Knife Handles Becoming Better Than the Blades

[Cliff Stamp]

... I don't think there is a legitimate reason to make a blade out of 420j2 unless one is going to use it around salt water.

Everyone can make their own choices as to which properties they desire, as long as you apply such criteria in a uniform manner it can't be contended.

It's like going to a restaurant you've always loved for their golden fried hand battered onion rings; then one day you come in and find out some imbecile has decided to go with frozen onion rings.

That class of knives has been around for a long time, Randall's 440B for example, so it isn't a new thing people have been using such stainless. CRK&T have been responsive to emails for me so I would suggest dropping them an email, maybe even inviting them to have a forum here where they could interact with their customer base.

-Cliff

 

[kel_aa]

If one cannot critize CRKT for focusing on the specific critera of toughness, stain-resistance, and ease of grinding, how does one defend their choices considering that CRKT have changed to "tougher" and more "stain-resistant" steels year after year? Did they figure it wasn't tough enough the last time around? Still too hard to sharpen on that SuperEdgeElectric9000?

 

[orthogonal1]

Randall knives - great craftsmanship.

But, I've never personally seen a user. Haven't even seen a test on one.

Used by NASA, bought by ....

Not exactly a good example for justifying a choice of steel for a knife, IMO.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

If one cannot critize CRKT for focusing on the specific critera of toughness, stain-resistance, and ease of grinding ...

They have models in higher carbon stainless alloys, there are a bunch of tactical models in AUS-8A, 440C and even 154CM :

http://www.crkt.com/ftws.html

... how does one defend their choices considering that CRKT have changed to "tougher" and more "stain-resistant" steels year after year?

They could be reacting to market demand, watching which knives sell. Bladeforums is a fairly extreme niche of the cutlery market given the knowledge/demands of the readership. There are companies like Spyderco which take advantage of this with runs like the Delica in ZDP-189, but other companies like CRK&T seem to be focused on another marketshare entirely.

My main point isn't that critism of CRK&T isn't justified but simply the same arguement isn't consistently applied. Consider that while Phil Wilson offers steels like S125V and CPM-10V he also offers 420HC at 55/56 HRC, he is also now looking to try AEB-L. You also as well really can't consistently praise Buck for using 420HC and then comdemn CRK&T for using AUS4A

[Randall]

I've never personally seen a user.

While they are now a heavy collector market this wasn't always the goal. People still do actually use them, I have handled two very used models personally. As noted though they are hardly an isolated case of lower HRC and similar steels in generally well respected knives.

-Cliff

 

[kel_aa]

Not everyone praises Buck 420HC, but I guess you do see a lot of "Buck's 420HC is good" snuck into various posts. I used a clearance Schrade fixed blade with what I assume to be 420HC similar material several weekends ago to cut up some stocky weeds and grasses pilled up on soft compost dirt in a compost bin. I experienced what I thought to be an unacceptable rate of edge degradation.

As for custom level blades using softer steels, the user is generally not on the same level as one who buys the lower CRKT's. Can't we generally assume that they have tried various layouts and "know" what they want? I don't think CRKT's "we know what you want, even though you don't know what you want" attitude is comparable.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

There are lots of people who are consistent sure and will condemn pretty much any low wear or softer steel, but the issue I raised here was more of the specific complaints focused on CRK&T which stands in contrast to praise of other companies with similar materials. I don't see it as fair to just assume CRK&T is just making a lower quality blade but that other makers/manufactures are actually making relevant and positive performance decisions using similar materials.

Consider that a few years back (before Bladeforums) 3V was pushed as a large knife steel. It was tougher (according to limited data from Crucible) and more wear and more corrosion resistant than steels that were commonly used. However not every knifemaker switched, some of them didn't even try it.Now if you compare 3V to something like A2 using Crucibles data it is actually far more lopsided than AUS-4A vs AUS-8A. Should all those makers be critized for not "upgrading" their materials and using steels which are cheaper, easier to work and to sharpen?

Or just consider S125V vs S30V. If you accept that a maker can decide that the wear resistance and hardness of S125V isn't enough to compensate for the loss of toughness and increase in price then how can you not allow the same arguement for AUS-4 vs AUS-8? Now at some point you have to wonder if the performance change is actually positive. For example you could drop back from 420J2 from 420J1 and gain even more toughness at the cost of hardness and wear resistance.

