Blade Steel Selection: Spyderco vs Benchmade

[Lenny]

This has been bugging me for a while.
As we all know, Benchmade uses 154-CM for virtually all their knife blades. Spyderco, on the other hand, uses ATS-34, VG-10, AUS 8,CPM-440V, etc.
To me, it seems that Spyderco obviously puts more thought into the area of matching knife use with steel selection. If that logic is faulty, tell me why you think they do it.
Now, almost all the Spyderco's I've seen have had fit and finish equal to the best in the world. Whereas Benchmade's QC has been erratic at best. The strange thing is that price wise, Spydercos are similar, if not less expensive than the "equivalent" Benchmade.
What Gives?
Any theories?
Is my logic faulty here?
Lenny

 

[Firebat]

Hi Lenny-

Just some ramblings in regards to some of the things you mentioned.

First off, Benchmade now employs GIN-1 and 440C in their product line, in addition to the 154CM. Also, they've made a number of models in the tool steels M2 and D2. Plus, the Balis were made in Sandvik, correct? Or at least they were...not too certain on that one.

I think it's difficult to make a hard and fast comparison in regards to blade steel selection versus intended use. I mean, isn't it kind of tough to predict what the consumer will ultimately use the thing for? So I don't agree that Spyderco puts more thought into intended use, as you put it, maybe they just cover the bases a bit better perhaps by offering a wider range. That's not to say either company doesn't do one heck of a fine job on their product lines, I just think it's more of a pricing and marketing issue rather than an intended usage one.

I think the balance is in finding the best steel for the knife as a concept. The plastic handled lockback that sells for 30 bucks probably isn't going to warrant the use of BG-42. Likewise, the anodized Ti frame lock with special filework and other decorative touches would seem a shame in anything but BG-42. See what I'm getting at? I just have a hard time with the intended usage part of what you said because how does one really know? Sure, you can market a knife as being great for some particular task, but it's hard to know after the sale if the guy used the Ladybug to skin an elk, or if the other guy who bought the 710 Axis in M2 just used it to open his mail.

Maybe I'm wrong though. But I still think that pricing and market share have a whole heck of a lot to do with it. Isn't it the goal of every knife manufacturer to get it's product into as many hands as possible? Seems Spyderco has done a pretty good job of it from the get go, and Benchmade is catching up nicely with their new models in the past couple of years. We are by far the elite minority, and not everyone needs or even cares that 154CM makes for a great knife blade- and are much less inclined to shell out more than the cost of the most inexpensive knife you or I have.

Now, how any of that relates to QC issues, I dunno. Lately, I've been really pleased with both. I was a staunch Benchmade detractor due to some quirks I experienced three years ago with their stuff, but I truly think they are past it. I'm a huge Spyderco fan, but I've seen a few examples of issues on their knives as well. All manufacturers will have a few rough ones get by now and again, and I just don't think it's fair to judge the entire company based on a very limited sampling. Guess I can't help you on that one, sorry.


Firebat

 

[AJ]

I'm gonna have to side with Firebat on this one. I think Benchamde has used some excellent steels in their knives in the last couple of years (most notably M2 high speed tool steel).

All of the Benchmade's I've purchased (6 or so) have had excellent fit and finish... easily comparable to my Spyderco's.

Both companies seem to be making excellent products, with Spyderco perhaps focusing on a broader consumer market (they seem to have a wider variety of knives, priced at different points).

AJ

 

[Guyon]

Perhaps my question here merits a new thread (or a search), but I'll go ahead here and see what people say. Is Benchmades 154CM an improved version of this steel? I'm no expert here, but my understanding is that 154CM actually predates ATS-34. In fact, when I ordered my Benchmade 710, I thought I'd get ATS-34, but I'm perfectly happy trying out a different steel. I know the two steels are similar, and I wonder if there's much difference in performance.

On the issue of BM vs. Spyderco, I will say that I appreciate the greater variety in Spyderco knives because it has allowed me to use and evaluate a wider range of steels. I've owned or own Spyderco knives in AUS-6, AUS-8, ATS-55, ATS-34, 440V and VG-10. (My Benchmades have been ATS-34 and now, 154CM.)

So far, I must say that I'm a big fan of VG-10, and I'm happy to see Spyderco using it in more models. I have the Moran fixed blade in VG-10, and I just got the Calypso Lightweight Jr. (now discontinued I think). Out of the box, that was the sharpest knife I've ever bought. Hair screaming sharp. Really. Hair was flying off my arm before the blade made contact. Try it. You'll like it.

 

[ThinkOfTheChildren]

I think when Spyderco picks out a steel they try and figure the use of the knife but also its total cost. I have noticed the same thing Lenny has about Benchmade up until recently only sticking to one or two steels (now a couple more). Maybe BM just rode on the fact that many thought that ATS-34 was the end all be all. In fact they seem to like to use a steel for its name. This can be seen in their new use of 154CM (so here's where I'm relating to Guyon's question). I purchased the 940 and the 722 in 154CM and they keep the stuff soft! This has been confirmed by others on the forums and points out that they are using 154CM for mostly its name and not its properties. After all, 154CM is almost the same as ATS-34 so why the huge decrease in hardness? They seem to want to make it perform like softer steels but with the trendy name still there. This is odd, IMO, because there are softer steels that would give better performance in other areas (corrosion, etc) that would also be cheaper. So why not use one of these steels which would cost less and perform better???There was a thread on this in the past, hopefully someone can dig it up.