Secrets of the Samurai Sword, PBS *LINK*

You beat me to it!

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>I was going to post about the show. It is a totaly cool show! If you all missed it please try to catch it.

Very insteresting how they tested the sharpness & strength of them.

Thanks

Dean Lapinel

>I would have completely missed that. That is one interesting subject.

Also OT: Watch Fox news- Hannity and Colmes tonight. They are showing an underground video of Cubas health care facilities at 9:30 tonight.

Despite tweaked statistics, Cuba ranks quite low as regards to health care.

Re: Secrets of the Samurai Sword, PBS *LINK*

Chris Scholz

>Jim,

exactly my thinking, too. So I put on my engineering hat and went to the drawing board (computer) to design a new blade, different design overall similar idea, had a few prototypes made, fine-tuned the process/materials, various blind tests, more fine-tuning etc.

Looking back, standards plane blades appear to be rather crude implements.

Chris

---

[...]

I kept thinking chisels and knives and plane irons while I watched this......well worth the watch for the lessons on making steel and also the incredible Japanese history of the Samurai and the sword.


Review of folded, laminated steel plane blades

Re: Secrets of the Samurai Sword, PBS

Brent in Montreal

>I saw an ad for that last week, but was a bit under the weather and thought it was on Thursday night. I guess I'll have to look for the rerun.

Re: Secrets of the Samurai Sword, PBS

Dean Lapinel

>In Boise Idaho we are getting reruns on this Saturday. I suspect that will be national.

getting to the same end with modern steel

Bill Tindall, E.TN

>If you desire a steel for chisels that is tough as well as hard then make some chisels from CPM 3V steel. The performance of this steel in chisels, where this toughness/hardness issue is most important, beats anything we have tried by a large measure. I never reported the results of a comparison with a Swan chisel I bought. I had already compared CPM 3V to Sorby and Two Cherries. In use on the bench I did not see a significant difference between the Swan and the Two Cherries, both of which fell short of the 3V. I realized in writing this that I almost never need to sharpen the 3V chisels. They sit on the bench and remove wood as needed to fit things, sometimes pareing and other times being pounded upon.

I have had a knife maker, not smitten by things oriental, make a convincing case that what was good for a sword steel is not best for a knife, or probably a chisel. And I have had people tell me about feats done with Japanese swords that I don't think would stand up to scrunity by Mythbusters. For example, cutting a gun barrel through. Which reminded me of a story my Sargent told a long time ago of a duel in the Pacific islands between a motivated sword bearer and a BAR. Lead beat steel.

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Joel

>What would happen in a sword fight if two swords crossed each other. Wouldn't the blades chip badly and get seriously damaged? Strikes me the main advantage of these swords is against opponents who don't have swords.

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Paul Kierstead

>In Japanese sword fighting forms it is fairly unusual to attempt to stop another sword dead by crossing swords; you'll only see that sort of thing in demo's I think. I could be proven wrong, but that is my experience. Usually a deflection of some sort is used, allowing the defender to counter attack (the deflection puts the attacker in a disadvantageous position). Japanese sword fighting doesn't have a lot of too and fro; it is expected to be over within a single stroke or two. It isn't fencing.

All weapons are best used on lesser armed people; a basic principle of warfare is to try be better armed then your opponent.

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

joel -( tools for working wood)

>You would think in actual warfare anything goes and a sword hitting a metal ornament on a suit of armor would suffer similar damage.

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Paul Kierstead

>You would think in actual warfare anything goes ...

Just to clarify; I was trying to say that they avoid crossing swords and focus on deflection as a matter of training, not rules. There is no need to put sword directly on sword and make it a battle of strength. Just about any sword would be badly damaged by that. It doesn't take much deflection to considerably lessen the strength of the blow, including that to the sword.

The swords are not has hard as the program made them out to be; they don't seem to chip easily (I know a couple of people who own traditionally ones made and have used them to cut up various bits).

Of course, it is not like real warriors went off having sword fights with 5 guys in a given battle. That is the stuff of movies.

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Have you compared tools made with CPM 3V to any well made Japanese tools?

Pam

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Warren in Lancaster, PA

>I think a comparison of these two steels would be very much biased by the habits and skills of the tester. Pam, I think if you tested them with your sharpening methods and your techniques, the Japanese tools would come out ahead. Perhaps if Bill tested them with his sharpening methods and the way he uses a chisel, the 3V would be the best. For people getting excellent results with what they are using, there is no incentive to change.

no, can't afford them

Bill Tindall, E.TN

>

Re: no, can't afford them

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>How many of what type do you need to do some testing?

