Any talk of a steel change?

• 
  Support BladeForums!
  Paid memberships don't see ads!

I think if CRK ever switched to anything it would be 20CV. I don't see them moving "up" in the S series of CPM steels. They just don't have the balanced trait that I think CRK feels they have in S35VN (and I agree).

20CV has the ability to offer that balanced factor, if heat treated well. It could do very well in the CRK lineup, but I'm not holding my breath. Nor am I at all unsatisfied with CRK S35VN at 59-60RC.

 

1. Why do people say things like if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it? What steel were people using 40 years ago? Why not use that still? I don’t see too many companies using 440 anymore. Should we all be using AUS8? Those were fine but almost every decent maker has moved on. They weren’t broke but wasn’t it nice when they “fixed it”?

2. Everyone is talking like the only option is for CRK to find 1 new steel to replace S35VN. How about doing special runs of different steels? Why does every blade have to have that “perfect” balance? How about we sacrifice a little corrision resistance for better edge retention on some knives. People buying CRK knives aren’t newbies and we know what we’re buying. We don’t mind a little extra work sharpening. I’m willing to bet a lot of us have plenty of other knives with other blade materials. We can handle it.

 

The more I use and sharpen, the more I’ve grown to appreciate the overall balance of S35VN. I’m ok with it. I only have one knife in 20CV, and I haven’t used it that much. I’ve been real impressed with 204P, however, so it makes sense that a move to 20CV would be a logical progression.

 

I wished for another steel option for a very long time.......and then did something about it......made a new blade of my own and I love it.
Excellent point Blade Runner on your post.

 

I'm all for 204P , M390 , 20CV and S90V.

 

CRK has built their name doing what they do best with little variation. Titanium slabs, S35VN, close tolerances, and excellent customer service. It's their bread n' butter. That's why, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Plenty of other companies offering sprint runs and super steels, many of whom have made a good name for themselves doing exactly that.

 

To add honestly even S30V is very decent if properly heat treated. I hear Spyderco/Benchmade heat treats them nicely.

 

Funny because I thought they built their reputation on ATS34 and BG42 way before S35VN. I feel that because Chris had a hand in the creation of S35VN, it makes it harder for them to move on. Being able to state that is useful in marketing.

 

I'd really love if their fixed blades were to hit 59-61 RC. I think S35VN can take it. The 'easier to sharpen' argument holds no water for me from CRK or Emerson. 99% of users will never be in a primitive environment long enough to have to sharpen their expensive knife on a rock. The 1% who might are smart enough to have a diamond pocket stone with their supplies, and would probably be better off with longer edge retention anyway.

 

I wouldn't say M390, 20CV or S90V is an upgrade over S35VN. You lose toughness as a trade for higher wear resistance.

 

Stop talking reckless bro. Out of the box thinking will not be tolerated.

Regardless of the fact that a run of CRKs in 20cv for a +200$ to base price premium would sell out before the first one was even made.

 

If you touch up your super steel blade and don't let it get dull you can actually spend the same ammount of time sharpening. If you work a day with a super steel and an aus 6 knife doing equal work and go home. You spend a few minutes sharpening them the super steel sharpens up in those few minutes because it was still fairly sharp. The aus 6 sharpens up from dull in those few minutes too.

It is only really an issue if you let your supersteel knife get dull. Then you will be spending a rediculous ammount of time at the stones trying to fix it.

 

I've been inept and incompetent with CRK's S35VN edge honing & maintenance (no such major issues with other steels!) which is my problem, but if the majority of the CRK's folder owning customers are quite content with this steel to remain as status quo, then so be it. However, I do have a problem with S35VN in larger fixed blade camp style knives. I know that CRK uses it plus a bunch of other makers such as Spartan, but I would not be interested in such patterns specially at the kind of prices which they seem to command.

 

Let me guess you are somehow freehand matching the angle of your edge to the stones?

I was having the same issues with CRK edge maintenance. All my other edges I could sharpen up fine but CRKs (all my experience is with folders) I was having lots of trouble with.

The issue is not the steel but rather that CRKs have a convex edge. (Sebenza: Hollow ground but convex edge) As a result it feels like you layed the edge flat against the stone as you raise over the shoulder, but you are not hitting the apex.

The remedy is to hold the knife at abit higher angle than what your senses first tell you. (Normally that tacticle click means you layed the edge flat to the stone, not here!) After a few strokes test the edge to see if you are hitting the apex. Soon the edge will flatten out and it will be easier.

 

^ hence as I had stated, my own deficiency and ineptitude. I actually knew that their primary bevel was a convex edge but still had a tough time with my Zaan which had a more obtuse edge as I went from the heel to the tip! I have since sold it and moved on.

 

And what do you need all that toughness for in a folder? Their made for cutting not chopping. Not to mention if you wanted those other options to have more toughness you could run a bit lower Rockwell.

 

Well-played , sir.

 

Yes , in a folder , edge retention and corrosion resistance are my main concerns with blade performance. IMO , toughness really doesn't play a role unless you're talking about fixed blades/choppers.

 

I for one would love it if they did occasional runs in other steels, similar to how Hinderer does. However I just don't know if, philosophically, CRK would ever go that route. There really is an ethos and drive there for them to say that they make what they consider to be the "best" overall pocket knife possible. Hence a perfect "balance" of steel attributes is always what they're looking for.

Steels that are much better at certain things but worse at others, while interesting and fun to enthusiasts like us don't really fit the CRK philosophy. I'd be happy if that changed or got more flexible, and the market may eventually demand it, but I'm not holding my breath at this point.

 

• 
  Support BladeForums!
  Paid memberships don't see ads!

I didn't say they built their name using S35VN. I said they build their name doing what they do best WITH LITTLE VARIATION. In other words, the've never sold knives based on the steel they use. Same can be said for people like Mayo, Southard, and Terzuola, who all continue to use "old" steels. The examples I gave for CRK are exactly what they're known for in this market, which has exploded for them, selling their line of folders as fast as they can produce them (also like Mayo/Southard/Terzuola). Great companies recognize the reasons of their success and stay the course as long as it works to maximum capacity.

Change for the sake of change has never been part of CRK's business model. They created their niche and captured a customer base that continues to grow, most of whom make repeat purchases. The same can be said for Emerson (who also started out with ATS34).

That said, I think S35VN is a poor choice for any fixed blade not specifically designed for EDC use. I'd rather see their outdoor and fighting knives in a carbon O1 or D2 than S35VN. Not gonna happen though. I feel the same about Emerson's fixed blades using 154cm.