It's getting out of control....and it's just sad

[xspook2158]

As a Newbie to this room The different views in this room, is the reason I am in this room and forum and not in another.

We are not here to agree, nor to argue, we are here to learn or to teach.

I am just a Fly Tyer, Trying to make knives. I Tie I Good Fly!! That does not intend, a fish will bite it. I guess thats why they call it fishing and not catching. LMAO

I have Ideas to make my work unique, does not intend they are better, Just a different twist on things.

Boatbuilder, Did you try and talk to Mr Fowler before you posted your comment?

I will wait to hear if you tried to ask him about his views before I post another comment.

Thanks for putting up with a Fly Tyer.

Jeff

[Kostoglotov]

Originally Posted by Ed Caffrey

(and I don't mean ONLY about recycled/used steel, because I stopped using that LONG ago.)

That is precisely why I started this thread, and is at the heart of the matter. I've been at this for pushing close to 30 years now, and I can remember a time when I had books right in the forging shop with me, following them to the letter, and anticipating the outcome(s) as written......in most cases it never happened.

At first I was confused and angry because I wasn't achieving the results the author(s) had. Over the years, through a lot of trial and error, I came to realize that there are two mindsets.....those that believe that if it's written, or documented, it's truth, and nothing can change it. OR, the mindset of using written material, whether that be in the form of a book, metallurgical reports, or even a spectrograph analysis as a STARTING POINT, rather than a definitive end.

As I learned more about metallurgy, and discovered spectrographing, my initial thought was that with those tools, I would quickly have it all figured out....NOT! What it did do was make me understand that there are many paths to the same destination. This is where I came to word the things I say very carefully......More often than not, you will notice my input/advice is prefaced with "In my opinion", or "This is how I do it". That's because I know that my way is certainly not the only way, nor is it necessarily the "right way" for everyone.....but what I do know is what does, and does not work for me.

I've learned much from Ed Fowler, as well as many other Bladesmiths, but when I tried to implement many of Ed Fowler's techniques, they simply did not have the same outcome as he was achieving. I'm certainly not going to "call him on the carpet" and call him a liar, or scream for some silly "proof", when I know beyond a doubt whatever he's doing, works well for him...even if I couldn't make it work in my shop, or see the logic in it.

This might sound dumb to some of you, but the way I define "proof" or "truth" when it comes to knifemaking is to form a theory......then either prove or disprove that theory, based on results. Positive or negative, the results dictate whether that particular thing/process becomes "proof" or "truth", or is tossed aside.

A prime example of this is the day I had two college Professors of Metallurgy in my shop, both from the same University. They had asked me to walk them through how made a knife with differential heat treatment. I took them through the entire process of making a blade to pass the JS or MS tests. One looked on with intrigue and asked many questions, while the other one remained quiet with a doubtful look on his face.
After going through all the tests as outline in the ABS rules, including the 90 degree bend. One was elated, while the other made the statement "if what you did were a viable method of heat treating, it would be in a text somewhere!"

The difference between those two individuals? About 35 years of experience. The Professor who was open minded and inquisitive had worked at a number of different positions within his field, and had 21 years teaching experience. The other was 3 years out of college with a Master's Degree in Metallurgy, with 2 years of teaching under his belt, and had never had any practical experience within his field.

My point? Knowledge is the beginning of Wisdom....not the end. While I do not always agree with others when it comes to processes or techniques concerning Knifemaking/Bladesmithing, nor do I expect everyone to agree with me, what I do is understand that there is more than one path to the same destination....which is why I very often endorse others to not take anything, include what I say, as "fact" until they prove or disprove it for themselves when it comes to Bladesmithing.

To do otherwise is simply a fool's errand.

Post of the year

[hsjrev]

Originally Posted by Kostoglotov

Post of the year

Well, it's only five days into the year, but excellent post all the same!

[cdent]

Originally Posted by xspook2158

....Boatbuilder, Did you try and talk to Mr Fowler before you posted your comment?....

I hope it's ok to jump in and mention that Boatbuilder did not write the letter. I believe he just copied it from a post on another forum.

