about edge retetion testing

Kitchen Knife Forums

Help Support Kitchen Knife Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

inferno

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) <*))))><
Joined
Jan 11, 2018
Messages
4,559
Reaction score
3,216
Location
(⌐■_■)
i have done some edge retention testing on cardboard and i can safely say it sucks ass.

so i had this r2 blade at hand. and i figured it would be totally dead at about 2 cardboard boxes. i have tried an r2 blade before and it was dead after 0,5+0,5 boxes, really dull. then i tried this out another time at work. i figured another r2 blade would do fine as trial run but it turned out i could cut cardboard until the cows come home and then some.

before i had cut up 2 cardboard boxes and after that 2 knives were dull. 1 r2 and 1 aus8. but now at work i went through 175m of cardboard (documented) and the r2 blade would still slice paper cleanly. maybe i had more abrasive cardboard last time?? i dont know. turns out cardboard can be very different. with or without clay for instance.
at my job i has gathered about twice as much cardboard as i thought i would need. 2 ply 8,5mm but it turns out this means jack ****. because i could cut this **** for ages. and basically nothing would happen.

so far i have gotten calluses on my thumb and then i have over worked my right arm from all cutting. and then the handle cracked on my knife. but it was probably unrelated though.

in the end it turns out for me at least that pretty much all steels from japan except maybe globals will keep a good edge for as long as you would ever want it. i still cut about 150 more meters of CB with the r2 blade. it would still cut print paper. ymmv i guess. it definitely did with me.

that being said i dont trust catra tests more than my dick.

whats a good edge retentiion test we can all perform?? it has to be reproducable.

ideas?

for me at least cardboard is out of the game because of the varibility.
 
It is difficult especially for kitchen knives. They don't really dull from abrasive wear. We don't cut abrasive materials, like cardboard, with kitchen knives.
Your issues with catra tests doesn't correlate with your cardboard testing. As you've noticed different cardboard is different. Catra card stock is the same so results are repeatable.
That being said as I said before catra testing doesn't correlate to kitchen use.
I just use my knife till the edge loses its bite and then I bring the edge back by whatever means are necessary
 
i have done some edge retention testing on cardboard and i can safely say it sucks ass.

so i had this r2 blade at hand. and i figured it would be totally dead at about 2 cardboard boxes. i have tried an r2 blade before and it was dead after 0,5+0,5 boxes, really dull. then i tried this out another time at work. i figured another r2 blade would do fine as trial run but it turned out i could cut cardboard until the cows come home and then some.

before i had cut up 2 cardboard boxes and after that 2 knives were dull. 1 r2 and 1 aus8. but now at work i went through 175m of cardboard (documented) and the r2 blade would still slice paper cleanly. maybe i had more abrasive cardboard last time?? i dont know. turns out cardboard can be very different. with or without clay for instance.
at my job i has gathered about twice as much cardboard as i thought i would need. 2 ply 8,5mm but it turns out this means jack ****. because i could cut this **** for ages. and basically nothing would happen.

so far i have gotten calluses on my thumb and then i have over worked my right arm from all cutting. and then the handle cracked on my knife. but it was probably unrelated though.

in the end it turns out for me at least that pretty much all steels from japan except maybe globals will keep a good edge for as long as you would ever want it. i still cut about 150 more meters of CB with the r2 blade. it would still cut print paper. ymmv i guess. it definitely did with me.

that being said i dont trust catra tests more than my dick.

whats a good edge retentiion test we can all perform?? it has to be reproducable.

ideas?

for me at least cardboard is out of the game because of the varibility.

Nice test. You probably thought I was crazy in the other thread.
 
