Case true sharp vs SAK steel?

An fyi. Case's trusharp is 420hc and SAK steel is 4116. I'd probaly give the advantage to the 4116 even though Victorinox heat treats it on the lower end of hardness.
 
Nonsense.
4116 and 420HC are kissing cousins, from a composition standpoint.
Roughly the same amounts of Carbon, Vanadium, and Moly.
4116 has a bit more chromium, which will improve the corrosion resistance, but won't affect anything else as long as they both have the same amount of Carbon.

http://www.agrussell.com/Steel_Guide/a/73/
 
Vic steel from some 2008 brochure information is :
C 0.48-0.60 Cr 13-15 Mo 0.50-0.80 V 0.15 HRC 55-56
Though i do have one peanut in SS, haven't used it yet, so i can't really be of any help right now. But i'll put it in my pocket, and see what i can say in a few weeks.
 
jackknife said:
Being that two of my favorite knives are the Case peanut and my SAK classic, I should be familair with them. But my Peanuts, (damascus and chestnut bone) are carbon while my SAK is the stainless of some mysterious blend. I long ago gave away the one peanut I had in true sharp, so I have no reference. Now I find myself wondering about the new tan caliber peanut, in true sharp of course. All of my case knives are CV except for the damascus peanut, but the idea of a feather weight peanut is intriguing me.

I was wondering if anyone here had an idea of how the true sharp stacks up against the SAK steel?

I know that I'm happy with the edge holding and cutting of my SAK's, and was wondering f the true sharp is compatible. I know many years ago I did some testing of a bunch of knives, but for the life of me can't recall if I did a true sharp and a SAK.

Carl.
Click to expand...

Carl, i own a number of SAK's and a Case Stockman with true sharp blades. In my experience there's very little to choose between the two.
Both sharpen up very easily and neither hold an edge forever. I don't claim to have carried out any scientific testing, nor do i claim to be the worlds greatest knife sharpener. I don't faff about working up burrs or stropping, just a few strokes across the stone, i just want a blade that cuts for everyday house/garden/outdoors chores and dressing game in the field, i don't own any fancy sharpening gear either, Norton IB8, Buck Washita Arkansas, Fallkniven DC4. In my humble opinion Case true sharp stacks up just fine against SAK steel. Hope this helps.

Craig.
 
supratentorial said:
Carl, That Case caliber peanut is calling your name. ;) I say go for it.
Click to expand...

You're not helping matters!

Here I am in a internal fight with myself about breaking my year and a half loyalty to my damascus 'nut, and going stainless to boot, :)eek:) and you're waving the starting flag.

I have no problem at with the SAK steel, and use a SAK often for those day to day chores. Even with the tiny blade, the classic cuts out those foil seals on windshield washer fluid bottles, and other stuff. If it does get a bit dull, the nearest coffee mug or car window will have it up and running again in a moment.

Frank, your data does indicate that it would probably take a real science lab to find any tiny difference between the SAK steel and Case True Sharp.

Thanks guys, you're helped make up my mind. I think there will be a ultra light weight peanut in my near future.

Carl.
 
Well done! Ultralite has a lot of advantages.....

To sum up, both reasonable steels for reasonable tasks.
 
Both of these steels are good and easy to get sharp. Depending on what you are doing on any given day, they'll either stay sharp for days or dull well before lunchtime.

Heck who hasn't dulled D2 in a days work or less. No steel is perfect and sometimes good enough is good enough.

In the knife world, things aren't going to be perfect. Just learn how to sharpen things and always have oil on hand.
 
I only have two things to say. First, congrats Carl for trying out something new! I really hope you take a liking to it :)

Second, I don't remember how long ago it was, but I was reading up on Frank's testing and I remember folks that perform CARTA testing mentioning how Frank's results nearly mirrored their results.

When I speak of a burr leading to a bad rap for a steel, I mean guys that sharpen a knife to shave a hair, cut a slice of paper and then its dull. I see this happen with super steels that can cut cardboard all day long and still shave hair.