Take care, Craig

[boatbuilder]

Thats correct c-dent, i never wrote the letter. I just copied it from thr person that wrote it and pasted here so all could know what the debate is about.
When I read this I see a lot of bashing of someone that has done a lot for the knife industry that we all crave. The writer says this letter was not meant to bash Ed Fowler but to me, and a lot of other people, it sounds like he has been bashed horribly. I don't know Ed Fowler myself but I dont care who you are, nobody needs to be bashed in a public publication like what has happened to Ed Fowler. We are all striving to become better knife makers and trying to promote the knife industry, not kill it.
I have been given lots of advise from knife makers that have way more experience than I do and I appreciate it very much. Some of the advice did not work for me but gave me a point to start on something that I had no experience with.
I have been a welder/fabricator for 25+ years now and just because I build something one way doesn't mean the same job can't be acheived by doing it another way.

"THERE IS MORE THAN 1 WAY TO SKIN A CAT"

Jim

[Gary Mulkey]

Originally Posted by Ed Caffrey

(and I don't mean ONLY about recycled/used steel, because I stopped using that LONG ago.)

That is precisely why I started this thread, and is at the heart of the matter. I've been at this for pushing close to 30 years now, and I can remember a time when I had books right in the forging shop with me, following them to the letter, and anticipating the outcome(s) as written......in most cases it never happened.

At first I was confused and angry because I wasn't achieving the results the author(s) had. Over the years, through a lot of trial and error, I came to realize that there are two mindsets.....those that believe that if it's written, or documented, it's truth, and nothing can change it. OR, the mindset of using written material, whether that be in the form of a book, metallurgical reports, or even a spectrograph analysis as a STARTING POINT, rather than a definitive end.

As I learned more about metallurgy, and discovered spectrographing, my initial thought was that with those tools, I would quickly have it all figured out....NOT! What it did do was make me understand that there are many paths to the same destination. This is where I came to word the things I say very carefully......More often than not, you will notice my input/advice is prefaced with "In my opinion", or "This is how I do it". That's because I know that my way is certainly not the only way, nor is it necessarily the "right way" for everyone.....but what I do know is what does, and does not work for me.

I've learned much from Ed Fowler, as well as many other Bladesmiths, but when I tried to implement many of Ed Fowler's techniques, they simply did not have the same outcome as he was achieving. I'm certainly not going to "call him on the carpet" and call him a liar, or scream for some silly "proof", when I know beyond a doubt whatever he's doing, works well for him...even if I couldn't make it work in my shop, or see the logic in it.

This might sound dumb to some of you, but the way I define "proof" or "truth" when it comes to knifemaking is to form a theory......then either prove or disprove that theory, based on results. Positive or negative, the results dictate whether that particular thing/process becomes "proof" or "truth", or is tossed aside.

A prime example of this is the day I had two college Professors of Metallurgy in my shop, both from the same University. They had asked me to walk them through how made a knife with differential heat treatment. I took them through the entire process of making a blade to pass the JS or MS tests. One looked on with intrigue and asked many questions, while the other one remained quiet with a doubtful look on his face.
After going through all the tests as outline in the ABS rules, including the 90 degree bend. One was elated, while the other made the statement "if what you did were a viable method of heat treating, it would be in a text somewhere!"

The difference between those two individuals? About 35 years of experience. The Professor who was open minded and inquisitive had worked at a number of different positions within his field, and had 21 years teaching experience. The other was 3 years out of college with a Master's Degree in Metallurgy, with 2 years of teaching under his belt, and had never had any practical experience within his field.

My point? Knowledge is the beginning of Wisdom....not the end. While I do not always agree with others when it comes to processes or techniques concerning Knifemaking/Bladesmithing, nor do I expect everyone to agree with me, what I do is understand that there is more than one path to the same destination....which is why I very often endorse others to not take anything, include what I say, as "fact" until they prove or disprove it for themselves when it comes to Bladesmithing.

To do otherwise is simply a fool's errand.

I debated for some time before replying in this thread as it is all too easy for comments in something this way to become misunderstood and inflamitory. I think that may be the case with Ed's articles as well. When reading articles of his in the past I have found myself scratching my head and thinking, "That can't be right.". The man does the testing of his techniques though and I believe that at least for him, that it IS right. Does that mean that I can get the same results if I try to imitate his techniques? Probably not. Will I criticize him for being wrong? Definately not.

