|
|
Post by JH Lee on Jun 3, 2021 0:13:59 GMT
I would appreciate it if you would read my post before responding. Or not. It is pretty long. Anyway, I disagree with this assessment that the demand for Western smith's custom katana is anywhere comparable to a JP shinsakuto. The rest of my post is actually predicated on this, which seems to be an important point of disagreement between your perception and mine. It's long, poorly formatted, and repetitive. I'll pass. There is absolutely just as much demand for a Howard Clark as there is for any Japanese smith. There is just as much demand for those skilled in polish, koshirae, etc outside of Japan as there is within. Allowing Japanese smiths to use modern steels and removing quantity restrictions will absolutely not decrease the cost. It may or may not increase availability. So, you decided to act like a a jerk and simply stick to making nonsense assertions. But no, there is not "just as much demand for a Howard Clark as there is for any Japanese smith." No, there is not "just as demand for those skilled in polish, koshirae, etc outside of Japan as there is within." Since you can't be bothered to think things through, have not a clue about notions like supply and demand, and can't even be cordial for some reason, I'll stop wasting my breath. |
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 3, 2021 1:15:51 GMT
It's long, poorly formatted, and repetitive. I'll pass. There is absolutely just as much demand for a Howard Clark as there is for any Japanese smith. There is just as much demand for those skilled in polish, koshirae, etc outside of Japan as there is within. Allowing Japanese smiths to use modern steels and removing quantity restrictions will absolutely not decrease the cost. It may or may not increase availability. So, you decided to act like a a jerk and simply stick to making nonsense assertions. But no, there is not "just as much demand for a Howard Clark as there is for any Japanese smith." No, there is not "just as demand for those skilled in polish, koshirae, etc outside of Japan as there is within." Since you can't be bothered to think things through, have not a clue about notions like supply and demand, and can't even be cordial for some reason, I'll stop wasting my breath. Okay.  |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Newport on Jun 3, 2021 1:36:37 GMT
So, you decided to act like a a jerk and simply stick to making nonsense assertions. But no, there is not "just as much demand for a Howard Clark as there is for any Japanese smith." No, there is not "just as demand for those skilled in polish, koshirae, etc outside of Japan as there is within." Since you can't be bothered to think things through, have not a clue about notions like supply and demand, and can't even be cordial for some reason, I'll stop wasting my breath.
"I cannot compensate for improper use of a sword. Nothing is bullet proof and idiots prove on a regular basis that nothing is idiot-proof -- they're just too creative." -- Keith Larman
^^^^ Great quotes by Howard Clark, probably one of the best "Japanese style" swordsmiths in the world and Keith Larman who was one of the best toshogi and mounter of "Japanese style swords" and Nihonto outside of Japan |
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 4, 2021 13:16:00 GMT
Ok, well first of all we've seem to have had this same conversation before. So with that in mind, I want everybody to follow this link and read the article, then we will proceed with the discussion: www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/tatara/index.htmblog.mchoneind.com/blog/carbon-steel-grades-chartwww.qtstools.com/TechInfo/SAE%20steel%20grades.htmIf you don't want to do all the reading of facts and such, I'll summarize for you. Traditional Japanese smiths started with a very poor grade of iron rich sand that needed incredibly labor intensive processing to produce usable steel. The swords they made were about 1 - 1.5% carbon with a high oxygen content. This equates to roughly to a 10XX grade. Therefore any modern 1055 to 1095 is roughly equivelent. However, the high O2 content of tatara steel makes the resultant impurities a positive rather than a negative in the finished steel. Things got a bit easier with the coming of the Portugese and their ability to import iron ore from China and the Phillipines. As stated, the cost of a traditional blade is VERY high, mainly due to the intense labor required to obtain the steel. In this case, the steel is very expensive, as is the labor to make a finished sword. It is a laborious and slow process that takes a large amount of resources in both time and material. Even so, the Japanese managed to make many tens of thousands of swords every year. They were dealing with "economy of scale" back in those days as they had an organized nationwide industry in place, but now there are so few smiths left using traditonal methods that the cost of the swords now are insanely higher than they would have been back in medieval times. Using modern methods we can make 10XX steels literally by the metric ton per hour and it will be pure and consistent in it's composition. Therefore, on a modern reproduction sword, the cost of the metal is next to nothing. Add in that the blade blank was probably cut on a CNC machine and finished using mechanized power equipment, the labor cost is much lower as well (to a point). Therefore the cost of a modern sword is in how much post-production fit and finish labor will be put into the blade rather than the cost of materials. Please follow the links and do the reading. |
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Jun 4, 2021 14:40:19 GMT
For more information to consider, the best tahamagane steel, grade 1A, was (circa 2014) 8249.64 yen per kilogram which is 75.41 USD per kilogram. It is similar in price to CPM3V steel. I had my CPM3V katana made in 2012 for 3.2K. I believe it cost much much more to have it sent out for heat treating than the steel itself. And it was one of the most expensive steel at the time.
