|
Post by Rafael on Jan 17, 2013 18:47:51 GMT
Yes okay, it's more important who manufactures the sword than what steel they used. Really I believe you so you don't need to tell me LOL. instead let's try to narrow down how t10 and 1095 relate to each other. I've been wondering about this difference between T 10 and 1095 for a while now. Some people say it is the same thing basically t10 is a Chinese version of 1095. But I have found listings from Chinese steel manufacturer that gives different price for what they are calling T10 versus what they are calling 1095 steel. So at least for some people in China there is a difference between the two things. It seems like even manufacturers or resellers are not sure exactly what they have. Example: I purchased a Wakizashi from swordNarmory that has held up well and it's identified by them as being made with T10. I saw a listing on eBay also from swordNarmory advertising a T10 steel World War II reproduction Japanese sword. But when I looked at the photo on the listing of their cheesy certificate of authenticity, the certificate calls it 1095 steel (the certificate that came with the WakizAshi listed the sword as T10). I sent a message asking which is it T10 or 1095? I got a reply back saying that 1095 and T10 are the same because T10 is just the Chinese version of 1095. So even though they are selling both items and printing out certificates of authenticity for both swords, the guy Jackie or whoever is answering the eBay mailbox seems to think it is the same thing. The way I understand it so far, T10 has higher carbon (1% or more vs 0.95% for 1095) and also has more silicon compared to 1095. supposedly "real" T10 steel is also a tungsten alloy, which gives the metal more flexibility and durability; this extra flexibility and durability is I guess thought to balance out any increased brittleness resulting from the higher carbon content compared to 1095. In fact, based on reading the reviews on the main page of sword buyers guide, it sounds like T10 steel should be expected to be significantly more flexible compared to standard AISI 1095 steel Where it starts to get confusing is when we get the revelation that all of the T10 steel in China is being made completely without tungsten, and is essentially a highcarbon version of the --60 series spring steels; ie holds an edge better compared to them but has similar flexibility or shear strength. So compared to regular 1095 steal it should also be expected to have more manganese and more silicon. I guess 1095 was originally made with just carbon + iron but these days all modern steel is made with traces of other elements, such as manganese and silicon, even some chromium, but not necessarily Tungsten So assuming all of this is mostly true, when people talk about how great the T10 katanas are that Paul was reviewing on the main site, are those swords being made with Chinese T10 steel that does not contain tungsten? Is it possible to even get swords made with T10 that is actually a tungsten alloy, or is it all this other Chinese spring-steel-like version? if the swords Paul is reviewing that are made with this famous tungsten alloy have all of these awesome properties of durability and edge retention then does it even matter what is in the alloy to begin with? I'm not totall sure, it's at this part of the thought process that I always start to get a headache and decide to think about something else for a while Btw this is where my original information about T10 being a tungsten alloy came from, in case anyone who has already been born has not already seen it linked twice before : www.sword-manufacturers-guide.co ... teels.html
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 18, 2013 1:23:18 GMT
Here are some references which may (or may not) clear things up a bit as far as steel content and elements goes: zknives.com/knives/steels/steelgraph.php?nm=1090%2C+T10&sz=2&gm=0&hrn=1T10 is in blue and 1090 in grey in this graph... However, there are also many references which show Chinese T10 tool steel as not having tungsten (W) content at all, like so: www.jmst.org/EN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=15284so there does seem to be some discrepancy in the constitution of T10 in China, which may or may not resemble 1090 enough for someone in China to call these two "the same thing," dunno :roll: They obviously are not the same thing when we look at the elements involved. Call it marketing, call it a translation semantics thing... all I know is the standards for steel in the US differ from the standards in China, and I dunno how often these steels are confused. And here are some other detailed references on the subject: