# Doubt about Epicurean cutting board



## calostro5

I have an old polyethylene cutting board that I would like to replace. I have just discovered the Epicurean cutting boards that look like they have many advantages. But I wonder if they are really knife friendly.
Has somebody experience with these cutting boards?


----------



## Towerguy

I have two of them, but I would add that they show every single cut mark. They are dishwasher safe, and they are reasonably knife friendly. However, they are not as good or as friendly as an end grain maple board.


----------



## captaincaed

They're pretty rough on knives


----------



## WildBoar

We got rid of ours shortly after getting into j-knives.


----------



## calostro5

So far, I don't have any japanese knife. All my knives are european knifes with 1.4116 steel or similar.
But I hope to buy a japanese knife made of VG10 in the future.

So, I see this kind of cutting boards are not recommended.
I understand that en grain boards are probably the best, but they are quite expensive.


----------



## LostHighway

I haven't owned one but several friends have them, I'm not impressed. IMO they are no better than polyethylene or polypropylene boards for edge durability and significantly more expensive. As @Towerguy noted they show cut marks. I much prefer Hasagawa (the brown is PE but a good version of that material), Hi-Soft, or end grain cherry or walnut.


----------



## calostro5

LostHighway said:


> I haven't owned one but several friends have them, I'm not impressed. IMO they are no better than polyethylene or polypropylene boards for edge durability and significantly more expensive. As @Towerguy noted they show cut marks. I much prefer Hasagawa (the brown is PE but a good version of that material), Hi-Soft, or end grain cherry or walnut.



My main reason to replace my polyethylene board is the fact that has a lot of cuts and I think it is not possible to fix the surface. For the knives I have, I don't find polyethylene too aggresive with the knives.
Hasagawa must be good board, but very expensive.
The board is for home use, and I don't cut much food. I think a simple wood board would be enough for me. But now the doubt would be: from what tree?


----------



## esoo

They are very hard. They are light and dishwasher safe. I only use mine for raw meat so I can throw them in the dishwasher after. 

Generally I use edge grain maple. You can find them cheap enough. 

Unless you are buying a nice board (Hasegawa/Ashi/Boardsmith), just consider it a disposable item and replace as needed.


----------



## calostro5

esoo said:


> They are very hard. They are light and dishwasher safe. I only use mine for raw meat so I can throw them in the dishwasher after.
> 
> Generally I use edge grain maple. You can find them cheap enough.
> 
> Unless you are buying a nice board (Hasegawa/Ashi/Boardsmith), just consider it a disposable item and replace as needed.



A wood board is not disposable. It can be sanded and the surface obtain is new.
I don't remember seeing maple boards in Spain. Maybe they are popular in USA. But I agree with you, edge grain boards are usually affordable. Probably I will buy this kind of boards.


----------



## esoo

Some of the edge grain boards I buy come from Italy. 

And if the board is too thin, it will warp and crack, and therefore disposable.


----------



## daveb

I used the Epicurean a lot before JKnives and like others I still keep a couple around for raw. Being able to throw them in the dishwasher without warping is probably the biggest strength. I was not bothered by the cut marks and put quite a bit of mileage on them. You could do a lot worse.

To go with a hardwood board in Europe you'll want to look for hardwoods that are grown locally or one that is retailed there through Amazon or equivalent.


----------



## btbyrd

They're not especially gentle on edges; I mostly use my Epicurean boards when using serrated knives. They're inexpensive, thin, light, and require zero care. This makes them good for traveling, camping, or for leaving in vacation properties or whatever. But they're not a great everyday board.


----------



## parbaked

esoo said:


> They are very hard. They are light and dishwasher safe. I only use mine for raw meat so I can throw them in the dishwasher after.


I agree. I use them slicing for raw and cooked proteins, where edge life is not a concern. Very easy to sanitize. 
Don’t chop/mince meat or you’ll get shards in your mince…


----------



## calostro5

esoo said:


> Some of the edge grain boards I buy come from Italy.
> 
> And if the board is too thin, it will warp and crack, and therefore disposable.



I agree, if they are too thin, they are cheap and easily replaceable.



daveb said:


> I used the Epicurean a lot before JKnives and like others I still keep a couple around for raw. Being able to throw them in the dishwasher without warping is probably the biggest strength. I was not bothered by the cut marks and put quite a bit of mileage on them. You could do a lot worse.
> 
> To go with a hardwood board in Europe you'll want to look for hardwoods that are grown locally or one that is retailed there through Amazon or equivalent.



I am looking for end grain boards and I have found two carpenters in Spain that do this kind of boards. But there are some others in Europe.
The prices are around 80-110 € for a board with dimension of 40x30x4 cm.



btbyrd said:


> They're not especially gentle on edges; I mostly use my Epicurean boards when using serrated knives. They're inexpensive, thin, light, and require zero care. This makes them good for traveling, camping, or for leaving in vacation properties or whatever. But they're not a great everyday board.



So, do you also suggest me end grain boards?


----------



## calostro5

parbaked said:


> I agree. I use them slicing for raw and cooked proteins, where edge life is not a concern. Very easy to sanitize.
> Don’t chop/mince meat or you’ll get shards in your mince…



You say that this boards are useful for a not hard work, only slicing and smooth cutting.


----------



## parbaked

calostro5 said:


> You say that this boards are useful for a not hard work, only slicing and smooth cutting.


Yes. I use hinoki or Boos edge grain for vegetables.


----------



## Jovidah

End grain boards can be had for cheaper if you shop around. Cheapest option in Europe is usually beech wood which is great. As long as you avoid bamboo pretty much every affordable end grain board should be fine.


----------



## esoo

Cheap and cheery. NORRSJÖN Chopping board, oak, 44x42 cm - IKEA

Haven't used, but it's likely one of the disposable variety. I've got a big beech one from the from years ago.