Source:
|
|
|
|
Post by Drunk Merchant on Jun 12, 2021 19:49:44 GMT
No offense but I’m not at all impressed by commercial sites when there is nothing to compel them to be accurate. Peer reviewed journals, by world leading metallurgists though? That is another story my friend. I don’t know enough about sand to make claims but there are a ton of peer reviewed studies on tamahagane out there: They’ve used XRF and other X-ray technologies to look at its quality and found koto swords had remarkably high purity and freedom from edge inclusions. The former impresses me and the later is a big deal cause if you read about say, Oni or Mantis users complaints, their swords are full of inclusions that gum them up. You can read the study without the paywall here. Also it’s true that the ability to make large quantities of steel improved in the shinto period but Nagayama, a head of the NBTHK and world leading appraiser, looked through studies showing nanban testu had sulfur and phosphorus contamination making it brittle/unsuitable for blades. While I wholeheartedly agree that industrial steel can work just as good (if a skilled smith uses it), the evidence says those old blades, even by modern standards are good in purity and freedom from inclusions. Even the few “contaminants” you see in koto swords are odd things like Si, known to help with elasticity. There lies the devil plaguing so many production swords. Because water quenching has a high failure rate and steep learning curve, most production swords use oil quenching; even done right oil doesn’t harden as much, so edge rolling now becomes a possibility. Say you had a water quenched Howard Clark with utsuri to make it springy, instead of rolling when it takes too much, you just get tiny localized nicks. It’s made worse by the fact that many production fail oil quenching with L6, so as Jensen notes you get a very edgeroll prone blade one that is famous for breaking from tatami and the like, and that CAS warns can’t handle gallon jugs. In fact, if we go by what Jensen says, even the production L6 that don’t have failed oil quenching still have very wear and rolling prone edges. I would argue because the importance of heat treatment, a lot of gimmick metals like L6 are unsuited for production. It worked for Clark, (L6 and regular steel) because he was a world class expert at heat treatment and geometry. Not because he used the exact same grade of steel legendary edgerollers do. Don’t get me wrong, production swords like Bugei, and Kurin’s that avoid gimmic metals and instead focus on heat treatment and geometry, the basics, are very good. And also, industrial steel means expert smiths like Clark, and the makers of Japan’s Mantetsu were able to use easy to get good steel, along with traditional heat treatment and geometry, to make superb blades in higher numbers than you would if you waited for scarce tamahagane. My hope is as time goes by, more and more Shinken will go by those standards. I want smiths to master the fundamentals and go easy on the gimmicks. |
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 12, 2021 23:32:07 GMT
.... I want smiths to master the fundamentals and go easy on the gimmicks. Well, brother, there is no daylight between us on this topic. 100% agree with you on that. I've long said that getting the metal part of the sword right is the first and foremost important thing when it comes to making a sword. Everything else is cosmetic. Hitachi metals not being a reputable source? You know that if they published something incorrect all the PhD's in the metal industries world wide would call them out on it, right? Not to mention the PhD's that work for them directly? Granted, the article is from their public relations branch and not their engineering and research division, but I can make a safe guess as to where the PR people got the information from. As far as the rest is concerned, not every source has to be a peer reviewed journal. Sometimes a source can be from field research, or collections that cite other sources such as peer reviewed journals, industry publications (like from Hitachi metals), text books, photographs, and even personal interviews of subject matter experts or eye-witnesses. The key being that the information presented needs to have some foundations in something other than opinion that can be found and examined by anybody who cares to look at it. Regardless, the sources you shared are very interesting and I look forward to finding the time to read through them. Please continue to share them, I am trying to build something of a library. It's not always easy as many sources are not available to the public or only searchable on foreign language data bases. |
|
|
|
Post by Drunk Merchant on Jun 12, 2021 23:41:54 GMT
You know, you’re right. I jumped the gun in bad mouthing all those industrial sites. Good information, I need to keep an open mind.