It is difficult especially for kitchen knives. They don't really dull from abrasive wear. We don't cut abrasive materials, like cardboard, with kitchen knives.
Your issues with catra tests doesn't correlate with your cardboard testing. As you've noticed different cardboard is different. Catra card stock is the same so results are repeatable.
That being said as I said before catra testing doesn't correlate to kitchen use.
I just use my knife till the edge loses its bite and then I bring the edge back by whatever means are necessary
You can’t test steel differences by testing knives, too many variables. This is why catra testing works, you can keep most variables same so that differences in steels or heat treats of same steels can be compared in a repeatable manner. It doesn’t have to be catra, but a good test would have to be something very similar. Have you tried different steels in similar kitchen knives? Was there a difference in how long they stay sharp? Why does catra like testing works in every other industry, but it doesn’t work for kitchen knives? Why do more wear resistant steels tend to stay sharp longer than less wear resistant steels in kitchen knives? Does anyone think that in general blue super stays sharp longer than white 2 in kitchen knives or is it same, less?
 
Well, I'm very curious what Larrin & Shawn's "Super Secret Project" turns out to be, because it involves some form of sharpened test blades. I'd be very pleased if they introduce or validate a test.

I believe for his own development, Shawn has been doing a rope test cut where he measures loss of sharpness after a set number of cuts, using a BESS tester. Not everyone has one, though.

The cardboard testing done by a few YouTubers does seem to be fairly consistent from test to test, even with different testers - they're using a particular cardboard, and testing always in a 1" section of the blade. Sharpening media has been standardized for each tester, which has its merits and demerits.

I'm really interested in the idea of a DIY-able, quantifiable edge stability test. Roman Landes had an interesting test, but it's not really hobbyist-accessable. I think a simple fixture and a drop-weight might do the trick, as long as we had a way to measure the damage - although that could be rather challenging without specialized equipment.
 
Well, I'm very curious what Larrin & Shawn's "Super Secret Project" turns out to be, because it involves some form of sharpened test blades. I'd be very pleased if they introduce or validate a test.

I believe for his own development, Shawn has been doing a rope test cut where he measures loss of sharpness after a set number of cuts, using a BESS tester. Not everyone has one, though.

The cardboard testing done by a few YouTubers does seem to be fairly consistent from test to test, even with different testers - they're using a particular cardboard, and testing always in a 1" section of the blade. Sharpening media has been standardized for each tester, which has its merits and demerits.

I'm really interested in the idea of a DIY-able, quantifiable edge stability test. Roman Landes had an interesting test, but it's not really hobbyist-accessable. I think a simple fixture and a drop-weight might do the trick, as long as we had a way to measure the damage - although that could be rather challenging without specialized equipment.
I am looking forward to that too. The problem is that no matter what test you design, you will get the same people complaining that it is not valid because it doesn't mirror their use exactly. It is always easy to complain and criticize while not doing anything yourself. It also seems that some people just can't make a mental jump from testing to real life. As if science doesn't work in every single industry in our world.
 
You can’t test steel differences by testing knives, too many variables. This is why catra testing works, you can keep most variables same so that differences in steels or heat treats of same steels can be compared in a repeatable manner. It doesn’t have to be catra, but a good test would have to be something very similar. Have you tried different steels in similar kitchen knives? Was there a difference in how long they stay sharp? Why does catra like testing works in every other industry, but it doesn’t work for kitchen knives? Why do more wear resistant steels tend to stay sharp longer than less wear resistant steels in kitchen knives? Does anyone think that in general blue super stays sharp longer than white 2 in kitchen knives or is it same, less?

Catra testing works to give an idea about performance in other industries because almost all industrial cutting involves abrasive materials. We don't have those in the kitchen. Sure your wood cutting board is mildly abrasive but you shouldn't be sawing at it.
Generally high wear resistance steels are high alloy steel and need a proper heat treat. The carbon steel Japanese smiths use don't and most of them guess as to their austentizing temps and such so of course it's not going to perform at its best. Whereas sg2 and the like must be done with a digitally controlled furnace for a specific amount of time. It will get an excellent heat treat and perform much better
 
Catra testing works to give an idea about performance in other industries because almost all industrial cutting involves abrasive materials. We don't have those in the kitchen. Sure your wood cutting board is mildly abrasive but you shouldn't be sawing at it.
Generally high wear resistance steels are high alloy steel and need a proper heat treat. The carbon steel Japanese smiths use don't and most of them guess as to their austentizing temps and such so of course it's not going to perform at its best. Whereas sg2 and the like must be done with a digitally controlled furnace for a specific amount of time. It will get an excellent heat treat and perform much better
sg2 is trash
 
I've never had an sg2 knife but I would have to say many people would disagree with you on that. Sg2/r2 has a reputation for being good. Ok let's say aeb-l then. That's one everyone can agree is a good steel.
 
