Shaving with a camping knife

[nashdude]

You know, I've seen some fancy stuff done with knives. I've even seen knives sharpened to shaving sharp. But this really takes the cake for me...

YouTube - Shaving with a camping knife!

[tech413]

I saw that a few days ago, thats impressive!

[MRobb]

Wow! That's really something! I'd love to get a knife that sharp.

[tech413]

I guess it takes lots of practice!

[easilyconfused]

I've seen that lots when I work at a slaughter plant. If you can't shave with a knife you're going to get sore wrists by the end of a shift. Also lets you get ready for going out after the evening shift. Just takes time, practice and paying attention to what the knife edge geometry should be.

[Rich Hale]

I believe anyone that makes edged steel should learn to sharpen for the intended usage.
When you begin to make blades for any use you should test them in the manner they will be used for. This fella uses what he calls a neck knife and the edge he attained is for me, right for the blade. It is finely sharpened and not likely to be used to split a hide or nick bone. It would be a great everyday carry knife. The steel selection was correct and the most important part the heat treat appears to be spot on. If you want to craft a blade like this put the time into picking the correct steel, and try several different heat treat programs and then sharpen and test. Be sure to keep a log of what you did to each piece and record your results. Only if you keep track of what you did can you recreate what you have found that works or did not work. And remember to start over each time you change to a different steel composition. If you want a starting place with a fairly easy steel to heat treat, I have made a camp knife that was used to shave facial hair many times and I used 1084 carbon steel. Heat treated by quenching in oil warmed to 120f and tempered at 400f for one hour in an oven. Careful sharpening followed by stropping with a razor strop finished the edge. Have fun

[Graham Fredeen]

Interesting you should bring this up as I just shaved last night with the new EDC I made for myself. The edge geometry on it is not as well suited for shaving since the bevel angles are not quite as acute as with some blades, but it still did a fairly decent job.

Getting a knife to shaving sharp is not as tricky or challenging as you might think. The main things that have to be taken into consideration are edge geometry, blade material and HT, then sharpening technique. The biggest of these is edge geometry. Most working knives, and most factory produced blades do not have edge geometry suited for shaving. They have less acute angles to create an edge with more meat to it to survive abuse. A thin edge more suited for shaving would be too fragile to withstand the abuses of a working knife. Like Rich mentioned, a blade should be sharpened for its intended usage. If you're in the jungle clearing paths you arent going to use a straight bladed razor, and if you are going to shave, your machette is probably not the ideal thing to use. Right tool for the right job.

If you have a knife with correct blade geometry and is suited for uses where a very sharp edge is required and its made from decent material with a good HT, then like I said its not horribly difficult to bring it to shaving sharpness. Its usually as simple as grinding the edge with a fine grit belt (I usually use a 600) until a wire edge forms. The wire edge indicates you have brought the steel down to as thin as it can maintain itself. Next you have to remove the wire edge/burr. I have a 2"x72" leather belt strop that goes on my grinder that pulls the wire edge right off and stropes to shaving sharp quite quickly. You can also use a buffing wheel with buffing compound to pull the wire edge off and polish the edge. Thats usually all it takes to get a shaving edge, maybe a very light touch up on a super fine stone, or even a butchers steel just to return some of the "roughness" to the edge. Thats the way I usually put the inital edge on my blades. It makes for a pretty sharp edge that holds up quite well, and is fairly easy to maintain/sharpen.

[steveh]

when i was a lot younger i was staying at ma and pa's.one night i was sharpening a Gerber lock blade i had and my youngest brother with his friends came in.one guy started razzing me about what i was doing.i warned him if he didn't stop i would shave his mustache off.to make a long story short he went a home little later with half a mustache.funny thing was when i had him in a head lock and said if he moved he'd get cut,the guy never twitched a muscle.that was over 30yrs now that i think about it.

[nashdude]

Seems that convex blades are much easier to get this sharp than beveled blades. Also, they seem to hold that edge better with constant use.

What say yall? Beveled or convex?

[ironrosefarms]

I think sharpening a knife well is far more about patience than most folks would like to admit.
First comes the patience (and willingness) to learn.
Second the patience to make mistakes in practice.
Third is the patience to to sit down long enough to actually perform the task correctly.

Working with scouts for as many years as I have, most of them that don't really learn how to sharpen a knife well are those who won't sit down long enough to perform the task... I keep my knives very sharp as a dull knife in my opinion is dangerous at best.