www.nihonzashi.com/types_of_steel.aspxzknives.com/knives/articles/knifesteelfaq.shtmlwww.efunda.com/materials/alloys/alloy_home/steels.cfmAs far as the smith vs. steel, chicken vs. egg sort of question many people seem to like to argue about... it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You can't get chicken without eggs and vice versa. While I do agree that the smith forging the blade is a very key component - e.g., give a monkey a hunk of L6 and he won't come up with a bainite katana _ there is also the real finding that different types of steel behave and look differently. For instance, 1090 can produce some really eye-popping hamon, while 5160 struggles to form a hamon that is appreciable to most eyes. So you can't make chicken salad out of chicken $h!+ either, even if you are a master chef. In other words the steel does matter; you can't make a good sword outta nuttin' but elemental iron, no matter what the high falootin' reputation, Juyo ranking of the smith or school he comes from. It's too soft. Steel is more than the element Fe, it is an alloy. So these other elements alloyed with the Fe do matter in the outcome of what the sword is like. Like C makes it harder than Fe alone. Yes, the smith is hella important. Also, what type of steel the smith uses does limit/enhance the final outcome possibilities. If it didn't, everyone would still be using plain Fe with no variation like they did in the stone age... er... um, iron age, whatever
|
|
|
Post by aussie-rabbit on Jan 18, 2013 2:43:02 GMT
Remember that the Chinese steel mill will have the same advertising mind-set as everyone else in China, forges will be looking for the lowest price steel not the best quality, ergo T10 may very well be another name for 1095.
|
|
|
Post by DavidW on Jan 18, 2013 7:09:58 GMT
This. I know not every Chinese person is the same, but from my experiences in China and from what my parents have told me, lower class vendors (in this context, i.e ebay sellers, NOT Hanwei and Dynasty Forge) will do and/or say anything to sell their product.
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 18, 2013 12:37:23 GMT
My point was I dunno how common place it is for T10 to be called 1095 in China. For instance, in the US, a lot of us say "I'm going to Xerox some papers." when we are making copies. Thing is, nobody has a copier made by Xerox anymore. But when we say this, it isn't really meant to deceive anyone into thinking we have an actual Xerox machine, it's just how we talk. I dunno if T10/1095 is like this in China; is it is common to call any steel with 1% C by the same name, without really having the intention to defraud? There's a whole nother thread about that topic you can look at if you wish forum.sword-buyers-guide.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15187But then this other recent thread is probably the impetus for this thread anyway... I have no doubt there are Chinese vendors who will tell you anything you want to hear in order to sell their swords. For instance, there are vendors who would lead you to believe a stainless steel sword is made of T10 or 1095 if you'll buy it. Lest anyone pull the race card or whatever, please note this is not a uniquely Chinese problem either. In the US, many people in many professions - e.g, lawyers, salesmen, politicians, televangelists, etc - are selling something 24-7 and basically lie for a living. Since most of the items in the world are made in China these days, my take is there is probably more fraud about buying goods perpetrated by Chinese simply because they make most of the stuff and so the sheer volume just makes it this way rather than anything nasty about the Chinese people themselves in general that makes them different from any other country in regards to getting over on buyers. Fraud is fraud and the truth is the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Rafael on Jan 18, 2013 15:29:53 GMT
No I had not seen that thread yet. I have been trying to find out about this for a while now. Usually when I bring it up the topic is shouted down by a chorus of people beating me over the head with the idea that steel type makes no difference because the manufacturer is all-important. Yes the manufacturer is important, but it's in oversimplification to decide that steel type is irrelevant.
That's why I started this thread by "admitting" that the manufacturer is more important, because I was hoping for some actual discussion of the topic this time. Which now we are doing, hooray!
You're making some good points. just because they're calling it one thing or the other -or even claiming to have both available to choose one or the other- doesn't mean that they aren't just selling the same thing and pretending to give you the choice to make you happy and get you to buy the sword.
