orangejoe35
The Opposite
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2016
- Messages
- 370
Comment removed.
Last edited:
We don't have all the facts. I think we need to assume good intent and behavior from all involved. There could be any number of reasons tests would vary, and unless any of us are experienced hardness testers it's not helpful to speculate.
Same holds true for commenting on the testing environment. Unless you know a clean environment is required for HRC testing please don't speculate. I worked in a toolmaking shop for 10 years. It was dirty. No way around it. We had a hardness tester that was less dirty but certainly not clean. It seemed to pass periodic calibration testing.
I agree that their intention was/is good and beneficial for us knife nuts, and appreciate it.
To me, it is common sense and rationale to conclude that a clean environment would be desired for accurate and consistent measurement based on the fact that it depends on very precise depth measurement.
But it is just me.
We know that the tester(s) has gotten and may get outliers or inconsistent values but don't know the probability and cause for improvement.
So it is not wise to take individual measurements seriously, whether they are good (right on or high) or bad (low), for them and for us.
One PM2 specimen has been mentioned to have 62 HRc and a good one, but it may very well be an outlier.
Based on the measurement error and variability, I think that multiple measurements on different samples are required for statistical inference, not anecdotal survey.
Just my 2 cents.
Edit: I guess large manufacturers have group data already. I wish they release the mean values and SD or CV, not just a range (like PM2 60 +- 2 HRc).
That PM2 appears to not be an outlier. Alchemy1 and Kurt confirmed this morning that one of the new Delicas in M390 hit at 62, as well.
As for third party verification... Kurt has been verified many times over, including the trip to Peters. The Dom stands alone. To that end, everyone is now on board with verifying low outliers before reporting, and reporting privately first.
First off, I do appreciate what you guys are doing for the community (assuming that you are part of it, as Blade Banter?).
I was just saying that I do not know how certain I can be about individual values.
To me, it would be beneficial to aggregate data on a single steel from a single manufacturer with an assumption that they equally heat-treat the steel and aim at a hardness value.
For example, you guys have 5 data points on M390 from Spyderco including the Delica you mentioned (59.6, 59.2, 60.1, 62.0, and 62.0).
We do need more samples for sure but let me assume that they follow a Gaussian-like distribution of (mean 60.6, SD 1.3), including sample variability and measurement errors.
Then, we can compute the probability of having a value below 58 HRc and get 0.027.
So we would get 2 ~ 3 blades out of 100 below 58 HRc measurement (by Kurt).
I didn't see this post until just now as my we have been involved in a devastating family event. And reading 20 pages would probably just aggravate me terribly. But I would like to offer this right here and in the other nasty thread - if you have a question about anything I said on social media about this particular discussion regarding its authenticity or truthfulness, post it right here and tag me. Not a nasty accusatory post, but a question of explanation in a courteous fashion - I will explain in kind.
I didn't see this post until just now as my we have been involved in a devastating family event. And reading 20 pages would probably just aggravate me terribly. But I would like to offer this right here and in the other nasty thread - if you have a question about anything I said on social media about this particular discussion regarding its authenticity or truthfulness, post it right here and tag me. Not a nasty accusatory post, but a question of explanation in a courteous fashion - I will explain in kind.
I didn't see this post until just now as my we have been involved in a devastating family event. And reading 20 pages would probably just aggravate me terribly. But I would like to offer this right here and in the other nasty thread - if you have a question about anything I said on social media about this particular discussion regarding its authenticity or truthfulness, post it right here and tag me. Not a nasty accusatory post, but a question of explanation in a courteous fashion - I will explain in kind.
I didn't see this post until just now as my we have been involved in a devastating family event. And reading 20 pages would probably just aggravate me terribly. But I would like to offer this right here and in the other nasty thread - if you have a question about anything I said on social media about this particular discussion regarding its authenticity or truthfulness, post it right here and tag me. Not a nasty accusatory post, but a question of explanation in a courteous fashion - I will explain in kind.
To me, your statement was clear and understandable.
LTK has published an apology to you and Lionsteel for his actions on this.
I think the case is settled now and we learnt a lesson.
The only thing I have a gripe about you is that I cannot buy Otnat directly from CK as being outside the US
I was in the same boat as you when the first shuffler run came out and one of the regulars got one for me and shipped it up to Canada. It just took a few days more than buying direct.To me, your statement was clear and understandable.
LTK has published an apology to you and Lionsteel for his actions on this.
I think the case is settled now and we learnt a lesson.
The only thing I have a gripe about you is that I cannot buy Otnat directly from CK as being outside the US
He did not insinuate anything. He stated that there is not a good flat spot on that blade to test. Peters confirmed that THEY had to take the knife apart to find a suitable spot on the blade. I have tested knife blades and have run into similar issues. It's a valid observation, not an "insinuation". Strike one.First post was Mike insinuating that they did an hrc test on the blade edge. Of which wasn't true.
You misread his statement. He said Kurt deleted his Instagram account and stated that it's easier to delete an account than to hunt down posts in which Kurt had made unwise remarks. Strike two.The 2nd to last paragraph in particular in the latest post are a bit disingenious. Saying he would have to hunt down posts. .
He said nothing of the sort. He only talked about LTK's failure to state that third party testing by Peters did not confirm his earlier findings. Strike three.Yet Mike's making it seem like this anomaly makes all these tests invalid, of which does not. Then he goes and says how his work place must have all the wrong numbers...
He only talked about LTK's failure to state that third party testing by Peters did not confirm his earlier findings.
Not disputing the rest, and only pulled this piece out to clarify.
Brad (of Peters) and Kurt actually confirmed/matched the samples taken, other than the Dom.
The Dom is the only one relevant to CK’s involvement, which makes it easily understandable why that was the focus of his statement.
The TRE and Manix Brad and Kurt tested together lined up with Kurt’s previous hits.
Exactly. Mike was only addressing the LionSteel knife because those are HIS. Special factory order. He is the only seller.
I can well understand Mike's Ire. I did not hear anything in LTK's non-apology to acknowledge that his trumpeted findings on the CK LionSteel knife were not validated by third party testing. Mike was significantly more polite than I would have been under similar circumstances.
I think maybe some of the companies are using this heat treatment,
and some are using the heat treatment below.
That would mean that some knives are optimized at a lower HRC. Maybe, at your price, 57 is optimized. Maybe you don't want to pay to get a higher HRC at the cost of price and corrosion resistance. I think maybe everything's okay.