Respectfully,

Kevin
 
:)
DSCN0140.jpg
 
I have 2 Victorinox knives one is about 17 years old and the other is about 2 years old.
I use them almost strictly as work knives (I am in an office).
I am not a fan of Victorinox steel and based solely on anecdotal evidence (memory of usage) I think they lose there edge quicker then any other folder I own including my Case stockman in ss steel.

No side by side testing just how it seems to be
I prefer other knives for my edc's but the sak's and traditionals don't alarm my co-workers

The plus side is that they are easy to sharpen, and work well enough for my purposes
 
Last edited:
Carl, when in doubt about getting a knife, go for it.

I have found that Buck's 420HC is no. 1 for me, then Victorinox's standard stainless, then Case SS. Case has the nicest designs though. I still prefer CV, but like the song goes,
you can't always get what you want, but sometimes you get what you need... oh yeah baby...
Click to expand...
;).
 
knarfeng said:
It is not an opinion. It is the result of the tests. Deal with it or ignore it as you wish. But it is data, not opinion.
(snip...)
Now, all that being said, I sometimes carry a Case knife because they are available in a variety of different patterns. The steel, even with its lack of edge retention compared to other knives I use, is good enough for most everyday activities.
Click to expand...

These discussions remind me of the technical discussions/debates on cycling forums about the rolling resistance of tires or the ability of a bike frame to "absorb" or dampen road vibration.

The problem has to do with systems engineering. A bike is not fast or slow or harsh or damp. All bikes do is lean against the wall of the barn while waiting for rider - a rider who will ride in a certain way on real roads, not on test equipment. In the same way, a knife isn't a good slicer and doesn't have durable blade. It just sits in the pocket or on the shelf waiting to be used.

The knife/user/cut material system is as highly variable as the bike/rider/road system. Tests have their limits. They need to be replicable and we desire to isolate variables and as we do all that, we may end up heading in directions that do or don't line up with how another may want to use the knife or bike.

That is, the results of a given test are often baked into the assumptions made in setting up the test.

This is in no way a criticism of anybody's test approach. But as I read different testing approaches and results, I'm left with wondering how much of this relates to my actual cutting needs.

I would love to see discussions of different kinds of cutting tasks and how blades degrade in those cutting tasks and from that, thoughts on sharpening strategies and blade materials. In short, I would rather see more qualitative analysis and less quantitative analysis.

For the sake of the OP, I would suggest the question "which is best" isn't well posed yet. Best for what? Need to answer the what first. And "normal EDC use" isn't enough I think. That varies too much.
 
Last edited:
Pinnah,

I don't think bikes have much to do with this testing issue :)

Take for example my bike against a barn..

UGhUXzIwMTExMTI5XzAuanBn-1.jpg


What does that photo tell you? Probably not much.

After spending a few years working for the DOD for a proving grounds, I could chime in a LOT about testing. But I don't feel its applicable. You can punch holes in just about any test if you really want. Or you can take the results for what they are worth. When the tester presents all variables, testing methods and the results I feel it can be valuable.

Even though I still form my own opinions through use, I would not attempt to discredit results from a 'controlled' test.

Kevin
 
richstag said:
Pinnah,

I don't think bikes have much to do with this testing issue :)

(snip...)
After spending a few years working for the DOD for a proving grounds, I could chime in a LOT about testing. But I don't feel its applicable. You can punch holes in just about any test if you really want. Or you can take the results for what they are worth. When the tester presents all variables, testing methods and the results I feel it can be valuable.

Even though I still form my own opinions through use, I would not attempt to discredit results from a 'controlled' test.

Kevin
Click to expand...

Kevin, I don't disagree with you. So long as I understand the methods, I can draw my own conclusions as to their applicability to my situation.

I mention the bike analogy only to raise the point that we run into big problems if we focus only on the object and ignore the fact that users are involved, as are different uses. This is what I liked about Frank's post. He discussed both his test results AND real world observations. Test's alone don't tell the whole story.