----------



## Jovidah

I miss the good old days when you could buy a massive 186x60x4 cm beech wood countertop for 40 bucks and just saw that up to make cutting boards from.  
Had I known they were going to dissapear I'd have bought a 12-pack of those...

When it comes to the Ikea stuff I'd avoid both bamboo and acacia. The rest is pretty decent, though I'd still prefer an end-grain board. They really don't have to be all that expensive.


----------



## calostro5

parbaked said:


> Yes. I use hinoki or Boos edge grain for vegetables.



I guess that would be too expensive for me.



Jovidah said:


> End grain boards can be had for cheaper if you shop around. Cheapest option in Europe is usually beech wood which is great. As long as you avoid bamboo pretty much every affordable end grain board should be fine.



Yes, beech is cheaper, but no much expensive it is possible to get maple or cherry.
I have one bamboo board and I don't use it.



esoo said:


> Cheap and cheery. NORRSJÖN Chopping board, oak, 44x42 cm - IKEA
> 
> Haven't used, but it's likely one of the disposable variety. I've got a big beech one from the from years ago.



Thank you. This board is certain cheap and I guess oak is a robust wood.



Jovidah said:


> I miss the good old days when you could buy a massive 186x60x4 cm beech wood countertop for 40 bucks and just saw that up to make cutting boards from.
> Had I known they were going to dissapear I'd have bought a 12-pack of those...
> 
> When it comes to the Ikea stuff I'd avoid both bamboo and acacia. The rest is pretty decent, though I'd still prefer an end-grain board. They really don't have to be all that expensive.




An end grain board could cost around 80-120€ for 40x30x4 cm made with walnut and chestnut or oak and cherry


----------



## Jovidah

Here in the Netherlands I can find end-grain beech boards that are surprisingly decent for 35-40 euros for 45x35x4. It might take some digging through a few different big store chains etc, but they can be found. 
Personally I think it's worth doing some extra digging for a nice affordable end grain board over the 'normal' wood boards.


----------



## calostro5

Jovidah said:


> Here in the Netherlands I can find end-grain beech boards that are surprisingly decent for 35-40 euros for 45x35x4. It might take some digging through a few different big store chains etc, but they can be found.
> Personally I think it's worth doing some extra digging for a nice affordable end grain board over the 'normal' wood boards.



In Dictum (an online german Shop), I yesterday saw a board made of acacia which I found affordable.








Acacia End Grain Cutting and Chopping Board, with Sap Groove | Cutting boards | Dictum


Acacia End Grain Cutting and Chopping Board, with Sap Groove from category Cutting boards with 30-day right of return at Dictum




www.dictum.com




The shipping to Spain cost 12,95€. 

I have also found this other made of oak, which cost 69,90€ plus 4,95€ of shipping.








Tabla de cocina de madera de roble.


Tabla de cocina de madera de roble a testa, la forma en la que esta colocada la madera la convierte en una tabla de madera diferente y muy duradera.




madergrab.com





What Wood is more convenient for a cutting board?


----------



## rickbern

Here’s a little biased info on acacia. 









Why Acacia is Becoming a Popular Wood for Cutting Boards


Durable, sustainable and affordable, Acacia is quickly becoming one of the most popular woods for cutting boards.




www.cuttingboard.com


----------



## Jovidah

Acacia is a bit on the hard side, not ideal IMO.
The usual rule of thumb that gets thrown around is that you want woods that are 900-1500 on the janka scale. Janka is slightly above that and in 'normal' edge grain orientation it was noticable IMO.

However in an end grain setup I guess it'd be fine?

The model that's sold in the Netherlands for cheap is from a brand called 'Butler'. But I'm not sure you can find that internationally. Their beech boards always served me well even though they are cheap as hell. Only caveat with those (and most other cheapos) is that they tend to be delivered dry, so you have to drown them in mineral oil first (can be found for cheap at Ikea under the name Skydd).


----------



## captaincaed

I would agree. I've been making a few cutting boards and learning how well different woods work. I've gone as soft as pine and as hard as Brazilian redwood. I agree that 800-1500 janka hardness is a good sweet spot. Too soft and it's easy to gouge the surface with the tip. Too hard and you shorten edge life. Acacia is above 2000 janka hardness, it'll feel almost glassy as a cutting surface. Not the best, but still better than epicurean boards for preserving your edge.







As a side note, teak is supposed to have a higher silica content, which is just sand, and hard on edges also. Haven't tried it myself though. 

From a woodworking background, I'll say hickory is hard in tools, and I wouldn't use it either. Oak is is easy enough on tools, and seems a good hardness, but it's so porous I'd worry that it might trap bacteria in the pores and be unsanitary. I'd opt for a tight grained wood that's too hard over oak as a general rule. If your board gets a bacteria colony...it's all over. You need to cut it out or throw it out. My dad made a board with a big crack and I made him cut the crack out before I'd use it. I work in public health and I've seen some horrible things in deli slicing equipment...


----------



## calostro5

I didn't know what janka scale is.




Jovidah said:


> Acacia is a bit on the hard side, not ideal IMO.
> The usual rule of thumb that gets thrown around is that you want woods that are 900-1500 on the janka scale. Janka is slightly above that and in 'normal' edge grain orientation it was noticable IMO.
> 
> However in an end grain setup I guess it'd be fine?
> 
> The model that's sold in the Netherlands for cheap is from a brand called 'Butler'. But I'm not sure you can find that internationally. Their beech boards always served me well even though they are cheap as hell. Only caveat with those (and most other cheapos) is that they tend to be delivered dry, so you have to drown them in mineral oil first (can be found for cheap at Ikea under the name Skydd).