Still, reasonably reputable manufacturers like Sinosword or jinshi or Zhengwu sword all allow you to pick from various steels including 1095 or T10. I could see if maybe one of them was creating a false distinction between the two steels, but I am inclined to believe that they are actually two different metals with differing qualities. Although, I think you're correct that at least some people just have one or the other and will basically tell you it is whatever you want it to be so that you will want to buy from them. This sort of thing is probably going on on eBay a lot.
|
|
|
Post by ineffableone on Jan 18, 2013 15:53:47 GMT
OK one thing that has been bothering me in this debate, T-10 is a Chinese tool steel designation from everything I have seen and heard. One example of this is quoted bellow, saying T-10 is equivalent to US designation W1. from www.nihonzashi.com/types_of_steel.aspxThis article and many others do not say T-10 is 1095, in fact quiet the contrary they state quiet clearly there is a difference between 1095 and T-10. So are there some Chinese pawning off 1095 as T-10? Mayabe. 1095 is not tool steel, and T-10 is supposed to be tool steel.
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Jan 18, 2013 16:19:06 GMT
There is a difference between T-10 (W-1) and 1095. Beside the slight difference in carbon content. W-1 is held to tighter specification, cleaner, less impurities. If you frequent Blade Forum and read the Knife Maker forum, many knives makers there complained that in the last 10 years or so, even in the U.S., 1095 steel they received were dirty and full of impurities, making the heat treatment unpredictable and difficult.
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 18, 2013 18:14:12 GMT
SoS ~ So here's a my train of thought: In America we have specific standards in the steel making business. Designations are in AISI.So for instance, there is this stuff called W1 made in America. On the other hand, there is stuff called T10 made in China, which is their equivalent of American W1. But the specs and designations are different. So my question is this, is it likely that the W1 and 1095 made in America is cleaner and produces better end products (e.g., swords) than what is made in China as T10 and 1095? If so, does this account for some of the discrepancies we find in quality between the smiths you are referring to and those factories in China? My guess is since China has become so industrialized the last few decades, their environmental standards and manufacturing regulations are probably not as tight as the ones in the US. The point being, I wouldn't be at all surprised if forges and vendors looking to make cheaper swords couldn't cut costs by using cheaper (less pure) steels? Seems doubtful a cheap eBay forge would import foreign steel; rather they'd use what is on hand in China already. On the other hand, a larger forge like Hanwei might very well bring in powdered steel from Sweden, a non-Chinese source for a forge located in China. Again, not pointing fingers at any specific vendor or forge; rather wondering if some of these factors contribute to some of the uncertainty we all seem to have on this subject... namely, without doing some sort of physical analysis on my sword, how would I know exactly what it is made of? and do forges take advantage of this fact? Thanks! Here's a quote which explains what I mean in much greater detail: web.archive.org/web/20070121072550/http://www.astm.org/BOOKSTORE/PUBS/DS67B_SampleChapter.pdf
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 19, 2013 14:13:17 GMT
Well, anyone who says the steel type makes no difference is just plain wrong. For instance, how are you gonna start with a steel that has a high Cr content and make a usable sword? Knives, yes. Swords?... ummm... I have heard there are some smiths who can make a usable sword from stainless steel, but I wouldn't suggest you go out and buy one on QVC and start banging it on a table or anything :roll: I get that the beauty of a Howard Clark L6 is in the synergy between the smith and the material. I get that in the hands of someone else, L6 may not behave the way it does for Clark... The smith is a very important thing. The forging process used and tempering and so on are vital. However, it just doesn't make sense to say the metal doesn't matter. It is vital too. There are several factors which can be "limiting reagents" in the sword forging chemistry process Go forge something from meteorite or tamahagane or stainless steel and tell me the differences in the final products don't depend on the purity and characteristics of the material you started with. Nonsense :lol: Anyway, the point of all this is if all forges were honest and making great products, we wouldn't have a need for SBG in the first place, would we? No need to separate the cr@ptacular from the truly epic if all vendors/forges are good. But when you get cr@p like this, it begs an explanation: forum.sword-buyers-guide.