Junk Steel

[RedLynx]

With soooo many knives and steels available to us nuts, it's pretty easy to satisfy my knifely desires while maintaining my sinophobia (thanks google).

As an English teacher, hats off to you for that one.

 

[Noctis3880]

Valid points, although it's worth noting there is absolutely nothing wrong with knives from China. They aren't inherently bad because they come from there. Many reputable U.S. manufacturers have entire lines that are produced there, with high standards... so I'll assume you meant the knives that are produced there at substandard levels in substandard conditions.

Ah, but if you follow the mentality of those choosing to buy from China(mostly as a cost cutting measure), it follows that the cost cutting would extend to the materials and QC as well in a lot of cases.

Speaking as someone typing on his Made in China Apple iMac, I fully understand that not everything that comes out of China is substandard crap. But I think it's safe to say that most substandard crap comes out of China, if you get the difference between the two.

 

[RedLynx]

Common myth. Given proper sharpening skills and equipment(very cheap equipment at that), I bet you'd spend more time on upkeep of those older/simpler steels than I would with some of the supersteels given equal use amount and patterns. On top of that, if the use is intensive enough, the blade will be gone on "easy to sharpen" older knife, while new one will still have quite a bit.
Given same amount of material cut supersteel category needs less time to review the edge, simply because less wear and tear occurs.

Do you know for certain that's a common myth? Have you done some testing in this area or are there tests to which you can direct us? I ask in all seriousness because if it is truly a myth it's one I have believed, and if you have done some tests and studies that can disprove it, I'd change that outlook (although I'd still always love Opinels just the same).

 

[RedLynx]

Ah, but if you follow the mentality of those choosing to buy from China(mostly as a cost cutting measure), it follows that the cost cutting would extend to the materials and QC as well in a lot of cases.

Speaking as someone typing on his Made in China Apple iMac, I fully understand that not everything that comes out of China is substandard crap. But I think it's safe to say that most substandard crap comes out of China, if you get the difference between the two.

I absolutely agree. As it IS a cost-cutting measure, often they will cut corners in QC, which is terrible (not only from a QC measure but also how workers can be treated). I think a lot of what comes out of there is crap. And I used to believe absolutely EVERYTHING that came out of there was crap (even though we're in many ways required to rely on it). But over the years, at least some of those views have shifted a bit.

My computer (and most of my electronic stuff) is Chinese or Japanese, so I hear you there. Ironically, I dislike Apple as a company for many other reasons that have nothing to do with their Chinese production practices. But different strokes, as they say.

 

[davek14]

As an English teacher, hats off to you for that one.

Aha. An epiphany.

Do you know for certain that's a common myth? Have you done some testing in this area or are there tests to which you can direct us? I ask in all seriousness because if it is truly a myth it's one I have believed, and if you have done some tests and studies that can disprove it, I'd change that outlook (although I'd still always love Opinels just the same).

Part of the reason I want a good but inexpensive steel is in case I lose the darn knife.

I am a ham radio guy. Years ago I bought a $400 2 meter (belt carry) radio that did everything but light your cigar. I didn't like having that much money hanging from my belt and being leaned on etc. I bought a $100 radio I could kick around a little more. The $400 radio was clearly "better", just not for me.

 

[RedLynx]

Part of the reason I want a good but inexpensive steel is in case I lose the darn knife.

I am a ham radio guy. Years ago I bought a $400 2 meter (belt carry) radio that did everything but light your cigar. I didn't like having that much money hanging from my belt and being leaned on etc. I bought a $100 radio I could kick around a little more. The $400 radio was clearly "better", just not for me.

Partly that is why I like them, too. Now, I'm not saying that as any kind of justification for buying quality budget knives (not that I need to) and just as often as I carry a budget blade, I might have something more expensive on me, too. But I do like knowing, that with my collection filled out with relatively inexpensive yet fully functional knives, if I lose one, it's no big deal. In fact sometimes I have a few backups of a budget model I really like. I enjoy using them for whatever reason, and although I do not consider my knives in any way to be an investment, but good working tools to be used. It's still true that random accidents can happen and a knife can somehow get lost, through no real fault of your own. I have only ever lost one and I don't go out of my way to lose any or be careless with them, but stuff happens. I like to know that it's something I can lose rather than something I'd really, really regret losing, if that makes any sense. If I do lose one, I honestly don't want to dwell on it too much. Maybe I'm weird.

 

[davek14]

Ya, it's not that I lose stuff. I don't really. It's that I don't want to *worry* about losing it.

 

[RedLynx]

Ya, it's not that I lose stuff. I don't really. It's that I don't want to *worry* about losing it.

