Buzzbait
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,810
As many of you know, Im big fan of Marbles knives and of convex grinds in general. So when Blademan asked for my input on the new Marbles Plainsman, I was overjoyed to help out. For those of you who havent been following the controversy, Ill backtrack a bit and get you up to speed. Marbles knives have been produced using 52100 steel for years. They have exhibited stunning field performance, but have not reached the level of popularity that they so deserve. My guess is that this lack of consumer attention has to do with many factors. Marbles knives are very traditional. These have age old blade and handle designs, employ many natural handle materials, and sport convex grinds. This philosophy, no matter how good the performance is, seems to be viewed as more of a collectors market than a competitor of todays more modern designs.
In an effort to turn its image around, Marbles has recently made to a move to a new brand of steel. They call their new steel Alchemite MC. This is where the big controversy starts, just because of the name. Alchemite MC is not a known steel with a known chemical makeup. The name is also rather fantastic, unlike todays more accepted steel names. And to top it off, Marbles claims that the new steel has a higher level of stain resistance than their old carbon steel alloy. Theyve not called it a stainless steel, but just say that Alchemite MC is stain resistant. This somewhat close-mouthed attitude on the part of Marbles has led to a great deal of conjecture by consumers, and no small amount of fear that Marbles is headed in the wrong direction.
Blademan was brave enough to ask for and receive a test sample of the new Alchemite MC in the form of a Marbles Plainsman. He posted his own thoughts ( http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=206430 ), and then sent the Plainsman off to me. Afterwards, the knife is off to a third party who is far more capable of testing than both Blademan and I put together.
I gathered a few blades together for the review, just so I had some helpful comparisons to make. I broke out my beloved Marbles Fieldcraft, as well as my BlackJack Small and a newly acquired Marbles Trailcraft. I do not own a 52100 Plainsman, so my findings are far from scientific. I had to take the various blade styles, lengths and steel thicknesses into account, and factor out the differences as much as possible. The Plainsman is made from a much thinner chunk of steel than the other knives, and has a very thin grind. The Fieldcraft is much more thickly ground from spine to edge. The Trailcraft is thinner overall than the Fieldcraft, but thicker than the Plainsman. The BlackJack Small is thicker at the spine, but equally thin at the edge as the Plainsman. Overall, Id call the BlackJack quite close to the Plainsman for purposes of comparison.
The first few hours were spent trying to eliminate the variable of edge sharpness. I took each knife and put a large burr on the edge with 1000 grit 3M wet/dry paper, stropped on a hard surface. I reduced each burr with 2000 grit wet/dry paper, and did the final stropping with the hard cardboard back of a notepad. I did not consider any knife sharpened until I could do a slow push cut against the grain of a piece of copy paper. This action can only be done with a wickedly sharp and well polished edge, especially when three of the blades are made from almost ¼ stock!!! Try this test on your own knives when you have the chance. There is a big difference between shaving sharp and cross grain push cut sharp. I also examined each blade under a 30 power lighted scope, just to make sure that each knife was equally sharpened and polished.
Eliminating other variables was not as I expected. To my amazement, each knife had approximately the same size flat portion of blade, with wide ranging lengths and angles of upsweep to the tip. I quickly decided to do all testing on the flat portions of the blades. Leverage was a somewhat larger obstacle to overcome, as the 4 knives had very dissimilar handle shapes and lengths. I ended up holding each knife for testing, with my thumb always making contact with an equal amount of blade spin. While not perfect, this at least helped to lessen the influence of leverage on testing results.
I wont bore you with zillions of numbers, mostly because I didnt bother to record them. I just made sure to perform an equal number of cuts with all the knives, and then see how the edges had faired. I started the battery of tests with a number of simple push cuts into a two pieces of wood. One was a big chunk of seasoned eastern red cedar. The other was large hunk of old red cherry. Both woods were very representative of real outdoor knife use. People dont make fuzz sticks from ironwood. Red cedar and cherry are commonly found and used in the NorthEast for a variety of purposes.
Unfortunately, these tests proved to be very slow going, as they didnt do much of anything to dull the blades. I tried pushing into some of the larger knots, but this also had very little effect on the edges. I also resorted to shaving down the pieces of wood, doing an equal number of strokes with all three knives. Such is the problem with these knives. They are all good enough for hard woodworking, and would require a huge amount of use to make a highly noticeable difference in the edge. The only aspect of the wood tests that seemed to significantly degrade the edges was a spot of cedar that still held its bark. Old dirty bark is a nightmare for knives, and dulls an edge quickly. Since I quickly ran out of bark, I switched to the next best thing. I had an old thick piece of leather sitting around, and began cutting equal numbers of thin strips with each knife. Leather is absolutely brutal for edge testing, and will test the wear resistance of any steel.