James

[Rob G]

i've seen 1-1/4" rope cut in one swing, 10 water bottles lined up cut in one sweep, ping pong balls floating on water stabbed and stick.........

cutting competitions

[Graham Fredeen]

Seems that convex blades are much easier to get this sharp than beveled blades. Also, they seem to hold that edge better with constant use.

What say yall? Beveled or convex?

Actually, flat ground and hollow ground blades have the ability to be sharper than a convex ground blade. With a flat ground blade you have the ability to pull the primary bevel all the way down to the edge and foregoe a secondary edge bevel, creating a super thin, super sharp edge, and even more so with a hollow ground blade. Perhaps it takes more patience and skill to work with flat ground and hollow ground blades so a convex grind might be "easier" to get sharp. And perhaps it is a bit easier to pull the convex bevel down to an edge without a secondary edge bevel. However due to the extra material and thickness present at the edge, a convex ground blade will not be able to attain the sharpness of a completly flat or hollow ground blade (but not to say that you can't get it shaving sharp and then some ) You are correct with your observation that convex edges do hold up a bit longer under use than flat edge bevels. This is because there is extra material present at the edge to help support it, and the overall shape of the edge and added thickness helps reduce stress risers and makes the edge less prone to rolling, folding , and chipping.

On most working knives I usually do a convex edge grind as a secondary bevel. I usually pull the edge down pretty thin or almost sharp before going into the secondary edge bevel to help make the blade sharper. For more speciality blades that require finer edges I might foregoe the secondary edge bevel and pull the primary bevels down to the edge.

[minaraimono]

I can tell you with some certainty that the knife in this video was not "flat" or "hollow ground". Murray is a friend of mine. He learned to make Knives in Kumamoto using the same tools and techniques that I am studying in Sakai. In my humble opinion basically none of the blade geometry described by TarAldarion above is relevant to the "cutting edge" of the knife. When shaving hairs we are talking about the last few micrometers of material! Talking about convex/concave/flat grind etc. without any consideration of the dimensions or proportions of the blade is meaningless anyway. The sharpness of this blade is mostly due to proper heat-treatment that results in a super fine grain structure that will take and hold a fine edge.

Sure good sharpening skills are required as well, and Murray is one of the best. But blade geometry (as long as we are in the range of reason) has much more effect on how a blade "slices" through something, and very little effect on how sharp the edge is.

[element]

i think there is something fake in that there video. Anyway if
cuts anything besides hair that knife will get dull a lot quicker
than the time it took to sharpen it.

[Graham Fredeen]

I can tell you with some certainty that the knife in this video was not "flat" or "hollow ground". Murray is a friend of mine. He learned to make Knives in Kumamoto using the same tools and techniques that I am studying in Sakai. In my humble opinion basically none of the blade geometry described by TarAldarion above is relevant to the "cutting edge" of the knife. When shaving hairs we are talking about the last few micrometers of material! Talking about convex/concave/flat grind etc. without any consideration of the dimensions or proportions of the blade is meaningless anyway. The sharpness of this blade is mostly due to proper heat-treatment that results in a super fine grain structure that will take and hold a fine edge.

Sure good sharpening skills are required as well, and Murray is one of the best. But blade geometry (as long as we are in the range of reason) has much more effect on how a blade "slices" through something, and very little effect on how sharp the edge is.

How can you say that blade geometry has little to do with the sharpness of a knife? Blade geometry is all about how a knife cuts, both how it moves through a medium as well as the sharpness of the edge. Blade geometry effects the thickness of material at an edge and dictates the angle that the edge is set at, as well as the structure present at the edge. A more acute angle for the edge means a sharper edge. This is edge geometry. Edge geometry is a part of the overall blade geometry and both are dependent on each other. Flat, hollow, and convex grinds all effect material thickness and angles both at the edge and over the entire blade. Flat and hollow grinds if applied to the same blade/same dimensions/proportions will result in a more acute edge than a convex grind based solely on their geometry, you can not argue against that, and that was my point above. The geometry of a blade with a flat or hollow grind allows for a more acute edge and therefore can attain a higher level of sharpness.

Proper heat treatment is a requirement for attaining (and especially retaining) a very fine edge, however the actual sharpness of the edge is all dependent on the geometry of the edge itself which is also dictated by the overall blade geometry (which includes dimensions/proportions). A good HT on a blade and improper blade and edge geometry will not result in a super fine, razor edge, that is not outside of reason, that is common sense. Likewise I do not argue that only edge geometry matters. Correct edge geometry on improperly heat treated steel may allow for a very sharp edge initially but it will not last very long, and physically you will not be able to bring the edge down nearly as fine due to lack of rigidity within grain structure. This I agree with completly. But the actual edge sharpness is still dependent on its geometry and how that realates to the rest of the blade. Thats pretty much what sharpening is all about, adjusting the geometry of the edge and how it relates to the geoemtry of the rest of the blade.