The danger with test is to avoid generalizations. To assume that any test has settled the question universally. "Best" is tricky stuff. I could have made the point with about anything. Cars. Guns.....
 
I find there is a difference even between various SAK's. The Vic Pioneer and its variants have a harder blade steel (or so it seems to me from sharpening and using them) than some of the Cellidor models. Is it the same steel? Is it the thickness that makes a difference? Heat treat? I don't know. I sharpen with a steel most of the time and you can hear the difference, the blade on the Pioneer has a ring to it which the cellidor blades don't. What all this means I'm not sure. I'm happy if my knife takes a good edge which 99% of the SAK's and the Case SS does easily and well. When they dull a couple of licks with a steel and I'm good to go again.

The problem with judging blade steels is it's so subjective. I've had knives with steel that I wouldn't recommend as a butter knife, yet I read of others, who's opinion I respect, say they have the same knife and can get a razor edge on it. As I can't believe either of us is wrong I must conclude that there is often a variation in the quality of blade steel in many makes of knives on the market today.

Steve
 
jacknife said:
The problem with judging blade steels is it's so subjective.
Click to expand...

Usage differs.

Many books, articles and postings you read about sharpening (correctly) point out that one may choose different sharpening strategies (or blade materials) depending on what you're doing. In the same breath, I think it's fair to say that there are several forms of edge degradation to be considered and that different usages and materials may produce different modalities of degradation, and hence the need to choose blade materials and sharpening strategies accordingly.

Rope cutting, meat cutting, game dressing (similar, but a bit different), fish filleting, cardboard cutting, scoring/hard material cutting (think, work in the trades), wood splitting, wood shaving, carving and whittling.... This is just a partial list of cutting scenarios I can think of.

In my work, we sometimes talk about "design patterns". A design pattern is a combination of a set of usage scenarios and a set of known solutions. Given a usage scenario, there may be a small set of known solutions.

To my thinking/training, talking about one blade material being superior to another without attaching it to a certain cutting usage is sort of disconnected.

Again, please don't let anybody mis-read this as a criticism of Franks testing results. It is not. Just pointing out that his test (like any other standardized test) assumes a certain form of cutting and a certain sharpening strategy which may or may not align well with a particular cutting scenario.
 
The information from a controlled test can be read or misread just the same as unfounded jabbering. It's the reader's responsibility to read it. Frank's methods are clearly outlined. From the discussion that I've had with Frank, I'm sure he'd welcome other controlled tests that either support or refute his tests... I haven't seen any though.
 
pinnah said:
Usage differs.

Many books, articles and postings you read about sharpening (correctly) point out that one may choose different sharpening strategies (or blade materials) depending on what you're doing. In the same breath, I think it's fair to say that there are several forms of edge degradation to be considered and that different usages and materials may produce different modalities of degradation, and hence the need to choose blade materials and sharpening strategies accordingly.

Rope cutting, meat cutting, game dressing (similar, but a bit different), fish filleting, cardboard cutting, scoring/hard material cutting (think, work in the trades), wood splitting, wood shaving, carving and whittling.... This is just a partial list of cutting scenarios I can think of.

In my work, we sometimes talk about "design patterns". A design pattern is a combination of a set of usage scenarios and a set of known solutions. Given a usage scenario, there may be a small set of known solutions.

To my thinking/training, talking about one blade material being superior to another without attaching it to a certain cutting usage is sort of disconnected.

Again, please don't let anybody mis-read this as a criticism of Franks testing results. It is not. Just pointing out that his test (like any other standardized test) assumes a certain form of cutting and a certain sharpening strategy which may or may not align well with a particular cutting scenario.
Click to expand...

Pinnah,

I believe I am reading you correctly. Let me offer up my understanding. You would like to see testing where the optimal HT, edge geometry, edge finishing and etc are achieved for each individual steel. You would also like these parameters to be optimized for each individual steel for the media being cut. You would like to see testing for multiple medias and cutting methods.

Am I getting closer?

Thanks,

Kevin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top