All in all, the four knives performed remarkably. Whether or not this has to do with the fact that all four knives had convex grinds, I do not know. I will tell you that they far outperformed almost all of the other knives in my collection. They kept their edge with no ripping or chipping. Even hard impacts tests on the cherry, with some purposefully done lateral prying had no serious effects. Each knife was the master of its job.
I did notice a few changes throughout the tests though. The edge on the Alchemite MC Plainsman blade rolled over a bit more than any of the 52100 blades, including the equally thin BlackJack Small. The rollover was not large though. The edge roll of the Plainsman was very hard to see without the use of a 30 power scope, but could be slightly felt by running my finger across the side of the edge bevel. Restoring the edge of Alchemite MC also proved more challenging than 52100. Resharpening required many more strokes on wet/dry paper than the 52100 blades needed. The Alchemite MC did have one noticeable advantage though. My 52100 blades had the tendency to develop a pesky wire edge while sharpening, which was tough to get rid off. The Alchemite MC lost its wire edge quickly, requiring much less cardboard stropping to get rid of it.
Overall, I found the Alchemite MC to be very good as a real world outdoor use knife steel. Id bet that very few people would notice a difference between Alchemite MC and 52100, without doing a direct blow by blow comparison with an extremely abrasive substrate. While Ive never had corrosion problems with my 52100 Marbles knives, I could see Alchemite MC as being optimal for some users if it is indeed more stain resistant. I didnt personally do any stain resistance tests though, as the blade did not belong to me.
If I had my guess, Id bet that Alchemite MC is similar to D2. My D2 Dozier has shown many traits in common with Alchemite MC. I believe that BG-42 and 440C would have rolled their edges much sooner than the Alchemite MC did, although I dont have any BG-42 or 440C that is convex ground for comparison. The convex grinds of Marbles knives make it very hard to compare them with other brands, so I could be off base. Either way you slice it, I dont think that Alchemite MC poses that big a change for the buyers of Marbles knives. I do prefer the 52100, but not by a large margin. I mostly just like the field sharpening ease of 52100. I have no problems with the wear resistance or impact resistance of Alchemite MC, and was actually amazed that a steel that is marketed as stain resistant, and ground so thin, could have tested so well.
In an effort to turn its image around, Marbles has recently made to a move to a new brand of steel. They call their new steel Alchemite MC. This is where the big controversy starts, just because of the name. Alchemite MC is not a known steel with a known chemical makeup. The name is also rather fantastic, unlike todays more accepted steel names. And to top it off, Marbles claims that the new steel has a higher level of stain resistance than their old carbon steel alloy. Theyve not called it a stainless steel, but just say that Alchemite MC is stain resistant. This somewhat close-mouthed attitude on the part of Marbles has led to a great deal of conjecture by consumers, and no small amount of fear that Marbles is headed in the wrong direction.
Blademan was brave enough to ask for and receive a test sample of the new Alchemite MC in the form of a Marbles Plainsman. He posted his own thoughts ( http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=206430 ), and then sent the Plainsman off to me. Afterwards, the knife is off to a third party who is far more capable of testing than both Blademan and I put together.
I gathered a few blades together for the review, just so I had some helpful comparisons to make. I broke out my beloved Marbles Fieldcraft, as well as my BlackJack Small and a newly acquired Marbles Trailcraft. I do not own a 52100 Plainsman, so my findings are far from scientific. I had to take the various blade styles, lengths and steel thicknesses into account, and factor out the differences as much as possible. The Plainsman is made from a much thinner chunk of steel than the other knives, and has a very thin grind. The Fieldcraft is much more thickly ground from spine to edge. The Trailcraft is thinner overall than the Fieldcraft, but thicker than the Plainsman. The BlackJack Small is thicker at the spine, but equally thin at the edge as the Plainsman. Overall, Id call the BlackJack quite close to the Plainsman for purposes of comparison.