Edit: I went and watched his other sharpening video on youtube, and the neck knife he uses is a "flat" ground blade, you can tell its flat by looking. He might not have "ground" it with a grinder, but its beveling is flat and fits the defination, and as he sharpens he lays the entire primary bevel on the stone and brings it down to an edge (no secondary edge bevel), then lifts the angle slightly for stroping purposes. This allows for the super acute edge he attained, as well as the overall thin crossectional area of the blade. His sharpening techniques and blade type all rely on blade geometry for their sharpness (not excluding good steel & HT), which only helps to illustrate my point. Edited January 8, 2009 by TarAlderion

[ironrosefarms]

My connection just came up good enough I actually watched the video, I've seen guys shave with their pocket knives. One of these guys is the man who taught me to sharpen a knife. I don't shave my face, but as I sharpen a knife, I do test it on my arm hairs. (I don't teach my scouts this method as mothers tend to freak at the idea of their sons using a knife that sharp near their skin ) I know that arm hair is easier cut than facial hair but the technique is the same. It is not that unusual for me to have a bald spot on my arm...

A dull knife requires far more pressure to cut an object than does a sharp knife. That additional pressure can be enough to cause unsafe cutting methods to be used. Those unsafe cutting methods can lead to lots of damage to a knife, including nicks, bends, breaks. Maybe more important though is a dull knife is more apt to cause injury to the user or someone near by. As the supervisor at work, I am responsible for safety training of my people. I recently received some statistics that show steep increases in seriousness of injuries caused by knives that are not maintained and sharp enough to cut with minimal force.

I also find that my sharp knife doesn't take near as much maintenance to keep sharp as the effort I see many folks suffer through using their dull knife.

James

[nashdude]

i think there is something fake in that there video.

That's actually the END of a single, longer knife-sharpening segment. Murray Carter is a master bladesmith, and he was showing how to take a knife from completely dull and sharpening it to shaving sharp.

Search YouTube for more videos by Murray Carter. That should take care of your doubt ;)

[nashdude]

Sure good sharpening skills are required as well, and Murray is one of the best.

LOL no doubt. You see the video where he sharpens a blade on a concrete block and a piece of cardboard? :o

[Steve Sells]

i think there is something fake in that there video. Anyway if cuts anything besides hair that knife will get dull a lot quicker
than the time it took to sharpen it.

This is a heck of an accusation to make! Many, myself included make blades that can hold an edge, and it does not take me very long to sharpen a blade.

Why do you accuse this of being a fake? That evidence do you have? Edited January 8, 2009 by steve sells
to be nice

[KYBOY]

The guy is also a 17th generation bladesmith in a particular disipline..He actually lived and worked in the orient for many years as a villiage bladesmith/blacksmith...Its obvious the man is the real deal..Id hate to challenge him to a game of blade knowledge ;)

[minaraimono]

I really don't have time to spend on the internet, so I wont try to defend every aspect of my position. But I somehow feel compelled to point out a few things that I worry would be dangerous inaccuracies for beginners to be exposed to (that or I need some serious straightening out myself).

1)"Actually, flat ground and hollow ground blades have the ability to be sharper than a convex ground blade."
In terms of functional sharpness of the cutting edge (i.e. a shaving test such as in this video) this is not true.
In the shop where i work we make and sharpen Japanese sushi knives, western style knives, meat cleavers, hunters, skinners, you name it. Every one of them has to take hair off your head with the slightest brushing stroke or it doesn't go out the door.

2)"A more acute angle for the edge means a sharper edge. This is edge geometry."
"edge geometry" seems like a wealthy way to describe the angle that the blades edge is sharpened at. It is just one angle at the end of the day. No matter what goes on above it, the edge is always just one, single, simple angle. Usually equates to between 10 and 20 degree angle to the sharpening stone. You can get this angle whether or not the blade is flat, concave or convex.

3)"Flat and hollow grinds if applied to the same blade/same dimensions/proportions will result in a more acute edge than a convex grind based solely on their geometry, you can not argue against that, and that was my point above. The geometry of a blade with a flat or hollow grind allows for a more acute edge and therefore can attain a higher level of sharpness."

