"Experts" demand premium blade steels until it comes to prime collectors knives from companies like Loveless and Randall?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stahlmann

Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
382
I don't know how many times I've seen someone ask for input about XYZ knife. Mixed with the good/usable information is that from some of the steel "experts." Those that are quick to say the XYZ might be an OK knife, except for the fact its blade is made from ABC steel (a non-premium steel.) Thus, they wouldn't ever own it.

You see, they simply won't own knives that aren't produced using premium blade steels. If the blade isn't made from Bohler's latest and greatest (or better), it's "junk" in their minds.

Unless of course the knife is produced by a company like Loveless, RMK or the like. Then far more mundane steels magically become wholly acceptable to them.

Why the odd dichotomy?
 
Stahlmann said:
I don't know how many times I've seen someone ask for input about XYZ knife. Mixed with the good/usable information is that from some of the steel "experts." Those that are quick to say the XYZ might be an OK knife, except for the fact its blade is made from ABC steel (a non-premium steel.) Thus, they wouldn't ever own it.

You see, they simply won't own knives that aren't produced using premium blade steels. If the blade isn't made from Bohler's latest and greatest (or better), it's "junk" in their minds.

Unless of course the knife is produced by a company like Loveless, RMK or the like. Then far more mundane steels magically become wholly acceptable to them.

Why the odd dichotomy?
Click to expand...
Probably because those Randall and Loveless knives are more used for collecting purposes then the knives they demand the better steel from
 
On the other hand, many of the super steels aren't necessarily "tough"...and there are clearly different levels of "usage". Some where toughness excels, some where edge holding excels, and that middle ground where steel like CPM Cru-Wear excels (imho).

Many of the benefits of "older" out of fashion steels are "rediscovered" regularly.
 
What one may consider a premium steel, another may see it as inferior. It all boils down to what you like and what works for you. I've tried many many steels in a work environment and I have my knives narrowed down to what I like most in a knife steel, regardless of what others may think of those steels.
 
Echoing what others have said, I guess when you hold the keys to such a classic design(s) the blade steel becomes a secondary consideration. Not that there is anything wrong with the steel. In midrange knifes, higher end steels are everywhere.

Apples to oranges. Classic car vs modern may be a rough analogy?
All depends on what you like.

Edit: High end classic vs mid range modern is more like it.
 
Last edited:
I have never been a steel snob. The quality of the heat treatment usually trumps the quality of any given steel. I will take a mediocre steel with a spot-on heat treatment over a premium steel with suspect or inconsistent heat treatment any day.

And I have never been a brand name fanboy either, production OR custom. While I admire (and own) many custom knives from a variety of the usual suspects, I don't buy a knife because of the maker's mark, just as I don't buy a knife because it has the steel flavor of the week.

I think it comes down to want vs. need. Arguably, no one truly NEEDS a knife beyond a certain monetary threshold. Let's call it a 100 bucks for that argument's sake. There are dozens (hundreds?) of perfectly functional and decent quality knives at that price point. Yet many spend beyond - well beyond - that price point. Why? The reasons are many and varied.

Why does one buy a Porsche, when a Civic serves the same purpose? Pride of ownership? Part of being in a select club? Vanity??? And yes, performance may be a factor, but at what point do diminishing returns rear up? No different when it comes to "performance" steels. Many of us will never need the level of performance that a Porsche or (insert name of wonder-steel) offers - but we WANT it anyway.

For me to buy a knife now, there needs to be something that appeals to me on a much more basic, primal, functional and aesthetic level. I want a decent quality knife of course, but I want something that appeals to me beyond that. And that appeal has very little to do with who makes it, or what steel they make it with.

It is kind of the same intangible quality that makes art "good" or "bad". Does it need to be a Rembrandt, DaVinci, Monet, etc. to be a good painting? Not to me. I've seen some pretty good paintings done by local artists who will never be famous. But their work speaks to me in some intangible, unmeasurable way. Knives are no different.
 
Last edited:
Loveless and Randall are legacy designs and in a different market segment than production knife companies at lower pricepoints that need to differentiate themselves by adding value. That said, ESEE, Ka-Bar and Becker, Ontario, Mora, etc all seem to be doing fine selling fixed blades made from pretty simple steels, so there's more to it than just blade steel. I think the steel snob argument applies more to modern folders than other types of knives.
 
No such thing as experts, some have more knowledge, some have stronger opinions, every day is an opportunity to learn. Whether thru conversation or literature, I always try to walk away smarter than I showed up. Our likes in knives may not be the same, but our interest in them keeps us connected, one way or another. after all, if this were not true we wouldn't be typing right now.
Life is good, enjoy the ride
 
Randall knives have a highly regarded aesthetic, nice leather sheaths and an excellent reputation with knife users in general. They are expensive, hard to get from the factory. They use older, low-end steels, run soft (often at 54 Rc) that are perfectly functional, but easily surpassed by better steels.

I purchased one Randall used on the forum, just because I wanted to see what Randall knives are all about. The fit and finish were bad on my knife. I couldn't resell it because the finish problems were too bad (bottom photo). So I gave it a good workout. The blade performed miserably. The softness was readily apparent. Yes, used as intended, it was a workable knife. Used properly, it could last a lifetime. But it could not take any abuse.