That said, my main point was, I’ve heard the “tamahagane is crap” meme be repeated a lot, but no matter how hard I’ve searched, I’ve found no credible sources, like those sites or studies to back it. I have seen many studies like Yaso using x ray tech to find it’s (at least in the form of swords) quite good though. You have no disagreement from me about it’s inefficiency in steel production, and I know you weren’t saying it, but just gotta note for the curious people out there that the studies out there don’t support the “crap tamahagane” meme.
That said, yeah, ton of really good industrial steel swords ranging from Mantetsus to Clarks out there, no denying that. I think their smiths command over heat treatment and geometry is the main reason those preform so well, even in this day and age fundamentals are still king.
|
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 13, 2021 0:23:48 GMT
I'm with you brother. You have to also remember your audience. I have a background in industrial engineering and manufacturing and I'm working on my EdD now. I can research, read and understand your sources, but how many other random people on this forum could understand it? The sources I quoted were intended to "educate" by presenting the information in a simplified and easy to read format. It's quite a different animal than research intended to expand the knowledge base.
Industries have internal publications in the form of newsletters, technical books and various conventions in which experts give seminars. All of those things are considered "primary sources" because they fall under the umbrella of "industry best practices". That is a collective body of knowledge that often lacks published resources, but is most definitely peer reviewed as it is verified every day in common practice.
Yes, there is a ton of urban legend surrounding japanese swords. Most of it is semprini. Tamagahane is good steel. It's not the best thing ever in the history of ever, but it's also far from being trash. I marvel not at the steel, but in the sheer amount of ingenuity and work that it took to make it. I just wish more people would bother to at least try to seek out some kind of sources to support their beliefs, but maybe that is asking for too much.
It is true, however, that a samurai sword can indeed cut through a hot gun barrel. Facts. Saw it on TV so it must be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Jun 13, 2021 21:25:17 GMT
I used to have a metallurgical science paper on tamahagane. I cannot seem to find it now. According to the chemical analysis, it has very very very low impurities. Only particle metallurgy has lower impurities.
So the “tamahagane is bad steel” is a load of crap by people who talk out of their asses.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 13, 2021 21:47:39 GMT
I think it comes from a poor understanding of the amount of processing required to turn the raw sand into sword steel.
Most sources go into great detail over the agonizing process of continually folding the steel over, and over, and over, to homogenize and "remove impurities" etc. Many will simply hang onto that and forget that, by the time the steel is a sword, it's not that different to any modern steel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Jun 13, 2021 22:04:47 GMT
I think it comes from a poor understanding of the amount of processing required to turn the raw sand into sword steel. Most sources go into great detail over the agonizing process of continually folding the steel over, and over, and over, to homogenize and "remove impurities" etc. Many will simply hang onto that and forget that, by the time the steel is a sword, it's not that different to any modern steel. Modern steel go through the same exact process, except in much larger scale. In modern steel, they have to roll the steel several times because the initial casted steel doesn’t have carbon and other added alloyed elements distribute equally. And even after the rolling, it still doesn’t distribute evenly. 1095 steel may have 0.9 percent carbon and one end and 1.0 percent at the other end. Only powdered steel is truly evenly distributed. |
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 13, 2021 22:37:02 GMT
It helps tremendously that modern steel starts from a much better iron ore. And also our production methods are super precise and repeatable because we can accurately measure both the temperature and time of each step of the process. We are also able to manipulate the iron to create hundreds, if not thousands, of alloys that meet very specialized needs and applications. And not even talking about our ability to accurately test the steel and other QC activities that ensures an end product of known specifications.