I have found this board made of beech:








Butler kopsbeuk snijplank op frank.nl


Deze Butler kopsbeuk snijplank kopen voor € 22,74? Snijden en presenteren




www.frank.nl





I can buy this board from Spain throught this web:








Butler Tajadera BEUK cabeza 45x35cm en checkfrank.es


Compre este Butler Tajadera BEUK cabeza 45x35cm para € 23,94? Corte y presentación




www.checkfrank.es




Free shipping from 50€.



captaincaed said:


> I would agree. I've been making a few cutting boards and learning how well different woods work. I've gone as soft as pine and as hard as Brazilian redwood. I agree that 800-1500 janka hardness is a good sweet spot. Too soft and it's easy to gouge the surface with the tip. Too hard and you shorten edge life. Acacia is above 2000 janka hardness, it'll feel almost glassy as a cutting surface. Not the best, but still better than epicurean boards for preserving your edge.
> 
> View attachment 141136
> 
> 
> As a side note, teak is supposed to have a higher silica content, which is just sand, and hard on edges also. Haven't tried it myself though.
> 
> From a woodworking background, I'll say hickory is hard in tools, and I wouldn't use it either. Oak is is easy enough on tools, and seems a good hardness, but it's so porous I'd worry that it might trap bacteria in the pores and be unsanitary. I'd opt for a tight grained wood that's too hard over oak as a general rule. If your board gets a bacteria colony...it's all over. You need to cut it out or throw it out. My dad made a board with a big crack and I made him cut the crack out before I'd use it. I work in public health and I've seen some horrible things in deli slicing equipment...



I suppose that oak don't have problems of bacteria colonies growing. But I don't know.
You have made more complicated the wood selection.



rickbern said:


> Here’s a little biased info on acacia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Acacia is Becoming a Popular Wood for Cutting Boards
> 
> 
> Durable, sustainable and affordable, Acacia is quickly becoming one of the most popular woods for cutting boards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cuttingboard.com



Acacia seems a good option, but maybe a bit hard. Anyway, cheap and easy to find.

Now I am more confused. I thought oak was a good option, but what captaincaed says give me doubts.


----------



## captaincaed

A good Guideline. If the tree produces a food that you eat, it generally makes a good cutting board. (Maple, walnut, cherry...)

I don't think acacia is bad. We're all just big nerds. If it fits your budget and you like the look, it's good. There are better options if budget allows.


----------



## calostro5

captaincaed said:


> A good Guideline. If the tree produces a food that you eat, it generally makes a good cutting board. (Maple, walnut, cherry...)
> 
> I don't think acacia is bad. We're all just big nerds. If it fits your budget and you like the look, it's good. There are better options if budget allows.



I will consider the Guideline you say, and I will search what cutting boards I find.
This would be my first wood cutting board, so I prefer not spend too much money in it. But I don't want to buy a crap only to save some euros.


----------



## captaincaed

OK nice! If you find something nice, let us know!


----------



## calostro5

captaincaed said:


> OK nice! If you find something nice, let us know!



Yes, I will Tell you


----------



## rickbern

calostro5 said:


> I didn't know what janka scale is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have found this board made of beech:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Butler kopsbeuk snijplank op frank.nl
> 
> 
> Deze Butler kopsbeuk snijplank kopen voor € 22,74? Snijden en presenteren
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.frank.nl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can buy this board from Spain throught this web:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Butler Tajadera BEUK cabeza 45x35cm en checkfrank.es
> 
> 
> Compre este Butler Tajadera BEUK cabeza 45x35cm para € 23,94? Corte y presentación
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.checkfrank.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free shipping from 50€.
> 
> 
> 
> I suppose that oak don't have problems of bacteria colonies growing. But I don't know.
> You have made more complicated the wood selection.
> 
> 
> 
> Acacia seems a good option, but maybe a bit hard. Anyway, cheap and easy to find.
> 
> Now I am more confused. I thought oak was a good option, but what captaincaed says give me doubts.


I seem to remember reading that European oak is more suitable for a cutting board than American oak


----------



## calostro5

rickbern said:


> I seem to remember reading that European oak is more suitable for a cutting board than American oak



I will try to find information about It. I don't have any knowledge about Woods.


----------



## big_adventure

calostro5 said:


> So, do you also suggest me end grain boards?



End and edge grain are the same for your knife edges. Edge grain can show more cut marks, and end grain boards look nicer to lots of folks, but I have an edge grain maple Boos that I bought off Amazon in France and it doesn't really show any damage at all after nearly a year of daily use. Also, if marks bother you, just sand the board down from time to time.


----------



## Jovidah

Janka scale is just a rough categorization of hardness of different woods. Google janka scale + a wood type and you'll usually find a number or an entire table. It's an easy way to judge whether certain wood types are a good option or not.
There's still the caveat that other factors might make a wood type unsuitable (high presense of silicates for example), but it's a good starting point.

I don't entirely agree that end grain and edge grain are the same. They certainly don't feel the same when cutting, and most testing I've seen shows a difference in for example edge retention. But for me the more pleasant cutting feel is enough to justify paying more for end grain.

The big downside of any wood vs for example the 'better' synthethics like hasegawa, is that all woods still require at least some gentle love and care. You need to oil periodically, and you can't just throw them in a dishwasher. So I have some plastics for meat work since I find them more straightforward to sanitize.


----------



## captaincaed

Jovidah said:


> The big downside of any wood vs for example the 'better' synthethics like hasegawa, is that all woods still require at least some gentle love and care.


That's what makes them charming!


----------



## big_adventure

Jovidah said:


> I don't entirely agree that end grain and edge grain are the same. They certainly don't feel the same when cutting, and most testing I've seen shows a difference in for example edge retention. But for me the more pleasant cutting feel is enough to justify paying more for end grain.