The relevant question is what are the user feedback to 420J2. Some information from CRK&T would be informative in this regard. If your customers ask for hardness and wear resistance then you go one way, if the complain about corrosion and chipping then you go another.

-Cliff

 

[kel_aa]

From watching the Discovery channel, the slowest gazelle gets taken down by leopoard. From another viewpoint, we do it out of love. We hate to see a beloved member of the family go astray, and will try to herd them back.

The relevant question is what are the user feedback to 420J2. Some information from CRK&T would be informative in this regard. If your customers ask for hardness and wear resistance then you go one way, if the complain about corrosion and chipping then you go another.

I agree, although this would be fairly hard to categorize. You have to take into consideration the use and user experience and expectation. If they are reporting that their Aus4 is chipping too much, you really gotta ask what are they expecting hardened steel to do? If they find it too hard to sharpen, have they worked with a properly ground blade in the first place? If they find their Aus series or 440A rusting too much, might we not suggest stepping out of the acid pool?

From your experience loaning knives to family members/friends and talking to every-day users, what is your general opinion as to the trade-offs of corrosion resistance and toughnesss? If you get back a knife with a 0.5 mm deep chip, do you really say, I wish I had given him a tougher steel so the chip might only be 0.3 mm or even just plastically deformed? When you see some specks of discoloration on an Aus-6 blade, do you think his guy needs 440A to accomodate this "style"?

As well, what has been your experience with bead-blasted finishes in terms of corrosion resistance?

 

[Confederate]

I reckon I'm too much of a cynic to think that the move to 420j2 blades is market driven, though I'm certainly nowhere as knowledable as Cliff is. I do hear many complaints by people who use 420j2 blades that those blades lose their edges very quickly. And there's a lot of criticism of Chinese knives that use very similar steel in their blades. CRKT and Gerber are the two companies I have most knowledge of, but it's true that any knife maker that cheapens its steel should be equally criticized.

I've had personal experience with both CRKT and Gerber, too. I've taken to using various blades to cut thick plastic strips and I can tell a marked difference between 420j2 and higher grade steels. Thick plastic won't hardly cut at all. My conclusion is I'd rather pay just a few dollars for a Maxam knife than $19 for a Gerber Paraframe. Both use crappy steel, so I figure I'm better off with a Maxam for the money -- sometimes better since the Maxam blades are a bit thicker and will go through heavier plastic with some effort.

 

[kel_aa]

As for the Gerber Paraframe, department stores were selling them combo'ed with Leatherman Micra or something like that. That certainly raises the stakes. In addition, I found the Paraframe to be quite stainless. As well, if you had one on you, you wouldn't want to dull your nicer knife cutting spring rolls on a plate if you could use that instead.

 

[Bartleby]

To be fair, the handle on the paraframe is often at least as sharp as the blade....

 

[Confederate]

Yep, save the plastic hanging container the Paraframe comes in. It often cuts better than the knife and you won't mar the blade.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

... it's true that any knife maker that cheapens its steel should be equally criticized.

The most common knife steels which people praise heavily, the low alloy carbon steels, are actually really inexpensive, just price 1095. If you want high hardness and wear resistance then 420J2 isn't the way to go, however CRK&T doesn't promote this and in fact makes it clear that they offer other steels which are superior if you are looking for performance in those areas. It is hard to critize a company for offer a product you don't want when they do offer others that you do. Busse Combat for example made a kerambit awhile back, personally I have no use for that, but does this mean they should not make it?

I can tell a marked difference between 420j2 and higher grade steels. Thick plastic won't hardly cut at all.

This isn't the steel it is how it is ground.

If you get back a knife with a 0.5 mm deep chip, do you really say, I wish I had given him a tougher steel so the chip might only be 0.3 mm or even just plastically deformed? When you see some specks of discoloration on an Aus-6 blade, do you think his guy needs 440A to accomodate this "style"?

If a blade was chipped the first thing I would look at is geometry, can the edge be reworked to give it more durability without the loss of cutting ability passing critical levels? Sometimes it may even be possible to increase cutting ability and durability (in some respects) at the same time by reworking the primary and/or relief grind. If the steel was reduced to a tougher material would the loss of abrasion resistance and/or hardness induce more severe problems? Maybe it was just a matter of misuse and there are better techniques or I have more suitable knives for that type of work.

