Pretender To The Throne? Options

[Jasper Jigbu]

I found this website and I was hoping to have more educated eyes assess what they are saying about Wootz steel among other things. There is a reference to Daniel in that they mention Techno-Wootz. Anyone else have any experience with these guys?

I thought it was interesting in that he claims to have developed a technique for making Wootz.

I actually have some limited experience with one of them from an ebay purchase, but I want to leave that out for now so as not to potentially prejudice peoples opinions. Suffice to say I have never seen one of their blades in person so I cant evaluate them from that perspective.

http://www.dragonsbreathforge.com/index.html

[shanej]

I don't know that I should jump in... this is not my world anymore. My opinion may be unwelcome.

After scanning the "historical infomration" I did not gleen any special knowledge. Most of what he said could have been compiled, and it appears it has been from numerous readings easily found on the WEB.

That does not tell whether he does or does not know anything...and then sometimes "knowing" is a hell of a bunch different than "doing".

I dont guess it matters one way or the other.

A guy could spend a lifetime loooking at patterns in steel appreciating all the beauty. It ain't much diffenre than looking at the night sky after a long day in the shop.

Look at the whole "MOSAIC DAMASCUS" movement. None of them patterns, necessarily make a superior blade. But dang don't it look cool!?!

What matters is how the banding/patterns/carbide alignment...etc relates to PER-formance.

So let's everybody lay there cards down, do a blind panel eval, ...and get to cutting...there's your Pudding!

Shane

[Bithabus]

Unlike some smiths who advertise that they sell wootz or “technowootz” (typically just standard bar stock that has been heat treated to bring out its inherent alloy banding), my material is made by melting down carefully selected ingredients in individual crucibles, then slow cooling the resulting ingot to produce the necessary segregation in the steel. Finally, the ingot is carefully forged out to produce a bar of wootz, ready to dazzle the world.

The above author (one of the smiths) purports to be knowledgeable but this statement betrays his ignorance.

[Bithabus]

I thought it was interesting in that he claims to have developed a technique for making Wootz.

He claims to make Wootz, not that he developed any techniques. Pendray has allowed patent infringement for years.

[shanej]

As far as I can see he is offering his opinion about "technowootz".

If he's wrong..then bad on him for being ignorant.

Maybe I dont understand about patent infringement, but the real gig is that somebody calls it Wootz" with a big "W"...or maybe it would still be wrong if he said he could make "wootz" with a little "w"?

So i f a guy follows all the stuff Mr. Pendray openly talks about in any of his demonstrations...and ends up with something that is OK to make blades out of...why couldn't he call it "crucible ingot steel"?

Or he could say he has developed an "IMPROVEMENT" to WOOTZ steel...and get his own PAQTENET on the "NEW" procedure.

Honestly, there are a bunch of guys who tinker with the process the Mr. Pendray got them started on. And I have seen different products for sale as, "wootzy,wootz from sand, steel from dirt wootz"

Maybe I don't have a personal beef with guys using "wootz" as a descriptor.

Then again, maybe Dan has a beef with the guy describing "technowootz" incorrectly.

When I was there we had a number of AS pieces described as "Crystalline Damascus".

And that created BEEFS with everybody in the "damascus" business.

Shane

[Nick]

Well, patents cover processes, NOT the products thereof - so if someone is using a process that is fundamentally the same as Pendrays, they are infringing even if they don't etch it to make a visible pattern or call a word of attention to what it is, while if their method is in some way fundamentally different, the result can be identical to that of another process without infringing on the patent.

[shanej]

Hey Thanks for adding to the conversation.

Nick,

If what you say is SO then I am going to hurry up and patent the way I forge and heat treat my blades. Because then ANYBODY who uses, "THERMO-MECHANICAL MANIPULATION" and uses steel or iron to start with...and anybody who uses a "MULTI- TASK HEAT TREAT" which may or may not call for "MULTI-QUENCH HARDENING" with "SUBSEQUENT SUB-ZERO QUENCHES"...will have to stop what they are doing to avoid infringement.

Because honestly, I can play with patterns in banding and "THERMO-MECHANICAL MANIPULATION" ALL DAY LONG!

Does that mean I can patent ANY of the PATTERNS I come up with?

Because if I can...well then so can any bum munching idiot out there.

Since I started etching blades, I have tried to make a study of, not what they look like aesthetically, but moreso how they look, compared to how they perform.

Going by that critiria...Mr. Pendray may only hold the patent to the process, but not its outcome should somebody repeat his process, which he has shared publicly, and come up with a completely end result, and possibly one that performs in a completely superior way.

The patterns are the puzzles.