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=15168Was the lamination method off? Looks like it. Was the tempering process flawed? Wouldn't be surprised. Was the steel used cr@ppy in the first place? Dunno, but would anyone be shocked to hear Ryansword is cutting corners? Thanks for bringing the topic up. It had been on my mind lately too, as I have been looking for a 1095 sword with a hamon that really pops... maybe I'll buy a Kanie... thing is I'd have to have a bake sale and raise some funds... Wanna buy some fantastical magical chocolate chip cookies made by blind orphans who need an operation? Only $1000 apiece. What a bargain. A bargain for you! You buy now. Cookies can chop iron! :lol:
|
|
Marc Kaden Ridgeway
Member
Retired Global Moderator
Awful lot of leaving and joining going on here for me .... And gosh I can't recall doing a bit of i
Posts: 8,778
|
Post by Marc Kaden Ridgeway on Jan 19, 2013 16:08:04 GMT
I think that most people are oversimplifying the "steel type " comments , either by choice or by accident. I personally have never seen ANYONE say steel type doesn't matter. Instead there is always a flurry of voices " 1045 is too soft , L6 is a super steel , 9260 is the toughest" . In context to those comments the proper response IS that steel type doesn't matter so much as who is holding the hammer/doing the heat treat . That doesn't mean crazy unsuitable steels ... That means steels within the range of what is normally acceptable for sword making .
1045 too soft? For what? It had been my experience , and is backed up by Metallurgy 101 that 1045 is tougher than 1095. Absolutely . 1095 hardens deeper , it has more carbon ... It becomes hard to the point of being brittle . So here we see the smith / heat treated being important because a carefully controlled quench combined with supportive edge geometry can make a 1095 blade that is hard and durable rather than brittle to the point of uselessness .
1045 , while not hardening near as much , had way more ductility .. Making for a sword that is way more durable , but yet doesn't take/hold an edge so well . So again geometry is important ... More so than the steel.
L6 ? What is it without the right guy in control of it ? A hard to work steel that produces lackluster hamon and corrodes easily . But with the right guy ... It becomes an incredible sword with the sharpness of a martensitic edge yet the ductility of a spring tempered , bainitic body. Here the smith / heat treated is WAY more important than the steel. I'd rather have a blade made of En45 heat treated by James Raw than an L6 heat treated by anyone but a VERY short list of people.
Super steels are a myth. Sure some alloys have different qualities than others allowing them to be more suitable for some applications than others , but for everything you gain you give something up. You gain hardness you lose ductility , gain impact resistance lose elasticity ... Or whatever . That last may not be accurate ... I'm tired of typing ... But when you gain something you compromised something else to get it ... THAT is the riddle of steel.
So yes, I am sorry , but there is a damn good case for the argument that the steel doesn't matter so much as the maker. Not if you take it out of its context and start throwing in steels that are unacceptable for sword-making. All things being equal , with modern produced , homogenous steels , within the range that is acceptable for the application the steel type doesn't matter near as much as how it is made . A smith that works in 1086 will make you a far better blade out of 1086 then whatever the "steel of the day " is . Because he can do a solid , well controlled heat-treat on that medium.
I put it to you that most of the problems we see from mass produced swords generally have more to do with a bad heat treat than with bad steel... That Ryan included.
