Do Looks Matter To You?

SPXTrader said:
N690 (Bohler's) is basically modified 440C, correct?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. N690 shares similar characteristics with 440C but it has, as you may have guessed, cobalt and vanadium! This increases edge retention and the vanadium especially allows the steel to take on a much finer edge, thus, making it ridiculously sharp. If you don't have a blade in N690 Cobalt Vanadium, get one now! You will love it and then wonder why more makers don't offer it.
 
Yes and no. There are some features that I just plain hate, visually, like flippers, recurves, camo finishes, excessive text on blades and complex multi-grinds, but other than those exceptions, I'm open to anyhting, as long as it's a functional design.
 
jonnyt16 said:
Not exactly. N690 shares similar characteristics with 440C but it has, as you may have guessed, cobalt and vanadium! This increases edge retention and the vanadium especially allows the steel to take on a much finer edge, thus, making it ridiculously sharp. If you don't have a blade in N690 Cobalt Vanadium, get one now! You will love it and then wonder why more makers don't offer it.
Click to expand...

Soooo...the progression would be 440C to N690 to S30V. Got it! Thanks!

And I do intend on trying Bohler's M390 when Kershaw releases their new Volt.
 
A couple of my most-used knives are ugly as sin.

But I won't likely buy an ugly knife for the rest of my living days. Learning about the finer things can be a curse.
 
If I can have both form and function, why not?
It's possible-- I know it is --I've held such a knife in my own two hands.

...however, beauty is in the eye of the beholder; something that the Spyderco comments have summed up nicely. Personally, I would never own a Spyderco or Sebenza based solely on their appearances. I'm sure they are some of the best knives money can buy, but they just don't do anything for me.

There is perhaps one exception. If the knife is to be a user, I will not forgo comfort for any amount of beauty.
 
The interesting thing is, everyone has their own idea of what looks "good".

For instance, I don't particularly like tanto style blades but I know there are those who think they're great. Somebody up above there said they don't like leaf blades yet they are probably among my favourite shapes.

I'd hate to be a knife maker trying to work out what people like. :)

I wonder if there is any particular knife that virtually everyone can agree looks good, even if they wouldn't necessarily buy it.
 
What makes a knife appealing varies.. many want plain, some "cool", some tacticool, whatever floats your boat. If you simply play with or show off your knives, if you actually use your knives...all plays a part. Example; for me, design is everything. How it works/cuts, how it fits in your hand, how naturally it opens and closes. I've yet to handle a knife that works as well as the Spyder Hole. Flick it, open it slowly, it works. All of that is the first thing I look for, then how it looks.

I own at least one of most major brands, but the vast majority are Spyderco. They just plain work. THAT makes them attractive to my eye. Thats not to say I will pass one up that just plain goes over the top, rock lobster for example. Just can't dig that one. BM 940. While it may be a good cutter, that reverse tanto skinny blade and slippery handle? Nope. Go figure. To each his own.
 
Echoing the above - looks are the first requisite for any purchase. Then follow the other factors. I won't buy a junky knife if it looks good, but I won't buy any knife that doesn't look good.
 
I don't care much about the looks of a knife as long as it performs. However, I can say given two knives that perform the same, I would then look at them to see which one looked more appealing. One of my problems though is I like the look of a black blade but it seems like after about a month of hard use there are many scratches and rub marks on the blade.
 
I'm another that won't by an ugly knife. There are too many out there that are both functional and pleasing to the eye.

Dan
 
I seem to like ugly knives. But I like knives with thick blades and ridiculously strong locks so that usually goes hand and hand. Example:
100_1341.jpg

100_1000.jpg

100_0661.jpg
 
It is not very important to me how a knife looks, just a little bit. There are certainly knives that I find ugly and knives that I find beautiful. When it comes to single bladed knives, I prefer knives with a simple design and wooden handles, like the folding knives from the EKA Swede range.
 
knifezoid said:
Fortunately there are a lot of good looking and functional blades out there.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more... and this cuts some slack for those of us who do consider a knife's aesthetic impact as well as function. All other factors in a blade hypothetically being equal, why not pick the one that appeals to you visually the most?

Some may maintain that it's not a consideration, that function is their only concern. I'm not sure. There's SO many models out there for a given purpose that will perform well, and the question of performance can and is hotly debated... how would such a person make a decision given all the options out there? Are they perhaps afraid that acknowledging aesthetics in blades and tools is... I dunno, girly?

Let's face it folks, knives ain't like most other tools, there's a HUGE variety of forms out there, even in a given range or application. Unless you're Mr. Spock and have the time to gather empirical data on the efficacy of each design with the utmost scientific rigour, what your eyes see is liable to come into play at some point in the decision-making process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top