I have only sat down and talked knives with the man once and then only briefly. From this short encounter though I can see how his confidence could be misconstrued for something else. Few (if any) of us will ever work under laboratory conditions where all variables are controlled and what is "fact" for me may not be for others and vice-versa. Therefore it is usually a mistake to speak in absolutes and probably best to avoid doing so.

I got quite a good laugh hearing about your experience with the two professors having had classes with some of both types. I believe that you are right-on in saying that knowledge is a beginning and applaud you for the testing that you do (and the results that you pass on).

Keep up the good work and keep smiling.

Gary

[ron58]

i have watch his video's and like said before i did not think some of the things he was saying were right,but until i find out otherwise i'm not saying a word and i don't know if i would if i did,what works for him,works for him!
i work with 1095 steel,i have had not trouble with it so far,(i guess the mix is right???)but Ed C. has had some bad times with it,and i believe he has,would i say he is full of it because so far i have had good luck,not a chance!what he said makes me make sure i try and do everything right with this steel,and this is how i use Ed F. knowledge of 52100 to my advantage!
and i have been on other sites that if you ask a question they jump down your throat,it just sucks.

[Doug Lester]

Ok, I guess this whole thing is more over precieved incivility rather than a slight against Ed Fowler. I have never met Ed Fowler and have only met Stacy Apelt briefly twice and in those short conversations, I didn't find him someone who talked much to beginning makers, he didn't express any feeling one way or the other about Ed Fowler or his views so it would be presumtuous to accuse him of personal ill feeling to Mr. Fowler. He did evidently react strongly to some articles that even I didn't consider Ed Fowler's best work. His language might have been better but he had every right to express his feeling in a letter to the editor and Ed Fowler has every right to respond to that letter-or not.

Ed Fowler has been, and I have no reason to doubt he isn't still, one of the best knife makers in this country but he does seem to be a person devoted to his philosophy of making knives. As others have stated his views are not universaly shared by other makers and other makers who have tried doing things the way he says he did them could not get the same results. Being from a more technical background, to me not being able to duplicate results puts the method in question, if not disprove it. If one duplicates the method then the results should be the same; it not, somethings wrong. That does not take all that much away from the fact that he has made very good knives. It also does not mean that he does not rely mostly on tried and true principles. It just means that not all of the things he says always adds up-welcome to the human race.

Doug

[T.WOLFE]

My02. ,ol Ed's on a quest..the man is trying to get the best he can from 52100. hells bells, I'm on a quest of my own, trying to get all I can out of 0-1.That shows how far I have to go, and how far Ed has come.Personaly, I applaud ANYONE who has the tenacity to get all they can out of ANY steel.Lighten up boys, it's still just a knife.If you sell it, great..if you don't, you know you got a good piece of yourself to leave to someone you love......Tom Buchanan

[B.Finnigan]

That's why I don't hangout at BladeForums or subscribe to Blade magazine.

[Ed Caffrey]

I wanted to take a moment and thank everyone for remaining polite and civil. This type of thread can quickly change directions or get out of hand, but you folks are doing a wonderful job of keeping things on an even keel. My compliments and thanks!

[WBE]

I believe most of you are missing the point of Stacy's letter. It was not a personal attack on Fowler, but an attack on some of the BS he has written to be fact that has no facual content, nor any proof to back it up, other than just his word. If he wants to present that certain proceedures work as fact, and not his opinion, then he should back it up with more than just his word that it does indeed do this or that. Lets see some lab reports from some source other than from his words. Lets see some test results from a recognized metallugical lab. I would strongly suggest that you not hold your breath waiting on such, but it would be nice to see at some point. It is my belief that far too many of you have drank from his koolaid, and swallowed a bit too much of his BS. Just MHO. Bear in mind, that a good hype spiel can sell plastic bottled water for $5.00 a gallon to those foolish enough to buy it.

[Jim T]

So much for "remaining polite and civil", WBE....