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 19, 2013 19:03:36 GMT
MKR ~ First off, I respect your opinion and experience, and in principle don't disagree with what you are saying at all. I think we are just using different terms to define our points of view I think what we have is a case where people get involved in a chicken or the egg, nature vs. nurture, Tastes GREAT! Less Filling! sort of argument. So I purposely cited very simple examples to show how this argument doesn't make sense when we look at it more deeply and see it for what it is. At the heart of it, I don't think saying having a good heat treatment is more important than having good material to work with is an argument that makes sense. However, I do think it makes a lot of sense to say finding someone who can do proper heat treatment is more difficult to do than it is to find some good steel to work with. This might very well be what you are saying as well in different words. Sounds like it to me. I agree there is no such a thing as a "super steel" ... adamantium, unobtainium whatever sort of concept. I don't think my dad can beat up your dad, my sensei can beat up your sensei, or any of that playground stuff either, so that's not where I'm going. No worries You are right that we are talking about balancing properties instead of one property being the "only" important one to consider. What I am saying is a truly great sword is the product of being both functional and aesthetically pleasing at the same time. Can it take a licking and keep on ticking, as well as inspire us to say, "Wow, this is beautiful!" I'm sure you agree. How do we do this? Yes, it is a riddle... but a riddle that has many answers, not just one response. For example, I can order a billet of L6 steel myself. Like so: newjerseysteelbaron.com/shop/l-6/Just using L6 as one example of a material some folks call "super steel," not saying that I buy this premise, mind you. Just a common example. Thing is, I have no experience working with this L6 stuff. I'd be as likely as a monkey successfully writing Shakespeare to come up with the proper heat treatment to get this stuff to make a "great" blade. Verily, the person doing the heat treatment (e.g., Howard Clark) makes all the difference in the world. But we can say the same thing about any number of factors... they all make all the difference. Polishing? Me and my Dremel and a pile of sand paper from Home Depot are going to have a helluva time polishing that sword to look like art the way someone like Keith Larman could. Nobody, I mean nobody, would want to look at it, even if I ordered these Japanese finger stones: www.namikawa-ltd.co.jp/english/Geometry? I got an "A" in that subject in junior high school and still have a compass and protractor, but I'd be damned if I could take a bar of steel and shape it to have some sori & niku in a way we'd agree counts as proper geometry. Be lucky to be able to cut myself with it. On and on it goes... As you already know, there are myriad factors which go into the making of a great sword. The answers to the riddle is the synergy happens when all these different parts are done well, and we get a great sword. The point being, if any of these pieces are absent or cr@ppy - good steel, good heat treatment, good handle, good geometry, good nakago with menuki placement, good equipment in my shop (and many other things as well) - the sword fails. It doesn't make sense to me to say any one factor is more important than any of the other factors, because if any one isn't good, you don't have a proper sword, you've got cr@p. The phenomenon we call a good sword is dependent on many causes and conditions. So I agree with you that it is more difficult to hire some one who can properly heat treat a sword than it is to buy a good piece of steel. However, I don't agree that it is more important. If I got some crummy steel with lots of slag, this could cause the sword to fail as well. Apologies if this sounds like a semantic debate. It very well may be. But there are many reasons swords fail, and heat treatment is just one of 'em. Looks to me like the problem with that Ryansword definitely includes the steel, meaning they laminated things in a way that doesn't look right at all, by using the wrong steel in the wrong place. Soft where hard should be and vice versa. Basically they appear to have only used one layer of kawatetsu and the shintetsu doesn't appear to go to the ha. Sure doesn't look like what they are advertising: As I mentioned before, the heat treatment may be off as well as you suggest, but the steel itself doesn't look right... no worries. MKR, I know you know all of the things I've said above already. Keep in mind I am not trying to be a smart @$$, just talking to the OP about his experience with folks shooting him down for being concerned with what type of steel his sword is made of. Also keep in mind I am just framing the question in a way everyone can understand since this is the Beginners Forum. Yes, it is an oversimplification on purpose, and yes I know you understand it on a deeper level
|
|
|
Post by lamebmx on Jan 19, 2013 23:58:22 GMT
Well I mentioned it on the other thread. It could also be a case of a cracked blade, dark spot oxidation inside an old crack and light area the fresh break. better pics would be nice. Unfortunately the handy material science book did not have a mention of T10 in section on steel. Did get to see some nice close-ups on bainite.