I've never had an sg2 knife but I would have to say many people would disagree with you on that. Sg2/r2 has a reputation for being good. Ok let's say aeb-l then. That's one everyone can agree is a good steel.
... all depending on the heat treatment it got. And even then, AEB-L isn't exactly well-known for its spectacular edge retention.
 
Just a few factors for edge retention come to mind: produce, if it is sandy; board contact: nature of the board; kind of contact, depending on the used technique (rocking, push-cutting, slicing); blade geometry: with less resistance less power is required, so the board contact will be softer; edge geometry: a thin edge with a robust microbevel will prevail; sharpening: a highly polished edge with large carbides may undermine edge stability.
 
Just a few factors for edge retention come to mind: produce, if it is sandy; board contact: nature of the board; kind of contact, depending on the used technique (rocking, push-cutting, slicing); blade geometry: with less resistance less power is required, so the board contact will be softer; edge geometry: a thin edge with a robust microbevel will prevail; sharpening: a highly polished edge with large carbides may undermine edge stability.

You are absolutely right and all these reasons are why testing knives is so difficult, just too many variables. Spyderco probably came the closest with their mule program. Even then people could claim and did that because different steels were hardened to different hardness, this was the reason for differences in performance and some of it was that. At least the grinds and general shape of mules were the same and Spyderco is pretty good at heat treating.

Even if we took simple carbon steels, there is a general understanding that blue steels hold an edge longer than white steels in similar knives and that blue super is the king of slicing edge holding and holds the sharp edge longer than white 2. Since every thread needs to have TF discussion in it, take TF as an example, it is generally agreed that Denka edge lasts longer than Mabaroshi edge. One could claim that it has to do with hardness white 1 @65-66 vs Blue Super @66-67, but the edge seems to last a lot longer. It is reasonable to think that at least some of it comes from super being more wear resistant than white 1.

Larrin showed that CATRA results have a very high correlation to rope cutting test results as well as cardboard cutting test results, so it is reasonable to assume that it also has high correlation to food cutting test results too. Food is not very abrasive, but it is abrasive to some degree, take tomato skins for example. We are also dealing with very thin edges. Another example is yanagis, they dull and the white ones dull quicker than blue, these have practically no board contact at all and mostly cut very soft stuff. I think it is ignorant to think that wear resistance has no effect on slicing edge longevity. Or that CATRA is irrelevant because it doesn't test cutting tomatoes or potatoes or any other produce you like.
 
I’d be interested in hearing why you think so, despite a large number of reputable makers seeming to think that it is a good steel.

Actually I find D2/SLD a more interesting question. Barring powdered metal technology (I'm not aware of anyone using that) it is a relatively coarse grained steel with fairly large carbides and relatively low toughness. It has fairly good edge retention but less than great corrosion resistance relative to other high chromium steels. Edge retention is the only area where it out performs AEB-L. On paper SG2/R2, CPM154/RWL-34, AEB-L and Nitro-V all look like better options to me based on how I value knife steel properties yet I don't hear the chorus of detractors to nearly the same degree as with the VG10 pile on. In fact I hear a fair number of positive comments for SLD/SKD11. Is the real world performance better than the tests suggest?

To tie this back to the original direction of this thread SG2 appears to have at least slight slightly better CATRA performance than D2/SLD and 154 CM which are closely clustered, VG10 falls behind those but ahead of A2/SKD12, AEB-L, Nitro-V, O1, and 52100.

Edit: What is the @panda take on non-Hitachi steels like 1095 or W2 (I sort of expect him to find these at least tolerable), 52100 (probably too much chromium), or 26C3?
 
