JS Performance Test Knife

#21 · August 7, 2023, 1:40 pm

Well, I've had an absolute blast testing these knives and the things I've learned so far are indescribable. But....... its time!

After testing knife #5, I decided that I'll be forging two more Journeyman performance knives (I hope). These next two will be forged on the same day, both out of steel that has been previously used for successful test knives. They'll both go through the HT process together. They will be finished from there separately.

If you've been following this thread, you'll know this will be knives #6 and #7. If #6 performs to the standard that it's older siblings have, knife #7 will be making a trip to Montana for the final exam with Mr. Caffrey.

I realize that I'm adding pressure and possible embarrassment to myself if I should fail by talking about dates publicly, but back in April I made the commitment and penciled in a date to officially test my ABS performance knife on Sept. 12th.

This is a goal I set years ago and it's about showtime. It means a lot to me, and I haven't taken the 7 year journey lightly. I've done a lot of "homework" and feel it's time to shut up and put my money on the table.

Am I nervous? Yes, extremely.

Am I confident? Yes, but please see above lol.

I'll share some final thoughts before I pack up and head north. Until then, don't be offended if I'm antisocial. I'll answer any questions generated on this forum, but will be focused on the task at hand.

Thanks for following along to this point.

#22 · September 15, 2023, 11:42 am

Quote from Matt Kirby on September 15, 2023, 11:42 am
Well, I said that #7 was going to made for the official performance test. I was wrong.

I decided to try a few things on #6 and #7 during the forging process that I thought would be better, but it ended up not working like I'd hoped. I ended up having to do a few things to them outside of what I knew was "proven" through prior testing, so I elected to set them aside after the tempering process and save them for another day.

#8 and #9 were born and moved throughout the process as identical twins (as closely as my skillset allowed).

The morning that I left for Montana, I selected #9 as the knife I would present for my official performance test. I set it aside.

#8 was run through all of the tests and performed as I had hoped. It was bent to a 90 four times. I stopped there and did not continue until it broke.

#9 was tested on the rope and 2x4's in my home shop. The rope was uneventful, and the edge help up perfectly when chopping through wood two times that was full of knots and shaved hair easily. It was not bent for obvious reasons.

I touched up the scratches on the blade with 500 grit from the chopping, and lightly touched up the edge a bit to make sure it was ready for showtime at Ed's shop.

The official performance test was conducted by Ed Caffrey at his shop in Montana. The knife performed flawlessly.

I thoroughly enjoyed this experimentation portion of the journey and would recommend it to anyone wanting to become a better bladesmith. I learned many things that would've been impossible to understand without this experience.

Personally, if I were ever asked to build another performance test out of high carbon steel I would select 80CRV2 without giving it a second thought. I would follow the same process from start to finish including forging, HT, geometry (distal taper, convexing/edge thickness, etc.) that I landed as a result of my testing throughout the process. There are very likely many other folks seeing great results by doing something entirely different than what I landed on for my knife. This is just what worked for me and how I was able to produce consistent results. I'll start putting together a tutorial/informational on the details and process I landed on as Ed suggested in a different thread.

Here is a pic of some of the test knives I learned from during this journey:

Well, I said that #7 was going to made for the official performance test. I was wrong.

I decided to try a few things on #6 and #7 during the forging process that I thought would be better, but it ended up not working like I'd hoped. I ended up having to do a few things to them outside of what I knew was "proven" through prior testing, so I elected to set them aside after the tempering process and save them for another day.

#8 and #9 were born and moved throughout the process as identical twins (as closely as my skillset allowed).

The morning that I left for Montana, I selected #9 as the knife I would present for my official performance test. I set it aside.

#8 was run through all of the tests and performed as I had hoped. It was bent to a 90 four times. I stopped there and did not continue until it broke.

#9 was tested on the rope and 2x4's in my home shop. The rope was uneventful, and the edge help up perfectly when chopping through wood two times that was full of knots and shaved hair easily. It was not bent for obvious reasons.

I touched up the scratches on the blade with 500 grit from the chopping, and lightly touched up the edge a bit to make sure it was ready for showtime at Ed's shop.

The official performance test was conducted by Ed Caffrey at his shop in Montana. The knife performed flawlessly.

I thoroughly enjoyed this experimentation portion of the journey and would recommend it to anyone wanting to become a better bladesmith. I learned many things that would've been impossible to understand without this experience.

Personally, if I were ever asked to build another performance test out of high carbon steel I would select 80CRV2 without giving it a second thought. I would follow the same process from start to finish including forging, HT, geometry (distal taper, convexing/edge thickness, etc.) that I landed as a result of my testing throughout the process. There are very likely many other folks seeing great results by doing something entirely different than what I landed on for my knife. This is just what worked for me and how I was able to produce consistent results. I'll start putting together a tutorial/informational on the details and process I landed on as Ed suggested in a different thread.

Here is a pic of some of the test knives I learned from during this journey:

Uploaded files:

You need to login to have access to uploads.

#23 · September 15, 2023, 11:47 am

A quick picture of #8 and #9 before testing and final finish. The one on the right is the one I eventually selected for the official test.

Uploaded files:

You need to login to have access to uploads.

#24 · September 15, 2023, 11:54 am

This is #9 prior to being called upon to perform the official test.

Uploaded files:

You need to login to have access to uploads.

#25 · September 15, 2023, 12:14 pm

Here is the final picture of my JS performance test knife journey.

Uploaded files:

You need to login to have access to uploads.

#26 · September 15, 2023, 12:23 pm

I'd love to see questions/comments/discussion if anyone is interested and will keep an eye on this thread if there are any.

Until then, it's time for step #2. I'll start deciding/focusing on making the very best knives I can for presentation at the Bladeshow in Atlanta!

#27 · September 15, 2023, 1:32 pm

Congrats, nice job Matt.

I saw Ed's comment on ABS forum, and found my way here.

Matt Kirby has reacted to this post.

#28 · September 15, 2023, 11:13 pm

Thanks Jason!

Successful sale on the forum? Or want to donate to the KMT Forum? Click the donate button and thanks for your support!