Everyone Hates Soft Steel, So Why....

sabre cat

sabre cat

Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,155
There seems to be a common dislike (and rightfully so) of manufactres that use soft steel and/or poor heat treatment. If soft steel is so bad, why does everyone love Swiss Army products? Victorinox and Wenger both produce knives that are not very hard on the Rockwell scale and yet bladeheads seem to be very dedicated to their SAK.
 
Different knives, different steels, different purposes.
 
"Soft steel" has some good traits. First thing is they are easy to touch up. Second is a quality steel h/t to a lower hardness will generally be tougher than when treated to a higher hardness. Quality steel.

I have a couple of knives, one being a kitchen knife, that is a soft crap steel. If you try to sharpen it to a too thin edge it's like it just kinda flakes off, turns to powder or something. You can see it on the edge in the light. Have a Chinese made "SAK" that does the same thing.

Anyway a decent steel like a SAK or Opinel may be soft but you can sharpen to a wicked edge easily. And strop back in seconds. I also have a Kershaw filet knife that seems to be pretty soft. But hit it a couple of times with a fine hone and it's wicked sharp again.

So, to make a long story short. Like tokerblue said:D
 
Yeah......that "soft steel" in SAKs may surprise some people. It's a bit better than a lot of people give it credit for.
 
My assumption is because the majority of people that buy them don't know how to sharpen them properly and "softer" steel is easier to sharpen.
 
Because SAKs are quality products that work. To say "everyone" is a gross generalization...the people who are knife connoisseurs like those on this forum are a very tiny percentage of the knife-owning people of the world. The right tool for the right job.

In many parts of the world, people whose livelihoods rely on their ability to use their blades have only cheap knives with steel as soft as or softer than SAK steel. Many of whom accomplish more hard use with their "crappy" blades on a daily basis than the majority of owners of super-duper hard, "never-needs-sharpening" steels.

Jim
 
If I had to guess (which is not really a hard question to begin with) is that the Victorinox knives have become a staple of what a "utility" pocket knife is, and rightly so. They are very inexpensive, readily available in just about any store, they are very easy to maintain, and come in an almost endless variety of configurations to suit just about every person on the planet.
 
I like SAK for the attachments, it you will. The knife on my SAK sees the least amount of work a blade could see.

I personally ever so slightly dislike soft steels because I have to touch them up more often; meaning more work.
IMO s30v in no super steel, but it holds a working edge long enough when it's in rotation.
M390 is where it's at IMHO.
 
Well to be fair, I don't even use the blades in SAK's or equivalents. Though I love the tool itself for its multiple uses.


I just don't like carrying a full size multitool. :o
 
tokerblue said:
Different knives, different steels, different purposes.
Click to expand...

To expand on this with my opinion...

I think SAKs are about as optimized as they can get. Sometimes you look at a knife and you think "this would be perfect except for this one change" For a SAKs price, they are amazing. I also think that not being a dedicated 1 blade knife, normally not locking, and with a very slim geometry SAKs steel works very well. For most people a SAK is an emergency or back up tool. In that regard having a softer steel that won't chip out, that is extremely stainless and can stay on your person with no maintenance regardless of weather, and that can be touched up on rocks or the bottom of ceramic coffee mugs is a great choice. It's a cheap beater steel meant to require little maintenance made into a blade designed to slice.
 
SAK steel does better than many people think, but its also a multitool which steel doesnt matter as much anyways. I dont like soft steel because they flatten, completely eliminating cutting, when a harder steel microchips it still cuts. Of course theres alot of variability that determines these things, but as an example I was using an old imperial rhode island stockman one day, I cut a zip tie and it completely flattened a portion of the edge, if I used the zt 0561 that was in my pocket instead it would have been unharmed because elmax is way stronger than the soft mystery carbon steel of the imperial. Also the edge flatttening on softer steels requires more material removal when you repair it to a clean apex, I just touch up the edges on the harder and stronger steels before they get too far gone. Just my 2 cents, im no knife scientist or anything.
 
sabre cat said:
There seems to be a common dislike (and rightfully so) of manufactres that use soft steel and/or poor heat treatment. If soft steel is so bad, why does everyone love Swiss Army products? Victorinox and Wenger both produce knives that are not very hard on the Rockwell scale and yet bladeheads seem to be very dedicated to their SAK.
Click to expand...

The quality, consistency, and usefulness of the total product over-rides a single characteristic.
Yes, the steel is relatively soft but it still slices and cuts better than many products with 'better' steel.

-------------------------------

Here's my knife of the week: Inexpensive, soft steel, thin fragile blade...

6_2751.jpg


But just try to type on a vintage PDA screen with a Gold Class Benchmade. :p
 
Probably because SAK's aren't used in marathon cutting chores and the rest of the tools are very useful.
 
I actually like being able to easily touch up an edge. I don't baton or chop with my knives so I don't need a super hard steel. My Moras and Victorinox knives will resharpen on an Arkansas stone with a few swipes which is very convienent.
 
On this point, has anyone actually observed that their Chris Reeves A-2 steel Hollow Handle knives are softer and holding less their edge? The difference is supposed to be noticeable, and they have been around for decades. Despite their price there must be some user opinion out there...

Gaston
 
mr_anderson said:
My assumption is because the majority of people that buy them don't know how to sharpen them properly and "softer" steel is easier to sharpen.
Click to expand...

That assumption would be wrong. Knife junkies like us are the only ones really worried about steel, so, this discussion is really about "us." And the people here who like SAKs know very well how to sharpen properly.

I'm sure not as well as you do, of course. :rolleyes:
 
My dad has been using SAK's for about 45 years now with great success. Next time I see him I will tell him about the soft steel.
 
marcinek said:
Because soft steel isn't bad. Bad steel is bad.
Click to expand...

Brian.Evans said:
Yeah......that "soft steel" in SAKs may surprise some people. It's a bit better than a lot of people give it credit for.
Click to expand...

^What these guys said. I actually prefer my knives in the same general range as SAKs. It's a good hardness for general use on blades shaped to cut well yet not shy away from rough--but sensible--usage. It also also tends to be a good hardness for the steels that strike a good balance between performance and economy to be run at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top