I get it, completely.

I can hear people saying "why use any knife or collect them at all if you're worried about losing them" and that's not really what it's about... I think there is something to be said for at least minimizing the potential worry of losing anything you own, be it knives or anything more expensive, or even something that just cost you a buck. Heck, if I could literally train myself not to worry about it at all, I totally would.

 

[singularity35]

You new here? ��

Aha. An epiphany.



Part of the reason I want a good but inexpensive steel is in case I lose the darn knife.

I am a ham radio guy. Years ago I bought a $400 2 meter (belt carry) radio that did everything but light your cigar. I didn't like having that much money hanging from my belt and being leaned on etc. I bought a $100 radio I could kick around a little more. The $400 radio was clearly "better", just not for me.

I have a baofeng too.

 

[pnsxyr]

What is one going to be doing with a 3" to 4" FOLDER that they would need the same type of steel that would be used in a 10" Chopper...?

People aren't going to be chopping down 10" thick trees with their 3" to 4" folders.....

That aside I don't see the difference in maintenance other than the higher alloy steels need to be sharpened or touched up less....

As far as time goes goes for the said touch ups etc is basically the same.... Usually under a minute....

No idea on what every single user needs or will do with knives, but I am trying to illustrate the variation in steels often relate to the variation in preferences and usage by offering an alternative take. Not necessarily is it one driven by hard facts, but from one user's perspective in which an opinion has been formed based on direct experience.

For me personally, I really like everyday-Dave steels for folders like VG-10, 440C, and CPM-154. Some people prefer these steels for reasons I do. But the choice of what steel does not necessarily correspond to how someone can speak to “using” a knife. It often speaks more to preferences and specific usage by application.

Not really.


That would apply to old and new steels alike.


Common myth. Given proper sharpening skills and equipment(very cheap equipment at that), I bet you'd spend more time on upkeep of those older/simpler steels than I would with some of the supersteels given equal use amount and patterns. On top of that, if the use is intensive enough, the blade will be gone on "easy to sharpen" older knife, while new one will still have quite a bit.
Given same amount of material cut supersteel category needs less time to review the edge, simply because less wear and tear occurs.

I respectfully disagree with you and think the many threads on sharpening frustrations show that many users find some of the newer steels to be frustrating to sharpen. I think many of the older carbon steels and many of the “standard” alloy steels are also easy to upkeep. I'm not an expert at sharpening, and someone who is a master at sharpening will have a different take than I.

I am an average person with average skill who uses knives for average purposes. Absolutely nothing about me is exciting. I find many of the newer steels to be more difficult and take more time to upkeep. My criteria via my own personal preference is an illustration to why so many different steels exist and alternative views on the same steel exist.

But I still “use” my knives despite not using certain steels, arguably no different than someone may use their knife for the exact opposite steels for different reasoning. Certainly, differences in needs/preferences explains the popularity of niche steels like H1, 3V, or S110V, because these steels have advantages for certain usage, but disadvantages elsewhere. But in many cases, a steel like 1095, 440C, 154CM, or others can still fulfill roles and these steels are not "lacking" in a sense often discussed, nor does the steel say anything about the user. Additionally, I often take liking to the price and that alone is a reason I don't rule those steels out.

 

[sodak]

Due to their high fraction of hard and brittle carbides, these grades are difficult to sharpen and have low toughness. Especially if used on keen edge geometries, these grades have a tendency to chip in the edge, which is known as micro-chipping.

Keep in mind Sandvik and Crucible are competitors.

Low toughness? Explain CPM 3V. Hard to sharpen? I call BS on that. That's totally subjective, I find these steels just as easy to sharpen as any other steel.

Do you know for certain that's a common myth? Have you done some testing in this area or are there tests to which you can direct us? I ask in all seriousness because if it is truly a myth it's one I have believed, and if you have done some tests and studies that can disprove it, I'd change that outlook (although I'd still always love Opinels just the same).

Because so many people have repeated this, it seems to have attained myth status. Look at the 2 CPM 110v threads on the Spyderco Manix 2. I give specific examples of how long (or not) it takes to sharpen these steels and the equipment that I use. Plain DMT diafolds.

The easiest knife that I own to sharpen is a Phil Wilson in CPM 10V at 64.5 HRC. I can have it so dull that you can drag it across the veins in your wrist with no fear of injury, then bring it back to max sharpness in under 3 minutes, without rushing.

The hardest knife that I own to sharpen is a soft 1095 that has a floppy burr that flips over every time you try to get rid of it. Then you have to rip the burr off and start over again. I have quit using it, but keep it simply to remind myself how frustrating even "simple" steels can be.