I do argue against this. And i hope some other people will chime in so that we can get to the bottom of it. I might be wrong, but I say:
What angles and "geometry" that happens farther up the blade is ultimately very important to the performance of the blade (its torque strength, whether or not fish meat will stick to it etc) but its of minimal importance to the cutting edge . We are talking about a few thousandths of a inch here.*The angle of the cutting edge is set, as i said before, to one, singe simple ">" shape at the end of the day. Or it better be. Because is you dont set your knives to a good crisp angle, even if its only at the level of a 3000# whet stone, you are not going to cut anything.

If we put a knife under the microscope to examine just the cutting edge you would not be able to see the slightest difference between a hollow-ground and a convex knife. You would only see part of the top line in this shape ">". And you would be able to see that at this magnification the edge is not such a clean pretty line. Its a bit ragged and torn. The cleaner and more even it is, the better its going to cut. And how "crisp" this edge is when viewed under a microscope has a lot to do with crystalline micro structure and the skills and tools used to sharpen it. This is a terrible over simplification, but i just dont have anymore time.

PS.

The choice to use no secondary bevel gives only one advantage, strictly speaking. By just laying the whole blade surface against the stone he doesnt have to rely on his hands to control the angle. Its a lot easier to sharpen, but I maintain that it says nothing about the sharpness:geometry relationship.
Imagine he sharpened it like you say he does in the video.

"he lays the entire primary bevel on the stone and brings it down to an edge (no secondary edge bevel), then lifts the angle slightly for stroping purposes."

Now that he has the edge that he wants, lets pretend that he suddenly decided to make the knife convex! Crazy idea, but theoretically, he could change the knifes geometry without even touching the edge. The side walls near the spine would need to be thinned, but there is enough material for it. Then he would just have to preform the super-human feat of blending that convex curve down from the spine to withing some mind-boggling fraction of an inch from the edge without touching it. Not realistic, but maybe you see my point.

[Graham Fredeen]

It seems like you are just focusing on only the edge of a knife, and overlooking the rest of the structure of the blade that it took to get to that edge. How can you achieve a fine edge without taking the rest of the geometry of the blade into consideration as well? The geometry above the edge will ultimately help to dictate the edge geometry itself. I don't know how edge geometry is a "wealthy" way to describe things. That is the terminology I am accustomed to and is widely used; you might be used to different due to your different background. While it is true that most edges are just angles, there are also convex edges which are actually composed of arcing surfaces coming to a single point, may seem like a technicality, but that falls under the realm of edge geometry as well, and convex edges perform differently than an edge ground with flat geometry and cant be overlooked either. Convex edges are achieved through use of slack belt grinding when applying the edge, and to a degree (though not purposefully as in the previous case) through stropping practices, and other inconsistencies in human grinding movements. Convex edges will cut, and will cut very effectively, can shave, etc if done correctly.

1)"Actually, flat ground and hollow ground blades have the ability to be sharper than a convex ground blade."
In terms of functional sharpness of the cutting edge (i.e. a shaving test such as in this video) this is not true.
In the shop where i work we make and sharpen Japanese sushi knives, western style knives, meat cleavers, hunters, skinners, you name it. Every one of them has to take hair off your head with the slightest brushing stroke or it doesn't go out the door.

Pay attention to my wording here, note I said they have the "ability" to be sharper, not that they will be. More along the lines that implementation of such blade geometry CAN be used to achieve a more acute and therefore sharper edge than a convex grind, and we are not talking about implementing secondary edge bevels here, that is something I should have clarified, my apologies.

I think maybe some illustrations are in order to help you to understand what I am trying to say.

Back to what I originally said,

Flat and hollow grinds if applied to the same blade/same dimensions/proportions will result in a more acute edge than a convex grind based solely on their geometry, you can not argue against that, and that was my point above. The geometry of a blade with a flat or hollow grind allows for a more acute edge and therefore can attain a higher level of sharpness.

If you look at the illustrations bellow, they show what I am trying to say. I apologize for the poor quality of the pictures, but they should give the idea. Note, I drew these on AutoCAD and used the same blade thickness and blade width for each sample crossection, therefore each crossection has the same dimensions/proportions, as stated above. They are a bit exaggerated(I think the blade is 1/2" thick x 1.5" wide (edge to spine)), so ignore the impracticality of some of the illustrations, but that was necessary to allow for enough visual distinction, and it doesn

[minaraimono]

You are right, its taking way too long to communicate this way. We could have had this settled with a 15 minute conversation over a cocktail napkin. I can't really justify spending more time on this so I'm afraid this will likely be my last post. (I only have a few months left of my current journeymanship and I want to make every minute count).