Please, find me one scientific study showing that there is a difference in edge retention between end and edge grain. I've only seen two remotely scientific tests done (tests using hundreds or thousands of repetitions with controlled masses, then a sharpness tester, not someone saying "feels better"), and both showed no difference at all. The notably bad surfaces are consistently bamboo and cheap poly boards. Obviously metal and glass are things to never use as well, but I don't think that needs to be explained.


----------



## Jovidah

big_adventure said:


> Please, find me one scientific study showing that there is a difference in edge retention between end and edge grain. I've only seen two remotely scientific tests done (tests using hundreds or thousands of repetitions with controlled masses, then a sharpness tester, not someone saying "feels better"), and both showed no difference at all. The notably bad surfaces are consistently bamboo and cheap poly boards. Obviously metal and glass are things to never use as well, but I don't think that needs to be explained.


There aren't any proper scientific studies on the subject period. Literally every test (regardless of outcome) has major problems and can easily be critisized for its methodology... which is probably also why there's some completely contradictory outliers. But lines up with my own experience when I switched boards throughout the years. 
'Feels better' wasn't so much about the edge retention for me but about the cutting feel. My end grain boards simply feel more pleasant to cut on. For the same reason I detest cheap poly, regardless of whether it's good or bad for edge retention.

I do agree that bamboo in my experience stands out for being crap for knives.


----------



## big_adventure

Jovidah said:


> There aren't any proper scientific studies on the subject period. Literally every test (regardless of outcome) has major problems and can easily be critisized for its methodology... which is probably also why there's some completely contradictory outliers. But lines up with my own experience when I switched boards throughout the years.
> 'Feels better' wasn't so much about the edge retention for me but about the cutting feel. My end grain boards simply feel more pleasant to cut on. For the same reason I detest cheap poly, regardless of whether it's good or bad for edge retention.
> 
> I do agree that bamboo in my experience stands out for being crap for knives.



I didn't mean to criticize you saying "feels better" there - I was talking about the groupthink "end grain boards are better for edge retention" that 95% of sites and videos will repeat despite the absolute lack of evidence.

If you prefer the feel of cutting on your end grain boards, by all means, stick with them! For me, living in France, it's a ***** to find good quality end grain boards for less than "a months rent." I have a 61x46cm edge grain Boos board that works fine and showed up in a day from Amazon. I've used many and had a couple of end grain boards, and while they look magnificent, I've never noticed any difference in feel compared to edge grain of the same class wood, and definitely noticed no difference in edge retention. 

Cheap poly is the thing we can and will all agree on - cheap poly sucks to cut on, for every reason. 

Bamboo = bad for boards. I have a big Ikea bamboo board that came with an apartment one time, I use it as a surface to sharpen on. No edge will ever touch it.


----------



## Jovidah

big_adventure said:


> For me, living in France, it's a ***** to find good quality end grain boards for less than "a months rent." I have a 61x46cm edge grain Boos board that works fine and showed up in a day from Amazon.


They exist though. At least in the Netherlands... I got a beech wood 60x40x6 end grain for 82 euros. My previous 45x35x4 also only cost me like 30 or 35 euros. Both pretty nice boards.


----------



## KitchenCommander

Early in my knife journey I experimented with a few different wood boards. One was a very pretty 12" x 20" Texas Mesquite board that wasn't all that cheap, janka hardness 2500! I didn't see any real edge damage, but sharpness fell off quite quickly when cutting on that board. Still have it, may bring it out again for slicing tasks. 

Also last year I purchased an old BOO's Butcher Block, end grain maple 30" x 30" x 14" full thickness. Awesome piece, but the maple is soo seasoned and dried that it was causing microchipping on just about every J-knife I put on it. Real buzz kill because it was fun while it lasted. Now I just set my Boardsmith 18" x 24" end grain Cherry board on top of it and use it as a small cutting station. 

I have bought some cheap Acacia boards and have been happy with them. No damage to knives, look good, low cost. Gave several as gifts. Edge grain maple is also a good choice.


----------



## captaincaed

Dang, that's sad to hear about he Boos block. Have you tried giving it a heavy soak in mineral oil? I've made a few boards, and some kiln-dried woods soaked up far more than I expected, and I _feel_ like the wood fibers softened up a bit, but it may be in my own head. One 18x24x1.5 yellow pine board soaked up a full pint and a half of oil, but now performs very well, resists staining, etc.


----------



## Towerguy

Jovidah said:


> There aren't any proper scientific studies on the subject period. Literally every test (regardless of outcome) has major problems and can easily be critisized for its methodology... which is probably also why there's some completely contradictory outliers. But lines up with my own experience when I switched boards throughout the years.
> 'Feels better' wasn't so much about the edge retention for me but about the cutting feel. My end grain boards simply feel more pleasant to cut on. For the same reason I detest cheap poly, regardless of whether it's good or bad for edge retention.
> 
> I do agree that bamboo in my experience stands out for being crap for knives.


But, does it really matter?


----------



## calostro5

big_adventure said:


> End and edge grain are the same for your knife edges. Edge grain can show more cut marks, and end grain boards look nicer to lots of folks, but I have an edge grain maple Boos that I bought off Amazon in France and it doesn't really show any damage at all after nearly a year of daily use. Also, if marks bother you, just sand the board down from time to time.



I don't have any knowledge about it, but cutting fibers and cutting in the space between fibers should not be the same for the edge.
Of course, a wood board can be sanded, opposite other materials.



Jovidah said:


> Janka scale is just a rough categorization of hardness of different woods. Google janka scale + a wood type and you'll usually find a number or an entire table. It's an easy way to judge whether certain wood types are a good option or not.
> There's still the caveat that other factors might make a wood type unsuitable (high presense of silicates for example), but it's a good starting point.
> 
> I don't entirely agree that end grain and edge grain are the same. They certainly don't feel the same when cutting, and most testing I've seen shows a difference in for example edge retention. But for me the more pleasant cutting feel is enough to justify paying more for end grain.
> 
> The big downside of any wood vs for example the 'better' synthethics like hasegawa, is that all woods still require at least some gentle love and care. You need to oil periodically, and you can't just throw them in a dishwasher. So I have some plastics for meat work since I find them more straightforward to sanitize.