IMO, what makes a knife hard to sharpen is the thickness of the edge, not the type of steel.

The people saying geometry cuts are correct. The thinner, the better. You can get a hard high alloy steel very, very thin for max cutting ability, while a softer low alloy still is not strong enough to support that thin edge. That's where the advantage lies. That thin edge also sharpens in a *fraction* of the time that a thick edge does.

 

[pnsxyr]

Because so many people have repeated this, it seems to have attained myth status. Look at the 2 CPM 110v threads on the Spyderco Manix 2. I give specific examples of how long (or not) it takes to sharpen these steels and the equipment that I use. Plain DMT diafolds.

The easiest knife that I own to sharpen is a Phil Wilson in CPM 10V at 64.5 HRC. I can have it so dull that you can drag it across the veins in your wrist with no fear of injury, then bring it back to max sharpness in under 3 minutes, without rushing.

The hardest knife that I own to sharpen is a soft 1095 that has a floppy burr that flips over every time you try to get rid of it. Then you have to rip the burr off and start over again. I have quit using it, but keep it simply to remind myself how frustrating even "simple" steels can be.

IMO, what makes a knife hard to sharpen is the thickness of the edge, not the type of steel.

The people saying geometry cuts are correct. The thinner, the better. You can get a hard high alloy steel very, very thin for max cutting ability, while a softer low alloy still is not strong enough to support that thin edge. That's where the advantage lies. That thin edge also sharpens in a *fraction* of the time that a thick edge does.

I have read Phil Watson knives have edge geometry which puts them practically in their own class and that they are unusually easy to sharpen pretty much regardless of the steel. Wouldn't that greatly impact how easy a knife is to sharpen and kind of make comparing the two steels in difficulty in sharpening not the best comparison?

Your information on sharpening the 110V Manix is great. But I personally still find S110V to be difficult to sharpen. In terms of the same knives in the same steels, I find the D2 and the M390 to be more difficult to sharpen than the 154CM on my Benchmade 707 and 705 models. I am not saying that makes a certain steel bad, and as you noted it does have to do with the sharpener, but it certainly impacts my personal take on this manner which is one that is difficult to quantify scientifically.

 

[mcrow]

IDK, the only time I question a steel in general is if it is an off brand knife with a China stamp on it.

I've owned:

Elamax
VG-10
420HC
S30V
AUS 8
8CR
154CM

I found them all to be at least workable steels.

My favorite is Buck's 420HC for general purposes, it performs well in most conditions/uses, holds an edge well enough and sharpens very easily. IMO, S30V is the best overall performer of the bunch as far as edge retention goes. 420HC is hard to beat though at the price you can get it.

 

[RedLynx]

Because so many people have repeated this, it seems to have attained myth status. Look at the 2 CPM 110v threads on the Spyderco Manix 2. I give specific examples of how long (or not) it takes to sharpen these steels and the equipment that I use. Plain DMT diafolds.

The easiest knife that I own to sharpen is a Phil Wilson in CPM 10V at 64.5 HRC. I can have it so dull that you can drag it across the veins in your wrist with no fear of injury, then bring it back to max sharpness in under 3 minutes, without rushing.

The hardest knife that I own to sharpen is a soft 1095 that has a floppy burr that flips over every time you try to get rid of it. Then you have to rip the burr off and start over again. I have quit using it, but keep it simply to remind myself how frustrating even "simple" steels can be.

IMO, what makes a knife hard to sharpen is the thickness of the edge, not the type of steel.

The people saying geometry cuts are correct. The thinner, the better. You can get a hard high alloy steel very, very thin for max cutting ability, while a softer low alloy still is not strong enough to support that thin edge. That's where the advantage lies. That thin edge also sharpens in a *fraction* of the time that a thick edge does.

Thanks for your info, I appreciate it. I just have to call out these statements that this or that is not true but then the poster goes on to base why it is or isn't true on (what seems to be) pure conjecture. Sharing your sharpening experiences helps.

Truthfully, I own a lot of different steels and I wouldn't classify any as difficult for me to sharpen. I also use DMT diamond stones (although bench mounted ones, I only use diafolds if I'm out and about and need to sharpen on the move). Granted, I sharpen all the knives that I EDC, pretty regularly, and I usually don't let them get very dull. If I used one throughout the day, it gets touched up on the stones in the evening. Even a steel with reputed great edge-holding capabilities would get a touch up at the end of a long use session because that's just the kind of sharpener I am, I guess. If I can help it, which I usually can, I don't let them get too dull.