Last edited:
I like 1095 a lot, w2 indifferent (not as nice feeling as 1095 but not bad either), I like Marko's 52100. Haven't tried 26c3

One steel that isn't pleasant to sharpen that I don't mind is spydercos cpm-m4 because it has such good performance at everything else.
 
Last edited:
I kind of understand prioritizing feel on stones somewhat, most knives can last a few hours of non stop cutting, so if you don't mind sharpening every day then that makes sense.

Personally AEB-L, RWL-34/CPM-154 and SG2 are the only stainless steels I would recommend. I have one in M398 and no idea how sharpening that is going to go.
 
I kind of understand prioritizing feel on stones somewhat, most knives can last a few hours of non stop cutting, so if you don't mind sharpening every day then that makes sense.

Personally AEB-L, RWL-34/CPM-154 and SG2 are the only stainless steels I would recommend. I have one in M398 and no idea how sharpening that is going to go.
The only stainless I enjoy is ginsanko. But heiji semistainless offers hassle free experience with the feel of carbon, best of both!!
 
The only stainless I enjoy is ginsanko. But heiji semistainless offers hassle free experience with the feel of carbon, best of both!!

Thanks for your response. I'm a little surprised at your relative enthusiasm for Ginsanko/Gin3 given that it is quite close to AEB-L and Nitro-V on paper. Personally, I'm not big on work horse knives but perhaps I need to try a Heiji semi-stainless.
 
Thanks for your response. I'm a little surprised at your relative enthusiasm for Ginsanko/Gin3 given that it is quite close to AEB-L and Nitro-V on paper. Personally, I'm not big on work horse knives but perhaps I need to try a Heiji semi-stainless.
Oh I'm not a fan of heiji grind at all, but I just regrind it myself because the steel is so damn good, even the cladding is good!!
 
I kind of understand prioritizing feel on stones somewhat, most knives can last a few hours of non stop cutting, so if you don't mind sharpening every day then that makes sense.

Personally AEB-L, RWL-34/CPM-154 and SG2 are the only stainless steels I would recommend. I have one in M398 and no idea how sharpening that is going to go.

Perhaps as my sharpening skills improve feel on the stones will start to matter more to me. At this juncture I don't value edge retention very highly (home cook, rarely for more than two), even Shirogami 2 is fine for my purposes in that regard. I do, however, value toughness. My list of preferred stainless steels is nearly the same as yours although I would add Nitro-V and place SG2 a notch below the others. I have not yet owned a Ginsanko/Gin3 knife so that is a subject for further research. NioMax will be of interest if/when it comes to market.
 
I've never tried Nitro-V but I assume it's very close to AEB-L so I'd agree with that. After being a blue fanatic for so long I've started enjoying White/SC125 a lot more mainly because of how nice they are to sharpen. I do a lot of chopping versus slicing so toughness is somewhat important but the only knife I own that microchips is a super blue at 65 hrc.
 
I've never tried Nitro-V but I assume it's very close to AEB-L
There's a noticeable difference between the two, while making knives at least. On the stones I like the glassy feeling of Nitro-V better, but it seems to be a bit more finicky in the HT. I can't get AEB-L anymore, so comparison doesn't matter to me so much now.
Hardened Nitro-V on a coarse belt behaves very strangely... it shreds into long hairs, in a way I've never seen before.
One steel that isn't pleasant to sharpen that I don't mind is spydercos cpm-m4 because it has such good performance at everything else.
My supplier has CPM-M4 on sale... hnnnnnggggg
I can't imagine it would be easy to forge though...
 
There's a YouTuber that goes by the name "Cedric & Ada Gear and Outdoors" who tests steel by cutting sisal rope. He graphed all his results here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...L9yUHhUmDLAP1hJ1dN_0q5G4tug/edit#gid=43566811
Take it for what it's worth... it might be interesting to some people in this thread.

A cool thing to note: Most of the knives in his tests were factory made. He tested a W2 steel knife that was done by a custom maker, and it did surprisingly well considering how simple the steel is.
 
Back
Top