex grinds, so they do need help in this area. A coarsely finished edge will go a long way in this regard, adding a bit of bite to the cuts.
I will say that a convex grind is not for everyone. People who largely make only slicing cuts will reap little benefit from a convex grind. Much of this falls into the area of cutting technique though, as people often use a slicing motion when a push cut works just as well. Because a slicing motion usually works better with a more standard grind, weve grown accustomed to slicing whenever possible. So there are subtle changes in technique that will enhance the performance of a convex grind. Not every old dog wants to learn new tricks though.
Sharpening is the big difference. I personally find the convex grind to be MUCH easier to sharpen, but Im not everybody. Ive sharpened convex edges on D2 and 440V, which are not the easiest steels in the world to work with. I had no problems whatsoever with sharpening these convex grinds, where a standard edge bevel of 440V positively gave me fits. Wet/dry paper also happens to be light and small, so portability is excellent. No edge guides are needed, so generally its much simpler for a newcomer to sharpen a convex grind than it is to sharpen a standard grind on a bench stone. Much less technique is required on the part of the convex grind.
Ill reserve most of my judgements until my testing is finished on the Dozier test knives. To tell you the truth, if the convex ground blade is not dramatically thick in cross section, I dont expect the differences to stick out like a sore thumb. Im betting that there will be subtle improvements in some areas, and slight losses in others. Most of the different will be in sharpening and overall balance of the knife.
One thing common to most peoples convex grinds is a high degree of edge polish. This is great for push cuts, thus excellent for outdoor work. A convex grind is also, IMHO, much easier to control when whittling, thus adding to the outdoor flavor of the grind.
What many people dont realize is that a polished edge is not mandatory. Its very easy to put a coarse edge on a convex grind by using a coarse grit wet/dry paper. Lets face it. Slicing isnt the forte of convex grinds, so they do need help in this area. A coarsely finished edge will go a long way in this regard, adding a bit of bite to the cuts.
I will say that a convex grind is not for everyone. People who largely make only slicing cuts will reap little benefit from a convex grind. Much of this falls into the area of cutting technique though, as people often use a slicing motion when a push cut works just as well. Because a slicing motion usually works better with a more standard grind, weve grown accustomed to slicing whenever possible. So there are subtle changes in technique that will enhance the performance of a convex grind. Not every old dog wants to learn new tricks though.
Sharpening is the big difference. I personally find the convex grind to be MUCH easier to sharpen, but Im not everybody. Ive sharpened convex edges on D2 and 440V, which are not the easiest steels in the world to work with. I had no problems whatsoever with sharpening these convex grinds, where a standard edge bevel of 440V positively gave me fits. Wet/dry paper also happens to be light and small, so portability is excellent. No edge guides are needed, so generally its much simpler for a newcomer to sharpen a convex grind than it is to sharpen a standard grind on a bench stone. Much less technique is required on the part of the convex grind.
Ill reserve most of my judgements until my testing is finished on the Dozier test knives. To tell you the truth, if the convex ground blade is not dramatically thick in cross section, I dont expect the differences to stick out like a sore thumb. Im betting that there will be subtle improvements in some areas, and slight losses in others. Most of the different will be in sharpening and overall balance of the knife.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,675
Pendentive - Nifty analogies and drawings you have there. Ive also played around with grind #6 on a very small scale. I used a diamond bench stone to slowly change the shape of a Camillus Mini-Talon. It was a fun experiment with some obvious limitations. Despite the small size of the Mini-Talon, the Talonite made the work VERY slow going. I never quite got the knife ground where I wanted it to be. The size of the knife also greatly limited any possible testing. I will say that the excessive spine rounding definitely helped the cuts, but made my blade pretty ugly looking.
In particular, Talonite benefited greatly from the convexing. I experienced much less edge rollover than I did with a standard edge bevel. The blade also chipped out less. This was a blessing, as the soft matrix of Talonite was giving some rather nasty problems. The natural toothiness of Talonite really kept the knife slicing well after the convexing, giving the knife a great overall utility value.
In particular, Talonite benefited greatly from the convexing. I experienced much less edge rollover than I did with a standard edge bevel. The blade also chipped out less. This was a blessing, as the soft matrix of Talonite was giving some rather nasty problems. The natural toothiness of Talonite really kept the knife slicing well after the convexing, giving the knife a great overall utility value.