I totally agree about edge thickness, although I don't own many knives with massively thick edges, so that also cuts down on difficulty in sharpening.

 

[sodak]

I have read Phil Watson knives have edge geometry which puts them practically in their own class and that they are unusually easy to sharpen pretty much regardless of the steel. Wouldn't that greatly impact how easy a knife is to sharpen and kind of make comparing the two steels in difficulty in sharpening not the best comparison?

Yes, that's pretty much my whole point though. If the knife is optimized the way it should be for cutting, the steel makes no difference in sharpening.

Your information on sharpening the 110V Manix is great. But I personally still find S110V to be difficult to sharpen. In terms of the same knives in the same steels, I find the D2 and the M390 to be more difficult to sharpen than the 154CM on my Benchmade 707 and 705 models. I am not saying that makes a certain steel bad, and as you noted it does have to do with the sharpener, but it certainly impacts my personal take on this manner which is one that is difficult to quantify scientifically.

That's true and your point of view is certainly valid as well. Have you tried sharpening a Dozier though? You might not find D2 very difficult, as he highly optimizes his blades as well.

My point in all of this is that if you want a great cutter, thinner is better - assuming your not blasting through knots in wood, bone in animals, etc. It takes a strong steel to support a thin edge. Strength, in all steels, is directly correlated to hardness. For a given steel, harder is stronger. Obviously you don't want it too brittle, but for now, I'm talking hardness. So a steel that can go to 66 HRC will be able to be ground thinner than a steel that is at 57 HRC and not sustain damage like the 57 HRC steel. At 57, it simply doesn't have the strength to hold up that thin edge.

So if you want a cutter, figure out what geometry you are looking for. Get a steel that can be hardened appropriately, and get it thin. Most of the newer high-alloy steels have the double advantage of both high hardness and great carbides for wear resistance. Even a simple steel such as M2 HSS at 66 HRC or 1095 at 65 HRC will shock most folks that are used to 1095 at 57. The difference in edge holding is profound, to say the least.

 

[sodak]

...double tap sorry ...

 

[sodak]

Yeah I think edge thickness is a big factor myself. Going the other way in my arguments, I think a very difficult knife to sharpen would be a Scandi grind with no secondary bevel in a very wear resistant steel. That would take a while to chew through that half inch bevel....

 

[sodak]

Thanks for your info, I appreciate it. I just have to call out these statements that this or that is not true but then the poster goes on to base why it is or isn't true on (what seems to be) pure conjecture. Sharing your sharpening experiences helps.

Truthfully, I own a lot of different steels and I wouldn't classify any as difficult for me to sharpen. I also use DMT diamond stones (although bench mounted ones, I only use diafolds if I'm out and about and need to sharpen on the move). Granted, I sharpen all the knives that I EDC, pretty regularly, and I usually don't let them get very dull. If I used one throughout the day, it gets touched up on the stones in the evening. Even a steel with reputed great edge-holding capabilities would get a touch up at the end of a long use session because that's just the kind of sharpener I am, I guess. If I can help it, which I usually can, I don't let them get too dull.

I totally agree about edge thickness, although I don't own many knives with massively thick edges, so that also cuts down on difficulty in sharpening.

Yeah I think edge thickness is a big factor myself. Going the other way in my arguments, I think a very difficult knife to sharpen would be a Scandi grind with no secondary bevel in a very wear resistant steel. That would take a while to chew through that half inch bevel.... even with diamonds...

 

[Squintwithme]

S30V and VG10 on my spyderco knives are great recently sharpened a zt elmax. Bit more time to sharpen but damn its sharp for such a thick blade. Lets see how long it stays

 

[David Martin]

I doubt you really learned anything.....
Likely 98% of the meat we all eat is processed with commercial grade knives before the customers ever see it....
Yes, that also includes what we all eat in restaurants... As the restaurants are customers too....
That's chicken, fish, pork, beef and lamb...
That's not being cheap, it's what they all use as it's the industry standard..... And they get bulk discounts.....
Most employers aren't going to put $100+ knives in peoples hands for various reasons....... None of them have to do with performance...
At what the commercial grade knives cost they are basically disposable, and not expensive to replace and they meet all of the heath code standards.

I am an Inspector and I'll agree with Jim on this as I enter all meat markets and processing plants in my territory. During the past 20yrs. entering these markets I've not seen a single knife with up grade steel.
All the meat cutters use standard commercial grade knives with steels at best of 420. There is one old meat cutter who has a knife of 01. Not that I'd consider that such an up-grade. Haa, they still get the job done. DM