|
|
|
Post by Jussi Ekholm on Jan 20, 2013 17:53:15 GMT
Sure steel matters to a point, however once you have some form of steel from which you can make a reliable sword. Then I personally see other matters being more important than just the material. I'll quote myself from another thread, cause I'm too lazy to write it all again. So I'm pretty much in the same boat with Marc here. Once you have steel that is appropriate for a sword then other factors start to be more important. Here is a Chinese study in English about T10, you could get more of those by spending some money, but this one is free: www.google.fi/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=& ... 8874,d.bGE (just redo the xls to pdf and it'll work). T10 is just referred as c.1,0%C tool steel. just as 1095 is c.0,9-1,0% high carbon steel. Other properties can also be seen and compared, to me they don't give much insight as I don't understand their uses/meanings properly. Differences in tool steel vs. high carbon steel do not concern me. And has anyone ever had their sword tested for material used? I mean how else could you possibly tell the exact steel used in the sword? We are only trusting the manufacturers word, and at least for me that is enough as I don't care about the steel used as long as the sword seems good to me, and I believe that swords that seem good to my eye are getting enough attention on the steel department. To me there are so many more important things when choosing a Chinese made sword than the blade material. And like I said people might be overstressing on the material aspect. Could many of us even tell the material used? I know for sure I wouldn't be able to do that. Can many of us tell what will be the performance differences in X vs. Y steel? I know I can't aside than pointing to some tables on the Internet. I've had one T10 sword (at least it's sold as T10 ), and I thought it was weak, weak enough for me to switch to other swords when doing heavier cutting. Does that mean that T10 steel is bad, no. Does that mean that the swords by X manufacturer are bad, no. It doesn't even mean that that certain model is bad, I just might have stricter standards than some other sword fans. That's just a single sword so I can't say anything decive one way or another. Apart from the fact that personally I didn't like that sword. So what will be the differences in lets say Kaneie T10 and Kaneie 1095 swords? I'd say very little. T10 is just cheaper for Chinese forges to get than 1095. Therefore as the forge uses more expensive starting material, it's highly likely that the higher costing starting material gets more attention than the cheaper one which = more expensive material might result in better overall sword. The reason you don't see crap swords being made from L6 or 1095 for example is the fact that the starting material is much more expensive than maybe 1045 for comparison. So they will focus on working a better product from that expensive stuff. So I guess my final thought/guess is that T10 is cheap in China so they use it, yet it has quite similar aspects to 1095. 1+1,1 does not equal 2 but it's darn close So I fully understand why they make T10 swords and I have nothing against T10 steel. Concerning profit it would be a much harder action to import material and still trying to compete with similar products, then you'd probably have to have a better product, as competing with price might not be a viable option.
|
|
|
Post by lamebmx on Jan 20, 2013 18:58:25 GMT
I have to agree to an extent with that post. T10 or 1095, would be too close and the person making the sword would be the deciding factor. When making a cake, you measure by the cup of sugar, not the grain. I am confident they do the same when making steel. They have margins in their production, combined with the margins of their source materials.
Now for say, 1045 vs advertised at T10, you can tell. The huawei T10 I tested was definitely harder and therefore less tough than the Musashi. It also had a different color to it, and the hamon was quite different. It was markedly stiffer too. Through the testing it kept a crazy edge, capable of cutting other metal, much better.
Unless you are talking about large flat abusive targets, give that T10 a try in heavy cutting. I bet it gives you a good surprise!
Again, I do agree the difference between T10 & 1095 is of less concern than how it is made.
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 20, 2013 18:59:51 GMT
Hopefully I am not "overfocusing" on the steel aspect of a sword; this was not my intention. Rather just making the case there are multiple variables to consider in making a sword, the lack of any of which will give you a bad outcome, and the excellence of which will give you a good outcome.
Apologies it isn't regarding T10 and 1095 specifically, but rather one of the "super steels" people talk about L6...