I guess you are right when you say end grain and edge grain is not the same por the edge of the knives because it is different cutting fibers than cutting in the space between the fibers. And the feeling could not be the same because when you hit the board with the knives in edge grain you hit the fibers ans in the end grain you maybe hit the end of the fibers, but they move a little separating them form each other.
As I have seen, sometimes there are not much price difference between end grain and edge grain. Mostly when the edge grain board is made in one piece.



Jovidah said:


> They exist though. At least in the Netherlands... I got a beech wood 60x40x6 end grain for 82 euros. My previous 45x35x4 also only cost me like 30 or 35 euros. Both pretty nice boards.



Could you find this board on the Internet?



KitchenCommander said:


> Early in my knife journey I experimented with a few different wood boards. One was a very pretty 12" x 20" Texas Mesquite board that wasn't all that cheap, janka hardness 2500! I didn't see any real edge damage, but sharpness fell off quite quickly when cutting on that board. Still have it, may bring it out again for slicing tasks.
> 
> Also last year I purchased an old BOO's Butcher Block, end grain maple 30" x 30" x 14" full thickness. Awesome piece, but the maple is soo seasoned and dried that it was causing microchipping on just about every J-knife I put on it. Real buzz kill because it was fun while it lasted. Now I just set my Boardsmith 18" x 24" end grain Cherry board on top of it and use it as a small cutting station.
> 
> I have bought some cheap Acacia boards and have been happy with them. No damage to knives, look good, low cost. Gave several as gifts. Edge grain maple is also a good choice.



So extra point for acacia boards. I see that the boards made of this wood are easy to find in Europe and not too expensive.


----------



## calostro5

Towerguy said:


> But, does it really matter?



Feeling matters. Sometimes more than anything else.


----------



## big_adventure

calostro5 said:


> I don't have any knowledge about it, but cutting fibers and cutting in the space between fibers should not be the same for the edge.
> Of course, a wood board can be sanded, opposite other materials.



Yeah, it 100% is if the materials are softer than the material you are cutting with. All "quality" boards are woods that aren't toxic, that absorb a bit of water, are moderately durable and hard, and that contain very little silica. All of those wood fibers are MUCH softer than decent knife steel. That's the science. As an aside, even with end grain boards you are sometimes cutting into vertical fibers, where they are by far the strongest. The wood matters VASTLY more than the angle.

People have done tests using a fixed pressure for a thousand or more strokes and the whole length of the blade, and there is no difference between end and edge grain boards for edge retention. Now, if you want an edge grain board, get one! I'm not saying that they are bad, just that there is no proven difference in edge retention. They ARE prettier. They DO resist cuts and scratches better over time, but there is no difference at all in edge retention.


----------



## calostro5

big_adventure said:


> Yeah, it 100% is if the materials are softer than the material you are cutting with. All "quality" boards are woods that aren't toxic, that absorb a bit of water, are moderately durable and hard, and that contain very little silica. All of those wood fibers are MUCH softer than decent knife steel. That's the science. As an aside, even with end grain boards you are sometimes cutting into vertical fibers, where they are by far the strongest. The wood matters VASTLY more than the angle.
> 
> People have done tests using a fixed pressure for a thousand or more strokes and the whole length of the blade, and there is no difference between end and edge grain boards for edge retention. Now, if you want an edge grain board, get one! I'm not saying that they are bad, just that there is no proven difference in edge retention. They ARE prettier. They DO resist cuts and scratches better over time, but there is no difference at all in edge retention.



So, it is more important what wood I am using than if this board is edge grain or end grain.
This is so complicated lol. At the beginig I thought it was easier.


----------



## big_adventure

calostro5 said:


> So, it is more important what wood I am using than if this board is edge grain or end grain.
> This is so complicated lol. At the beginig I thought it was easier.



Maple is a relatively inexpensive, easy-to-care-for, durable, easily sourced, sustainable wood. Don't overthink this - as long as you avoid bamboo and some odd exotics, you probably will be fine.


----------



## Jovidah

calostro5 said:


> Could you find this board on the Internet?


What I bought:
https://www.debijenkorf.nl/butler-snijplank-van-hout-60-x-40-cm-6590090330-659009033000000
If you look at Butler Snijplank 60 x 40 you sohuld probably find some other retailers, but it's all going to be Dutch. Not sure if it's sold abroad.
For example: Hakblok Butler Beuk Kops (40 x 60 x 6 cm) | Kookexpert
I only ordered at the first store and they're fine, don't know about any others that are offering.

But there's also other options, like the brand Vogue; it's basically a restaurant supplier and you can usually only find it in restaurant supply stores, but they have pretty big boards for pretty good prices. For example:
Snijplank kopen?
Houten snijplank - 610x455mm

Affordable stuff exists, just have to look around a bit. Stores focused on restaurants instead of home consumers usually have the best bang for your buck. The one caveat is that these cheaper boards tend to come really dry. So you have to add 1-2 bottles of mineral oil to the price. But that can also be found rather cheap if you look around (I used to just buy it at Ikea).




> So extra point for acacia boards. I see that the boards made of this wood are easy to find in Europe and not too expensive.