What is the differnece between manuipualting a round cast ingot; and manipulating an ingot that has been cast at a factory, and then had its intial forging at a factory, and then somebody takes that rough forged bar shape, and refine it further, with heat or hammer, and using their knowledege, refines it into into a superior tool?

I gotta say fellas, it's splitting hairs. Ain't it?

Like I said earlier. Get the blades out and go to cutting.

If it's just about purty...then we can do that too, and let the customers decide.

I don't guess Dan will lose or gain customers based on what Al Pendray does, or what the Dragon's Breath Forge does.

In the end, it's time wasted worrying, when we oughta be doing what makes you happy.

Shane

P.S. If I stated somethgin that's just completely wrong. Just holler. I think over the years I have mellowed a lot, and dont mind admitting if I am out on the edge of non-sense. And I apolgize for my typos. Arthritis is kickin my bum.

[Bithabus]

What is the difference between manipulating a round cast ingot; and manipulating an ingot that has been cast at a factory, and then had its initial forging at a factory, and then somebody takes that rough forged bar shape, and refine it further, with heat or hammer, and using their knowledge, refines it into into a superior tool?

I gotta say fellas, it's splitting hairs. Ain't it?

That's the point. The guy I quoted doesn't understand this (hence his ignorant statement).

Also, you patent technologies not names. Anyone who apes Pendray's process is infringing his patent. I am aware he is OK with this. Altering the technology significantly would result in a new technology that would also be patentable.

You can't patent a technology that is already in widespread use, such as "THERMO-MECHANICAL MANIPULATION" and uses steel or iron to start with...and anybody who uses a "MULTI- TASK HEAT TREAT"

[Jasper Jigbu]

Thanks for all the answers. I was pretty skeptical of these guys for multiple reasons. One thing that I found particularly interesting was the way they seemed to have a little flavor of "we devoloped our own stuff too" a la they way some of the Angelsword site has read at times. Particularly with the Technowootz reference there. But they seemed to lack all the actual metallurgy information that the Angel Sword site provides. Trying to be clear here, it struck me as a poor attempt to copy some of the style. I realize there are plenty who outright copy AS (yes I bought a fake Angel once unwittingly)

I wanted others to look at it because some of the blades are pretty, though I have learned enough not to trust that. As well, I live pretty close to them (<1hr) so it would have been interesting if they were more legit. That said, I thought I was reading fluff and I guess that is what it turned out to be.

While I realize the next thought is mostly driven by fantasy (read my sig) I have gotten to the point of wanting my blades to be dependable should I ever need them for more than just show and forms practice. I'm sure that plenty of others make decent blades but I would question the reliability of these guys and their blades for sure.

[Bithabus]

These guys might make decent swords but there is no way to tell from their website. The info they present on wootz could have been copied and pasted from wikipedia, and the comment about Technowootz indicates to me that the author doesn't understand how modern steel is made or what wootz really is.

Without specifics of their heat treat or info about a new technology the swords they make could be anywhere from passable to junk.

Also, in my opinion, anyone who uses a 10 series steel to make a sword when there are superior modern alternatives cannot be taken seriously as a swordsmith.

[Nick]

These guys might make decent swords but there is no way to tell from their website. The info they present on wootz could have been copied and pasted from wikipedia, and the comment about Technowootz indicates to me that the author doesn't understand how modern steel is made or what wootz really is.

Without specifics of their heat treat or info about a new technology the swords they make could be anywhere from passable to junk.

Also, in my opinion, anyone who uses a 10 series steel to make a sword when there are superior modern alternatives cannot be taken seriously as a swordsmith.

I have to disagree with this personally - I see no reason there is not room for a traditionalist maker to be taken seriously, particularly if nearly all areas of historical accuracy are taken into account rather than just steel choice. Highest possible performance is the focus at AS presently, but considering how far Dan has pushed traditional methods and materials in the AS line in the past, even traditional can be "above 99% of the market" in terms of overall quality. Even putting that aside, I give full respect to any maker who uses an appropriate steel, the best possible heat treat for that steel, and a build that is both strong and lively by historical standards of what they are making. A maker that you would consider someone to be taken seriously as a maker, that is, someone using the best technology has to offer, are above respectable in the admirable category.

[Daniel]

Also, in my opinion, anyone who uses a 10 series steel to make a sword when there are superior modern alternatives cannot be taken seriously as a swordsmith.