Pam

Re: getting to the same end with modern steel

Chris Scholz

>Bill,

of course laminated and folded blades, if done right, have better dynamic properties than your solid steel blade and are a lot easier to sharpen with well established methods.

But it is absolutely true that genuine swords steel makes lousy woodworking tools; been there, done that, it does not work; the cutting edge of event the hardest sword is much softer than what you need for a woodworking tool. As far as I know not a single Japanese toolsmith is able to make any decent sword (although some blades are loosely associated with 'Samurai' or 'sword', pure marketing in my opinion).

A less know fact is that swordmaking came to Japan via Korea from Ancient China. Japanese sword smiths used Ancient Chinese techniques of swordmaking and sword designs (wikipedia: jian or wikipedia: dao sword). What specific technique which cultural sphere of influence invented seems to be hotly debated amongst scholars and is at times heavily loaded with cultural bias and political overtones.

Hitachi metals has an article on the history of steel production from the Japanese perspective. Scott Rodell is arguably the most prominent contemporary expert on ancient Chinese swords in the Anglo-American sphere of influence. Obviously the Japanese marketing engine is by far more developed than the Chinese marketing engine.

Chris

---

[...]

I have had a knife maker, not smitten by things oriental, make a convincing case that what was good for a sword steel is not best for a knife, or probably a chisel. And I have had people tell me about feats done with Japanese swords that I don't think would stand up to scrunity by Mythbusters. For example, cutting a gun barrel through.

[...]

---

judging excellent results

Bill Tindall, E.TN

>I used to get "excellent results" with steel router bits and saw blades, carbon steel kitchen cutlery, a PC XT and my VW bug. When carbide got developed I got vastly more excellent results with these improved products and ditto for the rest of the list, as almost every aspect of technology improved, including steel.

People "satisfied" with their results have no motivation to change, while others are never satisfied and continue to seek improvement. Excellent should only be judged relative to where the state of the art is.

Re: judging excellent results

Chris Scholz

>Bill,

I think you have a good point for planes that are used for rough stock removal, beater chisels and such (that is the use case that most tests favor).

For fine finishing planes, a well designed laminated blade on folded steel will beat your solid steel blade any time.

Chris

Re: judging excellent results

Joel

>" think you have a good point for planes that are used for rough stock removal, beater chisels and such (that is the use case that most tests favor).

For fine finishing planes, a well designed laminated blade on folded steel will beat your solid steel blade any time."

I don't think I have ever read a blade review in the past 20 years where the reviewer was interested in anything other than fine finishing shavings.

To try to compare the tools of two totally different cultures is an apple and oranges comparison that means nothing. In the west laminated blades gave way to blades of solid cast steel. The specific cast steels that were used for woodworking tools were superb. Low demand precluded manufacture of certain classic alloys but as Bill has certainly proved some modern alloys can give superb results (with other tradeoffs in sharpening etc which are decided the point of this discussion).

In Asia, toolmakers (probably without the availability of capital that allows construction of large mills with new technology) perfected blister steel which at it's best is also superb but being labor intensive is far more expensive and specialized. It was the Japanese in the last century who imported certain tool steels from Sweden and England, not the other way around.

When you get to the very high end of "performance" (whatever that means I guess) you find that the advantage is less and less the actual alloy but the dimensions of the blades, the way they are mounted and in the case of a plane bedded, and of course in the hand of the user.

How we got from there to here...history

Bill Tindall, E.TN

>In the beginning I wanted to make a set of dovetailing and mortise chisels. These would be pounded upon to remove wood chips. They would be of a blade and handle design that I thought to be superior for these applications and I have been pleased with the results. The motivation to make vs buy was driven by economics as well as unavailability of the designs I preferred. I approached this problem as I approach all technical problems. I asked experts what steel would be best for the application. I have faith that steel is quantifiable technology, at least for this application. Maximum toughness with high hardness were the properties to be optimized and in most steels these properties go in opposite directions. There was a consensus that CPM 3V would be the best steel for this application because of its superior toughness even at high hardness. While making chisels anyway, it was but a small increment in cost and effort to also make some lathe tools and plane irons.