The acacia boards I've used (edge-grain, cheap Ikea stuff) felt and sounded so hard I'd feel uncomfortable recommending them. Might be a different situation in end-grain though.



big_adventure said:


> People have done tests using a fixed pressure for a thousand or more strokes and the whole length of the blade, and there is no difference between end and edge grain boards for edge retention. Now, if you want an edge grain board, get one! I'm not saying that they are bad, just that there is no proven difference in edge retention. They ARE prettier. They DO resist cuts and scratches better over time, but there is no difference at all in edge retention.


The few 'tests' that I have seen that concluded that there is no difference (one was posted here on KKF a while ago) were so questionable in methodology that frankly you could not draw such conclusions from them. At best you can claim that while results are inconclusive you cannot prove there is a difference, but that's a far cry from proving that there is no difference.


----------



## big_adventure

Jovidah said:


> The few 'tests' that I have seen that concluded that there is no difference (one was posted here on KKF a while ago) were so questionable in methodology that frankly you could not draw such conclusions from them. At best you can claim that while results are inconclusive you cannot prove there is a difference, but that's a far cry from proving that there is no difference.



First, proving a negative is a logical fallacy. You can't do it. You cannot prove that, oh, vaccines don't cause autism. They don't, it's just common sense backed up by decades of data points showing no correlation between autism and vaccinations, but you cannot _prove_ that they don't. 

The fact that zero tests using any methodology at all have ever pointed to there being any difference between edge and end for edge retention _combined_ with the few tests using some consistent methodology showing zero difference between edge and end would tend to support the conclusion that there isn't any difference.

If you want to use end grain for any reason you choose, that's great, and there are a bunch of valid reasons (better looking, better scratch resistance to name two), but there's no reason to conspiracy theory a reason that nobody has ever proven to exist.


----------



## M1k3

Everyone nitpicking over cutting boards and grain orientation. Meanwhile at work my choices are "color coded poly boards" or "soft rubber that past coworkers have left their signature on, signed with a bread knife". I generally choose the poly ones, doesn't bring the knife to full **** you stop.


----------



## Jovidah

big_adventure said:


> First, proving a negative is a logical fallacy. You can't do it. You cannot prove that, oh, vaccines don't cause autism. They don't, it's just common sense backed up by decades of data points showing no correlation between autism and vaccinations, but you cannot _prove_ that they don't.
> 
> The fact that zero tests using any methodology at all have ever pointed to there being any difference between edge and end for edge retention _combined_ with the few tests using some consistent methodology showing zero difference between edge and end would tend to support the conclusion that there isn't any difference.
> 
> If you want to use end grain for any reason you choose, that's great, and there are a bunch of valid reasons (better looking, better scratch resistance to name two), but there's no reason to conspiracy theory a reason that nobody has ever proven to exist.


You don't seem to be getting the point. I've seen literally ONE test that supported your view that there is no difference, with questionable results and methodology, and I have seen MULTIPLE tests stating there is a difference over the last decade. My own personal experience also strongly points at the latter.
So like I said, I'm more than willing to concede that the jury is still out as long as we have conflicting stories and all the tests are dubious at best, but you can't just conclude that the one test you agree with is the only one that matters.


----------



## big_adventure

Jovidah said:


> You don't seem to be getting the point. I've seen literally ONE test that supported your view that there is no difference, with questionable results and methodology, and I have seen MULTIPLE tests stating there is a difference over the last decade. My own personal experience also strongly points at the latter.



See, I get your point. Your personal opinion is that there's a difference. I've never seen any test done with any consistent methodology saying that end grain is better than edge grain. I've seen people state their personal opinion that... the more expensive product is better. Luxury selection bias at it's finest. The thing is, the product doesn't have to be better in every aspect to be worth more. End grain boards are prettier and maintain their appearance longer and with marginally less care. That alone makes them worth more. I would have loved one when I bought my current edge grain board, but I couldn't find one large enough at a remotely acceptable price.



Jovidah said:


> So like I said, I'm more than willing to concede that the jury is still out as long as we have conflicting stories and all the tests are dubious at best, but you can't just conclude that the one test you agree with is the only one that matters.



When that test confirms my experience and makes sense scientifically, sure I can, though in this case, the only tests I've ever seen that actually showed testing being done and explained their methodology, and performed consistent tests on each material, agree as well. It's not just one, it's a few. OTOH, I've never seen a single test using any consistent, explained methods that showed an objective difference.

My experience is that there is no real difference on edges. That experience is backed up when you consider the hardness of the materials in question: none of the woods I've ever used are close to as hard as steel, and they don't contain hard sub components, so they are going to have minimal effect at worst on well-formed edges, regardless of grain. 

Bamboo, which is a grass, not a wood, and which has a high silica content, has an understandably abrasive effect on steel, hence it being bad for edges.

In any case, we've pretty much exhausted this topic.


----------



## spaceconvoy

big_adventure said:


> Luxury selection bias at it's finest.



 
there's a different phenomena going on here






Escalation of commitment - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## captaincaed

Hold my beer, I need to take one swing at the horse.

With so many potential variables, including differences between different boards of the same wood ... these tests are going to have a lot of experimental scatter. I found the issue of faster dulling on a scarred surface (even if made of soft wood) was an interesting idea.

End grain isn't really that much softer than edge grain from a woodworking perspective, and in fact it's much harder to sand it. I'm not sure I buy the "cutting between the fibers" argument for endgrain. It sounds like something that got passed around the internet, but I can't find a source for it. Your knife edge still contacts the wood fibers. You're not wedging fibers against the bevel sides, you're hitting the board with the edge. I do agree they stay looking nice for longer, as long as they don't split. In addition, mineral content probably drives dulling more than cutting wood lignins, and those minerals are present no matter how you orient the fibers.