Many modern steels are tougher, stronger and have much, much better wear resistance. They will greatly outperform Randall's O1 or 440B. That's why I'll never buy another Randall.

2v2JVnWUSxAWtWs.jpg


2v2EaTMWWxAWtWs.jpg

2v2JTYgcVxAWtWs.jpg
 
If Bob Loveless had twisted a knife out of the aluminum foil discarded from his baked potato at Sizzler, I would entertain buying it if I had the means and opportunity. No one is buying the makers mentioned because of their performance compared to technologically superior steel.

I will admit that I feel WAY too much stock is put into the premium properties of steel these days. I dont really require a knife to cut 1,375 times through rope before I consider it worthy of my edc chores. I'm the kind of guy that grew up on and prefers softer steels that like a good stropping once a week when I clean the fuzz out of the action. One of the reasons I use and appreciate my CRK is because it is just a well made and well thought out knife using a steel that I can maintain with a simple stone and a bit of loaded leather. Are there "better" steels on paper under $450? Of course, but that's not why I buy a CRK.

Even still, form and function is what is sought after when it comes to makers along with historical significance and simple scarcity. When a maker goes to that great Workshop in the Sky, anything they have produced holds more value...even my aforementioned potato knife.
 
Stahlmann said:
I don't know how many times I've seen someone ask for input about XYZ knife. Mixed with the good/usable information is that from some of the steel "experts." Those that are quick to say the XYZ might be an OK knife, except for the fact its blade is made from ABC steel (a non-premium steel.) Thus, they wouldn't ever own it.

You see, they simply won't own knives that aren't produced using premium blade steels. If the blade isn't made from Bohler's latest and greatest (or better), it's "junk" in their minds.

Unless of course the knife is produced by a company like Loveless, RMK or the like. Then far more mundane steels magically become wholly acceptable to them.

Why the odd dichotomy?
Click to expand...
Stahlmann said:
I've created Youtube content that's one helluva lot more productive
Click to expand...
Hey I remember you. You're the guy who created a lot of productive YouTube content but then ghosted us on posting the links.

It's cool; c'mon you seem smart. We want to see it.
 
Blues said:
On the other hand, many of the super steels aren't necessarily "tough"...and there are clearly different levels of "usage". Some where toughness excels, some where edge holding excels, and that middle ground where steel like CPM Cru-Wear excels (imho).

Many of the benefits of "older" out of fashion steels are "rediscovered" regularly.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

I suspect as a person's knowledge about knives and metallurgy legitimately grows, they also come to understand they'll never really realize the benefits touted of the M390s of the world. They maintain their knives, they don't abuse their knives, they use the right tool for the job (e.g. saws), etc.
 
I like 'em all, 420HC to S110V, 1070 to 52100, if the steel is appropriate to the overall design. My sharpest blade is an Ivan Campos Scandi grind in 1070 (with an ivory-ebony handle tastefully added by Kris Klammer in Edmonton). I wouldn't hesitate to tuck any Buck in my bugout bag. I love my Marbles blades in 52100, and my humble Manly Wasp in 12C27. They're all good.
 
In many ways, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison because it all depends on the intended purpose of the knife.

Probably, the vast majority folks who buy a Randall aren't buying it to process four thousand linear feet of cardboard every week. I'd bet in most cases, the knives are either not used, or lightly used for traditional camping/skinning/woodcraft tasks that don't require extreme levels of steel performance.

On the other hand, most folks who want a rough-and-tumble EDC folder do want something that can take a lot of daily use and abuse. A higher performing steel is desirable in that case. Because it's a knife that is going to be used every day unlike your Randall.

Then there's the whole aesthetics aspect. CPM S110V just doesn't belong on a Randall, any more than O1 belongs on a Microtech. ;)
 
Twindog said:
Randall knives have a highly regarded aesthetic, nice leather sheaths and an excellent reputation with knife users in general. They are expensive, hard to get from the factory. They use older, low-end steels, run soft (often at 54 Rc) that are perfectly functional, but easily surpassed by better steels.

I purchased one Randall used on the forum, just because I wanted to see what Randall knives are all about. The fit and finish were bad on my knife. I couldn't resell it because the finish problems were too bad (bottom photo). So I gave it a good workout. The blade performed miserably. The softness was readily apparent. Yes, used as intended, it was a workable knife. Used properly, it could last a lifetime. But it could not take any abuse.

Many modern steels are tougher, stronger and have much, much better wear resistance. They will greatly outperform Randall's O1 or 440B. That's why I'll never buy another Randall.

2v2JVnWUSxAWtWs.jpg


2v2EaTMWWxAWtWs.jpg

2v2JTYgcVxAWtWs.jpg
Click to expand...
Yet many steel snobs who can't even spell "physical chemistry" much less understand it, would wet their pantaloons at the prospect of owning your Randall -- prior to your product assurance testing.

At the same time they're advising newbs to stay away from some outstanding/well-priced knives because they're made from the same "junk steel" your Randall is/was.

Just out of curiousity, is your Randall for sale? If it is, how much would you have to have for it? Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top