I have to disagree with this personally - I see no reason there is not room for a traditionalist maker to be taken seriously, particularly if nearly all areas of historical accuracy are taken into account rather than just steel choice. Highest possible performance is the focus at AS presently, but considering how far Dan has pushed traditional methods and materials in the AS line in the past, even traditional can be "above 99% of the market" in terms of overall quality. Even putting that aside, I give full respect to any maker who uses an appropriate steel, the best possible heat treat for that steel, and a build that is both strong and lively by historical standards of what they are making. A maker that you would consider someone to be taken seriously as a maker, that is, someone using the best technology has to offer, are above respectable in the admirable category.

Nick, The fallacy in your argument is the assumption that a 10 series steel represents something traditional. While this is a commonly held belief within blade steel circles, I believe that it is erroneous. Few modern smiths use the more sophisticated and time consuming ancient techniques that would have been required get high performance out of a simple steel. Since traditional methods are not used, a 10 series would not end up as a traditional steel... just a simple one.

[Daniel]

I thought it was interesting in that he claims to have developed a technique for making Wootz.

I had never heard of any of these guys. But some of the comments do illustrate the inability to understand the micro-structural differences between wootz and alloy banding. Other comments lead me to question their understanding of carbon vs. carbides.

[Bithabus]

Daniel makes a very important point. But even if we assume simple steel swords are traditional I will maintain my position. Simply copying what someone else has done is not enough. And, today it is so easy to get fantastic steel that there is no excuse for using obsolete and inferior technology.

The conspiracy of ignorance has everyone believing that the old ways are better. They have done this not out of any sort of insight but because they are too stupid or lazy to innovate.

[Nick]

Nick, The fallacy in your argument is the assumption that a 10 series steel represents something traditional. While this is a commonly held belief within blade steel circles, I believe that it is erroneous. Few modern smiths use the more sophisticated and time consuming ancient techniques that would have been required get high performance out of a simple steel. Since traditional methods are not used, a 10 series would not end up as a traditional steel... just a simple one.

Obviously no way I'd argue with Dan the Man on this topic; reason dictates that given the technologies used for refining iron ore into steel though the iron age, most ore deposits would have measurable quantities of naturally occurring alloying elements which would end up in the final steels even in the times before anything more than carbon was intentionally added, and that's just the say mother earth has before a skilled smiths begin to get their word in. I guess I did imply 10 series is universally acceptable as traditional when I said "an appropriate steel" in context of defending the notion that 10 series can be suitable for some sword applications with good heat treat, but that wasn't really my intent. The easy one to mention is that I still consider many Japanese smiths that use their traditional steels serious makers, even though they could make much better blades (Dan and Howard obviously but there are some others, including a couple Japanese smiths) by modernizing. In some ways this is a poor example because Japanese smiths ARE privy to their own set of the traditional technologies you mention.
I suppose I was just gabbing a bit too much when I should have just said "If the type of blade a smith is crafting has hardness, toughness and abrasion resistance characteristics substantially similar to the results you get with good heat treat of a 10x series steel, it's an acceptable choice" - even if the blade COULD have several times the toughness, notably more hardness, and just about the same abrasion resistance(or some other "overall win" tweaking) with a modern higher alloy steel.
Obviously, though, since I invest in AS, I _do_ personally like my blades both made with the best modern alloys and technologies, AND built with knowledge of the most appropriate ancient techniques.

The conspiracy of ignorance has everyone believing that the old ways are better. They have done this not out of any sort of insight but because they are too stupid or lazy to innovate.

LOL, Bith, that's just mean... sure, there is a certain lure in the sword collecting community to "made exactly in the ancient ways of the ancestors, who's skill is unmatched to this day." But they bother me less than the circular backslapping I see among knifemakers where everyone tends to just compliment each other's work and the worst anyone says is that a particular piece seems overly pricey. It seems like the only real way to get blasted is to not participate in the game, or have poor communication with customers. Constructive criticisms between makers themselves would improve everybody s work, but youtube reviews seem to be the main source of that, and because the reviewers are not makers, they tend to only be able to say when and how some aspect fails.

This post has been edited by Nick: Jan 20 2010, 11:29 AM

[Bithabus]

"If the type of blade a smith is crafting has hardness, toughness and abrasion resistance characteristics substantially similar to the results you get with good heat treat of a 10x series steel, it's an acceptable choice"

Can't polish a turd.

[Daniel]

Can't polish a turd.

If it were dried, then pressure treated with a hard polymer, then cryo processed for additional quality...

[brandt14]

Actually Mythbusters PROVED you CAN polish a turd.... but what good in a shiny Turd?

[Bithabus]

If it were dried, then pressure treated with a hard polymer, then cryo processed for additional quality...

Dymondturd!

[Bill]

If it were dried, then pressure treated with a hard polymer, then cryo processed for additional quality...

Dymondturd!

ROFL!! Priceless!!

Bill