From Cook's lllustrated



> *Harder Woods versus Softer Woods*
> https://www.cooksillustrated.com/equipment_reviews/1972-heavy-duty-cutting-boards
> As in past years, the choice of a favorite board ultimately rested on two characteristics: durability and ease of maintenance. At the conclusion of testing, all the boards showed signs of use—marks from the serrated knife we used to slice bread and/or the cleaver we used to chop chicken parts for stock. But while some boards had only minor scratches, others were more deeply scarred. One board even developed a series of cracks. How could we account for these differences?
> 
> In part, a board's durability is related to the type of wood used to make it. Every type of wood has a different hardness, which can be measured by the Janka hardness test. A wood's Janka hardness value is expressed in pounds force (lbf). The higher the Janka hardness value, the harder the wood. And in general, the harder the wood, the more resistant it seemed to be to knife damage: Over the course of testing, boards made from harder woods such as maple (1,439 lbf) and yellow birch (1,259 lbf) retained fewer and shallower knife marks than the board made from *soft hinoki (Janka hardness value of 349 to 627 lbf*), which was more heavily scarred.
> 
> But what does that hardness mean for your knife? To find out whether some types of wood dulled knives faster than others, we teamed up with the Autodesk Technology Center in Boston, using one of their robots to make 5,000 cuts on every board with a brand-new, factory-sharpened knife and pausing every 200 cuts to test the sharpness of the blade. To expedite the testing, the cuts were made at a fairly large force load, averaging 7 pounds, or about the amount of force you'd use to break down a chicken.
> 
> The results were reassuring. All the knives could still slice through paper (our basic sharpness test) after 5,000 cuts, though some did so with more difficulty than others. Adam Senalik, research general engineer at the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin, told us that even though there is some variation in the hardnesses of the different woods and bamboo, all are still very soft compared to, say, glass, which can dull your knife in just a few strokes.
> 
> To our surprise, the knives that seemed the sharpest by the end of the test were the ones that were used on boards made from harder woods. By contrast, knives used on boards made of softer woods were a bit duller. Senalik offered a possible explanation: Soft woods might initially be gentler on your knives, but because they are more prone to damage, they can dull a knife a bit faster as they get more beat-up over time, forcing the knife to travel over an increasingly irregular surface. *This was certainly the case with the hinoki board: The knife we used on it was razor-sharp up until about 3,000 strokes, but as the board got increasingly scored and sliced up by the knife, the knife quickly began to dull.*


----------



## big_adventure

spaceconvoy said:


> there's a different phenomena going on here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Escalation of commitment - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



You are correct - I was too tired to remember the name and too lazy to look it up.


----------



## Edo

I think you are in Europe, maybe you can take a look on this








Miyabi Schneidbrett Hinoki - mittel


Miyabi Schneidbrett Hinoki Das mittelgroße Schneidbrett aus Hinokiholz ist die perfekte Schneidunterlage für Messer von Miyabi, denn auf diesem Holzbrett werden ihre empfindlichen Schneiden nur gering abgenutzt. Hinoki ist das Holz einer Zypressenart, die nur in Japan vorkommt. Es ist sehr...




www.pascher-linz.at




The page is in German, an Austrian website (you can use google translator). I haven’t found a better price for a wood board (Hinoki wood) by 57€. Made of 1 single tree, not glued.
I bought one few months ago and it is really good, I am very happy with it, it has a bit of pine scent and is very good for the knifes.
Good luck!
Good luck!


----------



## spaceconvoy

big_adventure said:


> You are correct - I was too tired to remember the name and too lazy to look it up.


Wait no, I was referring to you. I'm suggesting that if you're bringing psychology into this discussion, perhaps examine your own motives for wanting to believe the purchase you can afford is just as good as the one you can't.

(Personally I couldn't justify spending full price for an end-grain board so I scouted my local discount home-goods reseller for a few months until I found one for cheap. I paid roughly 6% of my monthly rent, if you're curious.)



big_adventure said:


> People have done tests using a fixed pressure for a thousand or more strokes and the whole length of the blade, and there is no difference between end and edge grain boards for edge retention... They DO resist cuts and scratches better over time


You acknowledge there is a difference between end and edge grain boards (resistance to scratching) but has it occurred to you this might be an important factor? Unlike testing machines, humans do not cut with fixed pressure at a perpendicular angle every time. If edge degradation in real world use is mainly caused by damage from cutting uneven surfaces at random angles rather than simple abrasion, then the tests you demand won't show a difference _because_ of their consistency.


----------



## Edo

Also, In the forum some member recommend this Danish board maker, when I contacted them once they were very fast and flexible to do a customized end-grain board, regarding the wood type, design and size.
I didn’t buy but I will at some point.


https://træskærebræt.dk/produkt-kategori/moenster/?orderby=price


Cheers
Ed


----------



## big_adventure

spaceconvoy said:


> Wait no, I was referring to you. I'm suggesting that if you're bringing psychology into this discussion, perhaps examine your own motives for wanting to believe the purchase you can afford is just as good as the one you can't.
> 
> (Personally I couldn't justify spending full price for an end-grain board so I scouted my local discount home-goods reseller for a few months until I found one for cheap. I paid roughly 6% of my monthly rent, if you're curious.)
> 
> 
> You acknowledge there is a difference between end and edge grain boards (resistance to scratching) but has it occurred to you this might be an important factor? Unlike testing machines, humans do not cut with fixed pressure at a perpendicular angle every time. If edge degradation in real world use is mainly caused by damage from cutting uneven surfaces at random angles rather than simple abrasion, then the tests you demand won't show a difference _because_ of their consistency.



Ok cool, I feel beautifully insulted then. Oh, wait, no I don't. I was pretty clear that I wasn't trying to justify anything at all. 

I could have spent more on my last purchase - money is far from my biggest issue - but simply couldn't find a decent product quickly for anything less than "extortion" prices. So I "settled" for a board I'm extremely happy with.