So here is a post from Keith Larman which explains more eloquently what I was trying to say previously:
|
|
|
Post by aussie-rabbit on Jan 21, 2013 4:13:23 GMT
Where swords are concerned we still follow the traditional process - Steel is made by person A - a foundry mixes iron plus carbon plus whatever else producing raw steel. Person B runs a forge taking the raw steel and turns that into a blade. Passed to person C who polishes the final blade while Person D makes the fittings. Person E then puts the sum of the parts together and you have a finished product. Today's forge is no different, steel is supplied in bulk from a mill and passes through the stages above in house, what you get at the end of the day will depend on each person. Reputation of the final product is the make or break point, I doubt anyone here has the ability to really test the material our swords are made from, we can make an educated guess for some steel, L6 is wildly different from 1060 but there is little or nothing between 1075 and 1095. We must look at the reputation of the supplier, as well as the reviews and tests carried out before handing out our hard earned cash.
|
|
Marc Kaden Ridgeway
Member
Retired Global Moderator
Awful lot of leaving and joining going on here for me .... And gosh I can't recall doing a bit of i
Posts: 8,778
|
Post by Marc Kaden Ridgeway on Jan 23, 2013 22:24:19 GMT
Then I fail to see a basis for debate , because that is EXACTLY what I was saying.
|
|
|
Post by Rafael on Jan 24, 2013 2:59:55 GMT
Sticking with the car metaphor, it's equally stupid to say that tires are the most important feature of a car or to say that tires make no difference in the performance of a car because all that matters is who made the car. If we can all agree on that, then just to explain the purpose of the topic or why it is even worth discussing let me explain it like this. I, we, you get that the tires are not the most important part of a car. BUT- it is still interesting to compare the performance of the same model of car using tires with different air pressure, using nitrogen instead of regular compressed air, different threads, made by different manufacturers etc etc. yes the tire is not the sIngle most important part of the car, but it does effect the performance. It does. To say that the manufacturer of the car Is more important than the type of tire used is probably true in most or even all cases. But to say that the car will perform exactly the same regardless of the tires used is wrong, and probably he result of 1. Realizing that who makes te car is the most important factor in the performance of the car And 2. Jumping to the cOnclusion that if the maker is the most important determining factor then other factors like tires or type of steel are unimportant (maybe true) or not worth discussing (strictly an opinion) Since some manufactures like sinosword offer the same sword made with your choice of 9260 T10 1095 or 1060, it is really not pointless At all to talk about how one type of steel performs in comparison to another. I think I understand When people want to reinforce the idea that talking about one steel vs another can sometimes be a moot point in the case of forges that specialize in one type of steel. Of course you should pick a forge you trust, not pick the steel you want and then find a forge that uses it. I just wanted to have a semi academic discussiOn about how one differs from the other or whether they are actually the same thing. Im still not sure about that but lots of good info was provided by you guys. Thanks for all the useful links, I'm still readng through it all
|
|
|
Post by stickem on Jan 24, 2013 7:54:54 GMT
That's because this wasn't a debate I think you and I may have gotten separated at the point where I was discussing the outcome of say stainless steel vs. carbon steel in sword making, just to make the point that steel does indeed matter in the outcome... I think you wanted to assume, for sake of the discussion, " That doesn't mean crazy unsuitable steels ... That means steels within the range of what is normally acceptable for sword making."My point was I wasn't willing to make this assumption the way you are. There are plenty of swords in the sub $300 market made from stainless steel, used car parts (whatever), so personally I don't think that just because you found a sword on the internet it is safe to assume the sword is made of an "acceptable" steel at all. Same for the fittings, the handle, saya (whatever). Just not going to assume someone made it out of proper materials. Besides, if we do this, then of course if we assume the materials are suitable, then what variable is there left to look at other than the work done with these materials? That's all there is, right? The materials and the work done on them. The bottom line is we are both saying the same thing from different angles, with different assumptions. Larman just summed it up better than my usual verbosity could. Steel does matter, but then so do a whole bunch of other causes and conditions! It's the phenomenon of them all coming together in the same place at the same time which solves the riddle of steel. To be redundant by regurgitating what I said in prior post, "in principle I don't disagree with what you are saying at all. I think we are just using different terms (and assumptions) to define our points of view."Peace
|
|