Yep, but it's pretty universal - even the knife manufacturers misuse the terms.


Now, Jerry holds some serious knowledge in material science, and he also chooses his words pretty carefully, and focuses on the strengths (not the engineering term) of his steel, which are numerous. INFI is great stuff, but it would make a lousy fillet knife, and doesn't really work all that well when you put a super thin edge on it.

However, for things other than pure slicing roles, where you leave a little beefiness behind the edge, the combination of properties he's managed to squeeze out of INFI is pretty dang remarkable. It's cool stuff.

Not sure what happened to your post, Toast, but you had said something like "if an INFI knife has to be thicker to perform the same as another steel, then its not a superior steel", and when I tried to reply, the SY forums got mucked up.



I'm not saying INFI has to be thicker to perform the same as another steel - I'm saying INFI's kick butt properties show themselves best in thick-ish geometries. 3/16 and up is the land of INFI, and in that land, it rules.



I simply tried to refute the claim that a "superior" steel automatically means that it can be made thinner and perform the same.

An INFI blade at, say, 3/16" thickness will majorly outperform the same blade made from 1095 at 3/16, just like a 1/2 inch thick INFI blade will outperform a 1/2 inch thick 1095 blade.

BUT, the ability to perform well in a thin blade is only one of many different ways of judging the quality of a steel. By that standard, and that standard alone, INFI might not be the biggest winner. But if your judgement is a knife that can be bent to a 90 degree angle, chop concrete blocks, and still slice through a manila rope thousands of times, then a big fat INFI blade is a heck of a performer.



At the end of the day, Busse's selling point is extreme toughness. An INFI or SR77 knife doesn't just have to be able to cut as well as the same knife made from 1095, it also has to be able to chop the hinges off of a Jeep. That's the selling point of these knives, and that's what gets them the attention they get. That means that big, fat, beastly knives are here to stay.



Try taking a Cold Steel blade of similar size, but a "thinner, more efficient" thickness, and doing what a certain Camp Tramp did..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

(not needed)

The above statement gets to my entire point. You state that INFI is better than other steels at any given thickness, and presumably hardness, profile, length etc. The RTAK has a reputation as being a very good and reliable hard use knife. If INFI is better in all the criteria you have stated, it should be able to made just as thin, or thick, as the RTAK and be a much better knife. I personally do not understand the desire to make a thicker knife when a thinner knife is more efficient and there are no apparent drawbacks by doing it (as seen by the success of the Skinny Ash).

I have been editing my posts, as it is hard for me to reply to the multi-quoting you use in the small window I have to type.

Perhaps I worded it poorly - INFI will outperform many other steels at the thicknesses where Busse tends to make their blades, and by outperform, I mean IN THE AREAS WHERE BUSSE FOCUSES THEIR PERFORMANCE.

That is to say, Busse emphasizes beastly knives that can take a beating. The RTAK has a reputation as a hard use knife, but I wouldn't want to carve up an oil drum with it, or baton it through the B-pillar of a car. Those are the kinds of things people expect Busse to be able to do.


It's not just about cutting efficiency, it's also about being tough as nails, and not just "tough" in the metallurgical sense, but "tough" in the holy-crap-that-knife-can-take-a-beating sense.



I am a big proponent of the skinnier Busse knives, and I have argued many times that the best knives Busse makes are the thin (by Wauseon standards) ones. However, you are grossly oversimplifying the concept of "performance" in a knife, and the material properties of steel.

The selling point for the super thick is that they have a lot of weight for chopping, and that they are nearly indestructible. The thinner ones, for me, are indestructible "enough" and I like the increased cutting performance, but I don't see either as "superior" - they are just emphasizing different traits.



An INFI fillet knife would probably be a terrible idea. It's just not the right steel for the job.

I guess I am done with this topic as I am not trying to be is a pissing match with anyone and it seems that is all this back and forth has resulted in. I am stating my opinion and that is all.

And yes, before anyone feels the need to clarify, I do understand that opinions are worth exactly what is payed for them.

I agree - I hate how obnoxiously thick most Busse blades are, but I'm also a materials scientist by trade so I love going on big tirades about poisson ratios and shear planes and buckling instabilities.

3/16 is, in my eyes, the sweet spot for most Busse blades, with maybe a bit thinner for true slicers that won't be beat on. But I also know the Busse target market, and the abuse of those knives by guys like Noss and Cliff Stamp have sold a lot of folks on the Busse family of sharpened prybars.

If a 3/16" thick INFI chopper is not superior in toughness, edge holding, and corrosion resistance a 3/16" chopper in 1095, we sure are foolish for buying Busses. Why not just get a Becker or the new RAT RC-10 instead for a lot less? I know there is a lot of hype in the knife business, but INFI really is a superior steel to 1095, which I still like.