This steel indeed produced a superior chisel edge for the application intended and it has done well for paring too. Although my dovetail design is poor for a paring, the chisels sit on the bench and get used for this task anyway. If I was not tired of working metal I would make some paring chisels from this steel but right now I am more interested in making furniture.

Others picked up on the excellent wear resistance of this steel and advocated its use in plane irons. It does do well in this application as evidenced by the quantitative wear data of Elliot. But, I would not claim that this is the best steel for this application because this application was not the motivation of the original quest. The steel does make a superior scraper because it holds a tenacious burr.

My only motivation in advocating this steel is to provide information to those that might want to make a chisel that one can make chisels as good in practical performance as any that can be bought, for a few dollars per chisel plus some time. As should be apparent by now I make stuff on a regular basis. As little maintenance as these chisels require it is hard to imagine that anyone has a greatly superior steel for this application. In any case, I have no motivation to do additional testing beyond the comparisons with Two Cherries, Sorby, M2 that I have already done.

All this needs to be put in the context of my pragmatic woodworking. I used hand tools to presicely remove wood to get something made. The plane and chisel fit between machines and sanding in my spectrum of wood removal. I am not interested in reproducing the digs and tear out I typically see in antiques made from North American hardwoods. I find that sanding provides me a more reliable surface for finishing than planing. Hence, I have no useful experience in "fine planing", to coin a term, or thin shaving competitions. But I can likely chisel a hinge mortise or fit a drawer as well as any.

We need an Article, I think

Wiley Horne -- So. Calif.

>Hi All,

I'm very attuned to Chris Scholz' and a few others' sensibility about forged Japanese steel. There's a lot of it in my shop--saws, chisels, and plane blades. And there'll be more, the Lord willing. But there is room enough in the world for both Chris and Bill Tindall.

One of the finest documented accounts of tool-making that we have on WoodCentral is Bill Tindall's expositions on his use of the particle steel CPM 3V for chisel making. Which he did at home, hiring out the heat treating. Bill and Phil Smith not only made the chisels, but worked together and developed a sharpening method for this steel which is not onerous--it uses an ordinary grinding wheel and one or two grits of diamond paste for honing (Bill prefers a single grit). All of this is documented in posts--the metal buying, the metal cutting and initial beveling, the heat treating (who to go to, what to spec), the final metal preparation and honing, the sharpening procedures--the whole thing.

Based on Bill and Phil Smith's initial work with CPM 3V, Steve Elliott (and to a far lesser extent, myself) involved ourselves with a plane-blade-making project, using CPM 3V. The batch of 'Elliott' marked blades that emerged from that exercise are exceptional blades for durability, edge-taking, and edge-holding, and I hope that Steve will continue with his blade-making and produce another batch. Steve and I use the blades in infill planes.

Particle 3V blades may not be most peoples' cup of tea--ever. You have to go to diamond sharpening--that's the gateway issue. Right now, I'm sharpening Japanese blades and C&W O1 blades with natural stones, and CPM 3V blades (on infills and LN5.5) with diamond. Most people are going to stick with water stones, oil stones, or ceramic stones, and high carbon steel or A2. They work just fine.

But Bill has opened the door to something new in this steel, for those who might be interested. And I might add, he has absorbed plenty of verbal slings and arrows for being innovative--seems to offend some folks. Doesn't seem to bother Bill, he's a tough nut, plus he's been successful.

Anyway, Dan Donaldson (if you're game), I will volunteer to pull together Bill's historic posts and get them in one place so we have a consolidated article to serve as a template for anyone interested in following Bill's path. Will take me a coupla three weeks to get it done, and provide the transitions.

Wiley

Re: We need an Article, I think

Bob Strawn

>Thanks Wiley, I am very interested. Making tools has become a passion of mine.

Bob

Facts about swords

Dean Lapinel

>These and all swords will nick easily if used improperly. The defensive posture of the sword was broadside, conversely the attacker, on seeing this would try to have his edge angle in so as not to damage the edge. Most of the attacks were on the inner parts of the arms and legs to strike vessels and the large muscle groups and tendons to incapacitate the opponent.

Re: We need an Article, I think

Dan Donaldson

>Talk to Rod and Garrett also. They do the real work, I am just the clerk in the middle ;-)

Thanks, Dan. I wrote to Garrett.

Wiley Horne -- So. Calif.

>