It's been debated before, so I won't go into the nuances here, but the bottom line is that I truly believe that if you could magically bring a medieval Japanese smith into modern times, they would be astonished at the ease of which we make steel that is so good and so consistent and in such quantities. I believe they would throw away their hand-fired forges and order a bulk of steel blanks from Hitachi and make their swords from that. After all, they were in it to make money also...
|
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jun 13, 2021 23:23:25 GMT
I think it comes from a poor understanding of the amount of processing required to turn the raw sand into sword steel. Most sources go into great detail over the agonizing process of continually folding the steel over, and over, and over, to homogenize and "remove impurities" etc. Many will simply hang onto that and forget that, by the time the steel is a sword, it's not that different to any modern steel. Modern steel go through the same exact process, except in much larger scale. In modern steel, they have to roll the steel several times because the initial casted steel doesn’t have carbon and other added alloyed elements distribute equally. And even after the rolling, it still doesn’t distribute evenly. 1095 steel may have 0.9 percent carbon and one end and 1.0 percent at the other end. Only powdered steel is truly evenly distributed. While this is certainly true, my comment was to the layman viewpoint of turning sand into a sword versus starting with an already-refined/processed piece of steel. The average person doesn't think about what goes into modern steel production, they just know they can buy a piece of 1095 and make a sword out of it, but if they wanted to use "tamahagane" then oh boy, they'd have to first go get some sand... |
|
|
|
Post by Drunk Merchant on Jun 14, 2021 0:13:42 GMT
It helps tremendously that modern steel starts from a much better iron ore. And also our production methods are super precise and repeatable because we can accurately measure both the temperature and time of each step of the process. We are also able to manipulate the iron to create hundreds, if not thousands, of alloys that meet very specialized needs and applications. And not even talking about our ability to accurately test the steel and other QC activities that ensures an end product of known specifications. It's been debated before, so I won't go into the nuances here, but the bottom line is that I truly believe that if you could magically bring a medieval Japanese smith into modern times, they would be astonished at the ease of which we make steel that is so good and so consistent and in such quantities. I believe they would throw away their hand-fired forges and order a bulk of steel blanks from Hitachi and make their swords from that. After all, they were in it to make money also... You’re possibly right, it’s classically trained smiths that made Mantetsu for the Second World War and those handled excellently and were quicker to make than tamahagane, even if star stamped tamahagane swords did just as well in normal temperature torture testing. That said, I recon they’d start ripping their hair out when they see how atrocious the heat treatment and geometry is in production swords. Edge rolling is not something that should happen to a properly hardened sword. And even the Japanese oil tempered showato, while easier to make, couldn’t preform at the level of water quenched Mantetsu etc. It’s a regression of sorts that most production have to rely on a less hardening edge roll prone quench. Especially when those vaunted specialized alloys are so prone to failed oil hardening and ergo losing the entire monouchi edge from soft objects. It might technically be better, but when at best the hardening results in an edge Jensen says wears and rolls away far faster than conventional steel and at worst results in a high proportion of badly hardened swords that are effectively destroyed by a single tatami or softwood hit. The reason I bring this up is the torture tests star stamped gendai got wasn’t a new phenomenon: Markus Sesko, a Met museum researcher and leading appraiser went though old smith, government, and other records concerning sword testing, you can read the full book here, but I will summarize by posting excerpts noting it was dead common for Edo period smiths to torture test their swords on hard objects ranging from antlers, wood, and armor/metal. So they could prove to clients, or the domain employing them that their swords could take a beating. By those archaic standards, those L6 production swords, supposedly the flagship for space age metallurgy, preform disastrously bad, suffering irreparable damage from tatami or soft wood. That makes me think a smith, if he got that as his exposure of what specialized alloys would do would shake his head and keep using regular steel. And, I know it’s not fair to use production L6 as the benchmark for what it can do but most L6 out there is production, and I wager the reason it works for Clark is because his talent at heat treatment. I’m no brighter than the average person here so I assume near all. Yes and to be honest what impressed me most is their hardness control. Have no idea how they figured this with archaic technology it still is top notch. Case in point soshu swords, those nie ribbons in their hamon mean they’ve got quite hard edges and those are coupled with ashi partitions, and utsuri (mild steel that doesn’t fully harden) right next to it to make it springy. Put it together and you get something that can be smashed against hard objects and if it takes too much, you just get small polishable chips. Honestly, a lot more useful than oil, where if it’s like the Oni, you role and lose most of your cutting edge. Sure no chips but a single hard object and your cutting edge is gone. |
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 14, 2021 0:19:29 GMT
Oh dear, yes. A medieval smith would literally grab a stick and start beating a sloppy modern sword maker. Or worse, grab a half-semprinied sword that the lazy smith made and cut off his head with it.