The first few hours were spent trying to eliminate the variable of edge sharpness. I took each knife and put a large burr on the edge with 1000 grit 3M wet/dry paper, stropped on a hard surface. I reduced each burr with 2000 grit wet/dry paper, and did the final stropping with the hard cardboard back of a notepad. I did not consider any knife sharpened until I could do a slow push cut against the grain of a piece of copy paper. This action can only be done with a wickedly sharp and well polished edge, especially when three of the blades are made from almost ¼ stock!!! Try this test on your own knives when you have the chance. There is a big difference between shaving sharp and cross grain push cut sharp. I also examined each blade under a 30 power lighted scope, just to make sure that each knife was equally sharpened and polished.
Eliminating other variables was not as I expected. To my amazement, each knife had approximately the same size flat portion of blade, with wide ranging lengths and angles of upsweep to the tip. I quickly decided to do all testing on the flat portions of the blades. Leverage was a somewhat larger obstacle to overcome, as the 4 knives had very dissimilar handle shapes and lengths. I ended up holding each knife for testing, with my thumb always making contact with an equal amount of blade spin. While not perfect, this at least helped to lessen the influence of leverage on testing results.
I wont bore you with zillions of numbers, mostly because I didnt bother to record them. I just made sure to perform an equal number of cuts with all the knives, and then see how the edges had faired. I started the battery of tests with a number of simple push cuts into a two pieces of wood. One was a big chunk of seasoned eastern red cedar. The other was large hunk of old red cherry. Both woods were very representative of real outdoor knife use. People dont make fuzz sticks from ironwood. Red cedar and cherry are commonly found and used in the NorthEast for a variety of purposes.
Unfortunately, these tests proved to be very slow going, as they didnt do much of anything to dull the blades. I tried pushing into some of the larger knots, but this also had very little effect on the edges. I also resorted to shaving down the pieces of wood, doing an equal number of strokes with all three knives. Such is the problem with these knives. They are all good enough for hard woodworking, and would require a huge amount of use to make a highly noticeable difference in the edge. The only aspect of the wood tests that seemed to significantly degrade the edges was a spot of cedar that still held its bark. Old dirty bark is a nightmare for knives, and dulls an edge quickly. Since I quickly ran out of bark, I switched to the next best thing. I had an old thick piece of leather sitting around, and began cutting equal numbers of thin strips with each knife. Leather is absolutely brutal for edge testing, and will test the wear resistance of any steel.
All in all, the four knives performed remarkably. Whether or not this has to do with the fact that all four knives had convex grinds, I do not know. I will tell you that they far outperformed almost all of the other knives in my collection. They kept their edge with no ripping or chipping. Even hard impacts tests on the cherry, with some purposefully done lateral prying had no serious effects. Each knife was the master of its job.
I did notice a few changes throughout the tests though. The edge on the Alchemite MC Plainsman blade rolled over a bit more than any of the 52100 blades, including the equally thin BlackJack Small. The rollover was not large though. The edge roll of the Plainsman was very hard to see without the use of a 30 power scope, but could be slightly felt by running my finger across the side of the edge bevel. Restoring the edge of Alchemite MC also proved more challenging than 52100. Resharpening required many more strokes on wet/dry paper than the 52100 blades needed. The Alchemite MC did have one noticeable advantage though. My 52100 blades had the tendency to develop a pesky wire edge while sharpening, which was tough to get rid off. The Alchemite MC lost its wire edge quickly, requiring much less cardboard stropping to get rid of it.
Overall, I found the Alchemite MC to be very good as a real world outdoor use knife steel. Id bet that very few people would notice a difference between Alchemite MC and 52100, without doing a direct blow by blow comparison with an extremely abrasive substrate. While Ive never had corrosion problems with my 52100 Marbles knives, I could see Alchemite MC as being optimal for some users if it is indeed more stain resistant. I didnt personally do any stain resistance tests though, as the blade did not belong to me.
If I had my guess, Id bet that Alchemite MC is similar to D2. My D2 Dozier has shown many traits in common with Alchemite MC. I believe that BG-42 and 440C would have rolled their edges much sooner than the Alchemite MC did, although I dont have any BG-42 or 440C that is convex ground for comparison. The convex grinds of Marbles knives make it very hard to compare them with other brands, so I could be off base. Either way you slice it, I dont think that Alchemite MC poses that big a change for the buyers of Marbles knives. I do prefer the 52100, but not by a large margin. I mostly just like the field sharpening ease of 52100. I have no problems with the wear resistance or impact resistance of Alchemite MC, and was actually amazed that a steel that is marketed as stain resistant, and ground so thin, could have tested so well.
) to a much less tough steel.