Going into that choice, however, I knew that edge retention wasn't a consideration between my options, because, as far as it's ever been shown, there is no difference at all. Salesmen and consumers of expensive end grain boards sell benefits that don't exist along with those that do exist. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Tapio

big_adventure said:


> End and edge grain are the same for your knife edges. Edge grain can show more cut marks, and end grain boards look nicer to lots of folks, but I have an edge grain maple Boos that I bought off Amazon in France and it doesn't really show any damage at all after nearly a year of daily use. Also, if marks bother you, just sand the board down from time to time.


End grain allows the use of soft woods. Soft end grain pine performs great. End grain’s ability to resist cutting marks allows a light contact between your knife and cutting board. Soft wood + light contact = knives stay sharp


----------



## big_adventure

Tapio said:


> End grain allows the use of soft woods. Soft end grain pine performs great. End grain’s ability to resist cutting marks allows a light contact between your knife and cutting board. Soft wood + light contact = knives stay sharp



The sharpness of your knife and your technique are what determine the contact between the blade and the board, the hardness of the surface has literally nothing at all to do with it. You can use a butter-soft Hasagawa and make very hard contact, or a cinderblock and make very soft contact.


----------



## Tapio

big_adventure said:


> The sharpness of your knife and your technique are what determine the contact between the blade and the board, the hardness of the surface has literally nothing at all to do with it. You can use a butter-soft Hasagawa and make very hard contact, or a cinderblock and make very soft contact.


I didn’t say that. An egde grain board will have cutting marks after some use. It’s the unevenness of the cutting board that requires to use more force. 

Regardless of the force you use a soft wood board is good for the edge retention. Soft wood works well only when used in an end grain board.


----------



## big_adventure

Tapio said:


> I didn’t say that. An egde grain board will have cutting marks after some use. It’s the unevenness of the cutting board that requires to use more force.
> 
> Regardless of the force you use a soft wood board is good for the edge retention. Soft wood works well only when used in an end grain board.



OK, you are saying things there that would be extremely hard to prove in anything resembling an empirical fashion. I have been using the same edge grain maple board as my main board daily, often twice daily, for over a year. It has almost no visible marks on it, and basically no marks you can feel. I've never sanded it or done anything other than use it, clean it and oil it. It also is just fine for edge retention.

In addition, one of the sort-of empirical studies shown above says the opposite about soft versus hard wood. Notably, soft wood, even on end grain boards, is going to be damaged more by edges and the soft wood damaged will do more damage to edges than hard wood. I'm not saying that's true or correct, just that it's at least an attempt at an empirical study. Saying "this works better because I said so" or "this works better because people on the Internet say so" isn't really all that helpful, at least in my opinion.

Again, I largely prefer end grain boards, for reasons given repeatedly above. I think that they are generally worth more money for those reasons. But those reasons don't include edge retention.


----------



## captaincaed

I think it's useful to look at the empirical observations (e.g. America's test kitchen) as _one_ data point. There is so much variety in the wood alone, it's hard to make a single generalization about end vs. edge. For example, boards closer to the bark will contain more silica due to sand being blown into the tree. Concentrations are much greater in bark than heartwood. So, you have board-to-board variability depending on where the tree grew, and how close to the bark the boards are.

Then, you consider a smooth vs. a textured surface for cutting. It seems reasonable that cutting into a heavily scarred wood surface with heavy pressure might chip or roll a delicate edge. A smooth, hard wood surface may simply enlarge the radius of the edge at the apex by abrasion, causing the edge to dull more slowly. So you may be talking about different modes of failure. 

From what I've seen, wood tends to blunt knife edges about the same, regardless of wood orientation (unless you're chipping and rolling it). You could do some carefully controlled experiments with Catra coupons and single boards, but I don't think that's been done. Beyond that, I think bamboo _generally_ does worse than wood, as do industrial wood composites like Epicurean boards because the binder is _so_ hard. 








Why you shouldn't put plywood on a jointer



Here, you can see how a jointer blade was scarred by cutting the glue in plywood. Boards that were cut after the plywood did not cut cleanly due to this scarring. I've had the same experience in my own woodshop. This is why I won't use an Epicurean board. I don't know if it's the same binder or not, but I have other options and choose not to. Luckily, the glue used to make endgrain boards (Titebond 3) is _not_ an industrial adhesive; it's much softer, and you can easily cut it without damage to your shop tools. 

Finally, glass and stone are two orders of magnitude harder on edges than even bamboo or epicurean boards, I think in part due to chipping and rolling, but someone correct me here. Easy decision in any case - stay away.

So I think the edge/end grain debate will go along for a while yet, but I'm pretty happy with any home-made/non-industrial wood board at the end of the day.


----------



## captaincaed

Some initial reading on silica in wood bark vs. heartwood. I'm no expert, just poking around, but other papers seem to agree.

_MINERAL PROPERTIES The mineral content of clean wood of temperate tree species is 0.1% to 06% and that of bark 3% to 5%. Mineral matter in wood consists mostly of salts of calcium, potassium, and magnesium. but salts of many other elements are also present in lesser amounts (Table 7). Some salts are formed with the organic acid groups of the cell wall components. whereas others occur as carbonates. phosphates, sulfates, silicates and oxalates. The mineral content of wood and bark is highly variable between and within species and can vary with soil and growth rate. Whole-tree analyses of minerals and trace elements in aspen. pine bark. and oak bark (Table 8) are different from that of pure wood. *Silica is rarely present in more than trace amounts in the wood of temperate tree species (Pettersen, 1984). The silica content of clean bark is higher than that of wood. Analysis of bark from 18 softwood species and 24 hardwood species indicated an average silica content of 0·05% and 0·11%, respectively (Harder & Einspahr, 1980). The silca content of bark. as used for fuel. however. is higher because of soil contamination by wind and harvesting methods.* _



https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf1991/ragla91a.pdf


----------