The only point I will address is this:

"The geometry of a blade with a flat or hollow grind allows for a more acute edge and therefore can attain a higher level of sharpness."

Its the phrase that got me into this discussion in the first place, and I take tremendous issue with it. Also, it seems to be the same point that you illustrate with your drawings. Geometrically the drawings are not wrong, but they have very limited application to knife making. You assume that a more acute angle will give a "higher level of sharpness". This is not really true in practice. With any basic knife set-up its easy enough to get the edge too acute. That is, getting the material to where it no longer has enough thickness to hold a physical structure. Getting a sufficiently acute angle at the blade edge is not the issue for most people who cant make a knife sharp enough to shave with (excluding absolute beginners).
And the acuity of angle is NOT the principle reason why Murray's knife shaves so well in the video. Micro structure and sharpening techniques are far more important.

As I mentioned before, we make and sharpen every type of knife you can imagine in the shop where I am working. These blades have a huge range of geometry; single-bevel, double-bevel, sushi knives, hunting knives, cleavers, French chef's knives, knives designed specifically for cutting mountain-potatoes and knives for removing the poisonous livers from puffer fish!(河豚引き). We sharpen them all at various appropriate angles, and when they are done, they can take hairs off your arm. Cleavers and sushi-knives alike, dispite having very different geometry right down to the blade edge. Why? Micro structure and sharpening.

I was simply concerned for beginners who might read what you wrote and think something like, " I should buy/make a hollow ground knife because it is sharper!" Or, "This hunting knife of mine could never be sharpened to a shaving edge because its convex".

I suppose you will say that you covered this when you added "(but not to say that you can't get [convex knives] shaving sharp and then some)". But to add that as a parenthetical to a whole post that gives an argument for the superior sharpness of concave and flat grinds feels very misleading for beginners.



P.S.
I find it interesting that you chose to make the thickness at the spine and the width of the blade constant, and then work down to the blade edge (In your drawings). I would have thought about it in the opposite direction (likely the reason for many of the misunderstandings). I would start by identifying the appropriate angle for the blade edge itself and then work towards the spine with appropriate proportions to suit the knife. I know I can get a surgical sharpness on a blade held at 14-16 degrees from the surface of a whetstone. So i dont worry about trying to get it anymore acute then that. The real performance-sharpness comes from micro structure and the tools and skills used for sharpening. I have had knives that were sharpened at this angle and didnt end up taking a good edge. My boss tried sharpening it and it still would barely take hairs off.
We put my blade under a microscope next to one of his blades, and sure enough, my grain structure wasnt the same. He said it looked like i had over heated it while forging, but how he could see that is still something of a mystery to me.

P.P.S.

The point about "micro serrations" is a good one. Lately we have been discussing the merits of matching up gain-size to sharpening stone#. for example, we only take Japanese white steel past 3000#. It holds a super fine structure so it can benefit from a super clean edge. But all of our Swedish stainless blades stop between 1500# 3000#. It has a courser grain, so its better to use the "micro serrations" to your advantage.

And thats all I have to say about that.
Good luck with everything!

[Graham Fredeen]

Hopefully without eating up more of a post than is necessary, I will respond to a couple of your points and call this all good.

You assume that a more acute angle will give a "higher level of sharpness". This is not really true in practice. With any basic knife set-up its easy enough to get the edge too acute. That is, getting the material to where it no longer has enough thickness to hold a physical structure.

Firstly, let me state that I do not "assume" a more acute edge angle will produce a sharper edge, it will. And this is true in practice and theory, HOWEVER, only to the point, if I may quote what I mentioned in my previous post, "within the physical limitations of the steel microstructure" (which was meant to directly address the issue you just brought up). If you could somehow achieve a physical structure that would support edge angles of small fractions of a degree you would have an edge amazingly sharper than one of 10,15, or 20 degrees. It is not practical to put in practice due to material limitations, but true none the less. Perhaps I did not place enough emphasis on material limitations originally, which is partly my fault, and partly due to the nature of the complexity of the topic itself, which will not allow certain issues to be mentioned without addressing each and every aspect of all things relating to it, in great detail. This tends to prevent condensing ideas, which is what I try to do to keep things short and simple. As a down side, some of these things usually end up getting passed over as being implied or as "common knowledge".

