Any traditional knife lovers like non-tradional alloys?

[Obsessed with Edges]

For a thin whittling blade 1095 might qualify as a super steel. The thin blade and thin edge need toughness in an alloy. A thin blade profile that can resist warping under pressure may require a hard steel. My first choice for a lot of traditional pocket knives would be 1095--like my old stockman. If I carry the knife everyday I lean towards stainless. My Victorinox SAK stainless has never failed me. It is an extremely practical alloy. If I were to upgrade I like BG42. It takes a better edge and is pretty tough. I have a couple Buck Master Series lockbacks that are my super pocket blades.

Always wanted one of those.

I do have a Buck 'Master Series' 119 in BG-42, but have never done anything with it, so far as sharpening goes. Now I'm intrigued...

(And it just occurred to me, I do have a Buck Custom limited-run 110 in BG-42, with black micarta handles & red spacers. I need to get busy with that one, I think.)


David

 

[Phil in Alabama]

I've got a few Queens in D2 and one in BG42 that I really like. One custom fixed blade in "traditional" style that's ATS 34. I do like the "modern" alloys very well.

 

[knarfeng]

It is a reasonably well known fact that I prefer stainless steels with carbides.

This is based on my own usage habits and my own experimentation with different alloys.
I've tried:
►simple carbon steels
►alloy steels
►stainless steels with less than 0.77% Carbon (no appreciable carbides)
►stainless steels with more than 0.77% Carbon (enough carbides to affect wear resistance.
►non-stainless PM alloys with LOTS of tiny carbides
►stainless PM alloys with LOTS of tiny carbides

Now in truth I never met an alloy I didn't like.

But at the end of the day, as long as it is stainless and has over 0.77% carbon to form enough carbides to have an impact on wear resistance, it works pretty darn good for my needs. It works better than any alloy, stainless or not, which does not have carbides. PM alloys are a goodness, but not absolutely necessary.

 

[Noddy]

I have a bunch in D2 and ATS34 -- Queen manufactures and others from the US and France -- Also a Gene Ingram sodbuster in D2 too, and some traditional pattern Shings in D2 also

I'd really like to see traditional patterns in VG-10 I like that stuff a lot. A big stockman, a 3 1/2" dogleg and a 4" sodbuster would be a good start

 

[skipper51]

Thanks to Ankerson, knarfeng and others in the General Knife Discussion forum I've learned a lot about the non-traditional alloys. Knarfeng can talk carbides whereas all I care know is how long I can cut and slice.

Jackknife's tales got me pointed back to the traditional forums and the Queen stockman and Northwods jack pictured in my original post. Thanks by the way because I could not find a modern folder that talked to me.

I believe there is a point of diminishing returns where steels like like CPM-S90V and M390 may be overkill in a traditional pattern. Steels like D2, CPM-154, 154CM and ATS-34 in my limited experience seem about ideal for my uses. 1095 has it's own qualities and will no doubt always be around.

There are side effects of having some of the newer steels, it didn't take long to figure out my old stones weren't going to work for D2. So I had to invest in a KME Diamond Kit. The newer non-traditional alloys are more expensive so that is a consideration as well.

The Northwoods had a fairly good edge out of the box and re-profiled easily. The Queen on the other hand had the worst edge I've ever seen on a knife. It had a very obtuse grind, the grind was off centered and it's thick behind the edge so it took a lot of work to re-profile it. Once done a quick few licks with a 1500 diamond will bring it back to life, just as easily as you can touch up 420HC with a stone.

The extra edge holding abilities stainless qualities offset the negatives for the way I use a knife. Looking at the pictures in the traditional forum I think variety is the very spice, that gives all traditional knives their flavor.