There's certainly a lot to be said about taking pride in your work. It is a critical factor in the outcome of the final product. Believe me, I know, I was a manufacturing engineer and my doctorate is going to be in just this subject (oversimplified, of course- there's more to it than that).
We've actually had many discussions on this forum about "super steels" like T10 and L6 or whatever. I think the consensus is that most of it is for marketing purposes and as you pointed out, they aren't all that good of a choice for making a sword with. I personally think 1055 to 1095 is all you need, although I have a personal preference for 9260. Opinions may vary, and sometimes they do quite emotionally....
|
|
|
|
Post by Drunk Merchant on Jun 14, 2021 0:23:58 GMT
That is cool, really cool. It must be interesting when your PhD matches your hobby. I’m supposed to be a medical microbiologist but closest I ever get to this is noting nihonto look weirdly like tissue in histology slides, what with the hada and structure and all.
The good news about sloppyness is that there are always Clarks out there. And hopefully the sloppy company can be shamed into cleaning up.
|
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jun 14, 2021 0:40:49 GMT
I could go into lengthy and excruciating detail about the differences between the modern sword industry and the medieval sword industry. But to summarize: nobody cares about swords today while back then it was a life or death matter. Most modern forges are in China, and I could again go into lengthy detail about work ethics and Quality Management philosophies in the Far East. Suffice it to say, their standards of acceptance are, shall we say "different" than we have in the West. QC remains spotty at best simply because the industry, and therefore the customers, no longer need the product in the same way as it used to be.
There is little incentive for them to make a better product- for every one hobbyist customer that complains about quality, there are 200 mall ninja wannabee customers that have no idea what a good or bad sword is. One complaint out of 200 is astonishingly good for Chinese forges. I suspect they are running more like one out of ten.
And for the doctorate it's just a logical next step in my personal and professional development. I don't see it as a crown jewel or anything. I've simply reached that point where it makes sense to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by JH Lee on Jun 14, 2021 1:18:24 GMT
I could go into lengthy and excruciating detail about the differences between the modern sword industry and the medieval sword industry. But to summarize: nobody cares about swords today while back then it was a life or death matter. Most modern forges are in China, and I could again go into lengthy detail about work ethics and Quality Management philosophies in the Far East. Suffice it to say, their standards of acceptance are, shall we say "different" than we have in the West. QC remains spotty at best simply because the industry, and therefore the customers, no longer need the product in the same way as it used to be. There is little incentive for them to make a better product- for every one hobbyist customer that complains about quality, there are 200 mall ninja wannabee customers that have no idea what a good or bad sword is. One complaint out of 200 is astonishingly good for Chinese forges. I suspect they are running more like one out of ten. And for the doctorate it's just a logical next step in my personal and professional development. I don't see it as a crown jewel or anything. I've simply reached that point where it makes sense to do it. All valid points. But I don't think it's fair to generalize about QC in "Far East" (which includes S. Korea and Japan) just because many Chinese forges produce substandard products. |
|
|
|
Post by Drunk Merchant on Jun 14, 2021 2:49:42 GMT
True but I am still dismayed at how both CAS and the industry pointman came running into threads like the one about the Oni who broke from tatami, insisting that it was perfectly normal for all swords to break from gallon jugs, and tatami will wreck any sword unless you’re a super special expert. They’re essentially telling people that a sword dismal by all old working sword standards is in fact how a sword should be (in another thread they were insisting those train wrecks were as good as Howard Clarks). If they get away with it, those misshapen, defective swords could become the only benchmark for a sword most people will know. Of course that’s not to say there aren’t talented custom smiths that excel at the fundamentals like Ron Chen but for every sword they make a hundred Oni equivalents are made by big companies. Mantetsu and steel mill gendai were made in large numbers, and they’re not expensive, its strange there’s no modern equivalent. |
|
