this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
540 points (96.9% liked)

Memes

45661 readers
1516 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's not true, no matter how many times you make that unsupported claim.

[–] Egg_Egg@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

My dude, nothing in that blog supports your claim.

First of all, it's talking about the metallurgy of the 16th century and after, which is after Japan had imported blast furnaces. Secondly, it ignores the amount of labour needed to actually produce refined steel from iron sands, which ultimately dictates the quality of the finished product.

This isnt a debatable topic, any steel made from iron sands before modern electromagnetic sorting contains a large amount of impurities when compared to steel made from rock ore.

Even during WW2 the Japanese had a hard time producing high quality steel even with the use of blast furnaces, because the iron sands contains a large amount of titanium.

This blog which falls over itself trying to engage in revisionist history, can only claim that the quality was "perfectly fine"....not good.

[–] Ross_audio@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

You've proven yourself wrong.

Mochi Tetsu is mentioned in that article as being a source that produces higher quality products than iron sand. Exactly what you're arguing against.

The facts are that due to the limited availability of good quality iron ore the steel produced in Japan often used iron sand and that led to lower quality products.