And the acuity of angle is NOT the principle reason why Murray's knife shaves so well in the video. Micro structure and sharpening techniques are far more important.

I disagree with the way this is stated, but mostly agree with what you are trying to say. The angle/geometry of the edge IS the principle reason behind why the knife is sharp and can shave very well. Edge geometry is the "principle" behind why anything is sharp, its what makes an edge an edge, its what makes an edge "sharp," and its why some edges cut well and others don't. BUT, and I say again, but, proper edge geometry i.e. the acuity of an angle, can only be achieved as a result of having firstly and most importantly, proper micro structure, and secondly, proper sharpening technique. A better micro structure present within an edge will allow for greater acuity to be achieved within the edge, and therefore facilitates sharpness, making it physically possible, but it is not the "reason" behind it, the geometry is. Both are dependent upon the other to achieve sharpness, and BOTH are equally important in achieving sharpness. Afterwards comes sharpening skill to get them there.

And as a result of everything stated above, I must disagree with your statement:

Geometrically the drawings are not wrong, but they have very limited application to knife making.

I believe they have extensive application in knife/blade making (granted not the actual drawings and proportions themselves, but rather the principles that they illustrate). The reason being that one big crucial thing is being overlooked (or at least hasn't been fully addressed yet): the structure of the material that is supporting the edge itself (not the micro and grain structures, but rather the physical mechanics of the "foundational" structure that the edge/edge bevels rest upon, or in simpler terms, how the shape and thickness of the material present both at the beginning of the edge bevels, within them, and throughout the rest of the blade effect the edge performance). Meaning, (in a simply put example) dimensionally, convex ground blades must be made "thinner" to facilitate the same edge angle as one present on a flat or hollow ground blade, which will effect not only the strength of the blade, but of the edge itself. So again back to the point made with the illustrations. Considering blades of equal proportions, and assuming the physical limitations of micro structure are not exceeded, proper sharpening technique is used, etc., flat and hollow ground blades can achieve more acute edge angles, and therefore "higher levels" of sharpness (again, do not overlook that I said blades of equal proportions). That may or may not be "important" depending on what exactly the blade is intended to do, and if its dimensions are relevant to the overall intended use and function (but in most cases they most certainly are). So I still maintain that my original statement regarding blade geometries and sharpness is correct, but perhaps not viewed correctly or understood without clarification, which is my fault.

I find it interesting that you chose to make the thickness at the spine and the width of the blade constant, and then work down to the blade edge (In your drawings). I would have thought about it in the opposite direction (likely the reason for many of the misunderstandings). I would start by identifying the appropriate angle for the blade edge itself and then work towards the spine with appropriate proportions to suit the knife.

That is due to how I view blade design itself. I suppose my thought process would be more along the lines of "blade engineering" as I approach a blade like an engineering problem. Firstly analyze what the "problem" you are trying to solve is i.e. what function/need are you trying to make a knife to fulfill? This gives you the performance criteria that the blade must achieve. This usually immediately begins to dictate size, shape and rough dimensions, not to mention cutting edge type/needs, required for the general types of stress and cutting operations the blade will be used in. Next I look at the materials required to perform under these conditions, with the main focus being blade steel choice and how to execute the HT to achieve the correct microstructures for both the edge and the rest of the overall blade. Then once I have this overall "blade" fit together, I look at what exact edge geometry is needed and how it is to be integrated, and tweak any blade geometry or dimensions as necessary. Starting with the edge geometry and theoretically constructing the rest of the blade around it seems very backwards to me, but to each his own.

That being for formal blade design. But sometimes when beginning to forge a new blade, I go into it without any previous considerations besides the steel, and let the steel dictate what it "wants" to be, and I worry about the other details as I go.

And finally (about time eh?)

I was simply concerned for beginners who might read what you wrote and think something like, " I should buy/make a hollow ground knife because it is sharper!" Or, "This hunting knife of mine could never be sharpened to a shaving edge because its convex".

I did not think this thread was created/intended for beginners, but rather was more about the general principles behind sharpening, and sharpness, and the whole underlying reasons. Someone mentioned blade geometry, which lead to my discussion on edge geometry/blade geometry relationships. Therefore, since I viewed this as a thread more for discussion rather than information for beginners, I didn't go into as much detail as I should have, and neglected to clearly state some things. I am glad you brought this to attention, as I said before, I do not want to be responsible for spreading misconception if possible.

Hope the rest of your journeymanship goes well and that you are successful in your endeavors.