Jim T

[Ed Caffrey]

I believe most of you are missing the point of Stacy's letter

Aside from the antagonistic tenor of that letter, what I see is an individual who has a given level of knowledge concerning general metallurgy, who is so staunch in the belief that the written word is the ?know all, end all?, that he is either unwilling, or unable to look beyond it, and either will not, or cannot accept that there could any other possibilities beyond what is written on the subject(s).

Has anyone stopped to think that the things that Mr. Fowler speaks of may very well be ?fact? in his experience, and that he may be paraphrasing to make a point?
How do we quantify ?fact?? Do we not deduce facts out of our own personal experiences? Hasn?t man as a species been doing that since the dawn of time? How did we acquire all the information that we now refer to as "fact"?

Something else I see in that letter is the demand for a "Unicorn". In other words, undeniable "proof" in the form of something that could be replicated by the masses, works the same exact way every time, under all conditions, for everyone.
It's simply not going to happen (just like hoping to find a Unicorn). There are simply too many variables from shop to shop, and Knifemaker to Knifemaker. MAYBE, in the ideal environment, under strictly controlled conditions, with all variables eliminated... then a single process, that achieves "optimum" results could be applied. But where would that leave us? Basically as a bunch or robots, turning out a "product", with no creativity or any chance for personal or professional growth.
There are many techniques and processes that Ed Fowler talks about/uses, that I have tried, and failed to replicate in my shop, and there are others that I just don't agree with. But they work for him, in his shop, under the conditions present there, and I'm certainly not going to call him a liar or demand proof to appease my own ego.
What I will, and have done is take the information that is useful to me, and do what I call, "take the next logical step". That being to seek an avenue to achieve a desired outcome....and sometimes it takes a long time, and a lot of effort to get there...and sometime I fall flat on my face...but that's all part of this adventure.

Mr. Folwer's knives meet the claims he makes. If you doubt it, do as I did and purchase one, and test it for yourself. That in itself will provide a great deal of "proof".

I know Mr. Fowler has a cabinet in his house, that contains years of metallurgy and spectrograph data/reports......I have a file cabinet full of the same thing in my office (though not nearly as much). Why don't we make all of that public? I can't speak for Mr. Fowler, but my reason is a selfish one. I poured years of time, effort, and money into learning what to do, and how to do it in my shop, and frankly, much of it does not correspond to the "prescribed" methods as seen in many metallurgy texts, but it works for me, and I'm not just going to give it all away. At least not to those who are unwilling to earn it, and do not deserve it. Much of it is routinely shared through answering questions, and with students.
All of that metallurgy and spectrograph paperwork, stuffed away in my office filing cabinet is not ?proof? of any kind, it is nothing more than verification that either something achieved the desired outcome, or it did not, and it gave me new directions to take, and in many cases changed my perceptions of what I should be doing, and a starting point for how to get to where I wanted to be.

I?m not trying to be antagonistic or rude, but what I see are many of those who scream for "proof" as not willing to take the time, or effort to actually find answers for themselves.
If folks are so sure that Ed F. is wrong, or not providing "factual" information, why hasn't somebody already provided "proof"? All I've seen is a letter, making claims that Mr. Fowler's information is false....where's all the "proof" that he's wrong? You see, it works both ways. If your going to be insistent that proof be provided to support one position, then you must be prepared to offer it for the other position too.

In the end, nobody wins in this type of scenario, it becomes emotional, and takes on a life of it's own, often with regrettable results. The best thing that any of us can do is take information that is offered with a grain of salt and prove or disprove it for ourselves.....this in not life and death....it's about enjoying the company of each other, and enjoying what we do.

[Kostoglotov]

Ed - Another great post

I?m not trying to be antagonistic or rude, but what I see are many of those who scream for "proof" as not willing to take the time, or effort to actually find answers for themselves.

This and your earlier comment about the HT "recipes" being a starting point are words that unfortunately are falling on deaf ears for those that think there is only 1 way of doing anything

In the end I think Ed F has optimized his HT recipe based on the way he makes knives. Others wont have the same results likely because they aren't using 52100 with the same chemical composition or aren't reducing from 3" bearings