As well, what has been your experience with bead-blasted finishes in terms of corrosion resistance?

You can readily note the effect of surface finish on corrosion, the pictures in the comparison I did in the small Sebenza review show this clearly for example. I have not done a comparison of bead blast vs satin vs mirror in detail though.

-Cliff

 

[kel_aa]

If a blade was chipped the first thing I would look at is geometry, can the edge be reworked to give it more durability without the loss of cutting ability passing critical levels? Sometimes it may even be possible to increase cutting ability and durability (in some respects) at the same time by reworking the primary and/or relief grind. If the steel was reduced to a tougher material would the loss of abrasion resistance and/or hardness induce more severe problems? Maybe it was just a matter of misuse and there are better techniques or I have more suitable knives for that type of work.

This sounds like a list of reasons why you don't need to go with "tougher" and "more corrosion-resistant" steels. Of course if you give people tougher or more corrosion-resistance without the drawbacks they'll use it. Heck, there are even people on here asking on how to make their H-1 rust.

Also, take into mind that the CRKT's using the lower end steels were NOT originally designed to use those steels. Every one of CRKT's blades has some designer's name on it, often times copying the look of the custom pieces, but the design doesn't with the changes in steel.

 

[not2sharp]

No, it doesn't bode well for us knifeknutz who do take the time to research, test, etc, but it is perhaps a good way to start someone in the right direction, affordably.

Another way to rephase the issue may be that, although we have come a long way in improving the knife, we have not done very much to improve the flow of information about how to get the most from your knives. If anything, we have taken a few steps backwards, since users tend to have less of a connection/access to outdoor then they did 40 years ago.

If we spend time showing people how to sharpen, and care for their knives, they will come to better appreciate good quality steels.

n2s

 

[Cliff Stamp]

This sounds like a list of reasons why you don't need to go with "tougher" and "more corrosion-resistant" steels.

One of the many benefits of customs vs production is the ability to optomize geometry, steel, sharpening grit finish, etc. to match the user. When you are just mass producing you have to deal with a much more difficult situation which is basically how many blades are you willing to have damaged in use and to what extent. You are in general always finding some balance of cutting ability / durability and the rest of the complementary properties, but those two are generally the critical ones.

Also, take into mind that the CRKT's using the lower end steels were NOT originally designed to use those steels.

There is that, it would be interesting to get some feedback from the designers/makers whose name is on the blades about the relevant performance issues.

Another way to rephase the issue may be that, although we have come a long way in improving the knife, we have not done very much to improve the flow of information about how to get the most from your knives.

I don't think this was true, in fact I have seen a massive increase in information in the last ten years. When I started discussing knives on the internet it was very difficult to even get comparitative pictures of knives which lead to all knives of hype. For example the McClung ATAK was promoted as being a better chopper than the Battle Mistress, something which would be absurd to try to argue now, however was contended strongly on Knifeforums. This myth was destroyed when the knives were actually shown in a picture side by side and the general specifics noted. Right now it isn't difficult to get exact geometrical details on a knife and talk to many people who have used it. The critical part is separating the promotional hype and misinformation from the reality. This is very difficult without the necessary experience so it becomes a catch-22 of sorts. It isn't in general that difficult though as a few specific questions usually cut through the fluff, requests for specific comparative evaluations usually does it as well as a guarantee of user performance duplication.

-Cliff

 

[roshi]

I
I think this is 90% the consumer's fault. There are good knives out there, if you inform yourself of the kind of knife you need. perhaps the cross section frequenting this forum is a minority and the other 99% of buyers are happy....who knows.

Yes, most buyers don't know what their buying and buy on marketing hype and price. This is the mass of buyers most manufacturers sell to.

We're worse. We expect CRK&T to deliver top end end steels for under $ 100.

The old adage "you get what you pay for" continues to be true.

 

[yobbos1]

Anybody remember the early 80's? Most factory knives were made with crap steel. This is what led to the custom knife explosion,. and that led to the factory/custom maker collaboration and that led to the fine factory knives of the past few years and that led to intense competition and that led to cost cutting and that leads to knives being made with crap steel. Hmmmmm....