Explanation of crossgrain

[Daggerob]

I would beg to differ that crossgraining is the result of contamination. I certainly would not negate this one gentleman's recolection of that alledgedly happening in the factory that he worked at. Especially if the factory had it's own forge and made blades in house. There again the forging, trimming and rough grinding were separate from the finishing areas to prevent such unnecessary damage to their finished product.

But....

This explanation would NOT hold true to the numerous small shops in the cutlery business that did not have the facility to forge and rough grind their own blades. Many smaller operations sourced there stock from larger companies or from companies that operated solely as suppliers to the trade such as drop forge shops for the blades and smelting and casting shops for hilt fittings, die stamping firms that supplied scabbard halves and the such.

These small shops were filling their contracts with outsourced parts to finish in their shop and to sell under their own trademark. In early SA dagger production there were several hundred makers, most of them small shops. Their premises would not have the alledged contamination of a large factory yet their blades also displayed the crossgraining we love so much to see.

As I mentoned before crossgraining is the result of the grit in the polishing compound that was used to bring up the blades to an acceptable finish. This process is still used today. One just needs to lok at currently produced knives and you will see similar crossgraining. Granted the degree of polish is not as beautifully done as on early TR era blades but the process is basically the same.

Tony

Your point is well made Tony.
That's an interesting perspective.
Thanks.

[Nakida]

Tony!

This is what forums are about, sharing knowledge and learning from fellow collectors.
Your input is very interesting and also makes sense for sure!Thanks for the lesson!

Skyline!

I’m also very interesting to hear more about your theory about that some manufactures took the time to polishing their blades after the cross grain stage.
This must have been a time wasting job only to get a brighter and high polished blade that also reduced the traces of cross grain.
Do we know about which manufactures who actually did the additional after the cross grain polishing job? This is very interesting!

Sam,

[Tor-Helge Y]

Maybe a bit off-topic, but some manufacturers also chrome-plated their blades (some Luft-daggers amongst others) to present a mirror-like blade on their merchandise.
If I remember correctly some manufacturers offered this as an "add-on" to your blade at time of order.

Cross-grain is easy to reproduce, but to get a result like on an original blade takes a lot of work/time. Some restorers of blades actually offer this service... So cross-grain is not something that's decisive on authenticity.

Cheers,

[SADagger]

I bought a Eugen Scheidt which I believe is one that remove the grain.

[ivbaust]

Cross-grain is easy to reproduce, but to get a result like on an original blade takes a lot of work/time. Some restorers of blades actually offer this service... So cross-grain is not something that's decisive on authenticity.

That´s very interesting!!! Has anyone seen yet a blade that has reproduced crossgrain? Can a reproduced crossgrained blade be identified as such? Are there any differences between reproduced and period crossgrain?

[Tor-Helge Y]

ivbaust,
Look through old posts here and on GDC, and you'll see plenty of examples of 100% fake blades with crossgrain.

As for original blades which have been repolished and thus received new crossgrain, I really cannot tell if it's possible to spot if the job has been well done.
I would think there would be also here other factors which would give it away, like sharpness of maker-motto etch/stamp, age on a blade polished away could give an uneven spine on the blade etc etc...

Best regards,

[Tiger 1]

Tony!

This is what forums are about, sharing knowledge and learning from fellow collectors.
Your input is very interesting and also makes sense for sure!Thanks for the lesson!

Skyline!

I’m also very interesting to hear more about your theory about that some manufactures took the time to polishing their blades after the cross grain stage.
This must have been a time wasting job only to get a brighter and high polished blade that also reduced the traces of cross grain.
Do we know about which manufactures who actually did the additional after the cross grain polishing job? This is very interesting!

Sam,

Thanks Sam,

That's how we learn from each other.

Just to clarify a point. Crossgraining is not a stage it is a level of polish. Some companies did indeed use finer grit compoung to further elevate the briteness of their finished product. Envision a series of polishing compounds with let's say 60 or 80 grit to true the surface of the blade as recieved from the forge. Then progressively polish out the preceeding 'grain' with finer and finer grits such as 120, 220, 320, 400, 600, to produce an acceptable finished product. Each sucessively finer compound leaves behind that much finer of a 'grain'. Any higher polish is brought up using rouge. That may have been done with some of the more highly polished baldes on occassionaly sees. When there is still some crossgraining showing on a highly polished blade that has not been messed with post factory that is evidence that the polisher went to the rouge polish before all the previous scatches or grain was removed.

That's about it for now.

Tony